Jewish rejection of evangelicals rooted in cynicism, ignorance, fear

JTA ^ | 7-16-02 | Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein

[Octavius]

"What is clearly visible to me from my vantage point is that the majority of evangelicals are passionately pro-Israel because it is part of their theology to love and support the Jewish people."

No, American christians are often pro-isreal because of their shared western values. Not for theological reasons.

[malakhi]

Good article. Bump!

[crystalk]

Haven't we had about enough of Lost Tribe on all Jewish-related threads? He needs to get lost himself, we have heard too much from his tribe already.

[malakhi]

it's my understanding that evangelical Christians, believing that Jews are God's chosen people, therefore Jews are "exempt" from prosyltyzing.

Not so, unfortunately. Some may have this opinion, but other evangelical groups pour tens of millions of dollars into efforts to convert Jews (see "Jews for Jesus" and the proliferation of "messianic Jewish" groups).

[SJackson]

The Jewish vote is more than their mere numbers. Unlike many other "minority groups", Jews are well integrated, and they have many non-Jewish yet liberal friends and family. If they switch alliegances, they may take some of those with them

And they tend to vote. New Yorks 9% or so Jewish population translates to nearly 14% of the vote. My only point was that in a political context, at least on FR, it may get too much of attention as a race determinate (outside of New York, New Jersey maybe Florida) other than in a very, very close race. And I know how close Florida was.

Look at Hillary, she got around 53% of the Jewish vote vs 80% in NY for Gore. A major failure for her, and I'd suggest a major defection of democratic Jewish voters. But it was an easy election for Senator Hillary. I wouldn't want to base my hopes for California on a shift in Jewish votes, which isn't to say I don't want to see it.

[LostTribe]

>.. all Jewish-related threads?

Need to get your own private BB if you want to wallow in erroneous self-indulgence without public critique.

[William Terrell]

So far, all the comments I've seen regarding the evidence that the lost 10 tribes of Israel became the celts when entering Europe add up to , "I just don't believe it." While this attitude benefits the ignorant when dealing with evidence that invades their comfort zone, I don't think it benefits people that claim to be savvy enought to post their opiniions on FR.

Can you offer an alternate explanation of what happened to millions of the House of Israel and the origin of the celts with some hard evidence? When a length of red string passing in front of the eyes changes to blue, one has to conclude it is still the same string based on prima facie evidence. Hard evidence is necessary when one wants to claim that the string were switched.

Do you have any alternate interpretation that would change the meaning of the plain words of Hosea 1:10, 11? One that makes sense? If you do, it's time to offer it. Much more delay will tend to change, "I just don't believe it." into "I just don't want to believe it." And from there the position deteriorates quickly.

[malakhi]

And where LostTribe posts, inevitably William Terrell will not be far behind, a one man cheering section. I guess anyone can get one disciple.

[PaulKersey]

I guess anyone can get one disciple.

You might be very surprised how many of us are watching, but not saying very much. I think Lost Tribe is right on target and I've been following his posts for a long time. If that offends your superior sensibilities, well ;;;;;

[malakhi]

Very well, two disciples.

[LostTribe]

>Very well, two disciples.

Ha! Do you really think historic accuracy is in any way dependent on some kind of a vote? IMHO your time would be better spent examining why you are so fearful of confronting historic truths. Do you have something to lose?

[William Terrell]

Do you have any alternative theory for which you have evidence? That's why I'm here, waiting and asking. Some time ago I noticed that losttribe would post, some would say nay, and offer no attempt to refute his data or advance a evidenced theory to the contrary.

This is prima facie evidence for the accuracy for his information. Each time someone posts a comment other than alternative information or evidence, it just reinforces the prima facie aspect.

"I just don't believe it." don't get it, friend. That actually impresses folks the other way. Now, I'd recommend that you get on with something of substance other than merely bitching that I support losttribe.

[malakhi]

This is prima facie evidence for the accuracy for his information.

You are right and the rest of the world is wrong. Sure. Sorry, but just because people are tired of hearing you repeat your eccentric theories and spamming threads with the same nonsense, does not mean that you have proven your case. Maybe, just maybe, you are so far out there that no one takes you seriously.

[Alouette]

no attempt to refute his data

What sets people off more than anything else is the hijacking of this and other threads from whatever topic is being discussed to LT's peculiar agenda. You could start a thread over on the "Religion" forum and post up a storm about the "British Israelites" and nobody would would say boo. But it is barging into threads where people are discussing current events and changing the topic. It is not from having inadequate data to be able to refute your hypotheses (it's quite easily done) but THAT IS NOT THE TOPIC BEING DISCUSSED HERE.

This is my absolute, penultimate post on the topic of "LostTribe's" agenda which has absolutely nothing whatever to do with this thread or any other thread in the News/Activism forum.

British Israelism debunked here and here and here and here and here.

[William Terrell]

You are right and the rest of the world is wrong.

What "rest of the world"? Show me the rest of the world.

[LostTribe]

>...but it is barging into threads where people are discussing current events and changing the topic.

Nobody can "change the topic".  FReepers talk about what they want to talk about.

A review of my posts over the years will show that my comments on the subject of The Lost Tribes of Israel and related topics have always come in response to something someone said on that thread which was in conflict with historic truth. That activity simply does not meet the definition of "barging into a thread ... and changing the topic".

>It is not from having inadequate data to be able to refute your hypotheses (it's quite easily done)

Talk is cheap. Put your money where your mouth is.  And say it in YOUR OWN WORDS, not something you have hacked from some other site.