patrick.net

You are confusing the Biblical term "Zion" with what the modernist secular/political movement took as their official name of Zionism. (Similar to the Federal Reserve using the name 'federal' when in fact it is not a part of the Federal Government, it is a private banking conglomerate that controls the money supply).

Zionism (/ˈzaɪ.ənɪzəm/ ZY-ə-niz-əm; Hebrew: צִיּוֹנוּת, romanized: Ṣīyyonūt, IPA: [tsijoˈnut]; derived from Zion) is a nationalist[1][fn 1] movement that emerged in Europe in the late 19th century aiming for the establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people, particularly in Palestine,[4][5][6] a region roughly corresponding to the Land of Israel in Jewish tradition.[7][8][9][10] Following the establishment of the State of Israel, Zionism became an ideology that supports the development and protection of the Israel as a Jewish state.[1][11][12] It has also been described as Israel's national or state ideology.[13]

Zionism initially emerged in Central and Eastern Europe as a national revival movement in the late 19th century, in reaction to newer waves of antisemitism and as a consequence of the Haskalah, or Jewish Enlightenment.[1][14][15][16] Throughout the first decade of the Zionist movement, some Zionist figures, including Theodor Herzl, supported a Jewish state in several places such as "Uganda" (actually parts of British East Africa today in Kenya), Argentina, Cyprus, Mesopotamia, Mozambique, and the Sinai Peninsula.[17] But then most leaders of the movement associated the main goal with creating the desired homeland in Palestine, then part of the Ottoman Empire.[18][19][20] This process was seen by the emerging Zionist movement as an "ingathering of exiles" (kibbutz galuyot), an effort to put a stop to the exoduses and persecutions that have marked Jewish history by bringing the Jewish people back to their historic homeland.[21]

From 1897 to 1948, the primary goal of the Zionist movement was to establish the basis for a Jewish homeland in Palestine, and thereafter to consolidate it. In a unique variation of the principle of self-determination,[22] the Lovers of Zion united in 1884 and in 1897 the first Zionist congress was organized. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a large number of Jews immigrated to first Ottoman and later Mandatory Palestine, and at the same time, some international recognition and support was gained, notably in the 1917 Balfour Declaration by the United Kingdom. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism has continued primarily to advocate on behalf of Israel and to address threats to its continued existence and security.

More here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

More on the history of the modern day political movement known as Zionism:

Theodor Herzl[a] (2 May 1860 – 3 July 1904)[3] was an Austro-Hungarian Jewish journalist, lawyer, writer, playwright and political activist who was the father of modern political Zionism. Herzl formed the Zionist Organization and promoted Jewish immigration to Palestine in an effort to form a Jewish state. Due to his Zionist work, he is known in Hebrew as Chozeh HaMedinah (חוֹזֵה הַמְדִינָה), lit. 'Visionary of the State'.[4][5] He is specifically mentioned in the Israeli Declaration of Independence and is officially referred to as "the spiritual father of the Jewish State".[6]

Herzl was born in Pest, Kingdom of Hungary, to a prosperous Neolog Jewish family. After a brief legal career in Vienna, he became the Paris correspondent for the Viennese newspaper Neue Freie Presse. Confronted with antisemitic events in Vienna, he reached the conclusion that anti-Jewish sentiment would make Jewish assimilation impossible, and that the only solution for Jews was the establishment of a Jewish state. In 1896, Herzl published the pamphlet Der Judenstaat, in which he elaborated his visions of a Jewish homeland. His ideas attracted international attention and rapidly established Herzl as a major figure in the Jewish world.

In 1897, Herzl convened the First Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland, and was elected president of the Zionist Organization. He began a series of diplomatic initiatives to build support for a Jewish state, appealing unsuccessfully to German emperor Wilhelm II and Ottoman sultan Abdul Hamid II. At the Sixth Zionist Congress in 1903, Herzl presented the Uganda Scheme, endorsed by Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain on behalf of the British government. The proposal, which sought to create a temporary refuge for the Jews in British East Africa following the Kishinev pogrom, was met with strong opposition and ultimately rejected. Herzl died of a heart ailment in 1904 at the age of 44, and was buried in Vienna. In 1949, his remains were taken to Israel and reinterred on Mount Herzl.

RayAmerica says

You are confusing the Biblical term "Zion"

2 Samuel (2 Sam 5:7) - King David established his capital on Mt. Zion, identified with one of the hills Jerusalem sits on.

Y'know, Jew-rusalem in Jew-dea. Not Arabsalem in Arab-dea

See also Psalm 137, a favorite topic for songs:

[1] By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.
[2] We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof.
[3] For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion.
[4] How shall we sing the LORD's song in a strange land?
[5] If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning.
[6] If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy.
[7] Remember, O LORD, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof.
[8] O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.
[9] Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

Part of that "recurring theme" in the OT.

Boney M "The Rivers of Babylon"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3QxT-w3WMo

You dismiss Genesis Ray, that just means you will continue in ignorance.

You can quote mountains of ignorant propaganda, but it doesn’t change, nor ever will change the truth found in Genesis. An everlasting covenant.

Here is one part of it.
God's Promise to Abraham

Genesis 17
When Abram was 99 years old, the Lord appeared to him again and said, “I am God All-Powerful. If you obey me and always do right, 2 I will keep my solemn promise to you and give you more descendants than can be counted.” 3 Abram bowed with his face to the ground, and God said:

4-5 I promise that you will be the father of many nations. So now I'm changing your name from Abram to Abraham.[a] 6 I will give you a lot of descendants, and they will become great nations. Some of them will even be kings.

7 I will always keep the promise I have made to you and your descendants, because I am your God and their God. 8 I will give you and them the land in which you are now a foreigner. I will give the whole land of Canaan to your family forever, and I will be their God.

PeopleUnited says

No. You need to get your facts straight. Start in Genesis. We’ll wait...

After reading my posts on the creation of the secular/political movement known as Zionism, I'd love to hear your comments. (By the way, I assume you are referring to Genesis 12:3. You'll need to read Paul's epistles to the Galatians and much of Romans in order to interpret WHO that verse is actually describing).

Not one comment on the above history of the modern secular/political movement of modern day Zionism. I wonder why that is?

The Antichrist will rule from Rome.

The Messiah will rule from Jerusalem.

RayAmerica says

You'll need to read Paul's epistles to the Galatians and much of Romans in order to interpret WHO that verse is actually describing)

No one replaced the genetic descendants of Abraham. Read Revelation it will prove it to you.

RayAmerica says

Not one comment on the above history of the modern secular/political movement of modern day Zionism. I wonder why that is?

Because you're starting at the end, and we're starting at the beginning and why.

I guess the Greeks were bad for seeking to take their land back against the Ottomans in the 19th because they last time THEY ruled themselves was in the last century BC or so.

The descendants of Abraham in which the blessings were bestowed were on the REMNANT of the faithful, not on the disobedient that were merely the physical 'seed' of Abraham. Had they been the spiritual seed of Abraham, which is that they were believers in God's truth, they would have known who Jesus was, precisely what Jesus was declaring in the following exchange between him and physical 'seed:'

37 I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.

38 I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.

39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.

40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.

42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.

44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

The two of you are believing Dispensationalist theory that was invented in the 19th. Century, which elevates the non-believing, Christ rejecting Jewish people, above the true children of God, which are those, both Jew and Gentile alike, that are found in Christ.

From Galatians chapter 3:

6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. 7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. 8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. 9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

And ...

26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

The New Testament interprets and defines the meaning of much of the Old Testament. That is exactly what is being declared in the above Bible passages. It is defining who the true children of Abraham are, and it is not physical, unbelieving Israel. It is clearly defined as those that are in Christ.

RayAmerica says

The descendants of Abraham in which the blessings were bestowed were on the REMNANT of the faithful,

RayAmerica says

and it is not physical, unbelieving Israel. It is clearly defined as those that are in Christ.

That makes no sense.

"For the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" and the context is clearly in reference to the literal seed of Abraham.



It makes no sense in the "Church is Israel context".

"The Church, you yourselves are enemies of the Gospel. But They, which is really the Church of you Yourselves, are saved for the sake of the Patriarchs"?

"A partial hardening has come upon them, which is you the Church whom I'm also talking to? To make you, the Church believers jealous of themselves, since you are also Israel?"

So the Church is the enemy of the Gospel, but saved for the OT Patriarchs sake?

That's far from a plain reading, and one hell of a tendentious twisting.

Kulak,

I noticed that you didn't address the BIBLE passages above which clearly defines that the SEED of Abraham are those that are found in Christ.

When the Jews professed that THEY were the seed of Abraham to Christ, what was HIS response? He clearly was defining the seed as those that are of faith, not of those that are merely the physical seed.

Do I understand that you are saying that ALL JEWS, whether they are believers in Christ or not, are all saved?

RayAmerica says

I noticed that you didn't address the BIBLE passages above which clearly defines that the SEED of Abraham are those that are found in Christ.

Absolutely not. Go earlier in Romans for the Context, Romans 11:1-2 (NKJV):

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. 2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, 3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. 4 But what saith the answer of God unto him?https://app.logos.com/books/LLS%3AKJV1900/references/bible%2Bkjv.66.11.1?registration_source_host=biblia.com

ESV for comparison:
11 I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham,[a] a member of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against Israel?
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+11%3A1-2&version=ESV

The Chapter STARTS with Paul addressing the Church when talking about the literal descendents - like himself - of Abraham.

Let me ask you a question - What tribe of Israel are you in? Benjamin? Judah?

Furthermore, what is the point of the story of the grafted on wild branch and the natural branches if not to contrast the Church in Christ with Physical Israel?

Romans 11 only makes sense if Israel means the physical Seed of Abraham, and "You" and "Grafted on wild olive branches" and "Church" means those in Christ.

You are choosing to completely ignore Paul's writings in Galatians (and Romans) as stated above, and, you've ignored the discourse between 'Abraham's seed' and Christ in John chapter 8.

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” - Gal. 3:28

What Paul is clearly saying is that the Jews are NOT cut off from Christ, but they are not in a higher position just because they were born Jews, as the verse above clearly declares.

Do you believe that ALL Jews are saved? Yes or No?

RayAmerica says

What Paul is clearly saying is that the Jews are NOT cut off from Christ, but they are not in a higher position just because they were born Jews, as the verse above clearly declares.

Paul is saying that Jews are PARTIALLY hardened until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in, and then all of Israel will be saved.

It also warns Church members not to treat Jews with arrogance or hardness, lest they upset the Lord.

Because in the OT, except for very few exceptions (such as Rahab the harlot), salvation, via the prophets and the word, along with God's sovereign grace, was only made available to the Jews.

When the Jews predominantly rejected Christ as Messiah, God's grace was then also extended to the Gentiles. Both Jews and Gentiles equally need Christ, without which there is no real hope for anyone.

RayAmerica says

Do you believe that ALL Jews are saved? Yes or No?

Not what I think, it's what Jesus revealed to Paul.

It's literally, and in plain words, in the chapter I posted above.

Again, are you saying that that verse means that ALL ISRAEL, including those that reject Christ, will all be saved?

RayAmerica says

Again, are you saying that that verse means that ALL ISRAEL, including those that reject Christ, will all be saved?

Paul says the current members of the Church whom he is directly speaking to were consigned to disobedience so that they might be saved, and so "They" (who is clearly not those in the Church whom he just addressed) - might be shown mercy and ALL will be saved.

He comes out and says it bluntly.

He also says they will be saved for the sake of the promises made to the Patriarch, and God's Words are irrevokable. Even though for now they are enemies of the Gospel. He can't say it plainer.

From Romans Chapter 9:

6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

CLEARLY defines who "Israel" is, and, states emphatically that "not all Israel ... are Israel."

So, the 'all Israel shall be saved' is defined by the above!

This is why "Jews are cursed" websites and tweets avoid Romans, because if they mention it and people look it up, without the Replacement heretic trying to trick the plain meaning, they'll see the plain truth of the Mystery God revealed to Paul.

If "not all Israel ... is Israel," WHO is the Israel that shall ALL BE SAVED? It is the Israel of FAITH, and NOT the Children of the flesh.

I have news for you friend ... what I am declaring to be true is backed up by orthodox Christian doctrine that was 'replaced' by the fiction, invented primarily by John Nelson Darby, and made popular by the Scofield Reference Bible notes. Prior to that, Dispensationalist doctrines cannot be found anywhere in orthodox Christian writings or commentaries, going back all the way to the earliest writings and throughout history. It is a modern day invention, pure and simple.

What I find interesting is that Dispensationalism has always been scorned upon by European Christians, including, Charles Spurgeon, who viewed it as modern day heresy.

RayAmerica says

From Romans Chapter 9:

6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

CLEARLY defines who "Israel" is, and, states emphatically that "not all Israel ... are Israel."

So, the 'all Israel shall be saved' is defined by the above!

Excellent! This Paul explaining that God will save whom he wants, and not according to the expectations of Men. It goes on to talk of Esau, who was given his own inheritance despite being the Eldest, for it was God's Sovereign Will. That is what 9:7 means.

However, in Romans 11 Paul clearly explains - and the OT shows repeatedly - that for the Sake of the Patriarchs, the Seed of Abraham will be saved in the end.

I suspect that is that the partial hardening will be lifted, and we see in modern times more Jews converting than any time since the days of Jesus.

RayAmerica says

I have news for you friend ... what I am declaring to be true is backed up by orthodox Christian doctrine

You mean back when the Bible was unavailable to most, and to be read only under "Guidance" of Middle Men.

The plain meaning of the Word trumps any Theologian's take.

RayAmerica says

What I find interesting is that Dispensationalism has always been scorned upon by European Christians, including, Charles Spurgeon, who viewed it as modern day heresy.

Many had Indentity a mile wide and an inch deep, but it's men like Spurgeon who lit a strong fire in many men.

But you claimed that "all Israel shall be saved," when Paul writes that "all Israel is not Israel."

Again, clearly Paul is declaring that the "Israel" that he is referring to are those that are of faith, and that those that are NOT of faith, are NOT ISRAEL. Only those that are in Christ are the Children of God ... period.

RayAmerica says

Again, clearly Paul is declaring that the "Israel" that he is referring to are those that are of faith, and that those that are NOT of faith, are NOT ISRAEL. Only those that are in Christ are the Children of God ... period.

No, because he just said that they are saved for the sake of the Patriarchs.

And, he's contrasting the Church members with whom he is addressing, with a "They" that is the descendents of Abraham

"They are beloved for the sake of their Forefathers"

Who is "They" here? It's physical descendents of Abraham.

When will the partial hardening end? When the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

Kulak,

You are way off base on this. Paul, and Christ in John 8, are making it perfectly clear that the true seed of Abraham is found in Christ alone.

You can believe what you want. That is your right.

RayAmerica says

You can believe what you want. That is your right.

Yes, we're in disagreement here.

I think we can agree that the most important part is to have Faith in Jesus.

I just would point out, not to rekindle or worry the argument, but in earnest burning to mention it, one extra factor in the point I made above:
AmericanKulak says

"They are beloved for the sake of their Forefathers"

Is "spiritual Israel" or the Church beloved for the sake of Abraham and Jacob? Why would a Moro or Igbo or Frank be beloved because of Abraham or Jacob? They would be saved by their Faith in the Mosiach, as would a Christ-believing Jew. More evidence Paul must be refering to the Physical Seed of Israel.

RayAmerica says

The New Testament interprets and defines the meaning of much of the Old Testament.

Just read revelation it proves the end of all the promises of Genesis, Daniel and Jesus.

AmericanKulak says

This is why "Jews are cursed" websites and tweets avoid Romans, because if they mention it and people look it up, without the Replacement heretic trying to trick the plain meaning, they'll see the plain truth of the Mystery God revealed to Paul.

Well said. Paul himself disproves the replacement crowd with his writings.

PeopleUnited says

It’s one giant circle jerk where Zionists are the cause of all of our problems. Gee where have we heard that one before?

They complain they keep being thrown out of nations and they are absolutely blameless victims.

You know this is ridiculous. There's a problem with their culture and they haven't addressed it in 100s of years

What they are doing in Gaza now will hurt them for centuries and the descendants will have to deal with it and they will say that what Israel did wasn't wrong. That's an error.

Was what Europeans did to the Natives wrong? Was slavery wrong? White people are made to feel so guilty over last horrors, is that a trait within the Jewish culture?

I can't change the past but look at the present. We can change that, but slaves are so habitual. In time you will discover you were on the wrong moral side it's obvious you are. The side that creates propaganda and lies is always in the wrong to do it.

RayAmerica says

Jews did not kill Jesus – US House of Representatives

So this was never actually said by the House right? Just a hook for the OP?

GOP lawmakers, conservative influencers slam ‘insane’ Antisemitism Awareness Act, warn it could silence Christians

Christians aren't 'antisemitic' for saying Jewish leaders helped get Jesus killed, Daily Wire commentator Ben Shapiro said.

Shapiro, an Orthodox Jew and Harvard University law school grad, said the bill is “obviously unconstitutionally vague,” on his show Thursday.

He also said the New Testament clearly said the Jews did hand over Jesus to Pontius Pilate to be killed. “Christians saying all that stuff [about Jewish leaders having Jesus killed], doesn’t make Christians antisemitic,” Shapiro said.

More here: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gop-lawmakers-conservative-influencers-slam-insane-antisemitism-awareness-act-warn-it-could-silence-christians/

NOTE: I am not a fan of Ben Shapiro, but on this issue, he is 100% correct, IMO.

RayAmerica says

NOTE: I am not a fan of Ben Shapiro, but on this issue, he is 100% correct, IMO.

He's controlled opposition. He just spent years extolling free speech, to fire Candice Owen because he disagrees with her view on Israel.

Does t actually have the principles he claims to have.