Why have Evangelicals allied themselves with Israel & Zionists?

[BillyT92679]

JSmitty2005:

A simple quote from the Catechism does not prove this. For example, Muslims believe that both Jesus and Mary were sinless (as do we) and also that Jesus will come a second time. Those are just two examples, but I just went to a lecture by Fr. Pacwa that was all about it. He had many more examples. I’m not saying that we don’t have a lot of differences, but we also have a lot of differences with the perfidious Jews.

I’m sorry, but I have to say this. Let’s please hold off on the epithets about an entire religious group, okay?

 

[Brian_C]

pro_universal:

They have also used methods of warfare that are absolutely abhorrent, including the use of aircraft bombings to kill individual terrorists in Apartment buildings full of people. I honestly do not see how a Catholic in good conscience can support the kinds of military policies that have been followed in Israel.

Uh, hello! Ever heard of a little organization called the PLO? Arafat INVENTED modern terrorism.

 

[pro_universal]

Brian_C:

Uh, hello! Ever heard of a little organization called the PLO? Arafat INVENTED modern terrorism.

No, he did not. He copied the methods employed by the Irgun and Lehi gangs in the 48 war. (Those were the folks who blew up the King David hotel in order to terrorize the british out of Palestine.)

The PLO’s dealings and acts of war were no different from those in any other post-colonial struggle. Ugly, yes, but an innovation? No.

Interesting side note: Arafat’s wife was one of those Palestinian Christians that the west’s Christians have largely ignored.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

pro_universal:

Interesting side note: Arafat’s wife was one of those Palestinian Christians that the west’s Christians have largely ignored.

Not a very good one. Her and her husband stole billions and billions of dollars from the Palestinian people. Not too interesting.

 

[pro_universal]

Semper Fi:

Not a very good one. Her and her husband stole billions and billions of dollars from the Palestinian people. Not too interesting.

He was a corrupt third world leader. I fail to see how that addresses or in some way minimizes the point I was making, which was that he clearly did not have a problem with Christians…and further that Christians and Muslims in Palestine are both against Israel. While there is plenty of talk in the west for helping Israel out against the “evil muslims”, there’s no discussion whatsoever about helping out the Palestinian Christians. Do you think that’s right?

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

JSmitty2005:

Actually, the Jews have been trying to destroy the Church from day 1. Muslims often times converted churches into mosques. That’s why JP2 visited that one mosque. It had the remains of John the Baptist in it because it was once a church.

Christians in the Holy Land are more likely to ally themselves with the Muslims than they are the Jews. For example, in Lebanon, all Muslims and 99% of Christians say they have a very unfavorable view of Jews. You have to remember that the Judaism of Christ’s time and the Judaism of today are VERY different. In fact, Jews of today have some anti-Jesus stuff written in their Talmud.

See here:

holywar.org/txt/Talmud/talmudx.htm

No objective scholar will tell you those writings are about Jesus of Nazareth. That has been used to justify anti-Semitism in the past (something Jesus would have condemned).

 

[JSmitty2005]

Semper Fi:

No objective scholar will tell you those writings are about Jesus of Nazareth. That has been used to justify anti-Semitism in the past (something Jesus would have condemned).

No. No politically correct liberal would tell you that that is Who those writings refer to, but it is the historical interpretation and is quite obvious.

 

[Brian_C]

He was much more than just a corrupt third world leader. You wanna talk about innocents, what about Ma’alot? And I stand by my earlier statement. The PLO and it’s factions crystallized modern terrorist tactics in the 1970’s regardless of their inspiration, it is THEIR example that sucessive terrorist groups have followed.

I’m not saying that this should reflect badly on all Palestinians. They were failed by their leadership and before that, by their neighboring Arab nations that were supposed to be their caretakers. They have been used as pawns.

pro_universal:

He was a corrupt third world leader. I fail to see how that addresses or in some way minimizes the point I was making, which was that he clearly did not have a problem with Christians…and further that Christians and Muslims in Palestine are both against Israel. While there is plenty of talk in the west for helping Israel out against the “evil muslims”, there’s no discussion whatsoever about helping out the Palestinian Christians. Do you think that’s right?

But back to the original topic…

JSmitty, the Jews are the people of the Old Convenant. If the Catechism is not good enough for you…

JSmitty2005:

For example, Muslims believe that both Jesus and Mary were sinless (as do we) and also that Jesus will come a second time. Those are just two examples

If you want to extend that logic…If Satan believes Jesus is the Son of God and Muslims don’t, does that mean we should be Satanists over Muslims?

 

[JSmitty2005]

Brian_C:

If you want to extend that logic…If Satan believes Jesus is the Son of God and Muslims don’t, does that mean we should be Satanists over Muslims?

No, that would not be similar logic. Satan is Catholic. Haven’t you ever heard that? He knows the Truth, but he just won’t listen. Anyways, Satanists don’t believe what Satan believes, they worship Satan.

I think that you all are getting the wrong impression. I am no fan of Islam. If you’re at all familiar with my posts, you would realize that. You may want to check out my blog.

I’m merely making the point that Jews are our enemies too. Catholics have never had very good relations with them. Since the very beginning they rejected Him and Jesus even called them the sons of Satan (John 8:44). The thing is that even though the apostles and Jesus may have been “Jewish” in their faith, they were still a Galilean minority. They were still different from the rest of them. The Jews on the whole rejected Christ and His blood is on their hands. At least that’s what THE WORD OF GOD says! By the way, the whole “perfidious Jews” thing is not something I came up with. It used to be in the Liturgy.

 

[JSmitty2005]

SemperJase:

So conquering Christian lands and converting churches into mosques is a sign of unity? Please. I suppose when they rail against ‘crusaders’ and threatening that our streets will run with blood also proves that we have more in common?

I would rather have a church be converted to a mosque with the hope of eventually returning it to a church rather than have the church be destroyed completely! And, I’m a big fan of the crusades. In fact, I have a thread going now about them.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=104508

One thing you forgot, Jesus is a Jew. The apostles were all Jews. Our tradition has its roots in Judaism.

See my post above about Jesus and the apostles being Jews. Catholicism does *not * have it’s roots in Judaism because Catholicism *IS * Messianic Judaism. It is a continuity. We are the people of God now with the True Faith while the Jews (as we know them today) have rejected Him and need to be converted.

 

[pro_universal]

Brian_C:

He was much more than just a corrupt third world leader. You wanna talk about innocents, what about Ma’alot? And I stand by my earlier statement. The PLO and it’s factions crystallized modern terrorist tactics in the 1970’s regardless of their inspiration, it is THEIR example that sucessive terrorist groups have followed.

No, it is not. The PLO’s adoption of terror tactics was itself a copycat move. They copied the Irgun and Lehi tactics for creating Israel, thinking (unwisely) that since it did the Israelis so much good, they could repeat the process.

“Modern terrorist tactics” can refer to so many things that I don’t think it’s possible to name a source for all of them. Certainly, though, if you are talking about suprise bombing civilian targets in order to weaken political will, assassinating key political figures (like the UN mediator in Jerusalem) that started in Palestine with the Irgun and Lehi type groups. The proto-Israeli groups even pioneered international terrorism…they bombed the British embassy in Rome as part of their terror campaign to create Israel.

The PLO’s mistake was believing that they could just use the same violent means to achieve their ends. That turned out to be disastrous, because the Israelis had international support, and a community willing to turn a blind eye to its methods, and the PLO did not.

Just more of a lesson to us all that indiscriminate violence will only produce more indiscriminate violence…that goes for the terror gangs that drove out the Arabs in 48, and for the PLO that tried to do the same to Israel after the illegal 1967 occupation.

 

[Brian_C]

If Jesus was so anti Jew, why did he spend his ministry on earth teaching and preaching to them? If they were enemies to be given up on. Why did he waste his time on them?

W/ regard to my previous quote, you know what I mean about Satan. If Satan were to teach Jesus is the Son of God, should we model ourselves on his qualities instead of say, the Jews? Just b/c Muslims have morsels of truth, it doesn’t substitute for the things the CCC says about the Jews. It’s more than just a simple quote. That simple quote in the CCC makes a grand statement about Christianity’s and God’s relationship w/ them.

'"for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable." CCC 839

*"‘elder brethren’ *in the faith of Abraham." CCC 63

[218](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/218.htm’) In the course of its history, Israel was able to discover that God had only one reason to reveal himself to them, a single motive for choosing them from among all peoples as his special possession: his sheer gratuitous love. And thanks to the prophets Israel understood that it was again out of love that God never stopped saving them and pardoning their unfaithfulness and sins.

[219](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/219.htm’) God’s love for Israel is compared to a father’s love for his son. His love for his people is stronger than a mother’s for her children. God loves his people more than a bridegroom his beloved; his love will be victorious over even the worst infidelities and will extend to his most precious gift: “God so loved the world that he gave his only Son.” 220 God’s love is “everlasting”: “For the mountains may depart and the hills be removed, but my steadfast love shall not depart from you.” Through Jeremiah, God declares to his people, “I have loved you with an everlasting love; therefore I have continued my faithfulness to you.”

So THESE people are our enemies?

And with regard to John 8:44…

**CCC 575 **Many of Jesus’ deeds and words constituted a “sign of contradiction”, but more so for the religious authorities in Jerusalem, whom the Gospel according to John often calls simply “the Jews”, than for the ordinary People of God. To be sure, Christ’s relations with the Pharisees were not exclusively polemical. Some Pharisees warn him of the danger he was courting; Jesus praises some of them, like the scribe of *Mark *12:34, and dines several times at their homes. Jesus endorses some of the teachings imparted by this religious elite of God’s people: the resurrection of the dead, certain forms of piety (almsgiving, fasting and prayer), the custom of addressing God as Father, and the centrality of the commandment to love God and neighbor.

 

[Brian_C]

Let’s not forget the Muslim Brotherhood, which first fostered ant-semetic and anti secular arab sentiment in '48…

But what most terrorism experts refer to as modern international terror, most often purpetrated by Islamic extremists, began with the PLO invasions of Lebanon, where they set up multitudes of training camps. The result was an explosion of anti-israeli terrorism. Resurgent Muslim Brotherhood-type organizations, whose goals were Sharia law, soon followed.

Oh, and this seems to be a good chronology:

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1578183.stm

pro_universal:

No, it is not. The PLO’s adoption of terror tactics was itself a copycat move. They copied the Irgun and Lehi tactics for creating Israel, thinking (unwisely) that since it did the Israelis so much good, they could repeat the process.

“Modern terrorist tactics” can refer to so many things that I don’t think it’s possible to name a source for all of them. Certainly, though, if you are talking about suprise bombing civilian targets in order to weaken political will, assassinating key political figures (like the UN mediator in Jerusalem) that started in Palestine with the Irgun and Lehi type groups. The proto-Israeli groups even pioneered international terrorism…they bombed the British embassy in Rome as part of their terror campaign to create Israel.

The PLO’s mistake was believing that they could just use the same violent means to achieve their ends. That turned out to be disastrous, because the Israelis had international support, and a community willing to turn a blind eye to its methods, and the PLO did not.

Just more of a lesson to us all that indiscriminate violence will only produce more indiscriminate violence…that goes for the terror gangs that drove out the Arabs in 48, and for the PLO that tried to do the same to Israel after the illegal 1967 occupation.

 

[Catholic29]

BillyT92679:

Actually, Palestinian Christians are mostly Orthodox Christians, then Catholics, then Protestants.

Thank you, that is a good fact to point out.

I find that many American Protestants and Evangelicals tend to throw Catholics and Orthodox Christians into the same club. Among the more Fundamentalist set they are both considered as heathens who are little better off spiritually than Muslims. Also when they go to the Holy Land on their pilgrimmage and somewhere witness an Orthodox divine liturgy, many assume they are Catholics having Mass and as such want no part of it.

As well as with most American Roman-rite Catholics remaining ignorant of the distinctions between Eastern and Western Christianity altogether.

Oddly enough, the religious alliances are shaping up to be American Evangelicals and Jews on the Israeli side, and Catholics, Orthodox Christians and Muslims for the Palestinians. So sadly the Israel-Palestine issue appears to be yet another wedge that is being driven between Catholics and Evangelical Protestants in the West.

 

[pro_universal]

Brian_C:

Let’s not forget the Muslim Brotherhood, which first fostered ant-semetic and anti secular arab sentiment in '48…

But what most terrorism experts refer to as modern international terror, most often purpetrated by Islamic extremists, began with the PLO invasions of Lebanon, where they set up multitudes of training camps. The result was an explosion of anti-israeli terrorism. Resurgent Muslim Brotherhood-type organizations, whose goals were Sharia law, soon followed.

Oh, and this seems to be a good chronology:

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1578183.stm

Yeah, the Muslim Brotherhood started doing that in 1948 in retaliation for the rebellion that founded Israel. The Arabs at the time took the immoral “The Jews expelled Palestinians, so we’ll expel Jews” route, which only made life worse for all parties involved. If the Irgun and Lehi had not used terror to expel hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, I think it’s safe to say the radical groups would’ve had precious little ammunition to support their claims that other religions were attacking Islam.

As for your list of terrorism, how is that qualitatively different from what the Jewish radical groups did to Britain and in the 1948 war? The hijackings started in the 70’s. The Israelis had been blowing up embassies, assassinating UN ministers, and once they had an army engaging in “pre emptive strikes” (67 war) for 30 years before that.

I think your timeline proves my point. They were copying the Irgun and Lehi methods of the 1940’s.

 

[Veritas41]

JSmitty2005:

A simple quote from the Catechism does not prove this. For example, Muslims believe that both Jesus and Mary were sinless (as do we) and also that Jesus will come a second time. Those are just two examples, but I just went to a lecture by Fr. Pacwa that was all about it. He had many more examples. I’m not saying that we don’t have a lot of differences, but we also have a lot of differences with the Jews.

Romans 11:1-32 (I’m only going to type selected verses due to space considerations, but I encourage you to read the entire chapter):

“I ask then: Did God reject his people [the Jews]? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. . .Again I ask: Did they [the Jews] stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches fo rthe Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!. . .For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their accpetance be but life from the dead? IF the part of the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; if the root is holy; so are the branches. If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, do not boast over those branches. *If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. *You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.” Granted But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. . .I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has some in. And so all Israel will be saved . . .As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your acccount; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable. Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God’s mercy to you. . .”

Now that’s the plain words of Scripture, and if you have a problem with that, you need to take it up with God

 

[BlovedbyBloved]

Most evangelicals believe in the premillennial return of Christ and the establishment of a literal 1000 year kingdom based in Israel with a reinstitution of the Israelite sacrificial system–a literal fulfillment of the covenant made with Abraham, which included the promise “I will bless them that bless thee and curse them that curse thee.”

They see (or saw) Zionism as God’s movement to bring Israel back into the land so that the kingdom would be ready to roll upon Jesus’ return.

The above was posted by poster named “Kevan”. I think he answered the question the best of anyone. And the most thoroughly. It is my understanding, for what it’s worth, that this is exactly what these Evangelical Protestant Zionists are in it for. They are of the honest belief that the “rapture” will come about when the Jews re-establish a new temple where al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock stands today ( see , for an example of this kind of thinking, anti-Catholic writers such as Tim LaHaye and … his partner, I can’t recall the name, Charles Jenkins??? ). That is, however, where their alliance with the Jews would be , logically at least, doomed to have to end. Because of course at that point they believe that if the Jews don’t immediately convert to their brand of Christianity just before JesusChrist’s return, which will be imminent, then they too will be bound to be “left behind”. In a sense, the Evangelical Zionists are kind of “using” the Jews, or believe they are at least, in a way, to bring about their own apocalyptic millenial dream. In another sense, the real Zionists, that is the Jewish Zionists, are probably using the Evangelical Zionists as well, and ironically far more effectively, by putting heavy dollars (through groups like AIPAC for example) into campaign coffers of men like Bush and his ilk , or any other upcoming politicians even if they are of the type the Jews would traditionally have *not * voted for, all the while stressing the “Judeo-Christian” friendship and relationship, the “common roots”, and (most importantly to them of course) the importance of maintaining the security of Israel at any cost.

 

[Veritas41]

pro_universal:

The above is true. What I don’t understand is how comparing the human rights abuses of US history and current Arab states’ excuses Israeli human rights abuses. I support reform and an end to human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia too; that doesn’t mean I have to ignore the crimes that have been visited upon the Palestinians.

I have seen no such thing. The Palestinian Christians are on the side of the Muslims in this conflict, and for good reason: it is about land and civil rights more than anything else. The Israelis have never recognized the Palestinian right to vote, the Palestinian right to a state, or the Palestinian right to retain territory that it was granted by international agreement.

They have also used methods of warfare that are absolutely abhorrent, including the use of aircraft bombings to kill individual terrorists in Apartment buildings full of people. I honestly do not see how a Catholic in good conscience can support the kinds of military policies that have been followed in Israel.

First of all, I am not excusing human rights abuses in Israel. In comparison to human rights abuses in many Muslim countries, they aren’t as bad. As I recall from my history classes, when Palestine was partitioned, the Jews were willing to accept the part of Palestine the U.N. apportioned them, but it was the Palestinians who wouldn’t accept that the Jews were given any land. Also, it has been consistent Palestinian political policy to consider nothing less than the complete elimination of the state of Israel. No peaceful co-existence, but annihilation. Same with many of the other surrounding Arab Muslim states. I also recall seeing on the news that Israel ordered the abandonment of Jewish settlements by Jewish settlers (with great protests from those settlers) because of concessions they had made to Palestinians regarding that issue. I haven’t seen any similar concessions on the Palestinian side.

Sorry, but I just don’t see the Palestinian Muslims being that interested in peace or human rights.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

JSmitty2005:

But they’re wrong on both points. The Jews are no longer God’s people, Christians are…specifically members of the Church (Catholics). Also, we have more in common with Muslims, don’t we? They believe in certain things about Jesus whereas the Jews have rejected Him altogether.

you maqy want to read Romans 11, it is the church that was grafted into Isreal, not the other way around.

Many evangelicals hold to dispensationalist theology and as such believe that modern Isreal is a fullfullment of prophecy. Since, modern isreal is in unbelief concerning Jesus I do not see them as a fulfillment of prophecy. And, since I see Islam as teaching another Jesus and another Gospel, we as Christians have very little in common with either modern isreal or with islam.

 

[pro_universal]

Veritas41:

First of all, I am not excusing human rights abuses in Israel. In comparison to human rights abuses in many Muslim countries, they aren’t as bad. As I recall from my history classes, when Palestine was partitioned, the Jews were willing to accept the part of Palestine the U.N. apportioned them, but it was the Palestinians who wouldn’t accept that the Jews were given any land. Also, it has been consistent Palestinian political policy to consider nothing less than the complete elimination of the state of Israel. No peaceful co-existence, but annihilation. Same with many of the other surrounding Arab Muslim states. I also recall seeing on the news that Israel ordered the abandonment of Jewish settlements by Jewish settlers (with great protests from those settlers) because of concessions they had made to Palestinians regarding that issue. I haven’t seen any similar concessions on the Palestinian side.

Sorry, but I just don’t see the Palestinian Muslims being that interested in peace or human rights.

On the UN settlement:

If you read the debates, the Palestinians wanted more negotiation and would not consider recognizing a Jewish state due to the ongoing terrorism against Palestinians and British officials. To say that they per se rejected any Jewish state is false.

Once the war started in earnest, the Jewish Agency (backed by Russia) refused any ceasefire, and its territory doubled over the original UN agreement.

Fast forward from 1948 to 1967: Israel launches a preemptive strike on Syria and Egypt, and seizes the west bank and gaza…its sized doubled again, and it immediately annexed Jerusalem (before 67, the old city was not part of Israel) and started buidling settlements.

The current “withdraw” plans are a few thousand out of 400,000 or so settlers, and do not constitute a realistic offer to the Palestinians.

It is certainly true that Palestinian groups have committed crimes against the Israelis, but it is equally true that Israel has not once offered a just resolution to the Palestinians. Israel has built so many settlements that it now refuses to go back to the 1967 line (which is required by international law, but the US and Israel have both proven that International law only applies to peoples without strong armies.)

The treatment of our Catholic (and Orthodox-I lump the two myself) brothers at the hands of this regime is inexcusable, and with the leverage that the international community could hold over Israel, it is wrong indeed that we have not demanded that Israel recognize the rights of Palestinians.