Is Obama After Israel’s Nukes?

The Woodward Report ^ | May 6, 2010 | Brad Macdonald

[Christian_Capitalist]

Thank you for the polite and thoughtful debate! I think it would have been more appropriate on a Religion Thread (which is kinda where I’d prefer to have such discussions), but I can’t fault your argumentative charity and good manners.

[Christian_Capitalist]

Thanks for your clarification, I apologize for any misunderstanding.

[Religion Moderator]

Evidently you are Preterist in your theology, i.e. that the Revelation prophecies have been fulfilled. That view is held by a number of Christians.

However because strong Preterism is also a belief of certain racist, anti-Semitic beliefs (e.g. Christian Identity) which are not allowed here at all - I must now ask you to state your views concerning racism, Israel/Jews and white supremacy groups such as Christian Identity, KKK, Aryan Nations, National Alliance.

[Salem]

Might as well ignore the guy, he isn't going to change his views, even in the face of the reality of today's geo-political scenario. You lay out the truth of scripture; they lay out opposing scripture fulfilled in 70 AD—and ignore the rest of history, including the rebirth of Israel.

I've been there done that; it isn't about "prophecy being revealed," it's spiritual pride.

They'll suck the energy right out of you if you let them.

[Christian_Capitalist]

Evidently you are Preterist in your theology, i.e. that the Revelation prophecies have been fulfilled. That view is held by a number of Christians. However because strong Preterism is also a belief of certain racist, anti-Semitic beliefs (e.g. Christian Identity) which are not allowed here at all

I'd think that particular deviancy is more associated with "Full Preterism".
I am not a Full Preterist. I am a Partial Preterist. I believe that most of the Book of Revelation has been fulfilled in the Jewish Wars of AD70, but not all of it. I think we've still got about the last three or so chapters to go yet.

- I must now ask you to state your views concerning racism,

Racism: A conviction that different ethnic subgroups of Human Beings, differ in intrinsic value or worth. Founded upon the Evolutionary theory that different sub-groups of Humans may have evolved at different rates.

Theologically, the viewpoint that any ethnic sub-group of Humans is of differing value or worth, should be impossible to a Genesis Creationist who believes that all Human Beings of all ethnic sub-groups are equally descended from Adam and Eve. Such is my own persuasion.

"Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans only as members of groups and never as individuals. Racists believe that all individual who share superficial physical characteristics are alike; as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their intense focus on race is inherently racist, because it views individuals only as members of racial groups."
-- Congressman Ron Paul
(who's also a Creationist).

Israel/Jews and white supremacy groups such as Christian Identity, KKK, Aryan Nations, National Alliance.

My wife is a half-Mexican US Citizen who's about one-quarter Jewish herself via her family's Conversos/Sephardic heritage, brought over to Mexico from Spain. Even a little Mizrahim Jewish from the Middle East; personally, I think that you can see the splash of the near-oriental in the shape of her eyes.

So, yeah, I'm pretty okay with Jews.
But the KKK/Aryan Nations types might not be okay with a Race Traitor like me, considering I married a Jew. Even worse, one of the "brown" ones.

Beyond that, I support Israel as an advanced and militarily-competent democratic ally with whom I think we can do some valuable joint training and R&D stuff, but I don't support (Jimmy Carter's) foreign aid programs to Israel and Egypt and the other Middle Eastern states. But that's just 'cause I don't really support foreign aid to anyone.

[Buggman]

No, Augustine's cross-reference of Daniel to Luke, which specifically refers to the desolation of Jerusalem, trumps your reference to 2 Thessalonians -- which has no such reference whatsoever.

Hardly. Since Peter was the only recorder of the Olivet Discorse to actually be there for it, Mark's record of Peter's teaching is the most direct word-for-word record. Matthew's follows Mark's, with the only distinctions being that he did not repeat certain warnings that he had already recorded in chapter 10 (propbably a repeated refrain in Yeshua's teachings) and the addition of a couple of parables (chapter 25).

The point of all that is that "Abomination of Desolation"--a clear prophetic and historical allusion to the desecration, not destruction, of the Temple--is the original, and the "armies surrounding Jerusalem" was either a deliberate paraphrase or from an earlier, but parallel, prophecy Yeshua had made in the Temple.

Since "Abomination of Desolation" is understood by all to refer to a false god being set up in the very Holy of Holies, it's very obvious to anyone who bothers to cross-reference Scripture-to-Scripture that that's what Paul refers to in 2Thess.

Augustine is not even really wrong per se--he's just incomplete due to his biases and separation from a Jewish perspective. If the question is, "Was Yeshua referring to the destruction of the Second Temple or the defilement of the Third in the Olivet Discourse?" the answer is, "Yes."

Ergo, I'm not the one with a problem here; you are. I can readily admit that the destruction of the Temple is within the scope of the prophecy while expecting a future, more perfect fulfillment at the time of the Second Coming. I can do so the same way I can admit that Isaiah's son Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz was within the scope of the prophecy of Isa. 7:14, but still believe that it looked past Maher to Immannuel.

In short, I don't reject preterism as the only interpretation of eschatological prophecy because of "literalism." I reject it because if we took preterism's hermeneutic and applied it to the prophecies of the First Coming the way you do to the prophecies of the Second, we'd have to conclude that the Apostles misused the prophetic Scriptures and Yeshua isn't really the Messiah.

Shalom.

[Salem]

Thanks for this public questioning on this thread. I was prepared to query the individual on these matters in a much, much less polite manner.

Mike ~
Christian Supporters of Israel List at Free Republic

[Christian_Capitalist]

A well-written response. I'm taking Mrs. Christian_Capitalist out to see Iron Man tonight; might I delay my response till tomorrow or Sunday?

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. I'll answer in a day or two.

[Christian_Capitalist]

Thanks for this public questioning on this thread. I was prepared to query the individual on these matters in a much, much less polite manner. Mike ~ Christian Supporters of Israel List at Free Republic

Humph. For what reason? What have I said that's anti-Israel?

Frankly, I'm a strong supporter of Israel's hard-won Right to Exist from the 1917 Balfour Declaration onwards; and in my opinion, based on the original "Jewish Palestine" Mandate, the Israelis should be entitled to keep Judea and Samaria (the so-called "West Bank"); the Palestinians there should either move to their natural country, Jordan (i.e., "Arab Palestine"), or else peacefully accept Israeli governance.

The Arabs have no Right to dispute Israel's legitimacy, as they originally agreed to allow the Jews a "National Home" in Palestine after the Ottoman Empire was driven out.

Might I be included on the "Christian Supporters of Israel List"? While reserving that I hope that the Israeli Government will freely permit Christian proselytizing and Jews for Jesus missions in Israel as well as equal rights for Messianic Jews, I otherwise do enjoy reading Christian News articles supportive of Israel and would appreciate any pings to such articles.

Or does one have to subscribe to some particular school of "Left Behind"-style Dispensationalist Prophetic flimflammery, in order to be considered a "Christian Supporter of Israel"?

[Buggman]

No prob. I usually take Shabbat off from FR anyway. Have a great date, and let me know how the movie is.

Shalom

[Buggman]

*chuckle* Actually, my Israeli friends would prefer your reasons for supporting Israel than the Dispensationalists. They're kinda worried about what will happen when what they see as a fad fades away--will Evangelicals still support Israel, or will the support go with the expectation of a immenant Rapture? Worse yet, pretrib Rapturism basically says, "Hey, we'll support Israel now, but when they need us most, we'll be outta here!"

Oi vey, people. The man is pretty practical in his support of Israel, eschatology and the belief that the USA isn't doing Israel any favors by keeping them dependent on us aside. I may disagree with him, but there's no reason to accuse him of anti-Semitism.

Shalom.

[Christian_Capitalist]

Thank you, Buggman. With your permission, I'm going to move the particulars of our eschatology discussion over to the Religion Forum later this evening (well, sometime between handling family crises with the in-laws and grocery shopping with Mrs. C_C, at any rate), but as far as the practicality of my support for Israel, I'll make the following observation:

Most Countries enjoy an axiomatically-assumed Right to Exist simply due to natural presence -- that is, France has a right to Be France, upon the territory that is France, because: well, because France has been France for a long time, and stuff. Its Right to Exist is founded upon the fact that -- well, it's just sorta "there", and has been for awhile now.

By comparison: Israel's Right to Exist is a matter of formally recorded establishment, by Treaty and International Agreement, conceded at the time even by those who are now her enemies.

I think it's entirely possible to be supportive of a Country whose Right to Exist is a matter of formal establishment in International Law, regardless of whether or not one believes that Country enjoys any particular prophetic significance. In fact, I believe that I am living in one.

[Salem]

"Actually, my Israeli friends would prefer your reasons for supporting Israel than the Dispensationalists. They're kinda worried about what will happen when what they see as a fad fades away--will Evangelicals still support Israel, or will the support go with the expectation of a immanent Rapture? Worse yet, pretrib Rapturism basically says, "Hey, we'll support Israel now, but when they need us most, we'll be outta here!" "

This has been addressed before at Free Republic. Although there is anecdotal evidence this is the worldview of some, when it is alluded to me, I respond as most Conservative Jews at Free Republic do when they are stereo-typed and pigeonholed as liberals who "put Obama into office."

I roll my eyes and move on.

People like David Brog and other high-profile Evangelical leaders like Joel Rosenberg have been pretty vocal about their positions on Israel. Much is posted here at Free Republic.

I unusually don't waste time debating the veracity of their testimony, nor allusions to the integrity of my own positions on Israel, whether personal or Biblical. I did that for many years, and it was a great waste of time. James M. Hutchens, President of The JerUSAlem Connection, once told me in personal conversation, and I concurred, Israel and the Jews are not a weather-vane in the prophetic timeline. Nevertheless, people are people and some, already being pre-disposed to some positions that global Evangelicalism has sinister, "ulterior" motives, will not listen. Some people just like to argue. I don't. That is why I stay out of the religion forum.

"...I may disagree with him, but there's no reason to accuse him of anti-Semitism. "

I have studied Preterism in depth. The Religion Moderator was smart to query on this thread. I spent a number of years online with a Calvinist who held Preterist views. He was a retired Army officer, gracious, kind, and a consummate professional. He was a master and artist with the English language as well as Protestant church history, and I still have many quotes from him and interviews littered throughout my personal site. I learned much from him.

As I mentioned before, though, after many, many hours going back and forth with him, I have no intentions of debating again with anyone else who holds Preterist views, as anyone is less qualified than this gentleman, in my view.

My conclusions? He was wrong. The reborn, modern nation of Israel; the rebirth of spoken Hebrew; the shekel as a monetary implement; is a daily, undeniable refutation of Preterist eschatology and prophetic worldview. Likewise, a basic internet search on Preterism and its part in the deteriorating environment in CHRISTIAN Germany pre-WWII reveals it was partial in the genocide of European Jewry.

I don't debate this. Period. Preterists can engage in doublespeak and the most contorted linguistical gymnastics all they want, pledging support for the Jewish nation and her people, it is historical fact.

Preterism, taken to its rational, logical conclusion, agitates against Israel and her supporters, as evidenced on this thread. If any of this makes me in someone's view somehow "Devilish" or "profane" as others were unjustifiably attacked so on this same thread....

*shrug*

Don't care.

[Buggman]

My conclusions? He was wrong. The reborn, modern nation of Israel; the rebirth of spoken Hebrew; the shekel as a monetary implement; is a daily, undeniable refutation of Preterist eschatology and prophetic worldview. Likewise, a basic internet search on Preterism and its part in the deteriorating environment in CHRISTIAN Germany pre-WWII reveals it was partial in the genocide of European Jewry.

I agree; Hal Lindsey's Road to Holocaust did a pretty good job of nailing that down (and is, IMHO, of better quality than the books that he's best known for). Nevertheless, I see no reason to instantly label every preterist as anti-Semetic, or to require the equivalent of "loyalty oaths" to prove that they aren't. Some are. Most, in my experience, aren't. Frustratingly blind to the reality of Biblical prophecy unfolding before their eyes, yes.

In the case of Christian_Capitalist, from what I have seen in his posting history, he has been very consistant in his distaste for using U.S. assets to shore up any other nation. He is simply not making an exception for Israel. He has advocated entering into more mutually-beneficial technological arrangements with Israel and has stated his belief that Israel has a right to not only exist, but to possess the so-called "Palestinian" territories as well.

I won't go so far as to say that I'll vouch for him. I completely disagree with his eschatology, and I think we should support the lone free nation in the region (especially since we keep putting her in the position of needing that support by our interference). I will say that I don't think he deserves to be piled on, however.

Shalom.

[Christian_Capitalist]

We continue our discussion over on the Religion Forum HERE, albeit entirely at your leisure. (I'll be out much of this evening, but will likely check in again tomorrow).

Iron Man 2 was great, Mrs. C_C enjoyed it very much. I've heard it described as "a Sequel that knows it's a Sequel, and so does a good job at being one"; I'd say that's about right. Other than the fact that Don Cheadle just does NOT carry the role of Rhodey nearly as well as Terrence Howard did (he hardly even seems like the same character), the movie rates at least three stars, maybe three-and-a-half; just a solid follow-up to the original four-star Iron Man, which is what I think it was trying to be.

[Christian_Capitalist]

In the case of Christian_Capitalist, from what I have seen in his posting history, he has been very consistant in his distaste for using U.S. assets to shore up any other nation. He is simply not making an exception for Israel. He has advocated entering into more mutually-beneficial technological arrangements with Israel and has stated his belief that Israel has a right to not only exist, but to possess the so-called "Palestinian" territories as well.

Well, from what I understand, the Israeli "Right of Return" Law applies to anyone who's one-quarter Jewish or more. I'm not sure that the same Right is extended to Jews who've become Christian (hence my grousing earlier about "equal rights for Messianic Jews"); but on the ethnic component alone, Mrs. Christian_Capitalist would qualify.

Ergo, if Mrs. C_C ever decided to exercise her own "Right of Return", I'd sure like there to be an actual Country of Israel there for us to live in. Y'see.

Incidentally, if Preterism leads inexorably to Anti-Semitism -- then when Mrs. C_C and I start having good little Preterist children, I shall be sure to teach them to hate themselves one-eighth of the time. I certainly would not want to be remiss in my Preterist duties.

[Christian_Capitalist]

With the eschatological discussion moved to the Religion Forum, I thought I'd make a few "News/Politics" observations related to this Thread:

I think we should support the lone free nation in the region (especially since we keep putting her in the position of needing that support by our interference).

Actually, while I can tell that it's considered heresy by some around these parts to oppose ALL foreign aid if that includes cutting foreign aid to Israel (though I appreciate your own understanding of my position, albeit in disagreement), it is my personal hope that Obama's frankly egregious interventions in Israeli domestic security decisions will be the straw that breaks the camel's back and brings the Israeli Government to the point of saying, "You know what? Keep your money, we'll keep our independence".

In 1980, with the Israeli GDP at just a little over $27 Billion, Jimmy Carter's $3 Billion a year represented over 10% of total Israeli national income -- a huge "carrot" for US Presidents to swing around whenever they wanted to force Israel to come to the negotiating table, regardless of whether the Palestinians had (ever) shown any Good Faith, or not.

By contrast, with the 2009 Israeli GDP at a little over $200 Billion, $3 Billion in Aid per year represents barely over 1% of total Israeli national income.

It's always hard for any Welfare Dependent to break his dependency; but at the point that US Aid constitutes only a little over 1% of total Israeli national income, we may be approaching the point at which the Israelis say to Obama, "Sorry, but you don't have the power over us that you seem to think you have. Keep your money, and shove your diktats."

I don't think that would be of any great benefit to the USA, since Israeli Aid constitutes only a fraction of our total Foreign Aid budget (and only a microscopic portion of our insane, runaway budget deficit), whereas I'd like to see ALL of it zeroed-out.

But I do think that it could be to the long-term benefit of Israel. I think it could mean greater Independence and greater Economic Freedom for Israel -- which I think she may well need, in the (IMHO) economically-tumultuous decade ahead.

[Buggman]

Well, from what I understand, the Israeli "Right of Return" Law applies to anyone who's one-quarter Jewish or more. I'm not sure that the same Right is extended to Jews who've become Christian . . .

It doesn't, but it's moving towards accepting Jews practicing Messianic Judaism rather than Christianity. We've been in some high-level discussions with the new Sanhedrin, and they're open to the possibility of considering Jews by birth (i.e., having a Jewish mother) who are practicing what is recognizably Judaism to make aliyah even if they profess belief in Yeshua. They've asked us to get our own Sanhedrin together--basically, a body authorized to speak for and make rulings for a significant percentage of the American Messianic movement--so that they can have someone to talk to. Given the fragmented nature of the Messianic movement, that's probably at least a decade off.

In the meantime, a Jew who was raised Jewish but has baptized as a Christian is not eligible for aliyah under the current laws. The reason is simple: For a couple of thousand years, Christianity has insisted that such converts stop being a part of the Jewish people. In a wierd sort of way, they're respecting the Christian interpretation that those who are "in Christ" are no longer Jewish (a distortion of "no more Jew or Greek").

Further, since the number of Christians in the world far outstrips the number of Jews, Israel fears a situation in which millions of Christians claiming Jewish blood through a grandparent might come in and take over demographically. The same concern is why the so-called "right of return" for the Palestinians is DOA in any negotations.

Incidentally, if Preterism leads inexorably to Anti-Semitism -- then when Mrs. C_C and I start having good little Preterist children, I shall be sure to teach them to hate themselves one-eighth of the time.

Actually, it's the other way around: Preterism comes from anti-Semitism, specifically, the anti-Semetic, pro-Roman situation of the 4th Century, when it emerged as an eschatological system. It was developed specifically to distance the Church from expectations of what would essentially be a Jewish overthrow of Roman paganism--not exactly an idea likely to help Christianity become and stay legal in the days after two failed revolutions in Judea.

Of course, after 1600 years, the original backdrop of the system has been forgotten, and arguments from the Scriptures developed. Such arguments have been made in ignorance of the original culture that gave us the Word, replacing a Jewish perspective with Greek beliefs heavily influenced by the same Platonic dualism that gave rise to Gnosticsm. Ergo, while certainly some modern preterists are anti-Semetic, the chief problem one should have with the system is not those supporters, but its origins and blatant de-contextualization of the prophetic Scriptures.

Shalom.

P.S. Have you ever traveled to Israel before? If not, I highly recommend it.

[Christian_Capitalist]

...Israel fears a situation in which millions of Christians claiming Jewish blood through a grandparent might come in and take over demographically. The same concern is why the so-called "right of return" for the Palestinians is DOA in any negotiations.

Thanks for the very informative reply; I haven't time to discuss your entire Post in depth at this moment (like I said, I may be around a little more tomorrow) but I just wanted to make one off-the-cuff comment regarding this section (in italics above).

There really should be no problem whatsoever with an Arab Palestinian "Right of Return". By official and formal establishment, the Arab Palestinians have been granted 77% of the original Palestine Mandate: "Arab Palestine", also known as "Jordan".

Arab Palestinians should have every Right to Return to their portion of the Palestine Mandate, that being the 77% of that Mandate which was established as a Homeland for Arab Palestinians.

In fact, I'm guessing that a great many Israelis wish that the Arab Palestinians WOULD return to Arab Palestine, and leave Jewish Palestine alone.

[Buggman]

In fact, I'm guessing that a great many Israelis wish that the Arab Palestinians WOULD return to Arab Palestine, and leave Jewish Palestine alone.

Yeah, but they were kicked out for killing the previous King of Jordan, the current monarch's grandfather iirc the relationship correctly. That's one reason Jordan has mostly played nice in the last few decades: They don't want the Israelis pushing the "refugees" over the border back into their country.

The fact is that no one really cares about the Palis. The Saudis call them Falastini (I have no idea if I'm spelling that right), which translates into "dogs" or something similar according to a friend of mine who spent several years in Saudi Arabia. They're left to languish soley to score moral high ground from the Israelis.

When I went to Israel a couple of years ago, I spent some time with some Christian Palestinians in Nazareth. They had done a pretty good job of restoring Yeshua's home village and were wonderful to our tour group of mixed Jews and Christians. I certainly wouldn't want to see them pushed over the border into a Muslim country. Nor do I want to see them persecuted out of Nazareth by the Muslim Palistinians as the Christians of Bethlehem were.

Shalom.