Messianic Jewish Teenager Ami Ortiz Victim Of Terror Attack By Israeli Jews For Believing In Jesus Christ!

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25306012/

Commentary from a Messianic Jewish magazine

The Bloodline Of The John McCain Supporting Rothschilds

This may open me up to charges of anti – Semitism. It is a risk that I am willing to take.

Financial Wizards & Wealthy Cults The Rothschild Bloodline

Artwork Depicting Jesus Christ Last Supper As Homosexual Orgy Shown At Austrian Museum

Click on link below.

Erotic Jesus sparks art debate in Austria | U.S. | Reuters

John McCain Accepts The Endorsement Of Heretic John Hagee!

First Huckabee, then McCain, who was on record in 1999 as stating that he did not want to overturn Roe v. Wade. McCain also has a long record of opposing many of the things on Hagee’s political and religious agendas. This just proves that the guy who denies the Messiahship of Jesus Christ, claims that Jesus Christ was killed by Rome for His political beliefs,prophesied that the United States would attack Iran in 2007 (and is still demanding that we attack Iran!) and preaches dual covenant theology is simply in it for the power and money.

Replacement Theology

From Dr. Randy Weiss of Crosstalk.com, who can be reached at randy@crosstalk.org

Conditions deteriorated between Jews and Christians
until the Church led the world into the anti-Semitic
excesses of the era known as the Dark Ages. It is worth
remembering that the Dark Ages of the Gentile world
revealed a renaissance of Jewish literature and
philosophy. While the Gentile world floundered in
illiteracy, the Jewish world gave rise to the birth of
talmudic writings and rabbinic literature that might
best be described as an era of Jewish Enlightenment.
Yet the Christian world seethed with hatred against
everything Jewish. And it was during these Dark Ages
that conditions further deteriorated for Jews. The
history of the Church was marred by abominable medieval
Christian atrocities against Jews.

The Church, as the “new Israel,” attacked the
original children of Israel with an unholy vengeance.
Christian theologians boldly revealed their propensity
to interpret the promises of God as having been shifted
from Israel to the Church. In their view, Christianity
got the blessings and the Jews retained the curses of
God. As the theology of the Church solidified, their
perspective on Jews and Judaism decomposed. The
Church’s premier thinkers inadvertently became the
Jew’s worst nightmare.

Aurelius Augustinus, the bishop of Hippo (354 – 430),
better known as Saint Augustine, was a leader of the
Church during the fourth and fifth centuries CE. Under
his guidance, Christianity slid deeply into the error
of anti-Semitism. It can be deduced from the teachings
of Augustine that the Church came to a view that the
Jews were a lost race without hope of redemption. The
Church determined that Israel had forfeited her
covenants by rejecting Christ. Augustinian theology
provided for a dramatic shift in Catholic politics,
worldviews, and eschatology. The leaders of the Church
of Rome began to teach that all the future messianic
promises of natural Israel were transferred to the new
spiritual Israel–the Church.

The Roman Catholic Church appropriated the system of
interpretation first developed by Origen in the early
2nd century. This permitted Church leaders to develop
their own symbolic interpretations of the Bible. As the
theology of Augustine became popularized, the Church
soon began teaching that God had chosen the Church to
receive all of the promises previously granted to
Israel as a divine right of Christianity. To the
detriment of the Jewish people, this dangerous system
of thought continued to expand throughout the region
touched by Church authority. That authority did expand
to include as much political control as the Church
could gain in the world. During portions of the Middle
Ages, the Church was in a position of power that
covered most of the continent of Europe. Unfortunately,
the beliefs and practices of the Church that ruled
Europe did not reflect the original orthodox views of
the earlier leaders of the Church in Israel. It is
clear from the accounts of history that when the Church
was dominant in both religion and politics, it led to
some of the most oppressive periods of Christianity. It
must also be admitted that the negative effects of
power were felt by both Christians and those outside of
the Church.

Augustine’s teaching did not lose impact after his
death. His views prevailed and furthered the
depreciation of the Jewish people. Any system of
Christian thought that presents the Church as having
spiritually taken the place of Israel, such as
Replacement Theology, or Dominion Theology, is heavily
dependent on the system of early Catholic biblical
interpretation developed by Origen and Augustine.

This perverted heresy worked its way deep into the
beliefs of the Roman Church. The effects have been felt
in many Christian circles since the early fifth century
when it became embedded in the spiritual DNA of many
Christians. Soon the Church espoused the view that it
had become heir to the covenant promises of God
previously granted to Israel. This also included the
Church’s right to the Holyland. Some within the
Catholic Church still hold the hope of a spiritual
claim to Israel. I believe it is one of the reasons
they refused to recognize the nation of Israel until
recently. Instead of leaving Jerusalem under the
control of Jews, Some Catholics would have preferred
that the Vatican be granted control over the Holyland
and the holy sites.

Modern history is closely connected to ancient history.
In a sense, the Jews were in the way of the Church
then. The Jews remain in the way now. The difference is
that at that earlier time, the Church used its newfound
political power to move the Jews out of their way. They
did so by enacting and enforcing terrible anti-Jewish
legislation. This wicked practice was one of the sad
legacies of the era of Christian political dominion. As
is well known by Jewish people, the Church was the
primary source of problems throughout the Middle Ages.
It must be remembered that the Church used terror and
violence to control the Jews. And they used brute force
to convert Jews to Christianity. It was common for
Christians to exert political oppression and every form
of cruelty to dominate Jews or kill them when it suited
the oppressors.

Beginning in the Dark Ages and continuing throughout
the Middle Ages, anti-Semitism came to the world from
the Church. Jewish people were permitted to live in
Christian controlled areas. However, this was not due
to any beneficent attitudes. Rather, it was to prove
the veracity of the Old Testament prophecies. Christian
leaders, such as Augustine, presumed that Scriptures
predicted that the Jews would be rejected and
dispersed. Therefore, when Jews were found to be living
below the standards of Christians, even if under
horrifying circumstances, it revealed divine punishment
and prophetic fulfillment. Jewish suffering proved
God’s will according to the perverse view of some
Christians in that age. Copyright 2005 by Randy Weiss, Ph.D.

Pat Robertson: Dual Covenant Theology Heretic

Independent Conservative » Blog Archive » Why Did Pat Robertson Lie to Michael Eisner About Salvation?On June 20, 2006 the cable TV network CNBC featured media mogul
Michael Eisner interviewing Pat Robertson. Although this happened some
time ago, there was something that took place during this particular
interview, that I have not found much outcry against and I felt it
should be noted here. Because it is a totally misleading use of
scripture and Pat Robertson once again showed he’s following AND
TEACHING a false gospel, to say what he said to Michael Eisner.

What concerns me occurred at the tail end of the interview. You can watch video of the interview via this link and once the interview video starts (after an advertisement), you can advance to 4:22 to see where things start regarding what I’m speaking of here.

Below is a quote from the official transcript.

…
MICHAEL EISNER:
This may be a silly question. I’ve almost been married as long as you have. About 40 years. How long have you been married?

PAT ROBERTSON:
About 52.

MICHAEL EISNER:
All right. So I’m not– I’m not in your league. I’m not in your league.

PAT ROBERTSON:
All right.

MICHAEL EISNER:
So my wife is Christian.

PAT ROBERTSON:
Right.

MICHAEL EISNER:
So I appreciate the fact that she’s Christian. She can go to heaven. I’m Jewish.

PAT ROBERTSON:
Yeah.

MICHAEL EISNER:
So from what I understand, we only can be together in– on this Earth. ‘Cause I can’t go to heaven, according to the 700 Club.

PAT ROBERTSON:
No, not according to the 700 Club. I don’t know who it’s according to.

MICHAEL EISNER:
All right. So– well, I thought Jews couldn’t go to heaven.

PAT ROBERTSON:
All right. Here’s the deal. And with this– the Apostle Paul said that
all Israel will be saved. There’s going to come a time when all Jews
are gonna come to heaven. They’re all gonna meet the– the Lord. And–
and it’s– it’s in the Old Testament. Zachariah says they’ll look upon
him who they have pierced, and they’re going to mourn and so forth. But
there’s gonna come a time of extraordinary persecution. There already
has come. But it’s gonna be some serious stuff. And– it’s told by the
Old Testament prophets the answer that we believe as evangelicals is
that God has a special role for the Jewish people. And you look at– you
look at the 22nd Psalm. He talks about his bones pulled out of joint,
you know? And he talks about people surrounding. And he looks down, and
it describes the crucifixion. It’s all in there. It’s in the Old
Testament– describing what happened. And– I’m just one of the goy that
came along late. (LAUGHTER) I– I’m– I’m converting to the– to the faith
of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

MICHAEL EISNER:
So you’re converting to Judaism.

PAT ROBERTSON:
Well, I’m not converting to Judaism. (OVERTALK)

MICHAEL EISNER:
See, I thought I’d– this would be– this would be a big announcement here.

PAT ROBERTSON:
(LAUGHTER) I’m–

MICHAEL EISNER:
I could get a big rating.

PAT ROBERTSON:
I’m converting– (OVERTALK)

MICHAEL EISNER:
Pat Robertson converts to Judaism. (OVERTALK)

PAT ROBERTSON:
–faith of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And– but the time is coming very
soon when there’s going to be a revelation of the Lord to everybody.
And all Israel, all Israel is gonna get saved.

MICHAEL EISNER:
You’ve always been known to be very pro-Israel.

PAT ROBERTSON:
Totally pro-Israel. I mean, I– I’ve got the Star of David printed on my underwear. I mean, it’s that kind of thing.

MICHAEL EISNER:
Thought you had Mickey Mouse on your underwear.

PAT ROBERTSON:
(LAUGHTER) (UNINTEL) said you’re more Israeli than (UNINTEL). But in–
in any event– I firmly believe that according to the Bible, the– the
fullness of the Gentiles will come in. And then all Israel will be
saved. That’s what the Apostle Paul wrote.

MICHAEL EISNER:
Wow. (LAUGHTER) Thank you very much– (OVERTALK)

MICHAEL EISNER:
Got a lot to think about now.

PAT ROBERTSON:
(LAUGHTER) I want you to be with your wife.

MICHAEL EISNER:
Yeah. I’m gonna be with her, one way or the other.

PAT ROBERTSON:
Okay. (LAUGHTER)

MICHAEL EISNER:
Thank you.

What Pat Robertson basically said was (paraphrasing), All you Jews are going to Heaven, because Paul said ALL ISRAEL will be saved.

In the context Pat Robertson spoke, he spoke a lie. We could say Hebrew scripture notes all Israel one day went into the promised land, HOWEVER we should not forget that many did not get beyond the wilderness.

Numbers 14:22-32 (New American Standard Bible) 22 “Surely all the men who have seen My glory and My signs which I performed in Egypt and in the wilderness, yet have put Me to the test these ten times and have not listened to My voice, 23 shall by no means see the land which I swore to their fathers, nor shall any of those who spurned Me see it. 24 “But My servant Caleb, because he has had a different spirit and has followed Me fully, I will bring into the land which he entered, and his descendants shall take possession of it. 25 “Now the Amalekites and the Canaanites live in the valleys; turn tomorrow and set out to the wilderness by the way of the Red Sea.” 26 The LORD spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, 27 “How long shall I bear with this evil congregation who are grumbling against Me? I have heard the complaints of the sons of Israel, which they are making against Me. 28 “Say to them, ‘As I live,’ says the LORD, ‘just as you have spoken in My hearing, so I will surely do to you; 29 your corpses will fall in this wilderness, even all your numbered men, according to your complete number from twenty years old and upward, who have grumbled against Me. 30 ‘Surely you shall not come into the land in which I swore to settle you, except Caleb the son of Jephunneh and Joshua the son of Nun. 31 ‘Your children, however, whom you said would become a prey–I will bring them in, and they will know the land which you have rejected. 32 ‘But as for you, your corpses will fall in this wilderness.

Take note of the statement “nor shall any of those who spurned Me see it”.
The Messiah of Hebrew scripture has come and His name is Jesus, Yeshua.
Yeshua, Jesus is the Christ. Since his coming, He warned Israel for
their unbelief in Him.

Luke 19:41-44 (New American Standard Bible) 41 When He approached Jerusalem, He saw the city and wept over it, 42 saying, “If you had known in this day, even you, the things which make for peace! But now they have been hidden from your eyes. 43 “For the days will come upon you when your enemies will throw up a barricade against you, and surround you and hem you in on every side, 44 and they will level you to the ground and your children within you, and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not recognize the time of your visitation.”

And it did happen.

Jesus provided the means for salvation through belief on Him. Jesus even explained this himself in John 3.
Through His sacrificial death, burial and resurrection, He provides
salvation to all who believe on Him, turning from darkness, both Jew
and Gentile alike.

One who rejects Jesus does not have the Father, they do not have God. They are not saved.

1 John 2:22-23 (New American Standard Bible) 22 Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. 23 Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also.

Therefore, it is impossible to tell anyone, even a Jew (a person of Hebrew blood) that they can be saved via any means except they believe on Jesus Christ. If they deny Him, they are not saved, period.

So what of all Israel being saved as Paul said? It is just like it
was for the Jews of the past. Those who deny the truth God has given to
man through His Son will perish, but a final remnant of Israel will
believe on Him and be saved. This does not mean Michael Eisner will be
part of that group. So to tell Michael Eisner “all Israel”, as if it
applies to him and all Jews is an untruth. Romans 11
is best read in full, given it details things fully. Through Hebrew
disobedience a means of salvation was made for Gentiles that believe on
Christ, but no Jew who rejects Christ will be saved. All Jews reading
this post should read the book of Hebrews from its first chapter to its last (chapter 13). When the fullness of Gentiles has come in (all Gentiles who are the Lord’s believe on Him),
that final remaining remnant of Hebrew blood will be at a point in
biblical prophesy, where they will all accept Jesus as Lord and He will
save them and all still in flesh at that time who believe on Him. All
who die today believing on Christ are saved too, but not anyone who
fails to. This does not mean Michael Eisner is saved by virtue of his
heritage, no more than anyone else that fails to believe on Jesus.

I feel it is a heinous crime against the Lord God, that so-called Christians are lying to people of Hebrew descent.

Related posts:

• Pat Robertson is a False Prophet and it’s Time We Christians Stop Giving Him a Pass! Benny Hinn too.
• And
  We Have (More) Proof Pat Robertson and Medina S. Pullings are False
  Prophets. Do you Know of Others Who Gave False 2007 Prophesies?
• Thank you Lord for Exposing the False Prophet, AGAIN! Pat Robertson Endorses Rudy Giuliani.

Powered by ScribeFire.

The Richard Cohen Farrakhan Thing On Barack HUSSEIN Obama Is Having Its Intended Effect

Please reference Big Trouble For Barack HUSSEIN Obama Based On His Church which was based on this Richard Cohen Washington Post column. Jewish voters are becoming wary of the fellow. See article below, especially the discussion board at bottom (including an angle on some Christian killer fellow named Raila Odinga of Kenya that is allegedly Obama’s cousin; have to check it out!). So, the anti – Hussein Obama coalition includes feminists, Hispanics, and Jews. This could case a real fragmentation of the left. In any event, this is still another example of how not to be conformed by the ways of the world. So many white evangelical Christians are going for Mike Huckabee and Mormon Mitt Romney, so many black Christians are going for Barack HUSSEIN Obama and Hillary Clinton. All the more reason why those of us of all races, nationalities, tribes, tongues, socioeconomic backgrounds, etc. that are on the Lord’s side need to stand up.

Who are you, Barack Obama? | Jerusalem Post

Big Trouble For Barack HUSSEIN Obama Based On His Church?

Now a few months back when Trinity Church of Christ was being derided for being a black nationalist liberation theology outfit that does not preach the true Jesus Christ, the left out of their hatred for Jesus Christ rushed to condemn Tucker Carlson and the other attackers. As a matter of fact, I participated in a lively “discussion” on that issue the day that I started this weblog. But now that Hillary Clinton fans see their ice queen’s march to the presidency threatened by this Negro usurper, the white left begins to pull from the same bag of racist parlor tricks as does conservatives.

Witness this article from Richard Cohen of the Washington Post. Now Cohen is actually an atheist, but he pretends to be Jewish when it is time to launch political attacks at his enemies by associating them with anti – Semitism. Cohen completely ignores the huge Jew and Israel hating contingent among Hillary Clinton supporters to demand that Obama disavow his church because its magazine gave an award to Louis Farrakhan. Now Trinity United Church of Christ has been doing similar things for years. As a matter of fact, it is impossible for the leading black liberation theology church in Chicago, where Farrakhan has his home base, not to have praised Farrakhan and similar black nationalists. If Cohen didn’t care about it when Obama was elected to Senate and becoming a much – needed celebrity for the Democratic Party the past four years, he certainly doesn’t care about it now. Just like he didn’t care about the ties that Congressional Black Caucus and NAACP leader Kwiese Mfume had with the Nation of Islam. Mfume, you see, wasn’t running against Bill Clinton’s wife.

Of course, the goal of this is to put Obama in a no – win situation. First of all, associating Barack HUSSEIN Obama with the “black Muslim” radical Farrakhan reminds white voters of things like Barack HUSSEIN Obama having an African Muslim father (and stepfather) and spending a few years in a Muslim school in Indonesia. Now the Nation of Islam is every bit the pseudo – Islam as Trinity United is pseudo – Christianity, but Cohen (and the Clintons) are banking on your typical Nevada, South Carolina, Florida, etc. white primary voter not knowing this.

Second, suppose Obama chooses not to respond. The line then becomes that JUST MAYBE Obama loves Farrakhan and hates Jews. That brings the fact that Obama, for a host of legitimate reasons that I will not get into, is known to be more sympathetic to the Palestinians and less sympathetic to Israel than most prominent politicians from the backburner to the forefront. Now this has not been a major issue so far primarily because Cohen and the rest of the left have been far more willing to countenance anti – Israel and pro – Palestinian voices than in the past because of spite against the pro – Israel Republican evangelical Christians. (More than a few Jewish leaders, and not all of them liberal, have even found backing a Palestinian state and risking the almost certain destruction of Israel as a result preferable to having to thank evangelical Christians for defending Israel.) This makes support for Israel a prominent political consideration in the Democratic Party that is less than two years removed from running off Joe Lieberman again. The thing is that even if Barack HUSSEIN Obama does what is required of him, Jews will have to think long and hard about whether to support the “risky unknown unproven black guy from Chicago with the African Muslim name” or “stick with the safe proven fighter for Israel and Jewish interests Hillary Clinton.” Please recall: a major hindrance with Jews in choosing between black and white candidates is the fear that whenever black interests and Jewish interests collide, that the black elected official will side with his own people. Needless to say, no threat of that exists if the elected official is Jewish or Caucasian Gentile. And that was the point of Cohen’s rehashing the “black – Jewish coalition” during the civil rights era, to the point of stating rather hyperbolically “Martin Luther King, Jr. always stood up against anti – Semitism and for Israel” and the utterly ridiculous charge “Obama’s failing to speak out would be like stomping on Goodman and Schwerner’s graves!” Being a well educated black man with strong ties to the civil rights community, Obama needs no history lesson from Cohen, and Cohen knows this. Instead, its purpose was to send a clear message to Jewish Democrats – of which there are not a few especially in the key February 5th Florida primary that will basically make or break Hillary Clinton’s campaign as Nevada is expected to be inconclusive, she is toast in South Carolina and Georgia, and she has been forced to use up her best ammunition (crying, attacks on Obama’s SUPERIOR qualifications) – that the appropriate thing to do is to vigorously support and promote Clinton regardless of what Obama does, and that they can do so without guilt and with demands that there be no recriminations from the black community and demand that our leadership lie down and take its place behind every other coalition on the left (labor, feminists, Jews, environmentalists, homosexuals, atheists) just like always. Well consider that when a lot of prominent Jews such as Lieberman (and Cohen) started opposing affirmative action because blacks were taking too many college spots away from Jews and when they joined the right wing hatemongers to defend Jewish Ivy League student Eden Jacobowitz’s yelling “hey you black water buffalo, if you want to act like animals you should go to the zoo!” at black black students for the “crime” of interrupting his studying, the past sacrifices of those like Goodman and Schwerner were invoked to deal with any guilt over those issues as well.

Third, suppose Obama disavows his church, Farrakhan, or both. First of all, his doing so will not prevent Jewish political leaders from backing Hillary Clinton. Second, and almost as important, it keeps the race issue alive, and that always benefits Hillary Clinton. Doing it in a way that keeps Hillary Clinton out of the picture so that she cannot be accused of race baiting or benefitting from the practice? Even better! And in a manner that will allow the media – especially the many in the media (and have ready access to it) that are supporting Hillary Clinton, like Gloria Steinem, who made the ridiculous claim that wealthy white women like her have had it harder than black men, and got away with it because of black leaders so fear crossing swords with white feminists because they know who will win that battle in the leftist coalition EVERY SINGLE TIME to start the “is Barack Obama black enough?” and to start sticking a microphone in the face of every black primary voter in South Carolina asking “Is Barack Obama a sellout for denouncing the man who led the Million Man March?”

Anything that takes the attention away from the fact that electing Hillary Clinton would mean continuing the past 20 years of this country being governed by utterly corrupt members of the same two families that are actually great friends (please note that Bill Clinton did not prosecute George H. W. Bush over Iran – Contra and that George W. Bush did not prosecute Bill Clinton over Chinagate … if Hillary Clinton gets elected do not think that she will go after George W. Bush over his scandals) and support basically the same policies (click here to read “The Bush-Clinton Dynasty by Chuck Baldwin) is good for Hillary Clinton. So is not talking about how not only did she vote for the Iraq War, but her husband used the same rationale as did George W. Bush – weapons of mass destruction – for bombing Iraq during his impeachment hearings. So is not talking about how she supports the death penalty, three strikes laws, and welfare reform. Or how “the great Clinton economy” was nothing more than companies ripping off hundreds of billions of dollars – much of it retirement fund money – through the stock market on Pets.com schemes, and how the Enron scandal (and remember Enron executives contributed heavily to the Clintons!) actually began during the Clinton administration, and how the current mortgage crisis was created by lenders desperate to recover the capital that they lost when the dot.com bubble (that the Clinton administration encouraged every step of the way and even took credit for helping create) burst. And no, it is not talking about how under the Clinton the September 11th hijackers all entered the country and did their training all while our huge national security apparatus was monitoring them. That was why the attacks were attributed to Al Qaeda almost immediately, long before they took responsibility for them.

This is not to say that Obama would be any better on these or other issues. But these issues are compelling reasons to vote AGAINST Hillary Clinton. Everyone knows that Hillary Clinton will govern just as her husband did. As a matter of fact, she has actually used that fact as a major part of her platform (refusing to acknowledge that her husband is not nearly as popular as is portrayed, with most of his “popularity” due to dislike of the other side). Instead, her message has been “even though I am going to continue the same evil policies that have been disastrous for the country in every way as have my husband and both Bushes since 1988, my being the first female president would make it all different and better!”

The lesson for Christians in this incident is clear: do not be conformed to the world or the ways in it. Else you will be party to its wickedness.

Was The Pope Jewish?

From Dr. Randy Weiss of Crosstalk.com, who can be reached at randy@crosstalk.org

Judaism brought much to the world of first century
Christianity. I want to explain one bold claim that I
regularly make in my own efforts to cause Christians to
reconsider the facts. I have been quoted many times for
a declaration that sounds odd, yet helps call attention
to a realistic issue. I have said: The first fifteen
popes were Jewish! I state this for effect to establish
the fact that those who assume the Church was not
inhabited by Jews are sadly mistaken. Of course this
requires some explanation.

Eusebius, one of the most famous ancient historians of
the early Church, details that the Jerusalem Church
(the first Church) was led by Jewish bishops until the
Roman invasion under Hadrian (approximately one hundred
years after the death of Jesus). Permit me to quote his
record and provide the names of the first fifteen
Jewish leaders of the original Church in Jerusalem. It
seems that their identity and their Jewishness have
been forgotten by most Gentile Christians.

There were fifteen successions of bishops in that
church, all which, they say, were Hebrews from the
first, and received the knowledge of Christ pure and
unadulterated; so that, in the estimation of those who
were able to judge they were well approved, and worthy
of the episcopal office. For at that time the whole
church under them, consisted of faithful Hebrews who
continued from the time of the apostles, until the
siege took place . . . The first, then, was James
called the brother of our Lord; after whom, the second
was Simeon, the third Justus, the fourth Zaccheus, the
fifth Tobias, the sixth Benjamin, the seventh John, the
eighth Matthew, the ninth Philip, the tenth Seneca, the
eleventh Justus, the twelfth Levi, the thirteenth
Ephres, the fourteenth Joseph, and finally, the
fifteenth Judas. These are all the bishops of Jerusalem
that filled up the time from the apostles until the
abovementioned time, all of the circumcision.

Each name of each Jewish bishop going all the way back
to James, the brother of Jesus is listed in an unbroken
line of Jewish bishops that lasted until the early
decades of the second century. In the earliest era of
the Church, the leaders of the Church were called
bishops. The term “Pope” was not used as it is
currently understood until much later (perhaps as late
as the ninth century). However, Jewish “Popes,”
such as Clement, the third alleged to succeed Saint
Peter, were even included within the lineage that the
Church of Rome used to trace their line of Popes
allegedly unbroken all the way back to the Jewish
fisherman. In a very real sense, the Jewish believers
used to run the show and fill the pews. How did we get
left out of modern Christianity? The Jewish leadership
of the Early Church is undeniable and should be
remembered.

Jewish bishops in Jerusalem were obviously the norm
when the primary population of the Church consisted of
Jewish people. What some might find interesting is that
now after nearly 1,900 years, Jerusalem once again has
a Jewish bishop. During Pope John Paul’s visit to
Israel in the spring of 2000, he appointed Benedictine
Abbot Jean-Baptiste Gourion to the position of bishop
at a Catholic church near Jerusalem. He was born in
1934 to a Jewish family in Algeria. This book does
contain some critical comments about Pope John Paul II.
However, I believe he deserves recognition for his
foresight in appointing a Jewish bishop to the region
at this critical time in history. I can only hope that
the next pope also grows in sensitivity to the Jewish
people and the problems facing modern Israel.

Some Christian scholars continue to misinterpret the
circumstances whereby Jewish leadership of the Early
Church dissipated. William MacDonald presumes that the
“internationals” hastily took over from the
children of “faithful Abraham.” He is not exactly
correct. “Father Abraham” had many sons; some of
them ran the Church. He ignores that “in the middle
of the first century” the New Testament was not yet
written. Paul was still in the middle of his
evangelistic efforts. It should not be presumed, as is
often accepted, that the Temple and the Church were
“polarized around the Lord Jesus Christ”
immediately following Pentecost. Unquestionably, this
polarization occurred, however, it was nearly a century
after that first Pentecost of the Church age featured
in the Book of the Acts of the Apostles.

The dictates of Rome during that century show how the
prevailing worldview differentiated Jews from
Christians–they did not! The Jews of the era were not
separate and distinct from the Christians of that time.
When the Jews of Rome were expelled by Claudius, the
Christians and Jews were all viewed the same–as Jews.
The behavior of Rome against the Jews affected the
Christians exactly as it did the rest of the Jews in
the empire. In the eyes of Rome, Christianity was
“indistinguishable from the synagogue.”

One need not look beyond the New Testament account in
the Acts of the Apostles to understand the situation.
When Paul came to Corinth in Acts 18:2, he visited with
two Jewish Christians, Aquila and Priscilla. They had
recently left Rome. Their exit was due to an edict by
Claudius demanding that all the Jews of Rome be
expelled. F. F. Bruce makes clear that they were not
converts of the Apostle Paul. Rather, they had become
Christians while living in Rome. In fact, the edict by
Claudius to expel the Jews was likely the result of the
propagation of Christianity among the ranks of the
Jewish community in Rome. This conclusion is justified
by “the natural inference from the statement of
Suetonius that ‘because the Jews of Rome were
indulging in constant riots at the instigation of
Chrestus (impulsore Chresto) he expelled them from the
city.’ ”

From Dr. Randy Weiss of Crosstalk.com, who can be reached at randy@crosstalk.org

The early Jewish Christians were certainly included as
one category of Jews among many sects of Judaism.
“Christianity was indistinguishable from Judaism in
the time of Claudius.” However, this condition did
not remain stagnant. “It was perfectly
distinguishable by the time Suetonius wrote (c. A.D.
120), and it was well known that it had been founded by
Christ (Christus, not unnaturally confused with the
common slave-name Chrestus, which was pronounced in
practically the same way).

Copyright 2005 by Randy Weiss, Ph.D.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Former Klansman and His Victim Reconcile During an Extraordinary Event in Alabama

And the Barack Hussein Obama Hillary Clinton Martin Luther King, Jr. (not Sr.!) Christian liberals say the Jesus Christ of the Bible is not real. We do not need racial re – education courses, racial sensitivity courses, tolerance and diversity courses, or political correctness and multiculturalism. We need Jesus Christ. Original link here plus Breaking Christian News’ link.

Jesus Christ profoundly changed the Klansman.

MOBILE, Ala. — It was the week before Thanksgiving, and Stan
Chassin, a 59-year-old investment counselor in Mobile, had been nervous
all day. He had heard that a bully from his youth was coming back to town.
Tommy Tarrants had terrorized Chassin in high school by cursing him for
being Jewish, grabbing him by the throat and threatening to kill him.

Chassin had watched from afar as Tarrants left school, joined up
with the Ku Klux Klan and was wounded in a police ambush while
attempting to blow up the home of a Jewish man in Meridian, Miss.”I realized he could have killed me,” Chassin says.

Tarrants was now 60 and returning to Mobile, not as a Klansman, but as a profoundly changed man. Years before, he had published a memoir, The Conversion of a Klansman,
and a decade ago had become president of the C.S. Lewis Institute, a
Washington, D.C., organization dedicated to helping people grow
spiritually.

Tarrants was to be the guest speaker at a dinner in town at Spring
Hill Presbyterian Church. Chassin, wary about what he had heard of
Tarrants’ transformation, wanted to see for himself. “My father always taught me to confront my fears,” Chassin says. “I
had a chance to unload my demons. But the closer I got to that day, I
wondered, ‘Do I have the internal fortitude to go through with this?’”

When he walked into the Fellowship Hall at Spring Hill Presbyterian
Church and saw Tarrants, Chassin had a flashback to high school. “I
thought, he’s not so big, I could have taken him!” Tall and slightly stooped, Tarrants had no hint about him of the long-ago teenager’s swagger or rant. As Tarrants was introduced by the Rev. Norman H. McCrummen III, Tarrants seemed to Chassin “almost frail.”

With his gently modulated voice, and touches of a dinner speaker’s
humor, Tarrants spoke of his slide toward militant bigotry, how he
learned to despise blacks and loathe Jews. He talked about sin as “a
cancer” that had come into his body and heart. He told of being in a prison cell, of reading classical philosophy
and Scripture, of a profound change in his heart as he came to
understand the true meaning of God in his life. He spoke of grace, of
forgiveness.

After Tarrants finished his speech, he asked for questions. Chassin hesitated. Then he stood. “It’s hard facing you,” he told Tarrants. Chassin recounted the story of how Tarrants had grabbed him by the throat at school, calling him anti-Semitic slurs. A few others in the audience were worried, at first, what Chassin
might do — getting even after all these years for the long-simmering
aggression.As Chassin’s voice got stronger, he grew calmer. As he spoke, he saw a look of pain on Tarrants’ face.

McCrummen, watching, says he saw Tarrants “almost crumble. It was so obvious, the remorse of the memory.”

Chassin recalled how a few weeks earlier, sitting in synagogue on
Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, he had heard the voice of God.

“God told me,” Chassin said, “You have to forgive him for what he did to you.

“And then, for all the hatred and disgust you felt toward him, you
have to ask Tommy,” Chassin’s voice was breaking now, “to forgive you.”

The hall fell silent.

Quietly, Tarrants answered: “I appreciate you being so gracious and
forgiving. I’m very grateful, Stan, for your having the courage to come
and share your forgiveness.”

Tarrants turned to the audience: “Isn’t it amazing,” he went on softly, “what God can do? God spoke to him.”

Chassin walked forward and held out his hand to shake.

The two men embraced.

Chassin was weeping.

Tarrants, who had never had anyone approach him from his past like
this, felt anguished to know of the pain he had inflicted on Chassin
all these years. He wondered who else from his past might still be
carrying old wounds, who else he must still reconcile with.

McCrummen returned to the podium, tears in his eyes at the extraordinary event he had just witnessed.

“In the fullness of your love, you give us a heart and a mind, to
recognize this,” McCrummen prayed. “Thank you for seeing us and hearing
us and not giving up on us.”

Samford Turner, a regional church leader, was in the audience and
wrote up a long letter about what had happened. He e-mailed it to local
pastors, who forwarded it throughout the community. He titled his
account The Miracle at Spring Hill Presbyterian Church.

In coming days, Chassin was approached by numerous friends, even
relative strangers, who told him that, in reading of the event, they
had started crying.

Chassin says his life has been changed.

Tarrants says the encounter “raises questions that may lead to a new phase” in his own life, “a new journey.”

What more can he do, Tarrants wonders, to combat racism and anti-Semitism? “Where will this lead me?” he wonders.

Several weeks later, Chassin returned to his old high school to walk
the grounds and recall the encounter that “joined our lives.”

He, too, speaks of reconciliation, of God’s presence, of “a new phase of my life.”

Then he turns a corner on an alley and spots a swastika
spray-painted on a wall. For a moment, Chassin is taken aback. “It
makes me so sad,” he says.

Then he realizes what lies ahead for him. His mission now, like that
of Tarrants, is to further education about hatred, about forgiveness. “The ignorance,” he says, “never goes away.”

Powered by ScribeFire.

Bill Kristol Being Added To New York Times Oped Page

huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/28/bill-kristol-to-become-e_n_78635.html

In my old religious right GOP days, I would have hailed this as a victory for conservatism. But now, I am forced to reckon with the fact that Bill Kristol is not a Christian, but a very aggressive big business neoconservative Zionist who is extremely hard – hearted towards the poor and the dispossessed. As a matter of fact, Kristol is the son of Irving Kristol, who is called the father of neoconservatism. Now is not the time to be worried about being labeled “anti – Semite” or be distracted with ideological or partisan political games. As much as I oppose Mike Huckabee, it is interesting to note, for instance, that the neocons are trashing the fellow because he represents people that actually takes their Christianity seriously rather than worshiping a false god of state, tradition, heritage, values, etc. These same people actually went ballistic over Mike Huckabee’s saying “the purpose of Christmas is to honor Christ”, hounded him until he stopped calling himself “a Christian leader” in his ads (despite the fact that it was a literally true statement from a former megachurch pastor and head of the Arkansas Southern Baptist Convention), and actually dedicated several days to analyzing whether Huckabee used special lighting effects to make the light reflecting off a bookshelf behind him take the form of a crucifix! They have spent the last month emulating the New York Times, NPR, and what have you in calling Huckabee’s supporters ignorant bigots out to start a holy war. The best part is how they trash Huckabee for having the same record and positions on issues that Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney have.

If that is what people think of those that follow the false Christianity that tolerates people like John Hagee and Kenneth Copeland (whose support Huckabee has aggressively courted) and if they went apoplectic over hateful Anne Coulter’s dual covenant theology, then what do they think of real Christianity and actual Christians? The New York Times’ hiring this fellow really does show that when it comes down to it, the mainstream left and the right are on the same side when it comes to the globalist agenda. Kristol is going to use the influence of the New York Times to win over as many liberals to that agenda as possible just as a generation ago William F. Buckley used the National Review to transform the conservative movement into its current neoconservative manifestation.

Proof positive: Bill Kristol agrees with George W. Bush, the Wall Street Journal, John McCain, Ted Kennedy, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, etc. on amnesty for illegal immigrants and not enforcing our borders in general. Kristol, when it comes down to it, is just another Council on Foreign Relations/Rockefeller guy, and he is going to use his position at the New York Times to lead a lot of liberals, conservatives, independents, etc. down that path.

Bush Administration Helped Evict Jews From Land In Israel

Original link
FROM WND’S JERUSALEM BUREAU
U.S. micromanaged Israeli evacuation Oversaw uprooting of small Jewish communities
By Aaron Klein © 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

JERUSALEM – The evacuation the past few days of five makeshift Jewish communities in the West Bank was micromanaged behind the scenes by the U.S. government, WND has learned.

Israeli police, backed by the Israel Defense Forces, clashed in recent days with Jewish activists and West Bank Jewish residents while destroying the five small outposts the government deemed illegal, because construction was not coordinated with proper housing authorities. The outposts, erected alongside existing legal West Bank Jewish communities, were first built Sept. 30, during the Jewish Succot holiday.

Israel strictly enforces regulations against Jewish building in the West Bank while hundreds of thousands of illegal Palestinian outposts have been constructed the past few years. That includes massive apartment complexes and refugee camps on hundreds of acres of land in Jerusalem owned by the Jewish National Fund, a Jewish nonprofit that uses donor funds to purchase property for Jewish settlement.

Four of the five new makeshift West Bank Jewish communities were evacuated by Israeli forces last week. Meanwhile, police are still struggling to uproot the final outpost, named Shvut Ami, Hebrew for “Return of My People.” Activists and police authorities clashed yesterday at the community, located near the Jewish town of Kedumim.

Israel National News reported the Israeli police brutalized several Jewish activists while attempting to evacuate the small community.

Orit Struk, a spokesman for Israel’s Yesha Civil Rights Organization, said two teens were brutally beaten during an interrogation inside a police station. The teens had been arrested for resisting orders to leave the Shvut Ami community.

Palestinian and Israeli diplomatic sources speaking to WND today said the evacuation of the five West Bank communities was heavily micromanaged by officers of the U.S. consulate in Jerusalem.

One Palestinian official said that at one point last week, Palestinian Authority officials were calling into the U.S. consulate several times per hour to report on the Israeli evacuation.

“We don’t credit [Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert for destroying these illegal outposts. This was done under the strict orders of the U.S. government,” said a Palestinian official involved in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.

The reported U.S. management comes as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is in the region to prepare for an Israeli-Palestinian summit next month in which Israel is expected to outline a future Palestinian state in most of the West Bank and sections of Jerusalem.

Rice yesterday stated at a press conference outside the compound of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas that the U.S. was deeply invested in an agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.

“The United States sees the establishment of a Palestinian state and a two-state solution as absolutely essential for the future, not just of Palestinians and Israelis but also for the Middle East and indeed to American interests,” Rice said.

“That’s really a message that I think only I can deliver,” she added.

Yesterday, WND quoted Palestinian officials stating Rice told them she would pressure Israel against initiating any Jewish construction in eastern sections of Jerusalem.

A senior Palestinian negotiator stated Rice singled out Jerusalem areas as becoming part of a future Palestinian state and told his negotiating team she would publicly blame Israel for the failure of next month’s U.S.-sponsored summit in Maryland if the Jewish state didn’t agree to evacuate eastern Jerusalem neighborhoods.

Rice’s comment were followed by an Olmert speech in which the Israeli prime minister hinted he would withdraw from parts of Jerusalem by asking whether it was “necessary” to retain certain Arab communities.

“Was it necessary to also add the Shuafat refugee camp, Sawakra, Walaje and other villages and define them as part of Jerusalem? On that, I must confess, I am not convinced,” stated Olmert, speaking at a special Knesset session to mark the sixth anniversary of the assassination of former government minister Rehavam Ze’evi, who drew up the 1967 map.

Vice Premier Haim Ramon, a member of Olmert’s ruling Kadima party, last week reportedly mapped out a future partition of Jerusalem under a deal with the Palestinians.

Time To Face Reality: Replacement Theology Is True!

I am concerned with the full – throated denunciations of replacement theology by evangelical and liberal Christians. The reason is that doing so almost inevitably leads down the path that starts with de – emphasizing important and fundamental Christian doctrine and ends with dual covenant theology. Why are we so afraid of causing offense to our Jewish friends on this matter? We should respect their feelings, but we cannot allow our doctrines to be governed by said feelings. And moreover, why are do we give any more considerations to the feelings of Jews than we do Muslims, Hindus, wiccans, etc.? Do we feel that Jesus Christ is the only way to God and eternal life or don’t we? Thus, if Judaism will not result in the salvation of a person from an eternity in the lake of fire, then what profit is there in it? In what way is it superior to satanism or witchcraft?

There is a point to my absurd reductionism here. One of the things that began to turn me away from the ministry of John Hagee was when he started having Orthodox rabbis on his show, and they would actually discuss things concerning God and scripture. Of course, Jesus Christ was never mentioned. Hagee knew perfectly well that the rabbis that he was putting on his TV show will go to the lake of fire for eternity unless he accepted Jesus Christ as his savior. Would Hagee have put a Muslim or Mormon on his show and talk about scripture with them? After all, you can talk about Jesus Christ in front of a Mormon or Muslim all you want and they won’t get the least bit offended! Of course not! Now as it was from Hagee that I first learned of the term “replacement theology” and how awful it was – responsible for the Holocaust he claims – and now I am wondering if it is all a scam. After all, has Hagee had Messianic Jewish rabbis on his show? Gary Hedrick, one of the most prominent Messianic Jews in this country, is right in Hagee’s San Antonio. If he has, I never saw them, and the answer is almost certainly no because affiliating with Messianic Jews would end Hagee’s political relationships with AIPAC and similar concerns in America and Israel that he has used to become quite influential.

But wait, you say, Jews and Christians worship the same God, so my comparison with Muslims, Mormons, and certainly satanists is wrong. No we don’t. The only way that you worship God is in spirit and in truth (John 4:22-24), which means that God can only be worshiped in the manner that He tells us to. When Christ spoke those words to the Samaritan woman, he was summarizing the commandments given to the Jews in the Torah where God commanded that their worship of Him not emulate the practices of pagan religions, so Christ did not give a new revelation in this regards: it is integral to Judaism (Christians, regrettably, have been more than willing to syncretize our worship with pagan and humanistic beliefs and practices unfortunately). So what did God say in John 14:6? “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” In this dispensation, the only way to worship God is to acknowledge Jesus Christ as God and worship the Father through Him with the Holy Spirit as the Intercessor. Now of course, the Jews were doing this in the Old Testament, but had no knowledge of it. But when that knowledge was revealed to them, they rejected it. As such, since they refuse to worship Jesus Christ as God, then they are not worshiping the true God. Christians that pretend otherwise, quite frankly, are either dual covenant theologists or are giving silent assent to what they know to be a lie. The New Testament, especially Hebrews and Romans, states repeatedly that there is no profit to the religion of the Jews without Christ.

Ah, but Christianity came from Judaism so we have to respect it, they say! As a matter of fact, it is becoming quite fashionable in recent times to say that Jesus Christ never intended to start a new religion. Well, that line of thinking actually helps replacement theology, because Jesus Christ explicitly stated that His purpose was to fulfill the law and that the Jews should forsake what they were practicing before and to follow Him, for He alone was the way. Even after the term “Christian” was first applied to the largely Gentile church at Antioch, it was not applied to Jews that believed upon the resurrection of Yeshua HaMashiach. Rather, they were called “the way” or “Nazarenes.” During the early part of Christ’s ministry, He tried to convince the Jews that the kingdom at heaven was at hand and to follow Him. It was only after He was rejected by Jews that He laid the foundation for the church (Himself) by intensively training and teaching the apostles.

Christ obviously tried to replace the Judaism of the day with worship that acknowledged Him as the Son of God but was rejected, see John 5:18 “Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.” After the Jews rejected the Stone, Christ built the church to take on the role that the Jews rejected. By virtue of the church doing what the Jews would not do, their entering the Promised Land when the Jews forbeared as their forefathers did when they left Egypt and as a result all save Joshua and Caleb died in the wilderness (a remnant that pretty much represents the Messianic Jews of today), clearly the church assumed the role that was originally intended for Israel, and in real spiritual terms replaced Israel. The church is now the vehicle by which God’s Will is done and His Presence made known upon the earth. Claiming otherwise is to deny the entirety of the New Testament.

Now this is where I part ways with Hank Hanegraaf and a great many other Christians that deeply resent Jews and in particular the nation of Israel, and as such have to basically declare Revelation to be mere political resistance literature to justify their antipathy (completely ignoring that Revelation expounds upon Matthew 24 and the endtimes teachings of Paul, Jude, and the other epistles from John). First, you have Romans 11:1-2a. “I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew.” And even more so, you have what makes my comparisons with Judaism and other religions extremely problematic superficially. Romans 3:1-4 reads “What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.”

Yes, the Mosaic covenant is broken and done away with. Not that you would ever know that from listening to John Hagee, who not only preaches the false prosperity doctrine based on it, but actually claims that Christians will be cursed under the terms of the old covenant for not tithing. But the covenant with Abraham is still in effect! Genesis 12:1-3 reads “Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” Now please realize that the portion in bold has already been fulfilled by way of Jesus Christ, the one who brought salvation to every nation, was a descendant of Abraham. But the rest? It is still very much in effect.

So, did I bring a curse upon myself by saying that Jews do not worship the same God as we do and there is no difference between being a Jew and a satanist? How did I avoid transgressing Romans 3:1-4? Simple. My former statement was confirmed in Romans 2:16-29. Please notice such excerpts from that passage as “For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written” and “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” As for my latter statement, I limited its terms to eternal salvation only.

But even as the church is incontrovertibly the spiritual and true descendants of Abraham, it is equally incontrovertible that because of God’s unconditional covenant with that same Abraham that in a natural sense his descendants are God’s chosen, elect people. This was demonstrated by the fact that God, even after their breaking the covenant and taking away the natural monarchy (the spiritual Davidic monarch, the true monarch, is Jesus Christ), God still restored them to their land. Some would say that the chosen status was entirely transferred to Jesus Christ, who became the personification of Israel. As such, those who are saved are in Christ and therefore are spiritually “living in Israel.” I do not disagree. But the problem is that a spiritual single reference interpretation does not solve the problem of Romans 3:1-4. There has to be a dual reference interpretation: one that applies naturally to the Jews and spiritually to the church. That certain Christians are unwilling to do that and in the course of doing so reject Revelation (and with it not only the long line of prior prophetic and eschatological passages that serve as the foundation of Revelation, but also the warnings to the churches in Revelation 2 and 3 and virtually everything straightforward that we know about the final resurrection and judgment) is not replacement theology. Rather, it is simply rejecting parts of scripture that they find disagreeable. The re – establishment of Israel proves that Romans 3:1-4 is true and that Genesis 12:1-3 is still in effect.

That isn’t a problem with me, because if Romans 3:1-4 and Genesis 12:1-3 are true, then it means that John 3:16 and Romans 10:9-10 are true too, and therefore that I am going to be with God for eternity rather than in the lake of fire. But it is a problem for a great many professed Christians who root for the collapse of the state of Israel (starting with its self – immolation by way of making a peace deal with Palestine) because to them that would prove that Genesis 12:1-3 has been transferred away from the Jews and to them. Why? Simple jealousy. They cannot stand being second place in any context. It doesn’t matter that their being second place is only for a time so that the very same God that they are trusting for their salvation based on His Word can keep the promise that He made with Abraham and thereby be true to that very same Word. But regardless of what they tell themselves in their rebellious hearts, Genesis 12:1-3 is still true. Because of Genesis 12:1-3, God is not through dealing with the Jewish people and the nation of Israel. Because of the promise to Abraham, the Jews and Israel are still going to be the central characters and have the leading role as the last days of history play out.

What will that role be? The end will not come until Israel, as a nation, undoes the wrong that they committed about 2000 years ago by accepting Jesus Christ as their Messiah and their God. Revelation 1:7 “Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.” Messianic Jew Randy Weiss of Crosstalk.org theorizes that this will happen when the entire nation of Israel in unison cries out to God in to save them from the armies that come against them during Armaggeddon. According to Weiss, the whole nation will be screaming “God save us!”, at which time Jesus Christ will return and do just that. At that time will be impossible to deny, for the Hebrew Name of Jesus, Y’shua, means “God saves.” How will they be forced to acknowledge that it is the Christian Jesus Christ rather than the Messiah that rabbinic Judaism teaches that they are still awaiting? Well, “and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him” would tend to mean that the wounds in His side and hands, the same ones that doubting Thomas said that he had to see and touch before he would believe, will still be there. In that respect, just as Judas Iscariot was the prototype for the members of his nation that rejected Christ and will eternally perish up until that day, Thomas was the prototype for the members of the Jewish nation that have been predestined by God to survive the great tribulation, see Jesus Christ on that day, repent, and be saved: those that will never believe unless they see (John 4:48) what the church believed without seeing and are called blessed because of it.

Why must history play out in this fashion? Think not of it in terms of the Jews being so special. (Which is not to say that the Jews AREN’T special; they just are, OK, so you just have to accept that and if you cannot well then it is on your head.) Instead, it is all about GOD. It is all about GOD being glorified for His Great Name’s sake. Please recall when Moses made his intercession for the children of Israel after they sinned in the desert. What did Moses say? Think of destroying Your nation would mean for YOUR NAME; how it would be viewed by Egypt and the other nations of the world. Does God need vindication, acknowledgment, and glorification from whom He desires to seek it? No. But does He WANT and DESERVE it? Of course He does. So for the sake of His Own Name and His Own Son, God is not going to countenance corporate rejection by His own elect nation, the very nation that He chose to bear His Name (1 Kings 8:29). If you want to say “Well now the church is God’s nation that carries His Name” … well OK then why didn’t God just destroy Israel in the desert? After all, He would have still had Moses to carry on the promise to Abraham through.

Whether their number will be great or small, Israel will as a nation accept Jesus Christ before the nations of the world so that God will be glorified. And it is because of that, the Will and Glory of God, that the church HAD to replace Israel spiritually but CANNOT replace Israel naturally.