People view "boomer evangelical foolishness" (as though evangelizing to people about their eternal fate is a negative thing. Only this evil world could turn the word evangelical into a negative) as why they support Israel.
Let me tell you something. I have a lot of issues with that generation of thought among the church. They bought wholesale the 1960s era liberalism, compromising on race, feminism, and other areas of morality.
But they also Biblically accurately recogonized that Jesus is the only way to have your sins forgiven. I suppose that's just "boomer evangelical foolishness" too? Should we throw that out because all the "stupid boomers" believed Jesus is the way the truth and the light?
The church's interpretation of Israel has never had anything to do with liberalness, pressure, etc. I have never heard any pastor of any age say that "we support Israel because they're righteous". Every pastor has recogonized that Israel is spiritually decieved, but the support is on what we know will be true of Israel and the prophecy regarding them.
You can't throw everything out just because "boomer evangelicals believed it". Again, doing that, you'd have to throw out believing in Jesus as well.
The primary issue with that generation was their accepting ideas brought on by worldly means regarding political issues in the West, that were popularized in the 1960s. But obviously the support for Israel has nothing to do with that as Charles Spurgeon and Paul both recognized Israel as being literally restored prophetically.
I have plenty of critiques of the post 1960s church rooted in their subtle adoption of liberal thought, but they're support based on prophecy of Israel has nothing to do with the liberal thought.
In fact, quite the opposite. The church has been one of the only institutions in America supporting Israel over "Palestine".
America, despite allying with Israel has throughout history viewed it as a difficult tight walk, and has had a major role in expanding "Palestine's territory with Israel usually getting less land.
The church has been the one consistent one saying we have a deed called the Bible that tells us who belongs there, and it's not Palestinians. This has been in stark opposition to the more secular minded and liberal minded American western thought.
Again, the subtle liberal church has plenty of things I will be speaking about on my blog about how the subtle liberal things they believe have serious problems in opposing Christian morality when you extrapolate those liberal ideas, but their position on Israel is not due to the post 1960s liberal adoption, but this position predates that adoption, and is a simple reading of the text, a simple and plain reading of what the Bible has said.
If you want to go against Christians who support Israel according to the understanding laid out in the Bible, you better be better literate and well read in regards to the whole Bible if you're going to bring that to the table.
Let me add another thing.
People view "boomer evangelical foolishness" (as though evangelizing to people about their eternal fate is a negative thing. Only this evil world could turn the word evangelical into a negative) as why they support Israel.
Let me tell you something. I have a lot of issues with that generation of thought among the church. They bought wholesale the 1960s era liberalism, compromising on race, feminism, and other areas of morality.
But they also Biblically accurately recogonized that Jesus is the only way to have your sins forgiven. I suppose that's just "boomer evangelical foolishness" too? Should we throw that out because all the "stupid boomers" believed Jesus is the way the truth and the light?
The church's interpretation of Israel has never had anything to do with liberalness, pressure, etc. I have never heard any pastor of any age say that "we support Israel because they're righteous". Every pastor has recogonized that Israel is spiritually decieved, but the support is on what we know will be true of Israel and the prophecy regarding them.
You can't throw everything out just because "boomer evangelicals believed it". Again, doing that, you'd have to throw out believing in Jesus as well.
The primary issue with that generation was their accepting ideas brought on by worldly means regarding political issues in the West, that were popularized in the 1960s. But obviously the support for Israel has nothing to do with that as Charles Spurgeon and Paul both recognized Israel as being literally restored prophetically.
I have plenty of critiques of the post 1960s church rooted in their subtle adoption of liberal thought, but they're support based on prophecy of Israel has nothing to do with the liberal thought.
In fact, quite the opposite. The church has been one of the only institutions in America supporting Israel over "Palestine".
America, despite allying with Israel has throughout history viewed it as a difficult tight walk, and has had a major role in expanding "Palestine's territory with Israel usually getting less land.
The church has been the one consistent one saying we have a deed called the Bible that tells us who belongs there, and it's not Palestinians. This has been in stark opposition to the more secular minded and liberal minded American western thought.
Again, the subtle liberal church has plenty of things I will be speaking about on my blog about how the subtle liberal things they believe have serious problems in opposing Christian morality when you extrapolate those liberal ideas, but their position on Israel is not due to the post 1960s liberal adoption, but this position predates that adoption, and is a simple reading of the text, a simple and plain reading of what the Bible has said.
If you want to go against Christians who support Israel according to the understanding laid out in the Bible, you better be better literate and well read in regards to the whole Bible if you're going to bring that to the table.