Will you bow down to the Jewish Zionists and deny Jesus is the Messiah OR will you become a fellow cast-off with Jesus, as this man born blind and healed by Jesus had to do, and be disowned by your own family and friends, and potentially lose everything?
-Created4Health dot org
The full article in which this quote is pulled is linked above if you desire to read all of it. I pulled out this false conclusion of his to make several points about current antisemitism in the professing "church" and among professed believers (current and past).
The writer apparently doesn't like Jews. Yes, that's an opinion, but it doesn't take long on his site to determine that's it's not an unfair assessment. But you may draw your won conclusions upon visiting.
In his question above, he offers this false dichotomy:
It's a false choice in two ways:
- he is stating that all Zionists (anybody who believes God promised a physical land to Abraham and a physical kingdom to David's offspring) is quote "bow[ing] down to Jewish Zionists."
- he argues that anyone who believes in the land and Kingdom promises (like the Apostles did) is one who denies Jesus is the Christ
As we shall see, he (as well as Calvin) insult and demeans the very chosen Apostles to the Circumcision. Apostles chosen and commissioned by Christ himself.
As to his stated argument, I'm not sure how believing God will eventually keep his promises regarding the land, the Kingdom, and the covenants (which are Israel's alone, Romans 9, etc.) to his earthly people (and people are free to believe this interpretation or not) somehow means I am denying Christ is the Messiah? That's a rather harsh charge. It doesn't bother me as it's a false choice and I am fairly confident that God is a God who will keep his promises.
His argument is self-serving to say the least. It falls into the "have you stopped beating your wife?" category of questions.
I've read the prophets and the New Covenant. I am convinced God will restore the Kingdom in a believing, cleansed Israel in a future age. That is, I believe the prophets are clear.
The writer of the article (and related site owner) must have as low opinion of the scripturally enlightened (Luke 24:25) and chosen Apostles of the Lord, who were taught for 40 days by the risen Lord about the Kingdom in which they will sit in 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes (Mat 19:28), as did Calvin.
Let's take a rather amazing look at what Calvin wrote about the Apostles:
He showeth that the apostles were gathered together when as this question [about the restoration of the kingdom in Israel] was moved, that we may know that it came not of the foolishness of one or two that it was moved, but it was moved by the common consent of them all; but marvelous is their [the Apostles'] rudeness, that when as they had been diligently instructed by the space of three whole years, they betray no less ignorance than if they had heard never a word. There are as many errors in this question as words. They ask him as concerning a kingdom; but they dream of an earthly kingdom, which should flow with riches, with dainties, with external peace, and with such like good things; and while they assign the present time to the restoring of the same. They desire to triumph before the battle; for before such time as they begin to work they will have their wages. They are also greatly deceived herein, in that they restrain Christ’s kingdom unto the carnal Israel, which was to be spread abroad, even unto the uttermost parts of the world. Furthermore, there is this fault in all their whole question, namely, that they desire to know those things which are not meet for them to know. No doubt they were not ignorant what the prophets did prophesy concerning the restoring of David’s kingdom, they had oftentimes heard their Master preach concerning this matter. Lastly, It was a saying common in every man’s mouth, that, in the most miserable captivity of the people, they should all be comforted, with the expectation of the kingdom that should be. Now, they hoped for the restoring hereof at the coming of the Messias, and hereupon was it that so soon as the apostles saw their Master Christ risen from the dead, they straightway began to think thereupon; but, in the meantime, they declared thereby how bad scholars they were under so good a Master.
-John Calvin (excerpt, Commentary on Acts 1:6), emphasis added
Such blasphemy against the chosen twelve.
As Calvin holds the Sermon of the Mount for "the Church," (I do not) and as one who believes in bodiless eternal fiery torment as he did (I do not) it's even more amazing.
And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.
-Matthew 5:22
Calvin says of the verse in Matthew 5 warning against calling a brother "a fool":
He who shall say to his brother Christ assigns three degrees of condemnation besides the violence of the hands; which implies, that this precept of the law restrains not only the hands, but all affections that are opposed to brotherly love. “Those who shall only be angry with their brethren, or treat them with haughty disdain, or injure them by any reproach, are murderers.” Now, as it is certain that the word Racha occupies an intermediate place between anger and openly reproachful language, I have no doubt that it is an interjection of contempt or disdain. Though Christ adjudges to the hell of fire none but those who break out into open reproach, we must not suppose, that he declares anger to be free from a similar punishment; but, alluding to earthly judgments, he assures them that God will judge and punish even concealed anger. But, as he who manifests his indignation by bitter language goes farther than this, Christ says, that that man will be held guilty by the whole heavenly council, that he may receive severer punishment.
-John Calvin (excerpt, Commentary on Matthew 5:22), emphasis added
The writer of the article quoted at the start must really not like Paul either. For that matter, he must really really hate the twelve who went to Jews only (Acts 11:19*). As noted, I guess he believes he knows better what the risen Lord taught them for 40 days about the restoration of the Kingdom in Israel (Acts 1:3-7) despite not having heard one word! Again, any are free to disagree with my interpretation, but I certainly wouldn't conclude that if you disagree, that means you are somehow denying Jesus is the Christ.
What a terribly self-serving Logical Fallacy and conclusion.
*I've done the math here, Acts 11 comes after Acts 2 and the falling of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost
Ironically, the writer accuses the Pharisees of a logical fallacy when they attempted to ignore the Lord's arguments and presented him with a false dichotomy. From the article linked above:
they did what the servants of Satan always do when they cannot win a debate based on merit, and instead resorted to personal attacks against Jesus, and slandered his character.
We do not live in the age wherein Israel is to have their kingdom restored (that was put on hold at the end of the Acts age), but if he wants to embrace the Book of Romans as for himself and as for this current age, I would offer this bit of advice:
For if the firstfruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root [Israel] is holy, so are the branches [Jews] . 17 And if some of the branches [Jews] were broken off, and you [Gentiles], being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them [Jews], and with them became a partaker of the root [Israel's promises] and fatness of the olive tree, 18 do not boast against the branches [Jews] . But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root [Israel] , but the root [Israel] supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.”20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches [Jews], He may not spare you [Gentiles] either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you [Gentiles] were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree [Israel] , how much more will these [Jews], who are natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?
-Romans 11:16-24
- do not boast against the branches [Jews].
- Do not be haughty [against the branches], but fear.
- Otherwise you also will be cut off.
Anyone is free to interpret that passage anyway he likes. But interpreting it as Gentiles grafted into Israel for the Holy Spirit stated purpose "to make Israel jealous" (Romans 10:19, 11:11, 11:14) does not mean I have chosen to deny Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God!
And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.
-John 20:30-31
I didn't know hating Jews or denying the hope of their earthly kingdom was a requirement to make that choice. If it were, as Calvin charges, and as "Created4Health" (also "Health Impact News") accuses, the twelve were denying Christ, not true believers, and headed for the fire of hell.
Such blasphemy!
I note: I don't hold that the conditions in Romans are for the current age. The article writer does, yet he has no fear as the passage warns him he should have. But even as I do not hold to Romans for this age, I do strongly hold that God will fulfill all his word and all his promises to an earthly, cleansed, believing Israel in an age to come. I also hold that nowhere are we given the right to blaspheme Jews, let alone blaspheme the chosen apostles to the Circumcision.
