Loading...Israel and Palestinians: in my previous post I began to explain why Christians in Britain and America (some of them highly influential on foreign policy in both places) came to support the re-establishment of the state of Israel in the early 19th century. I pick up the discussion there, with another excerpt from my book Armageddon: What the Bible Really Says About the End (Simon & Schuster, 2023). This one too veers into a direction I imagine you won’t expect.
******************************
For years evangelical Christians had been convinced that Scripture predicted Jews were to return to the Holy Land to reestablish themselves there as a sovereign state. After all, the Old Testament prophet Jeremiah had reported God’s words to his people Judah: “I will restore your fortunes and gather you from all the nations and all the places where I have driven you … and I will bring you back to the place from which I sent you to exile” (Jeremiah 29:14). If the end was near, as indicated by the events in France, then the eschatological restoration of Israel must be at hand. Between 1796 and 1800 this view was advanced in fifty some books published in Britain. Many evangelicals were thrilled when Napoleon’s army invaded Palestine in 1799, declaring that Jews were “the rightful heirs” of the land. As one commentator put it in 1812, “We know that the latter times approach, and that the Jews must and will be restored; these things greatly animate us in exertion and enliven our hearts in labor.”[1]
It was at just this time
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
This is off topic: Your program on the virgin birth/conception was outstanding.
What’s the chance of getting a program on grace?
Tom
I’m not sure — I haven’t thought about it. I’d have to figure out what it would cover and why peole might find it important. It’s actually related to the book I’m working on now on Jesus’ ethics….
Thanks for a great post. As I write this, I am watching an eposode of a great TV program (shown before several time, around Christmas) on national television in the country where I live, and you are a participant 🙂
Great stuff in this and your previous post, Bart.
We’re definitely on the same wavelength in this regard, as you can see from my following post today at historyhighjackers.com.
https://historyhighjackers.com/f/on-zionism-as-an-apocalyptic-evangelical-program-in-disguise
As you also can see, there, I have appreciatively and approvingly cited a passage from Chapter 4 of your Armageddon: What the Bible Really Says About the End, which I previously 5-star reviewed for Amazon.
In light of the preceding considerations, I hope you agree with my perspective on the motivation behind Mike Johnson’s H.R. 894 – even if writing about it may fall outside your self-imposed editorial bounds.
May the force be with you, Walt
The Mayan Calendar ending in 2012 was a big deal at the time too.
Jeremiah 29:14 is interesting, thanks for introducing me! — it’s my conclusion now that the God in the Bible (that isn’t the Creator God) is many God-Emperors under one title of office, just like many Herods are all addressed as “Herod”. (I think I’ve said before I think Herod means Son of Hero, ie 1/4 royal lineage, through Cypros.)
1) We now know what the epithets were for each god-ruler, like Yammu The Good God
2) We now know what troop movements that these god-emperors asked tribal vassals like Judaea to join in, where the Bible ascribes that request to God.
3) We know Sargon of Akkad and his line’s relationship with the Aramaean (Arabs in Aram) Yahmad Dynasty and Abba-El — I think that’s Abram.
The situation with Israel and Palestine reminds of Herod the Great and Ituraea. I think Jesus/Immanuel was using the Jordan to make a cross-faith Abrahamic statement and bring the Ituraeans displaced from Galilee into brigandage back into the fold, and I hope understanding of that helps someday.
I wasn’t to knowledgeable about Zionist. So I was clowned by a Zionist because I didn’t know they were atheist. He told me they don’t believe in God and he told me they aren’t waiting around for God. He gave me a name to look up and I found out it was the man who started Zionist. And he made it clear to me they were waiting for the antichrist. And that they would be successful with the help of the antichrist. As someone who didn’t know Zionist were atheist I was just flabbergasted.
Some Zionists are atheists. Some are incredibly devout. Others are anywhere in between. But few are waiing for the antichrist!!
Presently there are 4 Carrier task force surrounding the Middle East. The book of Daniel and Revelation have four beast rising from the sea and being destroyed by the beast over the land. Personally I think the Carrier task force will be ordered away from the situation, probably for political reasons. (The thought of how this country would respond to their destruction I do not want to consider.)
Is this ‘Art imitating Life’ or ‘Life imitating Art’?
I’ve mentioned my observation to a few who would listen, but they seemingly had no open opinion.
You’ve expressed near or actual contempt for those holding the idea that the bible is the inerrant word of god but what about these types who fervently believe the end is nigh? FFS, it goes back to Jesus [who may or may not have gone around with a sandwich board saying those words, prove he didn’t;)], isn’t it about time to recognize that there is something seriously wrong with these people and say so out loud whenever they pop their poor misguided heads up? You said “Way used his wealth and influence wisely” but wouldn’t it be more true to say he wasted it pathetically [and that’s not even about the long term dire consequences much in the news still today]?
I don’t hold contempt for people with conservtaive theological views, only for those who use their theological views to harm others. The belief in the imminent end has done massive harm to our world. I don’t despise those who hold it but I do find it sad and wish they would realize both that it’s not a sensible interpretation of the Bible and that it has done enormous hurt to others (I describe some of that in my book Armageddon).
“I don’t hold contempt for people with conservtaive theological views, only for those who use their theological views to harm others.”
Bravo, well said!
Interestingly it appears “postmillennialism” is making a bit of a comeback in Christian Nationalist circles. Not because of any faith in human potential but because it serves as an ideological underpinning for attempts to “reform” our society along Biblical lines.
Yup, interesting. Makes sense.
Premillennialism is currently in the news here in Australia in relation to the murders of two police officers.
Two police officers and one good Samaritan were shot by some religious extremists, described as Premillennialists.
Here’s how Australia’s national news service, the ABC, reported the religion of the shooters:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-16/qld-police-trains-shooting-premillennialism-christian-ideology/101985762
Note that Premillennialism is presented as the doctrine of some sort of extremist cult that inspires terrorism; if this had happened in the USA it would never have been reported in this way. Evangelical groups outside of the Anglican Church are viewed with suspicion in Australia. They don’t know much about them.
Some of my Evangelical friends emphasize that faith is the only thing that can lead to salvation, and that good works will not. Would Jesus and/or Paul agree with this view about faith vs. works? It seems to me that Jesus, at least, would not, b/c many of his statements tell people things they must DO to enter the Kingdom of God.
(for this question, never mind what “salvation” means. For Jesus, entering the Kingdom of Heaven seems to be his idea of salvation. Paul’s ideas seem more complicated).
That’s a modern Protestant way of putting it since Luther. Jesus would have fundamentally disagreed; his view is that a person needed to repent and turn back to God to do the things God demanded to be saved at the coming destruction. Paul would have thought the view nonsensical, since of course you can’t earn God’s favor by how you behave, but if you are justified you will do good deeds, and if you are a horrible sinner you obviously haven’t been justified.
Would Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye of the Left Behind series be heirs to the dispensational premillenialism of Darby? The reason I ask is that I don’t think most Fundamentalist/Evangelical Christians realize that Darbyism is a relatively recent phenomenon and would be viewed as a heresy by many early church fathers. For most of church history it wasn’t what Christians believed.
Am I also correct that even in evangelical churches this is not a doctrine that one is required to believe today? In other words, it’s not like the virgin birth, trinity, or the physical resurrection of Christ.
Most definitely they are. Most Fundamentalism have no clue about the invention of the rapture, and couldn’t define a dispensation if their eternity depended on it!