Most of the organized Christian Church is openly Anti-Semitic. How is it possible to make such a statement? Because, most mainline Christian denominations around the world have voted for an Israeli boycott. They have done this even though boycotting Israel is illegal according to section 8 of the 1976 US Tax Reform Act (TRA). This includes the majority of the Lutherans, Presbyterians, Episcopalians in the United States.
Boycotting Israel was begun by the Arab League after the formation of the state of Israel in 1948. After the Arab-Israeli war of 1948, Palestinian political action groups initiated a resurgence of the boycott in 2005. This group of 22 nations makes up the Arab League which also supports the boycott. In addition to the boycott, most of these nations will not accept an Israeli passport. We shouldn't be surprised that Arab influence continues to spread to many governmental agencies around the world. It is becoming increasing popular among universities to support the boycott, even denying Israeli researchers the opportunity of participating in academic conferences.
Palestinian political action groups have managed to influence several church groups. For example, the Church of England has voted for disinvestment and in 2010, the British Methodist Church voted to join the boycott as did the World Council of Churches. Not to be outdone, in 2012, the United Church of Canada (UCC) supported the boycott. All are liberal. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that they all hold to replacement theology, i.e., that the church has replaced Israel. This is the natural outcome when one interprets Scripture loosely, when one spiritualizes some areas of Scripture, picking and choosing Scripture ignoring context whenever it proves a favored theological perspective.
In the U.S., the Presbyterian Church USA has supported the boycott since 2004. Also supporting the boycott is the United Church of Christ, the United Methodist Church (2012), and the Episcopal Church (2012). Again, all these church organizations are liberal and teach the church has replaced Israel as the “True Israel.” They interpret the promises given to Israel in the Old Testament as given to the church because of Israel’s rejection of Jesus as her Messiah. The positive promises are thus given to the church while the negative promises are for Israel. Talk about picking and choosing!
Systematized Interpretation is when the interpreter approaches the text with a theological bent. Those who utilize Systematized Interpretation call this method the historical-grammatical-theological interpretation. But adding “theological” to the grammatical-historical method destroys both the historical and the grammatical elements. This leaves only the theological intact - a perverted theology.
Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Commerce is “charged with administering and enforcing the Antiboycott Laws under the Export Administration Act. Those laws discourage, and in some circumstances, prohibit U.S. companies from furthering or supporting the boycott of Israel sponsored by the Arab League, and certain other countries, including complying with certain requests for information designed to verify compliance with the boycott. Compliance with such requests may be prohibited by the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and may be reportable to the Bureau.” (From www/bis.doc.gov)
“During the mid-1970's the United States adopted two laws that seek to counteract the participation of U.S. citizens in other nation's economic boycotts or embargoes. These "antiboycott" laws are the 1977 amendments to the Export Administration Act (EAA) and the Ribicoff Amendment to the 1976 Tax Reform Act (TRA). While these laws share a common purpose, there are distinctions in their administration. The antiboycott laws were adopted to encourage, and in specified cases, require U.S. firms to refuse to participate in foreign boycotts that the United States does not sanction. They have the effect of preventing U.S. firms from being used to implement foreign policies of other nations which run counter to U.S. policy.” (From www/bis.doc.gov)
As easily seen from this antiboycott law, it is against the policy of the US to participate in a boycott against Israel. Yet universities and other groups have begun boycotting Israel, including many church denominations.
Why do these institutions participate eagerly with this Muslim influenced boycott? Because the Christian world is shifting away from truth to misplaced emotionalism. From absolute truth to post-Christian mysticism. We have moved from solid literal Biblical truth to maybe we don’t really know because supposedly the Scriptures are 'full of error'. The liberal church interprets Scriptures outside the normal rules of reading for the same reason the ancient Greeks did – they did not like the message! The ancient Greeks had their stories of gods that did unimaginable immoral deeds . Thus in an effort to make the stories acceptable to their world view they created a new way of reading – allegorical. Therefore, they could claim that the god’s incest did not truly happen for it was allegory not literal.
This same concept has gained acceptance into liberal churches. The Bible is not literal but allegory. Thus, everything in the Bible is now fair game to be turned into fable. They teach that the plain literal is the “milk” of Scripture fit only for the layman, but the meat is the allegory. Thus, two levels of Scripture are found with the liberal camp: “the literal was on the surface, but the allegorical represented the deeper, more spiritual meaning. Therefore, anyone who simply interpreted the Bible in its most natural, normal way was simple and missing the great meaning of the Scriptures.” (Mal Couch, Hermeneutics, p. 97)
For the liberal church, Israel has no eternal promise in the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 12,15, 17). Israel has no future of peace and rest, no promise of a Messianic kingdom, no land, no ethnic people, no King in the land, and no personal relationship with God. Instead, Israel is reduced to being a bland race of people with no specific rights to the land. This thought has unfortunately been the historical teaching of the Christian Church since around A.D. 250.
What happened in A.D 200 to move the Church into this anti-semitic point-of-view? In the next article I will examine what happened and expose the satanic Arab influence in today’s western societies.
Boycotting Israel was begun by the Arab League after the formation of the state of Israel in 1948. After the Arab-Israeli war of 1948, Palestinian political action groups initiated a resurgence of the boycott in 2005. This group of 22 nations makes up the Arab League which also supports the boycott. In addition to the boycott, most of these nations will not accept an Israeli passport. We shouldn't be surprised that Arab influence continues to spread to many governmental agencies around the world. It is becoming increasing popular among universities to support the boycott, even denying Israeli researchers the opportunity of participating in academic conferences.
Palestinian political action groups have managed to influence several church groups. For example, the Church of England has voted for disinvestment and in 2010, the British Methodist Church voted to join the boycott as did the World Council of Churches. Not to be outdone, in 2012, the United Church of Canada (UCC) supported the boycott. All are liberal. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that they all hold to replacement theology, i.e., that the church has replaced Israel. This is the natural outcome when one interprets Scripture loosely, when one spiritualizes some areas of Scripture, picking and choosing Scripture ignoring context whenever it proves a favored theological perspective.
In the U.S., the Presbyterian Church USA has supported the boycott since 2004. Also supporting the boycott is the United Church of Christ, the United Methodist Church (2012), and the Episcopal Church (2012). Again, all these church organizations are liberal and teach the church has replaced Israel as the “True Israel.” They interpret the promises given to Israel in the Old Testament as given to the church because of Israel’s rejection of Jesus as her Messiah. The positive promises are thus given to the church while the negative promises are for Israel. Talk about picking and choosing!
Systematized Interpretation is when the interpreter approaches the text with a theological bent. Those who utilize Systematized Interpretation call this method the historical-grammatical-theological interpretation. But adding “theological” to the grammatical-historical method destroys both the historical and the grammatical elements. This leaves only the theological intact - a perverted theology.
Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Commerce is “charged with administering and enforcing the Antiboycott Laws under the Export Administration Act. Those laws discourage, and in some circumstances, prohibit U.S. companies from furthering or supporting the boycott of Israel sponsored by the Arab League, and certain other countries, including complying with certain requests for information designed to verify compliance with the boycott. Compliance with such requests may be prohibited by the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and may be reportable to the Bureau.” (From www/bis.doc.gov)
“During the mid-1970's the United States adopted two laws that seek to counteract the participation of U.S. citizens in other nation's economic boycotts or embargoes. These "antiboycott" laws are the 1977 amendments to the Export Administration Act (EAA) and the Ribicoff Amendment to the 1976 Tax Reform Act (TRA). While these laws share a common purpose, there are distinctions in their administration. The antiboycott laws were adopted to encourage, and in specified cases, require U.S. firms to refuse to participate in foreign boycotts that the United States does not sanction. They have the effect of preventing U.S. firms from being used to implement foreign policies of other nations which run counter to U.S. policy.” (From www/bis.doc.gov)
As easily seen from this antiboycott law, it is against the policy of the US to participate in a boycott against Israel. Yet universities and other groups have begun boycotting Israel, including many church denominations.
Why do these institutions participate eagerly with this Muslim influenced boycott? Because the Christian world is shifting away from truth to misplaced emotionalism. From absolute truth to post-Christian mysticism. We have moved from solid literal Biblical truth to maybe we don’t really know because supposedly the Scriptures are 'full of error'. The liberal church interprets Scriptures outside the normal rules of reading for the same reason the ancient Greeks did – they did not like the message! The ancient Greeks had their stories of gods that did unimaginable immoral deeds . Thus in an effort to make the stories acceptable to their world view they created a new way of reading – allegorical. Therefore, they could claim that the god’s incest did not truly happen for it was allegory not literal.
This same concept has gained acceptance into liberal churches. The Bible is not literal but allegory. Thus, everything in the Bible is now fair game to be turned into fable. They teach that the plain literal is the “milk” of Scripture fit only for the layman, but the meat is the allegory. Thus, two levels of Scripture are found with the liberal camp: “the literal was on the surface, but the allegorical represented the deeper, more spiritual meaning. Therefore, anyone who simply interpreted the Bible in its most natural, normal way was simple and missing the great meaning of the Scriptures.” (Mal Couch, Hermeneutics, p. 97)
For the liberal church, Israel has no eternal promise in the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 12,15, 17). Israel has no future of peace and rest, no promise of a Messianic kingdom, no land, no ethnic people, no King in the land, and no personal relationship with God. Instead, Israel is reduced to being a bland race of people with no specific rights to the land. This thought has unfortunately been the historical teaching of the Christian Church since around A.D. 250.
What happened in A.D 200 to move the Church into this anti-semitic point-of-view? In the next article I will examine what happened and expose the satanic Arab influence in today’s western societies.
