Palestine

[visionary]

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/19812

I think it is a disgrace and insult to the faith of the biblical people, Yeshua, and believers in the Bible to promote Palestine like it was God blessed.

 

[psalms 91]

Totally agree, God laid out the boundries of Israel and they should occupy the land

 

[Lamb]

Here is an 8 day tour by that tour company in the article:

Day 1
ROME - TEL AVIV - NAZARETH
Day 2
MOUNT TABOR - CANA - NAZARETH
Day 3
LAKE TIBERIAS
Day 4
VALLEY OF JORDAN - QUMRAN
Day 5
JERUSALEM
Day 6
JERUSALEM
Day 7
BETHLEHEM - AIN KAREM
Day 8
TEL AVIV - ROME


It looks to me as if they're taking people to important places in the bible.

 

[visionary]

Here is an 8 day tour by that tour company in the article:

Day 1
ROME - TEL AVIV - NAZARETH
Day 2
MOUNT TABOR - CANA - NAZARETH
Day 3
LAKE TIBERIAS
Day 4
VALLEY OF JORDAN - QUMRAN
Day 5
JERUSALEM
Day 6
JERUSALEM
Day 7
BETHLEHEM - AIN KAREM
Day 8
TEL AVIV - ROME


It looks to me as if they're taking people to important places in the bible.

And with the Palestine slant to everything they say, it undermines Yeshua and His whole family.

 

[Lamb]

Have you contacted the travel agency or are you relying on second hand gossip to provide your information?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Prejudice thrives best without facts to contradict it.

 

[psalms 91]

so does ignorance

 

[Lamb]

In the comments section of the article there is this:

ZOA Retracts Criticism Of Vatican That Was Based On Erroneous Article By Respected Journalist
Share
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Print Email Addthis
For more information contact Morton A. Klein 212-481-1500
NEW YORK, December 1, 2016

The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) retracted its criticism of the Vatican for organizing and promoting tours of Christian sites in Jerusalem as part of tours to “Palestine,” omitting any references to Israel and to Israel’s Jewish identity. The ZOA’s criticism – set forth in agiu press release issued on November 29, 2016 – was based on a report from Giulio Meotti, a reputable writer for Il Foglio, an Italian daily. The report was inaccurate. It now seems that the Vatican travel office does not organize tours of Christian sites; they are operated by private contractors. The ZOA regrets the error.

 

[Pedrito]

In Post #6 on Page 1 MoreCoffee presented a truly important consideration:

Prejudice thrives best without facts to contradict it.

By so doing, he has opened the door for three pointed observations to be pulled out from under the carpet.

==============================================================================================

1. For over one thousand years, around one and a half thousand years in fact, the Roman Catholic Church officially promoted prejudice against Jews. During that time, the prolonged physical violence against Jews that resulted, was tolerated if not actually encouraged.

But didn’t the Jews deserve it? Didn’t “Saint” John Chrysostom accuse the Jewish people of deicide (killing God*)? Did he not declare that there was no path of atonement for that sin? (That declaration was made around the time that the Trinity became official church doctrine in 381AD (not 325AD at Nicaea as we have been traditionally told).)

Didn’t the RCC actively promote that idea until it was officially declared invalid during the Second Vatican Council (1963-1965)?

But old prejudices die hard.

==============================================================================================

2. Don’t many Protestant churches also harbour strong anti-Jewish sentiment? Especially those that maintain the concept termed “Replacement Theology” (Christians have inherited all the promises made to physical Israel)?

Does that prejudicial stance not directly oppose Paul’s divinely-inspired teaching in Romans Chapter 11?

Old prejudices truly die hard.

==============================================================================================

3. It is encouraging that various branches of the Lutheran Church, starting around the mid-1990s, have repudiated the intense anti-semitic enmity propounded by their founder, Martin Luther. Were anyone to quote some of his statements here (the sickening ones), that person would probably be sanctioned, or at least those statements edited out of their post.

But the entrenched, organisational conditioning of centuries is hard to suddenly eradicate in individuals, is it not?

==============================================================================================

“Prejudice thrives best without facts to contradict it.” Indeed.

But anti-Jewish prejudice is still alive and well, despite facts to contradict it.

==============================================================================================

*Killing God? God cannot die, can He? But we are told that Jesus had to be 100% God to be able to atone for the sins of mankind. Yet aren’t we also told that it was only the human part of Jesus that died? And yet the Jews are/were supposedly guilty of killing God (deicide)? Does the Reader detect a degree of dichotomy (illogical contradiction) there?

And where does that leave “Saint” John Chrysostom? Where does it leave all those (including Church officials, and even Popes?) who are now found guilty in retrospect of promoting John Chrysostom’s ideas, and were thus opposing what is now proclaimed as God’s truth? Does the Reader think that God changed His mind after all those years?

 

[Josiah]

IMO, the modern nation of "Israel" has little to do with God, the Chosen People or the Bible (no more than the USA does, for example). The mid-20th century political state of Isarel is only about 70 years old and was created largely by Great Britain as part of its messing around with middle eastern politics (most of which has gone badly).

The Biblical "Israel" fell in 722 BC and hasn't existed since. The political entity GOD built lasted from roughly 1100 BC to 587 BC. It had and has nothing to do with a very modern country now occupying the same geography.

"Holy Lands" is a bit strange, but yes - when tourists visit that part of the world, they often are reflecting on very, very ancient history - people and events some 2000 to 3000 years ago. So no, it's not really a visit to Israel (that very, very modern state the British set up some 70 years ago) - nice as I understand it is (I read an impressive article about their water management there, for example). I suspect that MOST tourists there aren't visiting Israel or Palestine, they are visiting a GEOGRAPHY that a very, very, very, very, very long time ago was the locale for some important religious events and people.


Just my perspective...



- Josiah

 

[psalms 91]

Just curious, when God laid out the boundries for Israel was there an expiration date or was it given in perpetuty

 

[MoreCoffee]

Just curious, when God laid out the boundries for Israel was there an expiration date or was it given in perpetuty

It expired when the old covenant did.

 

[Pedrito]

psalms 91 in Post #11 on Page 2 asked:

Just curious, when God laid out the boundries for Israel was there an expiration date or was it given in perpetuty

To do the question proper justice would take more space than is available here. So what follows can be regarded as more of a summary.

==============================================================================================

In Genesis 15:1-21 we see God's promise to Abram (Abraham) regarding the boundaries of Israel.

God's promise took the form of a one-sided covenant that God entered into with Abram regarding his descendants (meaning Israel, which would issue from the child of promise, Isaac). The covenant was one sided. God committed Himself to perform His side of that covenant (termed the land covenant) unconditionally. Abram and his descendants to whom the covenant applied were to benefit from that covenant no matter what they did or did not do. They had no obligation to uphold conditions of the covenant that applied to them, because there were no conditions imposed. It was a one-sided covenant.

There was no declared or implied expiration date.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

The "Old Covenant" by way of contrast was a covenant between God and the fledgeling nation of Israel after its rescue from bondage in Egypt. That covenant was two-sided. See Exodus 24:1-8 and Leviticus 26:1-46 for instance. In fact, that "Old Covenant" that God made with the nation of Israel in particular, was presaged by the covenant He made with Abram-Abraham in Genesis 17:1-27, and was its ultimate focus.

We see among other things, that the nation Israel's right to continuously live in the land that was theirs, was dependent on their obedience.

==============================================================================================

Thus we see that MoreCoffee’s thought expressed in Post #12 on Page 1, can be considered somewhat uninformed, even if often heard.
“It expired when the old covenant did.”

==============================================================================================

Now, can anyone point us to where God states categorically that He will eventually return Israel to the Promised Land, and gives the reason why He will?

 

[psalms 91]

psalms 91 in Post #11 on Page 2 asked:


To do the question proper justice would take more space than is available here. So what follows can be regarded as more of a summary.

==============================================================================================

In Genesis 15:1-21 we see God's promise to Abram (Abraham) regarding the boundaries of Israel.

God's promise took the form of a one-sided covenant that God entered into with Abram regarding his descendants (meaning Israel, which would issue from the child of promise, Isaac). The covenant was one sided. God committed Himself to perform His side of that covenant (termed the land covenant) unconditionally. Abram and his descendants to whom the covenant applied were to benefit from that covenant no matter what they did or did not do. They had no obligation to uphold conditions of the covenant that applied to them, because there were no conditions imposed. It was a one-sided covenant.

There was no declared or implied expiration date.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

The "Old Covenant" by way of contrast was a covenant between God and the fledgeling nation of Israel after its rescue from bondage in Egypt. That covenant was two-sided. See Exodus 24:1-8 and Leviticus 26:1-46 for instance. In fact, that "Old Covenant" that God made with the nation of Israel in particular, was presaged by the covenant He made with Abram-Abraham in Genesis 17:1-27, and was its ultimate focus.

We see among other things, that the nation Israel's right to continuously live in the land that was theirs, was dependent on their obedience.

==============================================================================================

Thus we see that MoreCoffee’s thought expressed in Post #12 on Page 1, can be considered somewhat uninformed, even if often heard.
“It expired when the old covenant did.”

==============================================================================================

Now, can anyone point us to where God states categorically that He will eventually return Israel to the Promised Land, and gives the reason why He will?

Cant quote the scripture but it is there in prophecy