Christian support of Zionism

Originally posted by menace71
It's not a myth as to why they believe they own the "Holy Land" or have the right to it.
They the Arabs believe this because of their connection to Abraham.



Manny

no, they believe they own it because they have occupied those lands for the past ~1500 years and they wouldn't tolerate a european colony in their midst.

now they have no choice but to accept that european colony that masquerades in the name of an ancient kingdom that briefly existed in that region a long time ago.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
no, they believe they own it because they have occupied those lands for the past ~1500 years and they wouldn't tolerate a european colony in their midst.

now they have no choice but to accept that european colony that masquerades in the name of an ancient kingdom that briefly existed in that region a long time ago.

You must wonder how is it that a 'nation' can occupy a region for so long and not seek ownership. They must be very weak or very dumb.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
http://www.gotquestions.org/end-times-Israel.html

Those are all from the bible. I have no doubt that the Hebrew written bible wrote things to indicate an entitlement to land in Palestine by Hebrews.

I asked him to provide a link showing it in the Quran as he claimed.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Isn't the bible primarily written by Jews? That would explain a lot of leanings in favor of them.

Zionism is creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. Right to do so has nothing to do with it that I am aware of, but maybe Jews have their own definition of the word that inserts the word "right".

When Jews started to migrate to Palestine Arabs were no t forward as you make it seem. Who is Jacob and who is his father and his father's father?

Isn't the bible primarily written by Jews? That would explain a lot of leanings in favor of them.

Would that also explain some of the harsh rebukes repeatedly given by God to Israel ?

Have you read Isaiah, Jeremaih, and Ezekiel ? Some Jews might say that they wish God would go pick on someone else rather than hold that Israel is His chosen people. The Bible testifies that it is HARD, real HARD being the chosen nation by God.

Incidently, clearly, that nation was to be beach head to gain the rest of the human race - like a Normandy in WW2 to gain all of Europe for Allied forces.

Just dismissing the Bible as Jewish national propoganda of a entirely selfserving nature has never seemed realistic to me.

By the way, let's look at the real situation of the world today. God certainly has not overlooked blessing the Arab nations. If God did not give them the land of Palistine He certainly gave them most of the oil in the earth by which they have become the riches nations on earth.

Can we say that God did not provide the Arab nations with tremendous material benefits ? I think we would have to say that as far as the riches under the earth worth billions of dollars God favored the Arabs over practically everyone else.

There is a divine way of balancing all things out.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Those are all from the bible. I have no doubt that the Hebrew written bible wrote things to indicate an entitlement to land in Palestine by Hebrews.

I asked him to provide a link showing it in the Quran as he claimed.

I was responding to your OP asking for Bible references.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I was responding to your OP asking for Bible references.

My mistake. Thanks.

Originally posted by jaywill

Isn't the bible primarily written by Jews? That would explain a lot of leanings in favor of them.

Would that also explain some of the harsh rebukes repeatedly given by God to Israel ?

Have you read [b]Isaiah, Jeremaih, and Ezekiel ? Some Jews might say that they wish God would go pick on someone else rather than hold that Israe ...[text shortened]... Arabs over practically everyone else.

There is a divine way of balancing all things out.[/b]

Hold on there Bubbaloowie!

All people are self serving by nature and that is realistic. Suggesting that Hebrews would write things that benefit a Hebrew agenda is not out of line in any way. That is how things tend to work.

Did Hebrews write most of the bible? Yes or no?

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Hold on there Bubbaloowie!

All people are self serving by nature and that is realistic. Suggesting that Hebrews would write things that benefit a Hebrew agenda is not out of line in any way. That is how things tend to work.

Did Hebrews write most of the bible? Yes or no?

I can tell from your statement that you have never read the Bible and do not know what it says. 😏

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Hold on there Bubbaloowie!

All people are self serving by nature and that is realistic. Suggesting that Hebrews would write things that benefit a Hebrew agenda is not out of line in any way. That is how things tend to work.

Did Hebrews write most of the bible? Yes or no?

All people are self serving by nature and that is realistic. Suggesting that Hebrews would write things that benefit a Hebrew agenda is not out of line in any way. That is how things tend to work.

Did Hebrews write most of the bible? Yes or no?

I fully believe that the Bible is a book of God Himself communicating with mankind. I believe most of the writers were Jews of the nation of Israel. The Gospel of Luke is an exception. The book of Acts is an exception.

Portions of the Old Testament are the speaking of Gentiles, ie. portions of Daniel. Job the oldest book of the Bible, I am not sure is from a Hebrew writer. Job apparently was not a Jew.

Now, my point was that it is not at all easy to assume just because ie, Moses, was a Hebrew, that all things written in his five books are that self serving to Israel.

If you read the Bible carefully, you could find many places that you might assume the enemies of Israel had written about God's relationship to Israel. The candidness of the Bible completely convinces me that what I am reading is not simply self serving national proganda.

Take for example the great national hero King David. Surely David is the pride of the Jewish people of ancient and modern times. Well, with complete candidness parts of the Bible record how David conspired to have a man murdered to cover up David's adultery with the man's wife. David stole a man's wife and had her husband killed. The man was not any man. He was a very faithful servant and valiant soldier of the king.

I think most nations in telling of their national heroes would try to conceal the most embarressing failures of them. The stark exposure of King David's crime is accounted with a candor that evidences that HONESTY trumps national pride here.

And that is only one of many many cases. Potentially embarressing material is conveyed suggesting something transcending mere national self promotion is being written.

Essentially, the Bible is too honest to be classified as self serving propoganda of any ethnic group, regardless that most of its authors were of that group.

Originally posted by jaywill
I think most nations in telling of their national heroes would try to conceal the most embarressing failures of them.

How do you know how many of "the most embarressing failures" have or haven't been concealed?

Originally posted by FMF
How do you know how many of "the most embarressing failures" have or haven't been concealed?

It is difficult to imagine anything more unflattering to have to mention, than that this nation rejected for the most part, their own divinely ordained and promised Messiah and Rescuer.

It is hard to imagine the equivalent. Perhaps if we saw the United States of America attempt to portray George Washington as the arch trader of the country worthy only of hanging by the neck in some alley behind Independence Hall we might grasp Israel's denial of their own Messiah.

There is no need to let wild conspiracy theories imagine something more self condemning, even if they could. What I am told is revealing enough.

Originally posted by jaywill

All people are self serving by nature and that is realistic. Suggesting that Hebrews would write things that benefit a Hebrew agenda is not out of line in any way. That is how things tend to work.

Did Hebrews write most of the bible? Yes or no?

I fully believe that the Bible is a book of God Himself communicating with mankind. I be ing propoganda of any ethnic group, regardless that most of its authors were of that group.

I'm just saying there is bias that you can expect from cultures and it is natural. The bible was written by men, not god. I know the religious crowd wants to believe god wrote it through them, but that seems silly to me. Lots of things in the bible are outdated by modern culture and will never be accepted. Women, for example are not likely to listen to some of the conservative views of women in the bible. They would reject it because it violates women's rights.

I really have not seen many passages from the bible that are clear about whether or not Zionism is supported by the bible in this time period. There is indication of the return to Israel but does not say when. If I were to make a prediction and be right I would not say when either. I would want lots of time for the chance of it happening.

Most of what is in the bible is easily subjected to different interpretations. I think the claim that the bible justifies Zionism is no exception. It is a bit weak.

Originally posted by jaywill
It is difficult to imagine ... etc.

I was asking about how you could know, not what you can and cannot imagine.

Originally posted by FMF
I was asking about how you could know, not what you can and cannot imagine.

I could not know.

Maybe you can tell me why you think the material supplied might be inadaquate to make some reasonable evaluation about the situation.

Originally posted by jaywill
I could not know.

Maybe you can tell me why you think the material supplied might be inadaquate to make some reasonable evaluation about the situation.

It's just one source written by the people it is about. They even claim themselves to be God's "chosen people". That alone would be enough to suggest the material might be inadaquate to make a reasonable, reliable evaluation about the situation.