Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Israel To The Jews


dairygirl4u2c

Recommended Posts

Madame Vengier

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1813508' date='Mar 21 2009, 07:24 PM']I agree that Catholics may disagree on whether or not to support Israel; but I do not believe Catholics have any leeway to believe that the Biblical promise of the Promised Land to the Jewish People is in any way fulfilled in the modern state of Israel, because it is incumbent upon Catholics to believe that the Old Covenant has been superseded by the New.[/quote]


That's YOUR opinion. Don't ever again say CATHOLICS MAY NOT BELIEVE THIS when what you are promoting is only an OPINION. That is what you did. You stated that "Catholics may not believe this". In doing so, you led many people to believe that what you were expressing was CHURCH TEACHING. Shame!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am doing no such thing, I'm being as honest as possible, please point to me where you think I'm missing your point... where does that article even talk about the concept of eschatology? it only refers to apocalyptic senses as the extreme forms, not the only forms, of a Christian Zionism which is referred to as "empire building" and "colonial"... all terms referring to the territorial positions of Christian Zionists, not the eschatological ones. where does it talk about myths about the nature of Israel and the end times? These Patriarchs are against the support of the Nation of Israel over and above the Nation of Palestine.

supporting a two state solution would be, according to the interpretation of scripture you have espoused, anti-biblical, would it not? If God has promised them that land, ought they not to have all of that land which was promised to them by God? I am honestly trying to understand, because you think that the Old Covenant real-estate deal with the Jews is still in place, do you think Israel should encompass the entire promised land of the Old Covenant?

"[The Jews] will never be restored to their former condition." -Origen, [i]Against Celsus 4.22,[/i]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1813517' date='Mar 21 2009, 09:35 PM']That's YOUR opinion. Don't ever again say CATHOLICS MAY NOT BELIEVE THIS when what you are promoting is only an OPINION. That is what you did. You stated that "Catholics may not believe this". In doing so, you led many people to believe that what you were expressing was CHURCH TEACHING. Shame![/quote]
Catholics may not believe it. It is contrary to the doctrines of the Church which make it explicitly clear that the proscriptions of the Old Covenant ARE NO LONGER IN PLACE. The Council of Florence has been cited. Pope Pius XII has been cited. Church Fathers have been cited. pray tell, where do you come off stating that something contrary to that which has been continuously taught by the Church (ie that the promises made to Israel are offered to and through the Church as the only true continuance of the Covenant) may now be believed?

the Church's interpretation of scripture is not on your side. you may support Israel, but interpreting the scriptures to say that Israel now has the right to this land given to them by God is contrary to the mind of the Church.

"For the true spiritual Israel ... are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ." -Justin Martyr, [i]Dialogue With Trypho 11[/i]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Madame Vengier

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1813518' date='Mar 21 2009, 07:39 PM']I am doing no such thing, I'm being as honest as possible, please point to me where you think I'm missing your point... where does that article even talk about the concept of eschatology? it only refers to apocalyptic senses[/quote]

You've done this before and the result was the same. I know what you're doing and you know what you're doing. Even if it goes over the heads of everyone else, you and I know. So let's stop this game now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you going to even try to reconcile the views of Supreme Pontiffs, Ecumenical Councils, and Church Fathers with your views?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1813515' date='Mar 21 2009, 07:30 PM']You're being intellectually dishonest. And I'm done with this.[/quote]


If Catholicism holds that the land of Israel belongs to the Jews then why didn't the Crusaiders give control of the area they took to the Jews? Did the Vatican put forth any documents in 1948 celebrating the fufilment of God's promise to the Jewish people? Biblical Israel extends considerably past the current boarders of the state of Israel, does Israel have a mandate to reclaim this land?

No one believes Aloysius is infalible. He is, however, usually very well read in his faith including the councils and theological founding texts of the Church, level headed, and open to being corrected. Consequently people, such as myself, very much respect what he has to say on Church teaching. The same holds true for a few other individuals I will not name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Catechism: #674 The glorious Messiah's coming is suspended at every moment of history until his recognition by "all Israel", for "a hardening has come upon part of Israel" in their "unbelief" toward Jesus. St. Peter says to the Jews of Jerusalem after Pentecost: "Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, whom heaven must receive until the time for establishing all that God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from of old." St. Paul echoes him: "For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead?" The "full inclusion" of the Jews in the Messiah's salvation, in the wake of "the full number of the Gentiles", will enable the People of God to achieve "the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ", in which "God may be all in all".

St. Paul in his letter to the Romans, Chapter 11, makes it clear that the faithlessness of Israel doesn't cancel out the faithfulness of God. In Verses 28-29 he says, "As regards the gospel they are enemies of God, for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."

Basically on the theological side, as Catholics we should pray for their conversion. On the political side, I tend to follow what the Vatican's representatives have to say, that means the Latin Patriarch, and the Nuncio. They are on the ground there, where I am not, and they have the church's authority in the region, and I do not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cmotherofpirl

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1813519' date='Mar 21 2009, 09:42 PM']Catholics may not believe it. It is contrary to the doctrines of the Church which make it explicitly clear that the proscriptions of the Old Covenant ARE NO LONGER IN PLACE. The Council of Florence has been cited. Pope Pius XII has been cited. Church Fathers have been cited. pray tell, where do you come off stating that something contrary to that which has been continuously taught by the Church (ie that the promises made to Israel are offered to and through the Church as the only true continuance of the Covenant) may now be believed?

the Church's interpretation of scripture is not on your side. you may support Israel, but interpreting the scriptures to say that Israel now has the right to this land given to them by God is contrary to the mind of the Church.

"For the true spiritual Israel ... are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ." -Justin Martyr, [i]Dialogue With Trypho 11[/i][/quote]
So you are saying the promise of the land to Abraham stopped because of Jesus? That the Word of God is merely conditional? I'm not saying that we are under the Law Al, I am saying God made a promise to the Israelites, and I don't see where Jesus fulfilling the Law [i]changes [/i]Promises made by the Almighty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1813609' date='Mar 21 2009, 10:45 PM']So you are saying the promise of the land to Abraham stopped because of Jesus? That the Word of God is merely conditional? I'm not saying that we are under the Law Al, I am saying God made a promise to the Israelites, and I don't see where Jesus fulfilling the Law [i]changes [/i]Promises made by the Almighty.[/quote]


You don't feel that sort of ethnic exceptionalism runs contrary to the universalism of the Gospel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I don't think it is that God's word is conditional, but that his promis to Israel was fufilled in the Christ. Or something like that. I don;t know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God's promises are forever. Just because God chooses everyone, including the Gentiles, through Christ, does not mean the Jews have now become "unchosen."

However the political entity known as the state of the modern day state of Israel should not be confused with the biblical Israel with which God had a special relationship. Modern Israel is a secular democracy and it has the same rights as any other state, and no more.

Edited by Maggie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Maggie' post='1813632' date='Mar 21 2009, 11:04 PM']God's promises are forever. Just because God chooses everyone, including the Gentiles, through Christ, does not mean the Jews have now become "unchosen."[/quote]


I guess that sounds somewhat to Orwell's all Animals are equeal, but some are more equal than others

[quote]However the political entity known as the state of the modern day state of Israel should not be confused with the biblical Israel with which God had a special relationship. Modern Israel is a secular democracy and it has the same rights as any other state, and no more.[/quote]


If Jews wanted to reestablish the "Biblical" state of Israel would they have a right not only to transform the current state but expand out and secure the totality of biblical Israel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, contrary to what some may imply this has nothing to do with religion and ethnicity. I find Muslims claims that Muslims somehow have a sacrosanct right to Palestine just as disturbing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, contrary to what some may imply this has nothing to do with religion and ethnicity. I find Muslims claims that Muslims somehow have a sacrosanct right to Palestine just as disturbing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whether or not the legitimacy of the establishment of the state of Israel was lawful or not is in my eyes insignificant. The real question lies in the significance of the actual event, and the providence of it. And whether or not it truly could be referenced to the prophetic dream of the Daniel concerning the End Times/Tribulation:

{9:24} Seventy weeks of years are concentrated on your people and on your holy city, so that transgression shall be finished, and sin shall reach an end, and iniquity shall be wiped away, and so that everlasting justice shall be brought in, and vision and prophecy shall be fulfilled, and the Saint of saints shall be anointed.
{9:25} Therefore, know and take heed: [b]from the going forth of the word to build up Jerusalem again[/b](1948), until the Christ leader (the great Catholic Monarch), there will be seven weeks of years (1948 to 1997 49 years, since a week of years is calculated as 49, when the great Catholic Monarch of prophecy in my opinion was born), and sixty-two weeks of years; and the wide path will be built again, and the walls, in a time of anguish.

Edited by kafka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...