What's your stance on Israel?

[followingtheway]

I’ve seen a couple videos about conflict between the two lately. Both sides have convincing arguments. Who do you support?

 

[Bezant]

In general, my views tend toward Israel, but I recognise Palestinian concerns. There’s loads of reasons to justify why a certain people need their own state, but at the end of the day, states are states because they can become states.

 

[triumphguy]

Israel and the Jews were there long before Islam. There’s what, 10 million Jews surrounded by 1 Billion moslems? They have been hemmed in, and their lands taken away for centuries, and been subject to pogroms and genocides.

They deserve a land to call their own.

Besides, Abraham is our father in faith!

 

[Bezant]

Israel and the Jews were there long before Islam. There’s what, 10 million Jews surrounded by 1 Billion moslems?

And hundreds of thousands of Israeli Arab / Palestinian Christians.

 

[Nate13]

I hear a lot of Palestinian leaders are not willing to accept that Israel has a right to exist as a country and will not negotiate an agreement where Israel is allowed to exist. Both sides have a claim to land and need to work it out, but saying one side does not have a right to any land is called a declaration of war. I can sympathize with Israel not wanting to enter negotiations with a group that refuses to acknowledge their right to exist.

 

[po18guy]

And hundreds of thousands of Israeli Arab / Palestinian Christians.

My daily Rosary was made in Bethlehem by the Catholic family of a man who was studying in the US and selling his family’s woodwork. He states that conditions are bad for Christians in Palestine, but he and his family have lived within view of the fields where the angel appeared to the shepherds at Christ’s birth - probably since that time. So far, they can still worship, which is a very good thing. Contact with him has caused my views to moderate toward Palestine, yet it cannot be just another radical Islamic puppet state.

 

[Chaplain777]

I voted in support of Israel because they are our allies. The Palestinians do not seem to be authentic when they decry peace or their intentions. There are groups that operate “outside” the legal government of Palestine with government support, and these groups continue to terrorize Israel while the government can deny responsiblity. Not to mention Hezboula (sp?) plays a very significant role in the government of Palestine. In my opinion Palestine, at this point in time, have NO legitimate arguments or claims.

 

[jonbhorton]

The aim of the made-up ‘Palestinian’ people is to eradicate the Jews and return the land to an islamic caliphate. On that point alone, I support Israel

The reality of the Palestinians, so-called, is due to the history of the Arab reaction to the Jews in the 20th century, and the scourge of mohammedanism which unfortunately was not eradicated during the Crusades.

Per Zuheir Mohsen, PLO, 1977, Dutch newspaper Trouw:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism.

“For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.”

Source: enotes.com/topic/Zuheir_Mohsen#cite_note-1

HAMAS, the real “power” in “Palestine”, has similar goals. The PLO tries to play to Western ideals and seeks to identify a national ideal which is utterly false. There is NO communion between the two factions, though they are allied to end Israel. Their entire idea is to “figure it out” once they eradicate Israel. The hardcore mohammedan followers/mindset will win for a short period. Eventually, they’ll either convert from mohammedanism, or they will die the death they chose.

 

[A_G]

I pray for the people in that area to find Jesus, and a Christian kingdom in the Holy Land:thumbsup:

 

[Ridgerunner]

And hundreds of thousands of Israeli Arab / Palestinian Christians.

There are just a few more than 200,000 Arab Christians in the whole of Palestine. Of those, about 140,000 live in Israel. About 60,000 live in the West Bank. Jews comprise about 500,000 (1/3) of the population of the West Bank. Most of the rest are Muslim Arabs. Gaza has been made essentially “judenrein”, because it is ruled by a terrorist organization whose charter swears death to all Jews.

Israeli Jews constitute the majority in Palestine outside of Jordan. Though people usually don’t think of Jordan as part of Palestine, it is, properly speaking. The overwhelming majority of Arab Palestinians live in Jordan, and the majority of Jordanians are Palestinians.

“Palestinian” is a tribal designation, not a national one. It has never been a national designation. Saying “Palestinian” is like saying 'Bedouin", another tribal designation. There are concentrations of both in certain places, but both are spread all over the Middle East.

 

[St_Francis]

I am pretty much on the side of the Israelis, except they have done some things with which I disagree.

But I have to admit that I also feel that those who are called Palestinians have been abused–by the other Arabs in the ME. They are just pawns who are brainwashed by their leaders. The history of that area just shows a callousness and hunger for power among the leaders that is just awful. The “Palestinians” in Israel are in much better shape than those in Jordan, who are confined to camps and are restricted in their work. The Israels have assimilated about as many Jews from Moslem nations as there were Palestinians, but the Arab nations keep the “Palestians” confined.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I am pretty much on the side of the Israelis, except they have done some things with which I disagree.

But I have to admit that I also feel that those who are called Palestinians have been abused–by the other Arabs in the ME. They are just pawns who are brainwashed by their leaders. The history of that area just shows a callousness and hunger for power among the leaders that is just awful. The “Palestinians” in Israel are in much better shape than those in Jordan, who are confined to camps and are restricted in their work. The Israels have assimilated about as many Jews from Moslem nations as there were Palestinians, but the Arab nations keep the “Palestians” confined.

Some Palestinians in Jordan are in camps. Most are just Jordanians. Lots of them in business and in the government.

 

[Bezant]

There are just a few more than 200,000 Arab Christians in the whole of Palestine. Of those, about 140,000 live in Israel. About 60,000 live in the West Bank. Jews comprise about 500,000 (1/3) of the population of the West Bank. Most of the rest are Muslim Arabs.

Therefore it would be wrong to characterise this as a Jew vs. Muslim apocalyptic war, as suggested earlier by another poster.

Gaza has been made essentially “judenrein”, because it is ruled by a terrorist organization whose charter swears death to all Jews.

Ghaza is “judenrein” (and I hate to use racially-charged, controversial language) because Israel withdrew its settlements in 2005.

Israeli Jews constitute the majority in Palestine outside of Jordan. Though people usually don’t think of Jordan as part of Palestine, it is, properly speaking. The overwhelming majority of Arab Palestinians live in Jordan, and the majority of Jordanians are Palestinians.

One of the most difficult contentions of the conflict is overlapping borders, identity, and demographic shifts. The ideas in the debate don’t coincide with the fixed geographical boundaries on the ground. It’s somewhat shaky grounds for a solution, IMO. Therefore, if you’re implying that Jordan should become Palestine, I disagree.

“Palestinian” is a tribal designation, not a national one. It has never been a national designation.

Have you missed the last few decades?

Saying “Palestinian” is like saying 'Bedouin", another tribal designation.

Er, not really.

 

[hank3fan]

There is only one thing about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict about which I am not neutral, and that is that I wish to God that it would stop.

 

[1AugustSon7]

My stance is disarmament in the Middle East: no armaments, no means to attack each other. Tensions instantly cool. NATO, the EU and N. America have overwhelming capability to guarantee that peace should any country or bloc dare break the peace or begin an arms race in the region; in fact, I think even Russia and China would condescend to honour such an agreement, if only for want of a good reason not to. Most ME countries would benefit enormously from transfering some of the military budget to police or law and order in general, and using the rest of the money to improve infrastructure or relieve debt or poverty in general.

As it stands right now, we are being forced to pick sides, which is rather peculiar seeing as i) nobody wants to pick sides, but we feel we are being forced to and so dragged into the problem and ii) no one benefits from picking a side, as should either side win in a potential conflict, there is no perceivable benefit from one group displacing another; in fact, the only likely certainty is that the Western nations will undoubtedly need to soak in an enormous number of displaced persons and refugees, they alone being arguably capable of doing so, unless we want another Rawanda on our hands, which no one wants.

If you suspect there are legitimately radical or Hitllerian figures in or around the ME that might take advantage of the situation, then you can be sure that they might dare to attack the unarmed, protected countries; and thus provide a perfectly just reason to conduct a regime change, which can only expand the overall peace and stability of the region, there being one less wildcard to worry about.

Also we should expect, in such an arrangement, that gas prices go down owing to the reduced likelihood of war and instability.

 

[Robbinson]

I support Israel because:

(i) It is a soverign state with the right to exist (just as the USA has the right to exist)

(ii) It has the right to defend itself against terroism and military threats to its security (just as the USA has the right to defend itself, and has, against similar threats);

(iii) I believe the return by ethnic Israel to the land of Israel is prophesized in the Hebrew scriptures (a prophecy that they would first return physically - and only later, spiritually) - I believe that Israel (born in a day, as fortold in Isaiah) is the begniing of the fulfillment of this prophecy; Even if the “land” promise will have its greater fulfillment in the “new jerusalem” in the end times, I do believe there will be a temporal fulfillment of the return to the promised land.

(iv) Jesus said he would not return until the leadership of Israel said “blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord” - similarly zechariah speaks of a day when the “leadership of Israel” will morn for the one whom they have pierced and call on the name of the Lord (both pointing to Israel existing for these things to occur); and

(v) I believe God’s great glory will be revealed when Israel, as a collective, comes to saving faith in Yeshua/Jesus (Romans 11 - and then all Israel will be saved ) - this is taught in the Catechism as well - and I see the state of Israel as the beginning of this process.

All of that said - Israel is at this point a largely secular state and the palestinian people - also children of God (we all are) - must be protected and respected. It is a delicate balance. We should have compassion on both sides of this struggle - recognizing the statehood of Israel, and recognizing the rights and concerns of the palestinian people.

We should all be praying for peace and, perhaps, it will be a common comming to faith in Yeshua that will unite Israel and its arab neighbors (just as it was the common love of their father, Abraham, that caused Issac (Jews) and Ishmael (Arabs) to put aside their difference to bury their father together.

Blessings,

Brian

 

[manualman]

I hesitate to pick one as Good Guy and the other as Bad Guy because there are such legitimate grievances on both sides.

When push come to shove though, I have to conclude that the Israeli leadership has generally made the critical decisions they have because they concluded that failure to do so would mean genocide of their people. They quite literally had their backs to the wall with nowhere else to go. It’s hard to fault them for refusing to rely on the goodwill of others or the assurances of Western powers to provide for their security. “Never Again” still rings a little too loudly for that.

Whatever the injustices suffered by the Palestinians, the actions of their leadership has generally been calculated for pride, personal profit and hatred, not the long term survival and wellbeing of their people.

So if you decide a side based on quality and morality of leadership, Israel has been less of a bad guy than the Palestinian side, IMO.

P.S.
Brian, You appear to be making a bit much of the modern secular state of Israel. One can’t turn a dandelion into a rose by renaming it. Israel in theological terms hasn’t been a nation state since AD70-something, and that’s no coincidence. Christ came to expand the covenant so that Israel is now the Church, the people of God baptised into Grace worldwide. The covenant is no longer limited to one particular chosen people.

 

[jonbhorton]

P.S.
Brian, You appear to be making a bit much of the modern secular state of Israel. One can’t turn a dandelion into a rose by renaming it. Israel in theological terms hasn’t been a nation state since AD70-something, and that’s no coincidence. Christ came to expand the covenant so that Israel is now the Church, the people of God baptised into Grace worldwide. The covenant is no longer limited to one particular chosen people.

Um, what? You are engaging in replacement theology and it is utterly false, from the Devil, and gives rise to all manner of un-Christ-like treatment of the Jewish people at large.

The “Church” has always been Israel in that the Gentiles were always intended as included in the plan of Salvation and our eventual grafting in to Israel. Ignoring that the Gentiles, being wild branches, are now grafted into spiritual Israel is to ignore that truth. If you take away this truth, you take away all promises, including the reality of the Jews eventually declaring, “Blessed is He Who comes in the Name of the Lord”. For they shall regain a place which is re-opened due to boasting and forgetting what Israel is, God’s chosen.

Please re-read Romans 11 for the subtleties of this.

drb.scripturetext.com/romans/11.htm

While modern Israel is not the end-all-be-all, just as modern Jews are not fulfilled, is not to say that modern Israel and all Jews are unfulfillable in their recognition of a covenant.

The original covenant was never limited, as Gentiles had the ability to become Jews. This was accomplished through acceptance of the covenant and circumcision, which is now replaced by baptism. The new covenant is of the Jews, for the new covenant is Salvation, which is of the Jews, and the Jews comprised the entirety of the first members in the Church. This new covenant is a choice for each individual, as opposed to a nation specified, though the nation specified still points to this covenant as the old must be considered in light of the new. The new is nothing more than a fulfilled permutation of the old.

 

[manualman]

The “Church” has always been Israel in that the Gentiles were always intended as included in the plan of Salvation and our eventual grafting in to Israel. Ignoring that the Gentiles, being wild branches, are now grafted into spiritual Israel is to ignore that truth. If you take away this truth, you take away all promises, including the reality of the Jews eventually declaring, “Blessed is He Who comes in the Name of the Lord”. For they shall regain a place which is re-opened due to boasting and forgetting what Israel is, God’s chosen.

Um, what? The Jews generally DID accept Jesus as the promised Messiah. Historical figures well before Christ and well after him show a drastic drop (like 90%) in the overall Jewish population that can only rationally explained by concluding that the bulk of the Jewish people accepted Jesus as Messiah in the early centuries of the Church and became homogenized in with the rest of us as members of the Church as the importance of particularly Jewish identity faded over time inside the Church. So I don’t comprehend what you mean by “the Jews” eventually declaring “Blessed is He…” That happened centuries ago.

I’m not familiar with the term “replacement theology” can you elaborate? This might be a thread tangent…

 

[jonbhorton]

Um, what? The Jews generally DID accept Jesus as the promised Messiah. Historical figures well before Christ and well after him show a drastic drop (like 90%) in the overall Jewish population that can only rationally explained by concluding that the bulk of the Jewish people accepted Jesus as Messiah in the early centuries of the Church and became homogenized in with the rest of us as members of the Church as the importance of particularly Jewish identity faded over time inside the Church. So I don’t comprehend what you mean by “the Jews” eventually declaring “Blessed is He…” That happened centuries ago.

I’m not familiar with the term “replacement theology” can you elaborate? This might be a thread tangent…

You state historical figures show a drop in Jewish identity, but you fail to factor the diaspora following the destruction of the Temple in A.D 70, as well as the Hellenization of the Jews. Even worse, you don’t link to these figures so they can be examined in context.

Matthew 23, specifically 39th verse, and read in context, is referencing Christ’s second coming- for at no time during His life in the Incarnate form did the Jewish people as a nation declare such a thing. This is later expounded in Matthew’s 24th chapter.

Replacement Theology is an easy term for Supersessionism.

Here’s a great piece from St. Augustine:

St. Augustine writes: “Instead of the grace of the law which has passed away, we have received the grace of the gospel which is abiding; and instead of the shadows and types of the old dispensation, the truth has come by Jesus Christ. Jeremiah also prophesied thus in God’s name: ‘Behold, the days come, says the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah; not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand, to bring them out of the land of Egypt.’ [Jer 31:31–32] Observe what the prophet says, not to Gentiles, who had not been partakers in any former covenant, but to the Jewish nation. He who has given them the law by Moses, promises in place of it the new covenant of the gospel, that they might no longer live in the oldness of the letter, but in the newness of the spirit.” (Letters, 75, 4)

Now, the Gentiles had no place in the old covenant, unless they gave up their gentile understanding of God and worship of God. They had to become Jews. But, there is no rupture in this, as now the people who were chosen for the old covenant must choose if they will abide by the new covenant, which is totally open to Gentiles as well, without being “Jewish”. So, the covenants are ultimately in the plan of God, in which Israel has always had a place both physically and in a spiritual manner- a manner which can take on metaphorical terms and application while still being under a very real physical set of conditions. The Jews subject themselves to the Old Law, and thus, find no benefit in the new Law, except in the manner in which the Gentiles previously drew benefit from the Old Law- abstractly.

If we boast in the manner the Jews did, we risk the same removal from the tree of Israel. Supersessionism is that very boasting of pride in that which we are no more than a prideful recipient of Grace, Mercy, and the opportunity to respond to God in the manner He makes known- the institutional religion. Only we gobble up all that mercy and grace and hoard it away from the Jews when we have no right to- just as they had no right to do the same as if they had actually done anything themselves, or were somehow “better” in their fault of doing so.

In other words, the Jews, being a proxy example of humanity, are always the Chosen People, chosen by God; but that does not always mean they have chosen God. The manner in which God will force the final choice is totally more sensible if we recognize current Israel as an extension of this historical dichotomy. While the Church recognizes this, Jesus was not talking to the Church in Matthew 23:39. He was talking to the Jews and implies a Second Coming. Matthew 24 then talks about the same mentalities which led to the Jews rejecting Him as Messiah. Matthew 25 then puts it all into perspective on what is done with that knowledge and the consequences.

There indeed will be a day when the visible Jewish people choose Christ, as they will recognize Jesus Christ for Who and What He is- Moshiach. They will recognize their mistake and correct it. That individuals have done this, as Jewish as they may have been prior, is irrelevant though prophesied as well.