Quote:
|
We are told to pray for the peace of Jerusalem.
|
It would seem to me that the inhabitants of the nation of Israel were told to pray for the peace of Jerusalem. I'm not suggesting that we be hostile toward Jerusalem, or the nation of Israel.
But it seems that Jerusalem was built, destroyed because of the wrath of God, then rebuilt. It then remained until Christ came, and the church spread sufficiently from that place then it was once again destroyed and the Jews scattered. So until it was rebuilt by the Roman empire starting sometime in or after 135. It is interesting that there have been times during which no Jew was allowed in the city except on one day each year.
And it might be reasonable to assume that the declaration that "they shall prosper that love thee" is the reason for the general poor economic conditions in the area. But that is deceptive. It seems that many of the nations around it are quite wealthy due to oil. That wealth may not reach the masses, but it is not for lack it being there.
But the real point it, what are we supposed to love about Jerusalem after the year 70?
I find it interesting that saying that something is not necessarily applicable in a way and time other than that for which it was expressly stated are referred to as "putting God in a box," yet those who insist that it has to be generally applicable no matter what context are not "putting God in a box."
The issue is not whether God is or is not in a box. The question is whether God's intent with respect to any particular thing is general, broad and limitless, or is specific and therefore limited. To agree with any statement by God that is limited in scope is not putting God in a box. Neither is agreeing with a statement that is broad and limitless taking God out of a box.
But as a bit of an extreme example, there are people who read that God is not willing that any should perish and conclude that hell can only be temporary and that everyone is eventually in heaven (whatever that actually is). To them, to suggest anything else is to "put God in a box." It is to place limits on God. But my reading of the Bible suggests that God has limited himself in that matter. On one hand, his will would have everyone become "his." But the record in scripture would indicate that he has restrained himself in the matter and determined that his righteousness cannot be ignored.
Quote:
|
It would seem that God would be upset if we didn't have unwavering support for Israel.
|
It might seem that way. If you read things in certain ways. But I have not been convinced that this is simply the truth because it is once there in the Bible in a particular OT context.
Don't misunderstand me. I believe that we should generally support Israel. But the nation of Israel as we know it in this day and age is not entirely righteous in all of its ways. Standing up and asserting that some of its actions are reprehensible is called for. But I would still agree that we should defend it from the onslaught of its neighbors who seek to simply push every Jew into the ocean to drown. It is the neighborly thing to do. It is the right thing to do.
And yet, if the issue was the continual onslaught by Israel to turn Jordan into a dust bowl just because of ancient animosities, I would similarly agree with defending Jordan.