Zone1 Christian Zionism

Let me help you, as those words prove that there is a single religion, Judeo-Christianity.

AI Overview

Jesus spoke "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani" (or "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani")
around the ninth hour (about 3 PM) on the day of his crucifixion, as recorded in Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34, expressing anguish...meaning "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?".


He spoke the words of the 22nd Psalm
Psalm 22 begins with "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"


Random?
A coincidence?
Or a clear announcement of His commitment to the religion of his birth, and of the Old Testament.
Like David, Jesus was without the Father. Then, as with David, the estrangement ended. Quite so, the parallels.

Not proof of identical religions, though. I've already conceded that Jesus was Jewish and committed to the Law.

Did you know that Jesus told the Jews that they would not inherit the kingdom but that a productive people would inherit it instead? The Jews were not productive, see. Ezekiel also called them a useless vine (15). Did you know Jesus hurled epithets at them, accused them of perverting Moses, and threatened them with fire and destruction?

Conversely, the Jews persecuted Jesus and his followers. Relentlessly. The book of Acts is full of such incidents.

In the New Testament, Jesus and his followers are the protagonists. The Jews are the antagonists. Two options: Moses or Christ. Two different religions.
 
Luv ya, PC. You’re a solid conservative with a good head on your shoulders. So I hope my disagreement with you in this matter doesn’t change anything.

First, I think your sources are suspect. The Puritans, the Scottish Covenanters, Anglican clergy, and William Blackstone are centuries removed from the events recorded in the Bible. Which is not a bad thing, per se; all historians live in a country far away from their subject matter. But better sources for New Testament history are the Bible itself and the events of first-century Judea and Galilee. The historians who study those events are the historians to trust.

Christian Zionism, in any iteration, is not even a concept at that time.

The sources for Christian Zionism affirm differences between Judaism and Christianity. Jews don’t trust Christian efforts to repatriate them to Israel, for example, because they don’t want them to attempt to convert them. To be converted from one religion to another means that the two religions are different. What’s more, the Jews today are not the Jews of the Bible. They are not a tribal people of Judea descended from Jacob. They are not a people with the Mosaic Law, the temple, or the priesthood. They’re rabbinic and Talmudic.

Sorry, but I just can’t accept Christian Zionism. I think it’s wrong and maybe even a little dangerous.
 
I believe that the Arabs lived in Palestinian as long as the Jews did.
As with everything the Left has told you to believe, Herman....you are wrong.


It has always been the Jews.


I read “The Oxford History of the Biblical World,” edited by Dr. Michael D. Coogan, director of publications for the Harvard Semitic Museum and expert in Near Eastern languages and literatures. The book is excellent on Syria-Palestinian archeology.

The following will shed light on the question.


The end of the thirteenth century BCE saw major disruptions in the civilizations of the Near East, Cyprus and Greece for unclear reasons (possible major droughts). “Many populations appear to have migrated….Egypt was attacked by groups called ‘Sea Peoples.’ They were repelled from Egypt, but the Egyptians could not stop them from taking over the Canaan coast. The Philistines …were among the Sea Peoples.”

“…the Philistines did not occupy the coast of Canaan until the twelfth century BCE…”


“Not long before, another group had appeared in the land of Canaan…This group called itself Israel…
The Egyptians maintained some control over parts of Canaan until just after the death of Rameses III in 1153 BCE….[including] Canaanites, Egyptians, Israelites, and the mysterious ‘Sea Peoples,’ of whom the Philistines are the best known. The settlement process in highland Israel began a generation or two before the Sea Peoples arrived on the coast…The displacement and migration of the tribe of Dan from the central coast to the far north is symptomatic of …this event.”


“This movement is documented by a variety of written sources in Akkadian, Ugaritic, Egyptian, and Hebrew, by Egyptian wall reliefs and by archeology.”

“The Philistines bequeathed their own name to Philistia (and later to all of Palestine).”

“Cypriot archaeologists invoke the Achaeans or Danaoi of Homeric epic as the agents of culture change in Cyprus; in the Levant, the same change is ascribed to the Sea Peoples. Both agents participated in the event recorded by Rameses III and should be related to the same confederacy of Sea Peoples, or Mycenaean Greeks, who invaded the coastlands of (Cyprus) around 1185-1175.”


Further evidence of the origin of the Philistines can be seen in biblical texts, which indicate expert bowman, “chariot-warriors,” and “chariots of iron,” (I Samuel 31.3, Judg. 1.18-19) and pottery which show warriors armed like the Mycenaean warriors depicted on the famous “Warrior Vase” found in Mycenae. The description fits Goliatath, as in I Samuel 17.5-6.

Under King David, first quarter of the tenth century, the Philistines were driven back to their original coastal cities.
 
Luv ya, PC. You’re a solid conservative with a good head on your shoulders. So I hope my disagreement with you in this matter doesn’t change anything.

First, I think your sources are suspect. The Puritans, the Scottish Covenanters, Anglican clergy, and William Blackstone are centuries removed from the events recorded in the Bible. Which is not a bad thing, per se; all historians live in a country far away from their subject matter. But better sources for New Testament history are the Bible itself and the events of first-century Judea and Galilee. The historians who study those events are the historians to trust.

Christian Zionism, in any iteration, is not even a concept at that time.

The sources for Christian Zionism affirm differences between Judaism and Christianity. Jews don’t trust Christian efforts to repatriate them to Israel, for example, because they don’t want them to attempt to convert them. To be converted from one religion to another means that the two religions are different. What’s more, the Jews today are not the Jews of the Bible. They are not a tribal people of Judea descended from Jacob. They are not a people with the Mosaic Law, the temple, or the priesthood. They’re rabbinic and Talmudic.

Sorry, but I just can’t accept Christian Zionism. I think it’s wrong and maybe even a little dangerous.
The love right back atcha'!


Of course not.....we're cut from the same cloth....I love the debate.


BTW, I consider myself a Zionist.

Have you been to the Holy Land?
 
Luv ya, PC. You’re a solid conservative with a good head on your shoulders. So I hope my disagreement with you in this matter doesn’t change anything.

First, I think your sources are suspect. The Puritans, the Scottish Covenanters, Anglican clergy, and William Blackstone are centuries removed from the events recorded in the Bible. Which is not a bad thing, per se; all historians live in a country far away from their subject matter. But better sources for New Testament history are the Bible itself and the events of first-century Judea and Galilee. The historians who study those events are the historians to trust.

Christian Zionism, in any iteration, is not even a concept at that time.

The sources for Christian Zionism affirm differences between Judaism and Christianity. Jews don’t trust Christian efforts to repatriate them to Israel, for example, because they don’t want them to attempt to convert them. To be converted from one religion to another means that the two religions are different. What’s more, the Jews today are not the Jews of the Bible. They are not a tribal people of Judea descended from Jacob. They are not a people with the Mosaic Law, the temple, or the priesthood. They’re rabbinic and Talmudic.

Sorry, but I just can’t accept Christian Zionism. I think it’s wrong and maybe even a little dangerous.
"First, I think your sources are suspect. The Puritans, the Scottish Covenanters, Anglican clergy, and William Blackstone are centuries removed from the events recorded in the Bible."


All of our Founders had great respect for the Jewish poeple and the religion.



“The Founders of this country had a reason for favoring the Jewish people, due to their attachment to the Bible, and because the Founders saw themselves as descendants of the People of the Book.

“Rather than just tolerate the Jews as another religious minority, America’s Founding Fathers were profoundly inspired by Jewish ideas, …. understanding liberty not as an individual license for each of us to pursue his or her bliss but as a collective commitment to a greater good under the watchful eyes of God.” In American Jewish History, a Key to Future Greatness


None of the Founders was a deist. All believed in a God who took an interest in us, and our country.

“Benjamin Franklin’s proposals for a Great Seal featuring not an eagle but Moses and the Israelites crossing the Red Sea.”
1637870738043.png









First Committee's Design for America's Great Seal - 1776
 
Washington, Franklin welcomed Jews, and I recall reading something along those lines re: Muslims.


AI Overview
Learn more

George Washington's Letter to Newport | My Jewish Learning


Yes, George Washington welcomed Jews and other religious groups to the United States by supporting freedom of worship and religious liberty.

Explanation
  • In 1790, Washington wrote a letter to the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island. In the letter, he:
    • Stated that the new nation would not sanction bigotry or assist persecution

    • Assured that the government would not interfere with religious beliefs

    • Embraced the idea that religious liberty is a natural right

    • Quoted the Bible's Old Testament to reassure that people would be able to worship in safety
  • Washington's letter is considered a stepping stone to the First Amendment, which was passed in 1791.

  • Washington's support of religious liberty led other religious communities to seek his affirmation. For example, a Jewish congregation in Savannah, Georgia, praised Washington for his "unexampled liberality".

  • Washington was the first head of a modern nation to openly acknowledge Jews as full citizens.
 
As with everything the Left has told you to believe, Herman....you are wrong.


It has always been the Jews.


I read “The Oxford History of the Biblical World,” edited by Dr. Michael D. Coogan, director of publications for the Harvard Semitic Museum and expert in Near Eastern languages and literatures. The book is excellent on Syria-Palestinian archeology.

The following will shed light on the question.


The end of the thirteenth century BCE saw major disruptions in the civilizations of the Near East, Cyprus and Greece for unclear reasons (possible major droughts). “Many populations appear to have migrated….Egypt was attacked by groups called ‘Sea Peoples.’ They were repelled from Egypt, but the Egyptians could not stop them from taking over the Canaan coast. The Philistines …were among the Sea Peoples.”

“…the Philistines did not occupy the coast of Canaan until the twelfth century BCE…”


“Not long before, another group had appeared in the land of Canaan…This group called itself Israel…
The Egyptians maintained some control over parts of Canaan until just after the death of Rameses III in 1153 BCE….[including] Canaanites, Egyptians, Israelites, and the mysterious ‘Sea Peoples,’ of whom the Philistines are the best known. The settlement process in highland Israel began a generation or two before the Sea Peoples arrived on the coast…The displacement and migration of the tribe of Dan from the central coast to the far north is symptomatic of …this event.”


“This movement is documented by a variety of written sources in Akkadian, Ugaritic, Egyptian, and Hebrew, by Egyptian wall reliefs and by archeology.”

“The Philistines bequeathed their own name to Philistia (and later to all of Palestine).”

“Cypriot archaeologists invoke the Achaeans or Danaoi of Homeric epic as the agents of culture change in Cyprus; in the Levant, the same change is ascribed to the Sea Peoples. Both agents participated in the event recorded by Rameses III and should be related to the same confederacy of Sea Peoples, or Mycenaean Greeks, who invaded the coastlands of (Cyprus) around 1185-1175.”


Further evidence of the origin of the Philistines can be seen in biblical texts, which indicate expert bowman, “chariot-warriors,” and “chariots of iron,” (I Samuel 31.3, Judg. 1.18-19) and pottery which show warriors armed like the Mycenaean warriors depicted on the famous “Warrior Vase” found in Mycenae. The description fits Goliatath, as in I Samuel 17.5-6.

Under King David, first quarter of the tenth century, the Philistines were driven back to their original coastal cities.
There were multiple instances of Jewish diaspora, some peaceful, some not, throughout history. The Arabs conquered the area some 14 centuries ago. Politically the Arabs governed Palestine longer than the Jews did. There was constant mixing of people so Jews and Arabs have ALWAYS lived side by side.
 
Did those Christian Zionists not know there were people already living there or did they just not care?
Not any more or any less than every other such instance in human history. People who believe in Darwinian principles shouldn't be making moral arguments when a people's land is conquered. A tribe satisfying their material needs and primitive impulses at the expense of others is quite natural and consistent with evolution and atheism. How can an atheist not appreciate evolution and the satisfaction of material needs and impulses?
 
There was constant mixing of people so Jews and Arabs have ALWAYS lived side by side.
Same for China when they were invaded or any other invaded country. Not because of anything more than the invaders and invaded couldn't kill everyone; as in all men, women and children. They had to live side by side. It's not because they wanted to.

Please tell me that you aren't making a distinction between good and evil.
 
There were multiple instances of Jewish diaspora, some peaceful, some not, throughout history. The Arabs conquered the area some 14 centuries ago. Politically the Arabs governed Palestine longer than the Jews did. There was constant mixing of people so Jews and Arabs have ALWAYS lived side by side.
I just proved you wrong again......get lost.
 
"Today US Christian Zionists take many forms. Some, such as Ted Cruz, ...if we support Israel, God will support America."
 
In his letter to the Danforth synagogue, George Washington didn't mention Christian Zionism. If he had, the letter wouldn't have been so cordial in the minds of his readers.

I think President Trump leans Christian Zionist, too. Before he died, Charlie Kirk appeared to have been pulling away from the movement.

Even the brightest among us have differing views.

At any rate, the movement has no connection to the Bible. Except maybe that, per Revelation chapter 9, when Jews are gathered in Jerusalem, a third of them would die. Ushering our Jewish neighbors into a killing field doesn't really comport with the neighborliness that Jesus preached.
 
In his letter to the Danforth synagogue, George Washington didn't mention Christian Zionism. If he had, the letter wouldn't have been so cordial in the minds of his readers.

I think President Trump leans Christian Zionist, too. Before he died, Charlie Kirk appeared to have been pulling away from the movement.

Even the brightest among us have differing views.

At any rate, the movement has no connection to the Bible. Except maybe that, per Revelation chapter 9, when Jews are gathered in Jerusalem, a third of them would die. Ushering our Jewish neighbors into a killing field doesn't really comport with the neighborliness that Jesus preached.
So, areCatholicism and Protestantism two different religions?
 
"We hear about Jewish Zionism all the time, for good reason — it’s Israel’s ideological justification for decades of settler colonialism and ethnic cleansing in Palestine. But there’s another form of Zionism that reigns in the United States: Christian Zionism, a political ideology driving much of the Trump administration’s current crackdown on Palestine activism on campuses ...

The foundation of Christian Zionism is the belief that Israel today is a continuation of the biblical land of Israel. Palestine will be “returned” to the Jews, then Christ will return to the Holy Land and initiate the end of times."
 
I would say no. They're two different denominations, to my mind, though some Protestants might consider Catholicism to be sectarian.

At any rate, both generally fall within Christian tradition. Judaism does not.
"generally fall within Christian tradition. Judaism does not.'

Jesus said they did. Who am I to believe?

Have you heard of the 10 Commandments?
 
Last edited:
15th post
"Donald Trump’s pick for US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, is likely to be the newest addition to a growing list of Christian Zionists in Trump’s cabinet. During his Senate hearing on Tuesday, he reaffirmed the roots of his connection to Israel and Zionism: “We ultimately are people of the book. We believe the Bible. And therefore, that connection is not geopolitical. It is also spiritual.”
 
"generally fall within Christian tradition. Judaism does not.'

Jesus said they did. Who am I to believe?

Have you heard of the 10 Commandments?
Jesus said Judaism and Christianity are the same tradition? Where?

Christianity wasn't even a tradition during Christ's ministry.

The Decalogue? Yes, Jewish custom.
 
Not any more or any less than every other such instance in human history. People who believe in Darwinian principles shouldn't be making moral arguments when a people's land is conquered. A tribe satisfying their material needs and primitive impulses at the expense of others is quite natural and consistent with evolution and atheism. How can an atheist not appreciate evolution and the satisfaction of material needs and impulses?
I recognize the fact of evolution but that doesn't mean I necessarily appreciate it or approve of the results of it in every case.

Same for China when they were invaded or any other invaded country. Not because of anything more than the invaders and invaded couldn't kill everyone; as in all men, women and children. They had to live side by side. It's not because they wanted to.

Please tell me that you aren't making a distinction between good and evil.
Just because I don't believe in absolutes of good or evil doesn't mean I don't have my personal values of what is good and what is evil.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom