Anti-Israel Jews, INCLUDING the bearded ones, DO NOT have a Biblical argument; they're argument is POLITICAL.
Your continuous use of this strawman proves you never read a about them.
And by the way, LOTS of anti-Israel Jews buy MILLIONS of dollars worth of Israeli Bonds.
You see, MOST if the only want to APPEAR to be politically correct.
Non-Zionist and anti-Zionist Orthodox Jews have a very grounded Biblical and Talmudic argument for their beliefs.
Haredim and Zionism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There are many different ideological reasons for religious opposition to Zionism; however, the main two are most widely expressed by Hasidim and Lithuanian Haredeim.
Historically, many dynasties in Hasidism have expressed anti-Zionist opinions because of the 'Three Oaths'. The Talmud, in Ketubot 111a, mentions that the Jewish people have been bound by three oaths: 1) not to ascend to Eretz Yisrael (the Land of Israel) as a group using force; 2) not to rebel against the nations of the world; and 3) that the nations of the world would not persecute the nation of Israel excessively.[33] Some consider the establishment of the State of Israel to be a violation of these oaths. The first Hasidic anti-Zionist movement was Agudath Israel, established in Poland in 1912.[34] Hareidi groups and people actively and publicly opposing Zionism are Satmar,[35] Toldos Aharon,[36] Neturei Karta.[35]
Lithuanian Haredim, sometimes called mitnagdim, take a different approach to their beliefs from their Hassidic counterparts. Lithuanian religious Jews oppose the state not because of the three oaths midrash but because they feel that Zionism epitomizes secularity and Jewish desire to be void of Torah. Many Lithuanian religious Jews, such as Rabbi Yosef Sholom Elyashiv, have been involved with Zionist politics as Israel progressively becomes more Jewish-oriented.[citation needed]
Amongst the Ashkenazi Orthodox rabbinical leadership, religious Zionists form a minority.[37] Generally speaking, most Sephardi Haredi authorities have never shared the anti-Zionism of their Ashkenazi counterparts, and some (such as the late Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu) are strongly affiliated with Religious Zionism, taking a similar stance to the Hardal movements.[citation needed]. However, there are anti-Zionist elements in the Sefardic communities as well. It is known that the late Baba Sali supported and celebrated the anti-Zionist views of the Satmar Rebbe
Three Oaths - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Anti-Zionist arguments that consider the Three Oaths[edit]
An overview of some of the primary claims made by anti-Zionists concerning the Three Oaths:
Although the Three Oaths are Aggadic in style, precedent shows when Aggadic material in the Talmud presents novel legal material (as opposed to punishments and rewards relating to legal material expounded elsewhere in the Talmud), that material is codified as halacha, unless there is a specific reason not to.[41]
Even if the oaths are to be seen as decrees, the existence of the modern State of Israel does not constitute proof that the decree has ended, because the state's future is still uncertain.[25]
The Satmar Rebbe, in his book Vayoel Moshe maintains that Maimonides spoke of the Three Oaths as binding. (See Modern Debate on the Appropriate Understanding of Maimonides above)
The oaths are between the Jewish people and God, and the gentiles and God respectively. The fact that the gentiles violated their oath does not tacitly mean that the Jewish people are free to do so as well. Historically, atrocities prior to the Holocaust have generally not prompted rabbinic encouragement of mass immigration to Israel, though there have been some notable exceptions.[42][43]
Living in Eretz Yisroel is not a general mitzvah for the Jews collectively, only individuals (see discussion of Rashbash (Solomon ben Simon Duran) in Nachmanides section above).
The Balfour Declaration never covered the Oaths.
The State of Israel has expanded its borders beyond the areas mandated by the UN and have thus expanded the borders without the permission of the nations.
The United Nations approval of the establishment of the State of Israel does not constitute permission from the nations of the world. The Halacha attaches no significant value to the United Nations. The relevant approval should be that of some of the other people who live in the land (in this instance, the Palestinian Arabs).[44]
In response to the Zionists' use of Rabbi Chaim Vital (see above), the Satmar Rebbe argued that Vital's remarks refer not to the Three Oaths incumbent on the Jewish people, but to God's oath not to redeem the Jewish people unless they repent out of love. This oath lasts a thousand years; after that point even repentance out of fear can bring the redemption.[45]
In response to questions of why God would allow the Zionists some measure of success if Zionism is against the Talmud; anti-Zionist religious Jews respond with the following; "The fallacy of the argument lies in the undeniable fact that there is evil in this world. Hashem allows people free will to choose to do wrong, and even to be successful in doing wrong on a large scale. ... Why Hashem decided to grant their efforts some degree of success is one of the mysteries of our era. But the fact that they succeeded is no more a proof that they were doing the right thing, than is the fact that the Germans succeeded in killing six million Jews a proof that they were doing the right thing."[46]
Many Haredim who subscribe to the anti-Zionist view still immigrate to the Land of Israel. Their rationalization is that they do so only as individuals and families, but not as members of the organized mass-immigration, and that they come to the Land solely to live there, not in order to conquer it or rule over it. Such Haredim accordingly do not believe themselves to be in violation of the Three Oaths.
