True Understanding About Israel's Place in the World Requires True Understanding of the Holy Bible - You Want Answers? Guess Where They Are.

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Jun 21, 2010 at 16:44

For the sake of limited time and the necessity of brevity, the earlier response to this was shortened and did not address the fully the characterizations represented in this previous post. So this may be regarded as a continuation, though there is the resurgence of the earlier question, of the need for this dialogue, or in simpler terms, what is the need for your persistence to undermine the Truth of the Holy Bible, and of your attempt to pursue the triviata of unbelief for its own sake.

Earlier, you try an attempt to associate my faith with that of the Roman Catholic Church, of even making it out like I have some supernatural reverence for the head of the Roman Catholic Church. If this is the basis for your attempts at castigating Christianity as a whole, then I can now understand your attitude towards the west as a whole, and your demeaning attitude towards Israel as well. My perspective of the Roman Catholic Church stems from a world view that though started in the Roman Catholic mentality, was ripped away from it by the internal teachings that contradict the Holy Bible. Of such is your quote, "Faith without reason is dangerous:" to whom? And whose reasoning do I believe is the most Biblical? We'll leave that there for the time being.

In your assertion that Islam is embraced by the Judeo-Christian beginnings, you err again. Provision is made for religious expression of the individual, but embracing religion is still the individual's prerogative, and Congress (and the Judiciary is supposed to refrain as well) is instructed from making any intrusions into one's beliefs, within the framework as espoused by the framers. The abuse of that in the current context of whose religion is better, or the absence of one's religious preference is at the core of this country's dilemma, what to do about those that would impose their beliefs, such as we see Islam doing in Saudi Arabia. Since I've already explained this one before, your allegation of my ignoring it is superfluous, for you have chosen to not to accept this on the basis of the valid exposition previously offered.

Your comment about Paul not meeting Abraham or Moses can be sufficiently answered from a verse in the Holy Bible, which in its explanation by Jesus Christ, says that no other man except Jesus Christ has done it either. I'll take Jesus Christ's word on that one.

Conversion in the Biblical realm of faith means that one has acknowledged the WORD of the LORD in its conviction of every man, woman and child of sin, of the need for a Savior to be the substitutionary agent for the payment of death for our sinfulness. Conversion requires that a regeneration in the Spirit has happened and that a new life with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as promised by Jesus Christ has occurred. The Islamic Prophet says he has no such relationship through Jesus Christ, thus no conversion for him.

Let us suppose for a moment, and if I am allowed to advance the idea of the Islamic Prophet converting, since the Southern Baptist convention, or any other modern denomination was not in evidence at that time, it would be inappropriate to assume that joining that communion was even possible…be serious. By the time of the Islamic Prophet, the religious expressions of Christianity had already factionalized itself so much that it is a reasonable situation to expect that he could not make heads or tails of it all, unless he took the time to read the original manuscripts and come to a saving knowledge. By your own assertion and that of so many others, he had not done this; and instead dictated his version of such things, of which you are content to follow. So be it: but do not try and make out like Christianity is something to be adverse to, at least not without understanding what it really means. As to the cathartic experience of the Islamic Prophet's claim of his heavenly encounter, where are his witnesses? When Jesus Christ met with Moses and Elijah in the transfiguration, there were witnesses.

Of the people of Almighty God that were believers prior to the first advent of Jesus Christ, were they Christian in the sense we know a true Christian today? No, absolutely not. But are they believers in faith of the promise that Almighty God made regarding the Anointed One, the Holy One of Israel, of Whom the Scripture wrote of about Yeshua HaMashiach? Absolutely so, for it is of Him the promises were made, from the time of Adam, to Job and Abraham, to Jacob (Israel) through Joseph to Moses, to David and Solomon, to Joseph and Mary in their receiving the WORD in the dream and seeing it fulfilled in their mortal lifetime; then on to the fulfilments of the prophets like Daniel, Isaiah and Ezekiel and others. I could go on and on, but the question is- will you receive it faith like they did?

And we come again to the centerpiece of these series of expositions, of the acceptance of Israel as the Jewish state. I know fully well that Mr. Herzl's utopian (secular) idea was for a place to which people of Jewish heritage could resort in the face of blackballing, discrimination and extermination in their various host nations. They had and have endured expulsions and acts of terror over the centuries and there was the cry to Almighty God to remember His people. And He did, but not the way the Mr. Herzl dreamed. The true Christian evangelical does not support the Israel of Mr. Herzl's exposition, but the Israel of the Biblical exposition. Any other mindset of how it is supposed to turn out is going to be disappointing to those who have had other ideas about who is going to rule in Jerusalem. Christians are NOT going to be instrumental in the establishing the Kingdom in Jerusalem, but we who are true to His WORD are witnesses to when He Who is the true LORD does.

Let us digress to the disposition of the glory of Persia. For starters, Iran cannot hold a candle to Persia, though the Bible says that the problems of the last days will come in part from a former part of Persia. Next, the list of supposed accomplishments you supply of the Islamic Revolutionary Republic of Iran are intangible differences that do not speak to the true meaning of glory; an example being if Islam is universally conciliatory to women being allowed higher education, why do we hear of Afghan schools for girls be attacked and forced to close by the Taliban? Wealth? I am not sure where you are getting your data, or if such data is really telling us the real truth, but it's reported Iran is in a economic crisis that would rival that of United States if taken on a comparative analysis. Given that there is the stated understanding that Iran is working on its nuclear status, then it is conclusive that such endeavors are the most expensive of any endeavor a government can undertake, and you can bet America knows about that better than anyone else.

Surprise about the justice system, I am expecting the designer of true Justice, the True Judge, will reform the world judiciary upon His Arrival, and completely trash the world's corrupted ways. Failure to acknowledge Almighty God and His sense of justice will always be the bane of the human experience, and neither Iran's, nor the former Persian system of justice can compare. And it's not any better here either, for that matter. As for second class citizenship in Iran, you are going to sit at your computer and tell me that dhimmi status is not the reality in an Islamic society that practices the fundamental form of Islam….seriously? So, the former glory of Persia is an expression of the time, that, surprise, Cyrus did receive blessings for allowing the original return of Israel to its land of heritage, and THAT is the glory I am speaking of. Can we say the same thing of Ahmadinejad? I do not think so.

And finally, the Holy Bible says, I will bless those who help you, and curse those who curse you. Draw your own conclusions as you observe how Israel remains in their land, and only as the times of the Gentiles comes to a close do the circumstances of completing the fulfillment of their (Israel's) promise do we see that the remnant spoken in the prophets of are the final inheritors of Abraham's promise. By the way, any truly evangelical believers in Jesus Christ are not expected to be there when it happens, only after it happens.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".