Christians Criticize Christian Zionists
Some Christians in America oppose any "peace plan" in the Middle East that might entail Israel giving up control over "biblical" lands and allowing for the creation of an independent, Palestinian state. These are generally known as "Christian Zionists" and they seek a future where Israel controls all land that is believed to have been once controlled by the Jews.
This is not because they like the Jews, but because they believe that this is a necessary precondition for Armageddon, the Second Coming of Christ, and the conversion of the Jews. Talk about your dubious allies... but that’s what they believe and they are working hard to stop the American support for the “road map” to peace - something that other Christian groups are starting to criticize. Rick Ross has an article from the Associated Press:
So-called Christian Zionists also see the modern state of Israel as a fulfillment of biblical prophecy -- and a precondition of the second coming of Jesus Christ. Setting up a Palestinian state is seen as undermining these end times events. ...Gary Bauer, a former Republican presidential candidate and an evangelical Christian, is spearheading a “one-state solution campaign” with a group called Americans for a Safe Israel, which is erecting billboards and distributing bumper stickers emblazoned with a verse from Genesis: “And the Lord said to Jacob...’Unto thy offspring will I give this land.”’
Christian Zionism is based on a theology called dispensationalist that emphasizes a literal reading of prophetic and apocalyptic passages in the Bible. Dispensationalists believe that the regathering of the Jewish people in Israel is foretold in Scripture, and that Israel will play a key role in end times events. This theology is embraced by about a quarter to a third evangelical Protestants in the United States, or as many as 17 million Americans, estimates Timothy Weber, a church historian and president of Memphis Theological Seminary.
The plight of Palestinian Christians is irrelevant — all that matters is ensuring that political changes do not undermine God’s plans for the Middle East. Wait... they believe that America’s actions can actually thwart God’s plans? What kind of theology is that? Since when does God need their help?
There’s a problem when people try to base politics on religion — whether it’s domestic political policies, like abortion and homosexuality, or international political policies like how to approach the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. America should deal with modern international problems on the basis of pragmatic, political decision-making, not prophecies preserved in Bronze Age religious texts. That’s just insane.
Christian Right & Christian Nationalism:
Islam & Israel:
Comments
Lunancy, like most everything else Humanist, is relative to the observer and the observed. So, when the pot calls the kettle black, there is usually a superb reason. In this case, obvious and abundant ignorance.
When you can bring forward a book, any book, which can explain Creation simply and clearly and without prevarication and without twisting evidence and without building a non-existant geological column, then I may consider it in lieu of God’s Word.
When you can bring forward a book, any book, which accurately makes predictions more than 400 hunderd years in advance of the event (taking Israel’s children out of Egypt), then I may consider it in lieu of God’s Word.
Can you even explain life on earth? Were you there?
Best regards.
Since this isn’t relevant to the post in question, it really should be deleted… but I’ll bite… I suggest that you respond in the forum, however, because I probably will delete future off-topic posts like this.
It’s unethical to make accusations of “abundant ignorance” without bothering to cite sufficient evidence to support this claim.
Sorry, I’m unfamiliar with any “Creation” that needs to be explained. I’m only familiar with a natural world around us and for that there are adequate explanations.
Also, I’m not the sort of person who gets insecure when not all the explanations are absolute and final. Science necessarily works on the basis of provisional explanation — explanations that can and will be altered in the light of new evidence. This means that only closed-minded and dogmatic personalities insist on any other kind of explanation.
I can’t think of any such — including the Bible.
No, I wasn’t there, and neither were you. Ancient texts written by people who also weren’t there doesn’t qualify, by the way. Your Bible is no more authoritative than the Upanishads.
There is no such word as “Lunancy.” I can only suppose you mean “Lunacy” but do not know how to spell it. I can also infer that you consider lunacy to be exclusive to Humanism, though you offer no evidence to support this bizarre assertion. You also seem to be saying that lunacy is always a subjective perception.
You offer no evidence to support your
contention that the only reason the pot calls the kettle black is “obvious and abundant ignorance.” I contend that in some cases the pot calls the kettle black because the kettle is, indeed, black. In such a case the reason is to express a truth based on objective
observation.
Your demand for someone to present you
with a book “which can explain Creation (sic) simply and clearly and without prevarication and without twisting evidence and without building a non-existant (sic) geological column (sic)” assumes that creation is a clear and simple process. It assumes that creation occurred in a way that makes it subject to description and explanation. Finally, it reveals that you have already decided that “God’s Word” provides the only valid explanation for the world’s existence.
In short, you have resorted to constructing what is called a “Straw Man.” That is to say, you have created a weak argument and ascribed it to those with whom you do not agree. You then challenge those who disagree with you to defend your incomplete, inept and fallacious concept as if it were theirs.
Your real point is that you believe the Bible story of Creation. That does not grant you the right to turn the argument on its head and challenge those who do not believe what you believe to disprove your belief. It
is incumbent upon you to prove your
assertion, not upon others to disprove it for you.
There are many books available that provide clear explanations on the origin of life, but they require a knowledge of such non-biblical subjects as chemistry, biology, history, paleontology, arithmetic and spelling. If you were truly interested in the
topic you would make the effort to learn what you can about it. But you’ve already decided. You’ve made it clear that nothing will change your mind. Your challenge is nothing more than cowardly posturing intended to belittle that which you have no
desire to understand.
Do you really expect anyone in this forum to take you seriously? Do you really believe that everyone else is as closed-minded as you are? Do you expect people to admire your ignorance?
Solomon advises one not to argue with a
fool. It is a Humanistic bit of advice, for who would feel good about making a fool seem even more foolish?