Quote:
Originally Posted by Dancing
How God operates with Israel reveals principles on how He operates with His church.
|
On this we can agree — at least broadly. But it is just that — principles. And the precise "whats" and "hows" of his dealings with the church are, in principle, similar.
But they are not identical. How he dealt with Israel had to do with obedience coupled with a continuous need to sacrifice more animals. But there are no more sacrifices. Yet the requirement for obedience remains.
Similarities, but not in all things.
The thrust of this thread is that a secular nation has a need to "return to God." The problem is that the nation does not have such a position to which it can return. The acts of a "few good men" (although that may be about all that can be said about some of them) does not turn this secular nation into modern Israel. It does not make every shoe-horned interpretation of modern events into the imagery of an OT prophecy proof that God is specially blessing this nation.
And for those who point to the fact that there has been such prosperity, note that we are not the only prosperous nation on the earth, and that some of them have minimal Christian presence relative to the US. And the presence that they do have is what so many of the people who rush after these modern prophecies would label as "worldly," "marginal," or "poor."
When I say that the events are "shoe-horned," take as an example the myth about the tree that saved the church. Of all the items on the property, including the tree and the church itself, among the only things that were potentially in line with harsh thrust of the falling towers would have been the tree. The building was not in the line of the assault of winds. It
was in the lateral outflow of dust and small debris. There is the possibility that the winds in these lateral outflows could have contained enough force with debris to possibly break some glass. But there was not enough to really damage any building. With or without the fallen sycamore.
That is the reason that any reference to the sycamore is something that the church claims but no one has enough need to comment on it because it is just not relevant. The tree did not protect the church. Two or three other buildings did. The only claims of special protection because of the tree come from those who need it to be so to sell their stories.
But before I take this any further, why is it that much worse governments in countries that make no acknowledgement of God in other than very small scale are not treated in a worse manner than the US? Why is there a prophecy against one of the more just kingdoms of the world of the entire history of the world?
Prophecies went out against the enemies of Israel. And against the apostasy of Israel. But not against the countries of the earth that had no idea what was even going on in the middle east in those days. Or that were coming to the aid of Israel. (And at this point in time, no matter how poor you consider the aid of the US, it is just about all that there is.)
Looks way too much like revisionist history.
I also noted in some of the stuff surrounding the myths of the sycamore as either the 6th or 7th warning, that there was talk of the Jews that did not return to Jerusalem, but stayed in Babylon or moved elsewhere, as something akin to morally bankrupt. In other words, another form of remnant theology. Seems like most of us just escaped from one of those. Why rush to join another.
The account in the Bible actually seems to be different. For example, Nehemiah was one of those who stayed. And according to the account, he was scheduled to return to Babylon when his task was over. Do you really see God using such a person if staying in Babylon was such a spiritual bankrupt position?