Posts Tagged ‘jews’

Barcelona Chief Rabbi to Jews: Get Out, Go To Israel

Photo credit: Israel Today

By  Tsvi Sadan
Israel Today

Following the Barcelona terror attacks in which 14 people were killed and some 130 wounded, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) asked the Spanish city’s chief rabbi, Rabbi Meir Bar-Hen, what he thought of the future of Jews there.

Generally speaking, European Jewish leaders are extremely cautious, and would seldom, if ever, dare to call upon Jews of their respective countries to pack their belongings and move to Israel. The negative backlash to Netanyahu urging Jews to leave Europe following the January 2015 attack on a Jewish supermarket in Paris is still well remembered. “To all the Jews of France, all the Jews of Europe, I would like to say that Israel is not just the place in whose direction you pray; the State of Israel is your home,” said the Israeli leader at the time.

Netanyahu made a similar plea just a month later following the February 2015 attack outside a Copenhagen synagogue that left a Jewish security guard dead. Click here to continue reading.

Dr. George Wood Responds to Lighthouse Trails Article on AoG Resolution 3 and Israel

Also see Part 1: “Commentary: Assembly of God (AOG) General Council to Vote on Resolution Against Israel ” and Part 3: “A Further Unveiling of Assemblies of God Resolution 3 & the Serious Implications”

By the Editors at Lighthouse Trails

On July 28th, Lighthouse Trails posted a commentary by Lighthouse Trails author Cedric Fisher titled “Assembly of God (AOG) General Council to Vote on Resolution Against Israel.” This commentary set off a fire storm on the Internet, and on Saturday July 29th, Lighthouse Trails editors received an e-mail from Dr. George Wood (General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God). Dr. Wood is familiar with Lighthouse Trails because of a controversy in 2013 where Dr. Wood gave his blessing and permission for contemplative emergent Ruth Haley Barton to speak at the 2013 AoG General Council Conference resulting in some Lighthouse Trails articles addressing the seriousness of such promotion.

Shortly after Lighthouse Trails editors received the e-mail from Dr. Wood on the 29th regarding our recent posting of Cedric Fisher’s commentary, we learned that the e-mail was being distributed on the Internet. Because Dr. Wood has made his e-mail public, we are responding in the public arena; and because his e-mail stated that the commentary we posted is “false, meretricious, and slanderous,” we are compelled to issue this response. Below is Dr. Wood’s e-mail to Lighthouse Trails editors in its entirety (in black bold) along with response comments by us in indented non-bold green paragraphs. (After you have read this section, please see a response written by Cedric Fisher regarding Dr. Wood’s e-mail.)

Dr. George Wood, General Superintendent of AoG

Dr. George Wood’s e-mail to Lighthouse Trails:

I don’t know exactly who to address this to, so I have included all the email contact points provided on your website.

I am asking you to retract and apologize for the totally incorrect article you published on July 28, titled, “Commentary: Assembly of God (AOG) General Council to Vote on Resolution Against Israel.”

Here are the facts, as opposed to the lies given by Cedric Fisher.

1. Resolution 3 doesn’t mention Israel at all. It has nothing to do with Israel. As general superintendent, I am not indicating my support or opposition to this resolution as it comes from delegates to our General Council – but, I can tell you for a fact that you can search this resolution with a microscope and you will find no reference to Israel, nor will you find any intention that this resolution applies to Israel. Here’s the full text of the resolution: http://generalcouncil.ag.org/-/media/GC17/2017GCResolutionsBooklet.pdf?la=en.

Our Response: It is true that Resolution 3 does not mention Israel at all, and Cedric Fisher never said that it did. However, the resolution absolutely connects Israel with the Resolution when it states: “Furthermore, the Commission on Doctrinal Purity and the General Presbytery approved the 12 Assemblies of God position paper entitled, ‘Church Mission and Peacemaking.’” It is in that position paper that Israel is discussed and clearly rebuked as the guilty party for causing conflict. There is no mention of Islamic/Muslim wrong doing in the position paper. We realize that some reading “Church Mission and Peacemaking” may not see how it is implicating modern-day Israel, especially if they are not familiar with the present efforts to put most or all of the blame on Israel for Middle East conflict.

2. The AG position paper is titled, “Church Mission and Peacemaking.” Lighthouse Trails added “and Israel,” even though the position paper doesn’t mention issues regarding the modern state of Israel. Here’s the position paper: https://ag.org/Beliefs/Topics-Index/Church-Mission-and-Peacemaking.

Our Response: The phrase “and Israel” was mistakenly added twice in one sentence. We have now corrected that error. However, this does not change the context of the position paper. Dr. Wood says that the position paper doesn’t mention issues regarding the modern state of Israel, but we believe that is exactly what that position paper is doing.

3. “Israel–the Church’s Response” is not a position paper. It’s what we call a “common concerns” article. It was written by the Office of Public Relations over 15 years ago. Here’s the article itself: https://ag.org/Beliefs/Topics-Index/Israel-the-Churchs-Response. Here’s the topic index of other common concern articles: https://ag.org/Beliefs/Topics-Index.

Our Response: Cedric Fisher’s commentary did call both papers “position papers” when in reality “Israel – The Church’s Response” is not an official AoG position paper. Rather, it is listed under AoG Beliefs on their website and described as “based upon [AoG] common understanding of scriptural teaching.” (source: https://ag.org/Beliefs/Topics-Index)

4. By mixing quotations from the position paper and the common concerns article, Lighthouse Trails concocts a belief that simply doesn’t exist.

Our Response: We don’t agree with Dr. Wood’s assumption here. To say that an argument can’t be proven by using different credible (and related) documents is faulty reasoning.

5. The article goes on to talk about Rick Warren’s PEACE plan, which is NOT mentioned in Resolution 3, the position paper, or the common concerns article. It then states, “Resolution 3 is an attempt to present a more powerful statement of disassociation with Israel.” But Resolution 3 doesn’t mention the contemporary state of Israel at all, let alone “a more powerful statement of disassociation with Israel.” This is simply a lie.

Our Response: As for Rick Warren’s influence within the AoG, this could be proven in a number of different ways (not to mention that he is one of the keynote speakers at this year’s AoG General Council along with Mark Batterson (Circle Maker) and Priscilla Shirer (contemplative teacher)), but we will provide this one piece of documentation. In a 2008 Time Magazine article titled “Rick Warren Goes Global,” it states:

“Warren is particularly excited by the hands-on involvement of some of the larger players in the Evangelical community. “A guy was going, ‘I’ll take Mozambique,’ and another guy was going ‘I’ll take Nigeria,’ ” he said happily, adding that he’s already secured personal commitments from influential leaders in the Salvation Army and the Assemblies of God (the largest Pentecostal denomination.) “They’ve said, they’re in, and they have to get their boards along,” he reported.” (emphasis added; source: http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1809833,00.html?xid=rss-nation).

Since 2008, the Purpose Driven paradigm has continued to have a major influence in nearly all evangelical denominations, including Assemblies of God. 

Regarding Dr. Wood’s statement that it is a lie to say that Resolution 3 is anti-Israel, it is not. This resolution was worded in such a way as to not appear to be directly implicating modern Israel. 

6. “AoG General Superintendent George O. Wood and other leaders of the denomination appear enamored with Warren to the extent they are virtually subservient.” That would be news to me, Rick Warren, and other leaders of the denomination. Furthermore, there is no denomination more active than ours in evangelizing Muslims.

See our response in point #5.

7. As is typical of Lighthouse Trails, you engage in six-degrees-of-separation conspiracy mongering. Even though neither Don nor Jodi Detrick wrote Resolution 3, he is mentioned because he is married to her, and she is mentioned because she allegedly promotes “contemplative spirituality.” This isn’t research; this is nonsense.

Our Response: Actually, Cedric Fisher’s mentioning Jodi Detrick because she is the wife of the chairperson of the AoG 2017 Resolutions Committee is certainly not “six-degrees-of-separation conspiracy mongering.” First of all, this is a husband and wife who are both highly active in AoG leadership; this is hardly “six-degrees of separation.” Second, the issue that took place with Dr. Wood and the AoG General Council in May of 2013 was no minor issue. Dr. Wood allowed Ms. Detrick to bring in a hard core New Age sympathizer to teach AoG women at the AoG General Council Conference that year. Lighthouse Trails wrote three carefully documented articles explaining several aspects as to why Barton should not be allowed to teach Christian women. After our first article (http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?p=11431), Dr. Wood issued a public statement defending Ms. Detrick’s choice of speakers (and he incidentally mentioned Ms. Detrick’s husband as he felt the association was important for people to know – the very thing he condemned Cedric Fisher for doing). Our second article in 2013 included Dr. Wood’s response defending the choice of Ruth Haley Barton (http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?p=11554). Incidentally, Cedric Fisher (a former AoG pastor who was not an LT author at that time) wrote an article addressing the issue with Barton (http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?p=11569). He made some very valid points, and his article from 2013 is worth reading to better understand the dilemma.

We believe it was appropriate for Cedric Fisher to mention the Wood/Detrick/Barton event that took place four years ago because from years of researching the contemplative prayer movement, we know that one of the “fruits” of contemplative prayer is a shift in attitude regarding Israel. While there have always been those (such as those in the Reformed camp) who have historically rejected Israel of having significance according to a biblically prophetic view and adhere to Replacement Theology, there is also now a growing number of evangelicals who are moving from a pro-Israel stance to an anti-Israel stance, and many of those evangelicals have first embraced the contemplative prayer movement. Is this just a coincidence? We don’t believe so. Those who practice contemplative meditation, over time, begin to change their views on the Atonement, the Cross, salvation, and even Israel and the Jews because the meditation experience is panentheistic (God in all) and interspiritual (all paths lead to God) in nature; and when one begins to accept panentheism and interspirituality, the Cross, the Atonement, salvation through Christ alone, and Bible prophecy (which includes understanding Israel and the return of Christ) do not fit into that mold any longer.

Dr. Wood resents the fact that Jodi Detrick name was mentioned in Cedric Fisher’s article, so much so that he has resorted to ugly name calling. We fear that Dr. Wood does not understand these vital issues, and that is why he is lashing out. 

8. The article about Ross Byar’s school is hilarious. Ross teaches “pacifism,” not “passivism.” And do evangelical Christians really want to go on record opposing the teaching of pacifism to MUSLIM students? Additionally, the Haaretz.com article cited doesn’t report that Byars’ school advocates “inner eye” mysticism. It says that on the day the journalist visited, they were learning about the mysticism of an important modern Jewish rabbi. A good education acquaints people accurately with the beliefs of others. LTR makes that look suspicious.

Our Response: Dr. Wood better read that article at Haaretz.com again. It clearly states that the teacher at Byar’s school is introducing and advocating a mystical spirituality to the students. The article states:

“Today, in fact, she’s [the teacher] trying to introduce the students to a mystical teaching from Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, the first Ashkenazi chief rabbi in British Mandatory Palestine. The big idea is his concept of the “inner eye,” and Talesnick [the teacher] wants to suggest that if you can see with it, you’re color blind. It’s a good lesson against racism.”

Cedric Fisher stated it accurately when he said the school was advocating a mystical teaching. 

9. I could pick apart the article’s references to the six authors of Resolution 3–all of whom I know personally or at least know of–but I’ll just quote this hilarious statement about Nam Soo Kim: “I could not discover any significant involvement or contributions to the AoG. As with most of the other authors, he seems to be involved with activity outside of the denomination.” For the record, Nam Soo Kim is an executive presbyter of the national Assemblies of God, a fact that is easily found on the AG website: https://ag.org/About/Leadership-Team/Executive-Presbytery.

Our Response: The fact that Cedric Fisher did not know of Nam Soo Kim’s involvement with AoG is a moot point, but we accept the correction. However, there is one author of Resolution 3 that we do know about, and that is Murray Dempster. In 2007, 80 evangelical leaders signed a document titled “An Evangelical Statement on Israel/Palestine.” A November 2007 Christianity Today article titled “Evangelical Leaders Reiterate Call for Two-State Solution for Israel and Palestine” discussed the document and listed Murray Dempster as one of the signatories. The article stated:

[O]ver 80 evangelical leaders have signed a statement indicating their belief ‘that the way forward is for the Israelis and Palestinians to negotiate a fair, two-state solution.'” (source: http://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2007/november/148-33.0.html (For a list of Dempster’s credentials that include the signing of this two-state solution document, see http://www.seu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/MWD-Resume-Updated-SEU-8.1.2013.pdf)

We find this unnerving that a man, Dempster, who is a signatory for a document that calls for a two-state solution, is also a contributing author and endorser to this AoG resolution that has the potential of invoking great harm to the Jewish people; and it is equally troubling that the head of AoG is perfectly OK with this. He says that he knows all of them personally or at least knows of them—insinuating that this makes them all legitimate). According to one Jewish Christian radio host we spoke with this morning, a two-state solution would “legitimize” a Palestinian State filled with brutal terrorists who want to destroy Israel. What in the world is AoG doing playing with this kind of fire?! Cedric Fisher provided us with some thought-provoking comments today on the two-state solution:

“Some evangelical leaders insist there is nothing wrong with the Two-State Solution.  They claim that Israel advocates a Two-State Solution.  If that were true, then it would have already occurred and we would not be having this controversy.  There is a vast difference between the versions of Two-State Solutions.  Israel’s version could be summed up as, “You leave us alone, and we’ll leave you alone.”  Conversely, the Two-State Solution advocated by certain evangelicals is to moderate a resolution between Israel and Palestine that involves Israel giving up the West Bank, its biblical heritage as God’s Chosen People, and other untenable concessions.  There is an effort to dismiss Israel from eschatology and brand it as just another sinful nation.

“These leaders cannot understand why true supporters of Israel view them as anti-Semitic.  They claim they are not anti-Semitic but rather that they also support Israel.  They obviously do not support the Israel that exists, but the “Israel” they have modeled for their peace plan.  I invite the reader to read the literature of these so-called pacifists for “peace.”  If they supported Israel as it presently exists, they would not be sympathetic to the Muslim narrative and attempt to coerce Israel to accept a pro-Palestinian Two-State Solution.  

10. This conclusory statement is an outright lie: “Therefore, to embrace the Palestinian and Muslim cause and reject Israel is, in essence, to be anti-Semitic. Thus, the AoG’s positions papers and Resolution 3 is oxymoronic in presentation and factitious in intent. It is an effort to unite the 60 million-member worldwide denomination with other denominations and political groups that are openly hostile to Israel.” None of the AG links the author has provided–to Resolution 3, our position paper, or even our common concerns article–embrace Islam, reject Israel, or exhibit antisemitism. The World Assemblies of God Fellowship numbers 68.5 million adherents, not 60 million (https://ag.org/About/Statistics), but the author can’t even get this basic statistic right. And I am unaware of any member nation of the WAGF that’s “openly hostile to Israel.” I certainly am not – having been to Israel over 40 times and having established the Assemblies of God Center for Holy Lands Studies that has brought thousands to Israel – including hundreds of students preparing for the ministry.

Our response: We stand behind Cedric Fisher’s closing comments. We believe AoG is facing a real threat, and the fact that their head cannot see this and has no problem with Resolution 3 is scary at best.

You should have regard for truth. But, you [do] not.

The article you published is false, meretricious, and slanderous. You should be ashamed.

Finally, there is a process in our Constitution and Bylaws by which members can present resolutions. The authors of resolutions have no guarantee that what they propose will be adopted; but, our Bylaws make provision for members to have that right.

Our Response: The men who wrote Resolution 3 are leaders in the AoG, not some renegades who have no influence in the denomination. Without intending on sounding disrespectful, the shame goes to AoG leaders who are involved in trying to pass Resolution 3 and to Dr. Wood, not Cedric Fisher and Lighthouse Trails.

Response to George Wood’s E-mail from Cedric Fisher:

I wish to thank Dr. Wood for taking time out of his busy schedule to respond to my commentary. Since Dr. Wood has insisted on more information, I will respectfully honor his request.

First, I concede that Resolution 3 does not contain the word “Israel,” and I never stated that it did. However, it contains the reference to a position paper that does mention Israel. Additionally, although “Israel—the Church’s Response” is not an official position paper, it is a position officially assigned to the “Church” and included under “Beliefs” on the AoG website. Further, Resolution 3 is presented as being about peacekeeping, but the statement it proposes to add to the Constitution includes justice and peacemaking. Here is why that is important.

We must ask, “What nations in conflict did the authors of R3 have in mind when they wrote the Resolution?”

The only nation in conflict that the majority of evangelicals are focused on is Israel. Regarding the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, the terms justice and peacekeeping are interpreted by the worldview of whoever employs them. Some evangelicals consider Israel “unjust” and even “racist” in their dealings with Palestinians. I propose that the conflict is not because Israel is unjust, racist, or rejects peace. It exists because her neighbors wish to annihilate her as stated in the following:

I will never allow a single Israeli to live among us on Palestinian land. (Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, The Jerusalem Post)

The solution that political Progressives, Liberals, Palestinian sympathizers, denominations, and some leading evangelical “pacifists” propose is a two-state solution. That attempt at “justice and peacemaking” would devastate Israel. Standing in the way of a two-state solution is the traditional, biblical, eschatological view that most evangelicals hold dear. There is currently a massive effort underway throughout Christianity to neutralize and eject that view from evangelicalism. The result, unintended or perhaps intended, is that anti-Semitism has reared its ugly head in evangelicalism.

Therefore, we are wary of overtures of justice and peacemaking by individuals who have been involved in efforts to impose a two-state solution on Israel.  Is it the intent of R3 authors to legitimize a worldview that undermines historical evangelical support for Israel in the name of justice and peacemaking? We can help answer that question by taking a look at some of R3’s authors.

R3 author Murray Dempster is considered by some of his peers as the “‘Grandfather of Modern Pentecostal Pacifism.” Dempster was a signer of the document “An Evangelical Statement on Israel/Palestine” that proposes a two-state solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. He also signed a letter to President George Bush in July 29, 2007, calling for a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict that includes the vast majority of the West Bank.

Dempster is professor of social ethics at Assemblies of God Southeastern University. An online blog post titled, “Liberal Theology at Assemblies of God University?” features the testimony by David Thrower expressing concern about the influence of the Emergent Church and “progressive” adherents that question the supremacy of God and the authority and veracity of His Word at Southeastern. Thrower mentioned Dempster touting liberal theologian James Cone. However, deeply troubling was his observation concerning rampant anti-Semitism that included an on-campus lecture by pro-Palestine advocate Sami Awad. At one point in the lecture, Awad had very anti-Semitic comments mentioning that Israel did not have a right to exist. – Chelsen Vicari, Juicy Ecumenism blog; December 18, 2014, https://juicyecumenism.com/2014/12/18/squishy-theology-assembly-gods-southeastern-university/

Another R3 author, Robert E. Cooley, signed the Yale “A Common Word” Christian Response document http://faith.yale.edu/common-word/common-word-christian-response. Among the signers is Rick Warren, one of the speakers at the upcoming 57th General Council in Anaheim. The document begins:

As members of the worldwide Christian community, we were deeply encouraged and challenged by the recent historic open letter signed by 138 leading Muslim scholars, clerics, and intellectuals from around the world. “A Common Word Between Us and You” identifies some core common ground between Christianity and Islam which lies at the heart of our respective faiths as well as at the heart of the most ancient Abrahamic faith, Judaism.

The document also stated:

Before we “shake your hand” in responding to your letter, we ask forgiveness of the All-Merciful One [a name for the Muslim god] and of the Muslim community around the world. . . . That so much common ground exists—common ground in some of the fundamentals of faith—gives hope that undeniable differences and even the very real external pressures that bear down upon us can not overshadow the common ground upon which we stand together.

As I pointed out in my commentary, R3 author Robert W. Houlihan and Russell P. Spittler have made statements in support of Dempster.

How can I or anyone who is willing to take a serious look at this situation conclude that R3 is anything other than an attempt to undermine evangelical support for Israel?

Related Information:

The Berean Call Conference: Israel in the Line of Fire

DVD Exposes “Christian Palestinianism” and the Evangelical Leaders Promoting It

 Chrislam – The Blending Together of Islam & Christianity

Another Look: Has the Church Replaced Israel?

Terror Against Israel

 

Reminder: What Lighthouse Trails Believes About Israel and the Jews

We have been shocked and utterly dismayed at witnessing a growing distain for Israel and the Jews by those within the evangelical camp. Sadly, we have learned that even some who read Lighthouse Trails fall in this category. That has been surprising to us because we have been very vocal about where our sympathies lie since our inception. While not everyone who has crossed our path has been upfront about their own views on Israel and the Jews, Lighthouse Trails has never kept this a secret.

Recently, we heard a sermon online by an evangelical pastor who said that those who hold a special regard for the Jews need to repent. In a day and age when anti-Semitism is growing rapidly and were there are only 14 million Jews left in the world, we were very troubled by this pastor’s comments. He elaborated on how much evil the Jews had done to the world as if they were especially evil and wicked. This is a sign of the times.

As a reminder, here is what we believe about Israel and the Jews:

We believe God made an everlasting covenant with Israel. We do not believe the church replaces Israel (replacement theology). We believe there is biblical prophetic significance with Israel today. While we believe that individual Jews need to hear and accept the Gospel just like every human being does, the Bible is clear that Israel and the Jews are the apple of His eye, and as believers, we have been grafted in.

We reject and detest every form of anti-Semitism (which we are shockingly seeing growing strongly within the evangelical church today). We have published two books by living Holocaust survivors and carry numerous other materials about the Holocaust, finding it to be one of the most atrocious acts every committed against humanity and particularly against the Jews. We believe Satan hates the Jews and Christians with a special vengeance.

We have posted numerous articles in the past several years that illustrate our concern for and interest in Israel and the Jewish people. In 2011, we began carrying Tony Pearce’s book, The Messiah Factor, which we find to be one of the best books we have read regarding Israel and the Jews. Below are a couple extracts from that book. We have also posted some articles by Pastor Bill Randles and Mike Oppenheimer, both who have written extensively about Israel. Below are some of those articles as well as others we have posted. Hopefully, these articles will clearly show our views regarding Israel and the Jewish people.

We realize there are Christians who will not agree with us, and to you we say, there are many websites that will side with you, but Lighthouse Trails is not one of them.

 

Israel in comparison to Arab countries: Israel – Red; Arab Countries: Green

SOME OF OUR COVERAGE OF ISRAEL AND THE JEWISH PEOPLE:

LT Statement on Luther and His Later Views Toward the Jews by Lighthouse Trails

Hitler’s Plan to Replace Christianity with a “New” Christianity  by Tony Pearce

Who Really Killed Jesus? (A word to those who hate the Jews)  by Tony Pearce

Israel/Flotilla Coverage You May Not Hear in the Mass Media – “Israel Should Go Home to Germany!”

Balaam, On Being Paid to Curse Israel  by Bill Randles

New York Times: America’s Policy Towards Israel Officially Shifts from The Berean Call

The Anti-Israel Revelation

Holocaust Remembrance Day 2012 – Resistance in the Midst of Travesty

Why the Heathen Rage in a World Gone Amiss  by Bill Randles

Obama and the Mourning of Israel Video with Bill Randles

Media misleading on Jews evicting Arabs from Jerusalem  by WND

Interesting Times? . . . Actually it is the End Times  by Bill Randles

Israel and Prophetic Proof  by The Berean Call

A Right and Left Hook to the Bible  by Mike Oppenheimer

“Former senior White House correspondent renews venom [against Israel and the Jews] at Arab conference” by WND

Vatican synod calls for end to Israel’s ‘occupation’ – “no longer a chosen people.” by Jerusalem Post

 

U.N. Human Rights Council Retaining Its Bias Against Israel

Obama Defends “Robust Support” For Israel – Administrative Record Proves Differently  by CSN News

UN Textbooks for Palestinian Children ‘Explosively Anti-Semitic, Anti-American and Anti-Israeli’  by CSN News

It’s Official: Obama Administration Promotes Islamist Regimes; Insists They are Moderate

Emerging Church Lesson for the Day: What Did Paul Mean That He Became All Things to All Men?

By Mike Oppenheimer
Let Us Reason Ministries

For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. And this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you. (1 Corinthians 9:19-23)
What did the apostle Paul mean that he became all things to all men for evangelism? This is his summation after he describes his goal and those people whom he wanted to reach. He adapted his teaching to their thought in their culture to reach them. He divides the world into the religious with the law (Jews), and the Gentiles, without the law.
According to 1 Corinthians 9:20, Paul was emancipated from the law as a means of salvation, yet he knew how to speak to them because of his former beliefs and life with them (Galatians 4:21). He knew how to put the Gospel to them without compromise and without offence.1
To the Jews, he would observe the Mosaic customs as long as it did not affect his duty to Christ. There was no compromise of principles or the law though Paul was a Jew among Jews. He did not act as a person obligated to the law with the Jews, nor as a lawless person to the Gentiles, but always made it evident he was serving them under the law of Christ.
In Acts 17, Paul showed the philosophers they were wrong from logic, their own history, and the Bible and explained to them what is right. He used what the Athenians did not know, an altar to an unknown god, to make known to them what he knew. Paul was not complimenting their religious worship as they were idolaters. These religious men of prestige were offended as he told them they would be judged by a man who came back to life. Yet, Paul’s continual quest was to persuade men to turn “to God from idols to serve the living and true God” (1 Thessalonians 1:9).
Paul certainly made a distinction (as did Jesus) between those who knew what God required and those in ignorance. Paul even pitted the Gentiles against the Jews to humble them from pride. Romans 2:14-16:
[F]or when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel” (giving the same summation as he did in Acts 17).
In 1 Corinthians 9:22, Paul said, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit: “To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.”
If this statement by Paul were isolated from the rest of Scripture, one could assume Paul was willing to do anything to reach the lost, including adopting their lifestyle and compromise his ethics, morals, and beliefs. This is a doctrine that is popularized among the seeker-friendly, emerging church evangelism crowd today. If we use this logic, then for one to reach a drug addict, he must become one; one cannot reach a drunk unless he becomes a drunk, etc.
When we compare Scripture with Scripture, we find that Paul did not mean this. In order for a doctrine to be biblically sound, it cannot contradict other verses. Paul taught that believers are to “abstain from all appearance of evil” (1 Thessalonians 5:22). Paul would not have done anything contrary to Christ and His ways in his own life and ministry. Remember he rebuked Peter for compromising of the Gospel when Jewish brethren came to visit him in Antioch. Galatians 2:11-13, speaking of the Judaizers: “for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision.” Saying to Peter in Galatians 2:14: “If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?”

So Paul did not mean that we can act one way with one group of people and another way with another group to win them.

We have good examples that Paul did not act lawlessly among the pagans who were outside the Mosaic law: Romans 2:14, 1 Timothy 1:9-10. Paul simplified the message, knowing his audience, so they could understand and receive.
Paul explains that he is always under the law to Christ, and he is never free to do things that would be contrary to the new covenant. And in Galatians 5:13, he says, “For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.”
Paul’s liberty in his evangelism was not a freedom to sin or to serve the flesh in any way. Paul was always strict in regard to sin, and he did not allow anything in his life that would bring the result of sin by spiritual carelessness.
Notes:
1. From Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament.

U.S. Preschool Teacher Urges: ‘Kill Some Jews’

Photo: WND

By Chelsea Schilling
WorldNetDaily

A Jew-hating Muslim preschool teacher in South Arlington, Texas, was fired Wednesday after she urged her social media followers to “kill some Jews” and tweeted: “How many Jews died in the Holocaust? Not enough…HAHAHAHA.”

Nancy Salem taught preschoolers at the Children’s Courtyard in South Arlington. She is also an activist with Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Texas, Arlington, according to campus watchdog group Canary Mission. Salem also supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, or BDS, an anti-Israel movement that advocates severing global economic relations with the Jewish state. To continue reading, click here.

Related Information:

Holocaust Remembrance – When Hitler Was in Power – by a Holocaust Survivor

Anti-Jew, Anti-Israel, Replacement Theology Movie

 

Commentary: What Do Hitler, Alice Bailey, and Replacement Theology Adherents Have in Common?

By Philip Gray
Free-lance writer and contender of the faith

What Do Hitler, Alice Bailey, and Replacement Theology Adherents Have in Common? Basically, the answer to that question is that in all three cases, they reject the Jews as God’s chosen people. Those who embrace Replacement Theology probably don’t realize that the thinking behind Replacement Theology is some of the thinking behind occultist Alice Bailey as well as Hitler when it comes to the Jews. Now we are not saying that people who adhere to Replacement Theology would want to kill the Jews as Hitler did; but Replacement Theology adherents need to understand that behind this view of the Jews lies a far more sinister aspect. Satan hates the Jews (partly because he knows God will use them in the culmination of things in the last days to end Satan’s days). That view of the Jews can start “innocently” by saying the Jews and Israel are no longer significant with regard to Bible prophecy. But it is not a far step from that thinking to anti-Semitism. Let’s just take a brief look at Alice Bailey and then Adolph Hitler and see what they thought about the Jews:

Alice Bailey

Alice Bailey

Consider these statements by Alice Bailey in her book The Externalization of the Hierarchy.

The force emanating from that section of humanity which is found in every part of the world and which we call the Jewish people. What I say here has no specific reference to any individual; I am considering the world problem, centering around the Jews as a whole. . .  The Jew, down the ages, has insisted upon being separated from all other races but he brought over from the previous system the knowledge (necessary then but obsolete now) that his race was the “chosen people.” The “Wandering Jew” has wandered from System One to this where he must learn the lesson of absorption and cease his wandering. He has insisted upon racial purity . . . this insistence has been carried down the ages . . . When humanity has solved the Jewish problem (with the understanding cooperation of the Jew) and overcome ancient antipathies and hatreds, it will do so by fusing the problem in one vast humanitarian situation. When that happens, the problem will be rapidly solved and one of the major difficulties will disappear off the face of the earth. Racial fusion will then be possible. Our earth humanity and the group of human beings who are far more ancient in their origin than we are, will form one humanity and then there will be peace on earth. . . . .

The solution will come, as I said, when the races regard the Jewish problem as a humanitarian problem but also when the Jew does his share of understanding, love and right action. This he does not yet do, speaking racially. He must let go of his own separative tendencies and of his deep sense of persecution. (p.40-42, 1998 edition, Lucis Trust)

As for Hitler, we know without a doubt that he did not consider the Jews God’s “chosen people.” Rather, he wanted to eliminate them from the face of the earth. But where did he come up with this demonic evil idea? While there are different factors involved in the answer to that question, Mike Oppenheimer provides the documentation to show what was perhaps the greatest influence on Hitler and his views about the Jewish people:

Hitler’s ideas about the Aryan race came from the Thule Society. Thule was supposedly a lost island inhabited by an ancient race that were “masters of wisdom” (much like the mythology of Atlantis or Lemuria and the spiritual hierarchy, the White Brotherhood today). Though unseen, they are a superior highly intelligent beings working behind the scenes (as Benjamin Crème states). Hitler believed he was in contact with them and that they gave him power and energy. Through his alleged contacts with this mythical superior race, he believed he was destined to lead the Aryans to rule the world. Hitler’s vision of the world was that Germany would unite the world under his leadership which would last for 1,000 years.

Contance Cumbey, in her book The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow, summarized Hitler’s path to being Germany’s messianic figure: “While still a very young child, Hitler was initiated into the finer mysteries of the occult. He attended a Benedictine monastery school near his German home. “The occult interests Hitler gained in this school, stayed with him all of his adult life and helped to shape his future spiritual philosophy.” . . .

Hitler, Himmler and Goebbels were Catholic in their background before they indulged themselves into a new spiritual worldview. Occult books were some of Hitler’s favorite reading. It was in the early 1920s Dietrich Eckart introduced Hitler to The Secret Doctrine, by [Helen] Blavatsky. He was taught its secrets by Professor-General Karl Haushofer (Suster), who was a member of the Berlin Lodge of the Vril Society. One of the primary qualifications for one to be admitted to the Vril Society was to have a minimum ability in Blavatsky’s “Secret Doctrine.” Karl Haushofer was alleged to be a master of the secret doctrines espoused by Blavatsky, and it was he who initiated prisoner Adolf Hitler at Landsberg Prison. . . .

Helen Blavatsky

Helen Blavatsky

Cumbey notes: “Hitler rightly believed he had established communication with Lucifer, from whom he openly coveted possession” (Secrets of the Rainbow p.101). It should not surprising to find that he was led to The Secret Doctrine that glorifies Lucifer.

The “Secret Doctrine” held that they originated in Atlantis and that one of the seven Atlantean races was that of the Aryans.” The Aryans were the master-race or supermen of the Atlantean races.” The myth of Aryan superiority was the basis for Hitler’s Nazism and ethnic cleansing of the Jews. . . .

Hitler seemed to have favored Blavatsky’s Secret Doctrine above other books he had. We do know that U.S. Army historians catalogued Hitler’s personal library and found numerous occultic volumes heavily annotated in Hitler’s fancy handwriting. Among the books was one that Hitler often kept by his bedside, the occult standard The Secret Doctrine by Madame Helen P. Blavatsky (Kubizek). (Adolf Hitler, The Occult Messiah, Gerald Suster, 1981).

Blavatsky not only claimed these masters were directing the work of the Theosophical Society but were also guiding the evolution of the human race throughout history. Thus Hitler found his place in the grand scheme of these masters. (“Hitler’s Spiritual Master – Maitreya,” Let Us Reason Ministries)

We can easily say that Helen Blavatsky shared a similar view about the Jews as Alice Bailey. In fact, Bailey probably got at least some of her anti-Semitic views from Blavatsky.  In Blavatsky’s book The Secret Doctrine, she wrote:

Judaism, built solely on Phallic worship, has become one of the latest creeds in Asia, and theologically a religion of hate and malice toward everyone and everything outside themselves. (Blavatsky, H.P.. The Secret Doctrine (Kindle Locations 20502-20503). Chios Classics. Kindle Edition)

Blavatsky also said the Jews were “degenerate in spirituality” (Ibid. Kindle location 15961).

The point of this commentary is to show Christians, especially adherents of Replacement Theology, that occultic influences have worked their way into the church and altered the way Christians think about the Jews, Israel, and  the Word of God. It’s tragic to think about Martin Luther and how he turned against the Jews in a most vehement manner; then Hitler, centuries later, used the sentiments of Luther to convince the German people that the Jews were an inferior people so that he could more easily commit the horrendous atrocities against them. (Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, LT edition, endnote section)

In Mike Oppenheimer’s booklet called Israel: Replacing What God Has Not, he offers some valuable insights. In closing, here are two paragraphs from that booklet:

At a time when a clear and biblically sound understanding of  Bible prophecy is most important, we find the church, paradoxically, having less knowledge of it, especially as it relates directly to Israel.  Most evangelical Christians throughout history have supported the Jews and the modern state of Israel, but things are changing. The church, from its infancy, believed God had a future plan for Israel based on Scripture (Acts 3:19). This plan included the national  restoration of Israel to the same land from which they were eventually  dispersed. As time went on and the church drifted further and further away from her Jewish beginnings, many began to erroneously believe the church had replaced Israel. But in this day and age when we see biblical prophecy being fulfilled on such an unprecedented and unparalleled scale—with God’s continual protection and restoration of the Jews to their land, there should not be those who walk in disbelief with regard to God’s promises. But there are! . . .

God says that we are to bless them and not curse or turn against them. Of the Jew, Paul stated “unto them were committed the oracles of God” (Romans 3:2). Jesus Himself said that “salvation is of the Jews” (John 4:22). And though they have been dispersed throughout the world, God has blessed and prospered them wherever they went. We, therefore, owe a great debt to the Jewish people; and Israel is still Israel and will continue to have a special place in God’s heart and significance in the future of our planet. Remember, God has said of the Jew: “For thus saith the Lord of hosts; After the glory hath he sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye” (Zechariah 2:8).

Thanks to people like Neale Donald Walsch (Conversations with God author), who said in his book that sold millions of copies that Hitler did the Jews a favor by killing them, or people in the emergent church like Tony Campolo and Brian McLaren, who reject the notion that the Jews and Israel have any significance in the present day or the future, people’s (including many evangelicals and other Protestants)  views of the Jews and Israel are fast changing. When you consider how anti-Semitism is growing throughout the world, as Christians, let us ask ourselves, “Are we to think as the world thinks? Are we to think as occultists think?” God forbid.

Related Information:

  Alice Bailey, the Mother of the New Age Movement And Her Plans to “Revitalize” Christianity by Ray Yungen

Oprah Winfrey’s New Age “Christianity” (Part 2) – Neale Donald Walsch, “God,” and Hitler by Warren B. Smith

Do Gentiles Become Jews When They Believe?

By Mike Oppenheimer
Let Us Reason Ministries

When a Gentile becomes a believer in Christ, he becomes part of the body of Christ, not Israel. He is a spiritual Gentile, not a Jew.  Israel is a nation consisting of Jews; Hebrews are an ethnicity who are from the linage of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (the twelve tribes). A Gentile (both believer and non-believer) is from Abraham, not Isaac and Jacob.

Being Abraham’s seed does not make one Jewish; this is where people have been taught wrong. Its Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, (from whom came the 12 tribes); otherwise the Arabs are Jewish too. Selah.

John 18:35 Pilate answered, “Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered You to me.”

Romans 1:16: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.”

It is written “that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to rise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles.” (Acts 26:23). Two groups of people. Later it was Saul who was specifically called to this other group while the original apostles worked among their people, the Jews. Paul was also going to the Jews first as his priority, but they rejected the message from him and said in Acts 28:28 “Therefore let it be known to you that the salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will hear it!”

Romans 11:12-13: “Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness! For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry.” He spoke of himself as “a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth” (1 Timothy 2:7).

Paul made the distinction between Gentiles and Jews before their salvation and continued this distinction afterwards in Romans 2:9,10.

Romans 10:12-13: “For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

He is not saying Jews and Gentile are no longer valid or erased, but that both call upon the Lord for salvation.

Under the new covenant.

Romans 2:28-29: “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.”

In other words, one must have faith to be a Jew, not just in their lineage. It was also a matter of the heart.

Speaking to the Gentiles, Galatians 3:29: “And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” He refers to one being of the seed of Abraham as one exercising faith.

Paul had to rebuke Peter:

Galatians 2:14: But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?

Clearly, there were distinctions; yet he also said of those who were in the body of Christ to not see each other as they did before.

Colossians 3:10-11: “and have put on the new man who is renewed in knowledge according to the image of Him who created him, where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised nor uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave nor free, but Christ is all and in all.”

Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

What he is saying is that as the body of Christ we are all children of God and that any differences should not be used to divide (2 Corinthians 12:13). Jew and Greek is a more specific substitute for the distinction of Jew and Gentile. There were still slaves and masters existing at the time just as there were still men and women. But this was to be overlooked in defining a person who is now in Christ.

In the same way Matthew 19:6 says: “So then, they are no longer two but one flesh.” This does not mean one literal person, but speaks spiritually.

Jesus says in Revelation 2:9: “and I know the blasphemy of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.”

Clearly there were those who claimed to be Jews but were not believers and were against the Messiah (as in Acts 14:2).

The Gentiles as said to be called by His name (Acts 15). Acts 21:25: “Gentiles who believe.”

Paul never said Gentiles were Jews after they believe.

Romans 15:10-11: And again, he says: “Rejoice, O Gentiles, with His people!” And again: “Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles! Laud Him, all you peoples!”

Galatians 3:14 says that the “blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”

Ephesians 3:6 explains that “the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel.

Acts 17:17: “Therefore he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and with the Gentile worshipers, and in the marketplace daily with those who happened to be there.”

Just as Gentiles were not called Jews when they worshiped God in the synagogue, they are not called Jews when they believe in Messiah Jesus. Rather, they are fellow heirs; they become believers, spiritual Gentiles. this distinction continues through the Scriptures.

Related Material:

 

 


Lighthouse Trails RSS Feed
**SHOP FOR BOOKS/DVDS**

SEARCH ENTIRE SITE
Categories
Calendar
September 2017
S M T W T F S
« Aug    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
Archives
Show Buttons
Hide Buttons