This wasn't a conversation I ever planned on having - and certainly I never imagined the day I'd defend Tucker Carlson - but here we are. It must be done.
Thank you for sharing this. From the Old Testament (The Torah), New Testament (The Bible), it's time everyone read the final testament ( The Qur'an) and read the 114 chapters of the perfect words of God.
Perhaps in a future post, you can share your personal journey to Islam and what the Qur'an teaches about Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, and that yes, the Qur'an confirms that Jesus is the Messiah, was saved by God, and saved from those who plotted to crucify him.
I'm an atheist, and I criticize Christianity, Judaism, and all religion even though I am an atheist for 25 years now, I occasionally criticize atheists (atheist and atheism are exactly the same thing). I appreciate what good Muslims and Christians do when I think they are right. So, please keep up the good work.
Just wow. And I double checked the verses. And how un versed are we? To proclaim we know without reading?
Thank you for this post. Whether modern day Jews believe this or not is a moot point. The ultra Zionists are claiming this is the land of Jews. So we will go by what is said in the original Bible. Also the beginning of the Quran it says I am just a continuation of the Torah and the Bible. If you cannot find the answers look in those writings.
And Jesus was a Jew. And he was a good sign not evil, and he was killed because they were afraid of losing control and money.
Well understood. But I offered it as a "call his bluff" kind of comment. One more exposure of deceit and hypocrisy (as if we needed more) One can assume he is lying each time he speaks. As I have said before in other contexts "I think the last time he told the truth was at age three he said "Mom I have to pee."
Sigh. We live in such troubled and stupid times. For what it is worth, my SoBap pastor Dad believed that the key fact was not that these apparently bad actors were Jews but that they were bad actors. In other words, had Jesus come to earth in China all the bad actors would have been Chinese. It really does not matter to me.
Historians mostly suggest that the Romans were the ones who wanted him dead, and that the story that it was the Jews was concocted when early Christians wanted their religion to be more appealing to non Jews. I think it's extremely risky to rely on the bible for actual history.
Thank you for the explanation of what Tucker might have meant, I had not read about his part of their rally, and a review of what led up to the crucifixion of Christ. I’m not surprised Jews who have not read the NT would not know the story, but I am always surprised when “Christian’s” use the Jews involvement in his death as something to hold against them. This was going to be longer, but it went off course so I sum it up by thanking you for this and all the information you share. Hope your healing is going well and you have a great week.
You have to understand something very fundamental about Christianity, and in particular Catholicism ... we believe Christ is found in everything. In everyone. It is the reason we say 'He is Risen' not He rose....His crucifixion is happening constantly.
True but meaningless, because Jesus was Jewish both culturally and religiously and lived in a land primarily populated by Jews. It’s like saying American plots to kill American to describe Kirk’s murder or the infamous “black on black crime.” It’s a measure of segregation, not violent tendencies of a particular group. Yes there were Romans and Hellenized Jews who lived among them but Jesus ministered almost exclusively to Jews/Hebrews with rare exceptions (Matthew 15:24).
I would also be interested to look at the translations because those can color the meaning substantially. They might have been translated in a misleading way. Even if by the time of the writing of the Gospels the Jewish authors had started to mentally separate themselves enough to refer to their brethren as a separate group that is interesting but retrospective and still fundamentally doesn’t matter because of the above.
Of course you know this framing of the Story has been used throughout A.D. history to justify atrocities and discrimination against Jews. The way we tell stories matters. I don’t particularly assume that Carlson meant this as an anti-Semitic dog whistle. I’m not offended by your tweet on its own, but this substack (after the beginning description of how Christian talk about persecution) tells a misleading story of Jew on Jew crime without mentioning the “on Jew” part and is the beginning of a narrative that tends to end very badly.
I have followed and supported your Real Justice efforts, but the latter part of your post comes across as pointlessly anti-Semitic.
Thanks for your openness to engaging. I am working on the assumption that you do not wish to be anti-semitic or to make the claim that Jews are violent by nature.
I am basically with you on your post up until right after you share your tweet. Tucker specifically does not say "Jews" anywhere in his speech. I am not familiar with his whole canon, but the video you shared, by itself, doesn't strike me as obviously harmful and I agree that it sounds like a very familiar Christian narrative.
I understand that the title and the latter section of your post is intended to be in answer to respondents who were not aware that Jewish people were key characters in the Christian story. It would have been very useful to see some examples of those responses. Forgive my skepticism, but the problem throughout much of the last two millenia has been conflation, through sloppiness or malice, of "the Jews killed Jesus" with the actual story in the Bible in which both the heroes and the villains are mostly Jewish. I would not be shocked if many of these responses were a criticism of the reductionist meme and not ignorance of the text. Are there people on the internet, including Jews, who do not know the New Testament? I'm sure there are. Like you, I would also be surprised if these were the majority of responses. Even if these people exist, I'm not a sure a lengthy catalogue of Jewish crimes is warranted and it's certainly not immune from further critique.
Jewish people have a high level of sensitivity around the Passion story for good reason. I'm not a medieval scholar but my understanding is that violence against Jews followed Easter services with an unfortunate frequency due to the rehearsal of passages including the ones you recite in your post which repeatedly mention "the Jews."
The Passion Trust, a British organization dedicated to the revival of Passion Plays has an entire page on the history of anti-semitism in passion plays.
Issues in this history of passion plays are similar to what I would point out in the tenor of this post. The villains of the story were portrayed as Jewish, with stereotypical Jewish markers, while none of the other characters, including Jesus, were invested with same markers. It tells an a-historical story of a "white" Jesus killed and his "white" followers harassed by "the Jews." Even if purely fictional, it would be problematic for the same reason, the movie 300 is problematic. It just so happens all the heroes are white and all the villains are brown or asiatic, and maybe a bit gay. Oops. Now imagine that film was played every year for ~1,500 years across at least two continents.
On a more personal level, I know a young woman who as a child was told by other children in school in Canada that she "killed Jesus," because she is Jewish and I have no reason to think her story is unique. Yes children can be cruel, but I'm sure you would agree that the way in which they are cruel reflects the biases of the culture they are raised in.
Now to speak more directly to the post.
The post pretty strongly implies and sometimes states that it is about the Jews as a whole. You say: "a meticulous Biblical perspective on just how much _the Jews_ in the time of Jesus harassed him..." Not "some Jews," not "Jewish leaders," not "powerful Jews," just "the Jews." Was this a slip up? I hope so. Though I think the overwhelming sense of the text throughout is the same even if you drop the "the."
You mention that "Jews ... paid a Jewish friend of Jesus to betray him." Again true, but the context that all of his friends (aka Apostles) were Jewish, very much changes the connotation of the story.
Coming up with an exhaustive list of all the crimes that "Jews" committed against Jesus without providing in significant measure the context that nearly everyone in the story is Jewish certainly gives the appearance than you are making the case not just that the people who opposed Jesus in the story are Jewish but that their Jewishness has some relationship to violent or evil tendencies. You do mention "his fellow Jews", once showing that Jesus is Jewish, but the bulk of the narrative paints Jews as the villains of the story which is accurate only insofar as it is a Jewish story.
It's like saying "The PRC leadership, who are Chinese, oppress Christians." That is a true statement, but the Christians they oppress are also overwhelmingly Chinese. Or that the Greeks killed Socrates. Who else would have killed him? He was a Greek man in a Greek culture.
You make a point of calling out Jews even when more specific descriptors are given, but only for the villains:
"Matthew 9:10-11: …When the Pharisees saw it, they said to his disciples, "Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?"
Who were the tax collectors and sinners? They were almost certainly also Jews.
Matthew, the author of the Gospel, was a Jewish tax collector.
If I were to give an exhaustive list of Germans who did bad things, taking care to point out in each instance that the person as German even when it is fairly self-evident from context, you might think I had a problem with Germans. "Hitler, who was a German politician, was the key architect of the Holocaust. Nazis, who were German, were guilty of human rights violations. Goebbels, who destroyed synagogues, was German." All of those statements are true, but after reading that--not each isolation but as a collection of statements--do you now think I have a problem with Nazis or do you think I have a problem with Germans?
Or perhaps I should go through the Bible pointing out negative actions taken by men, making sure to point out that they were men? " Cain, who was a man, killed Abel. David, who was a man, sent Bathsheba's husband to his death. Amnon, who was a man, raped Tamar. Moses killed an Egyptian; please note, Moses was man." You might think I had a problem with men. You might also note that a lot, in fact the majority, of named figures in the Bible are men, including many of the victims mentioned, and they do both good and bad things.
Now when you get into Acts, it does get a little more complicated. The history of Jewish prophets talking to the people of Israel as a body comes into play here. I think this falls under, if you're a comedian, you can make bad jokes about your own ethnicity/race that someone else can't make. A Jewish Apostle of Jesus trying to evangelize the Jewish people is quite different from a modern non-Jew using that same language as a decree of guilt. Context matters. Perhaps you are making the argument that if Jesus had landed in Spain or China, the outcome would have been all sunshine and butterflies. I don't know how to refute that counterfactual, except that it seems inconsistent with the Story which says that "all have sinned."
Early in the piece you say that typically people talking about Jesus' persecution in the manner that Carlson did "were not talking about modern day Jews." Then you go on to say "I reject outright that these ancient texts are irrelevant to modern day Israel or modern day Jews." What exactly is the relevance to which you are referring? Are you saying that the fact the villains of the Gospels were Jewish stands as evidence that modern day Jews are inclined to vile actions? That seems like the most obvious interpretation. If not, then what? I actually didn't focus on this statement on my first read. Of course if this is what you think then all these words are likely wasted, but I've already spilled the ink, so here you go.
I too find your finding this to be anti-Semitic puzzling. Even Paul pointed out the Jews who were complicit. It is clear in the scripture the Jewish leaders were to blame, not every Jew in existence. Are we truly to the point where we cannot criticize the self serving actions of leaders without being accused of hating a people as a whole?
Ken, I also agree that the biblical story is clear on the point that it was a collective of Jewish religious leaders and not the Jewish people whose actions should be criticized (though as I mentioned the translations should be examined). As nearly everyone in the story is Jewish any other interpretation is ridiculous on its face. I have family obligations but will respond directly to Shaun as to why I think this post goes beyond that as time allows.
To be clear, I just want you to know that your principled response is welcomed. I disagree that it was just religious leaders like I disagree that was Israel is doing to Gaza is just Netanyahu.
Since you were a Christian and a preacher Shaun, and very learned in the Bible, Old and New Testaments - I have often wondered how many Christians go back and forth between the Old and New - I do know the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 5, verse 17, where he states: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them" and he lived the moral of the Law as no one else could successfully do. He also spoke on how what is in our hearts is far more important than total obedience to Jewish rules of behavior. Yeshua also stated He was bringing a New Covenant (don’t know the exact verse) and as well because Yeshua said He was here to fulfill the prophecies and, for instance fully supporting the Ten Commandments, this is why Christians go back and forth between the two? SOMETIMES it comes across as a matter of convenience in making a point. I’m also aware that Yeshua taught “Love one another as I have loved you.” - is this why, okay, one reason why Christians support Israel?
Comments are open to all. Obviously, you must be respectful. Feel free to push back if you need to.
ᴛᴡᴇʟᴠᴇ ʏᴇᴀʀs ᴏғ ᴄᴀᴛʜᴏʟɪᴄ sᴄʜᴏᴏʟ ᴀɴᴅ I'ᴠᴇ ᴏɴʟʏ sᴋɪᴍᴍᴇᴅ ɪᴛ (ɪᴛ's 07.30 ᴀɴᴅ ɪ ʜᴀᴠᴇɴ'ᴛ sʟᴇᴘᴛ)
ᴛʜɪs ɪs ᴡʜᴀᴛ ɪ'ᴠᴇ ʙᴇᴇɴ ᴡᴀɪᴛɪɴɢ ғᴏʀ. ɪᴛ ᴀʟʟ ʀɪɴɢs ᴛʀᴜᴇ / ᴛʜᴀɴᴋ ʏᴏᴜ (ɪ'ᴍ ʙᴇᴛᴡᴇᴇɴ ᴇʏᴇ sᴜʀɢᴇʀɪᴇs sᴏ ᴄᴀɴ ᴏɴʟʏ sᴇᴇ ᴛʜᴇ ᴍᴏʙɪʟᴇ ᴄʟᴇᴀʀʟʏ)
Asalamu alaikum Shaun
Thank you for sharing this. From the Old Testament (The Torah), New Testament (The Bible), it's time everyone read the final testament ( The Qur'an) and read the 114 chapters of the perfect words of God.
Perhaps in a future post, you can share your personal journey to Islam and what the Qur'an teaches about Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, and that yes, the Qur'an confirms that Jesus is the Messiah, was saved by God, and saved from those who plotted to crucify him.
Jesus in the Quran
By: Syed Abul Ala Maududi December 24, 2021
https://www.islamicity.org/6405/jesus-in-the-quran/
Jesus in the Quran by Nouman Ali Khan - Official - Bayyinah
Playlist (16 videos) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLutdSTmJ7bAL-Um6lL8K4-IULNBifHJck
Ahmad Deedat - Jesus Christ in Christianity and Islam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaLXCFm-pr8
Wa-Alaikum-Salaam my dear brother. I am working on something like this. Send my salaams to your family
Allah bless you, my brother!
I'm an atheist, and I criticize Christianity, Judaism, and all religion even though I am an atheist for 25 years now, I occasionally criticize atheists (atheist and atheism are exactly the same thing). I appreciate what good Muslims and Christians do when I think they are right. So, please keep up the good work.
I am open to principled debate and disagreement still though. Hope you are well.
Definitely coming back for this read!
It’s pretty much just him giving 100 bible verses on why it was the Jews who killed Jesus.
I’ll be happy to read that too :)
This was a tremendous amount of work for you to do to tell people what they already know. Sometimes the truth hurts.
You would be shocked at how many people really do not know this.
Just wow. And I double checked the verses. And how un versed are we? To proclaim we know without reading?
Thank you for this post. Whether modern day Jews believe this or not is a moot point. The ultra Zionists are claiming this is the land of Jews. So we will go by what is said in the original Bible. Also the beginning of the Quran it says I am just a continuation of the Torah and the Bible. If you cannot find the answers look in those writings.
And Jesus was a Jew. And he was a good sign not evil, and he was killed because they were afraid of losing control and money.
Sounds all too familiar.
Truth has been dead a long time. Whats true is what the cabal says it is. Sick of the whole damnable lot. Is the coming revolution really a bad idea?
"Therefore the Jews said to him, “It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death.” Someone need to point this out to a certain head of state!
Indeed Jon. But man, Netanyahu really isn't even religious. It's all a ruse.
Well understood. But I offered it as a "call his bluff" kind of comment. One more exposure of deceit and hypocrisy (as if we needed more) One can assume he is lying each time he speaks. As I have said before in other contexts "I think the last time he told the truth was at age three he said "Mom I have to pee."
I do not think the issue was that it was contrary to Jewish law, but contrary to Roman law.
OK. If so I stand corrected on that, but not my point.
Sigh. We live in such troubled and stupid times. For what it is worth, my SoBap pastor Dad believed that the key fact was not that these apparently bad actors were Jews but that they were bad actors. In other words, had Jesus come to earth in China all the bad actors would have been Chinese. It really does not matter to me.
Historians mostly suggest that the Romans were the ones who wanted him dead, and that the story that it was the Jews was concocted when early Christians wanted their religion to be more appealing to non Jews. I think it's extremely risky to rely on the bible for actual history.
Thank you for the explanation of what Tucker might have meant, I had not read about his part of their rally, and a review of what led up to the crucifixion of Christ. I’m not surprised Jews who have not read the NT would not know the story, but I am always surprised when “Christian’s” use the Jews involvement in his death as something to hold against them. This was going to be longer, but it went off course so I sum it up by thanking you for this and all the information you share. Hope your healing is going well and you have a great week.
You have to understand something very fundamental about Christianity, and in particular Catholicism ... we believe Christ is found in everything. In everyone. It is the reason we say 'He is Risen' not He rose....His crucifixion is happening constantly.
True but meaningless, because Jesus was Jewish both culturally and religiously and lived in a land primarily populated by Jews. It’s like saying American plots to kill American to describe Kirk’s murder or the infamous “black on black crime.” It’s a measure of segregation, not violent tendencies of a particular group. Yes there were Romans and Hellenized Jews who lived among them but Jesus ministered almost exclusively to Jews/Hebrews with rare exceptions (Matthew 15:24).
I would also be interested to look at the translations because those can color the meaning substantially. They might have been translated in a misleading way. Even if by the time of the writing of the Gospels the Jewish authors had started to mentally separate themselves enough to refer to their brethren as a separate group that is interesting but retrospective and still fundamentally doesn’t matter because of the above.
Of course you know this framing of the Story has been used throughout A.D. history to justify atrocities and discrimination against Jews. The way we tell stories matters. I don’t particularly assume that Carlson meant this as an anti-Semitic dog whistle. I’m not offended by your tweet on its own, but this substack (after the beginning description of how Christian talk about persecution) tells a misleading story of Jew on Jew crime without mentioning the “on Jew” part and is the beginning of a narrative that tends to end very badly.
I have followed and supported your Real Justice efforts, but the latter part of your post comes across as pointlessly anti-Semitic.
Which part seemed anti-semitic? Please be specific and I will try to revisit it. Thanks for your thoughts.
Thanks for your openness to engaging. I am working on the assumption that you do not wish to be anti-semitic or to make the claim that Jews are violent by nature.
I am basically with you on your post up until right after you share your tweet. Tucker specifically does not say "Jews" anywhere in his speech. I am not familiar with his whole canon, but the video you shared, by itself, doesn't strike me as obviously harmful and I agree that it sounds like a very familiar Christian narrative.
I understand that the title and the latter section of your post is intended to be in answer to respondents who were not aware that Jewish people were key characters in the Christian story. It would have been very useful to see some examples of those responses. Forgive my skepticism, but the problem throughout much of the last two millenia has been conflation, through sloppiness or malice, of "the Jews killed Jesus" with the actual story in the Bible in which both the heroes and the villains are mostly Jewish. I would not be shocked if many of these responses were a criticism of the reductionist meme and not ignorance of the text. Are there people on the internet, including Jews, who do not know the New Testament? I'm sure there are. Like you, I would also be surprised if these were the majority of responses. Even if these people exist, I'm not a sure a lengthy catalogue of Jewish crimes is warranted and it's certainly not immune from further critique.
Jewish people have a high level of sensitivity around the Passion story for good reason. I'm not a medieval scholar but my understanding is that violence against Jews followed Easter services with an unfortunate frequency due to the rehearsal of passages including the ones you recite in your post which repeatedly mention "the Jews."
The Passion Trust, a British organization dedicated to the revival of Passion Plays has an entire page on the history of anti-semitism in passion plays.
https://passiontrust.org/is-your-passion-play-anti-semitic/ https://apnews.com/article/covid-entertainment-health-religion-befa7acb6420d845eb2f101ab2e5265b
Issues in this history of passion plays are similar to what I would point out in the tenor of this post. The villains of the story were portrayed as Jewish, with stereotypical Jewish markers, while none of the other characters, including Jesus, were invested with same markers. It tells an a-historical story of a "white" Jesus killed and his "white" followers harassed by "the Jews." Even if purely fictional, it would be problematic for the same reason, the movie 300 is problematic. It just so happens all the heroes are white and all the villains are brown or asiatic, and maybe a bit gay. Oops. Now imagine that film was played every year for ~1,500 years across at least two continents.
On a more personal level, I know a young woman who as a child was told by other children in school in Canada that she "killed Jesus," because she is Jewish and I have no reason to think her story is unique. Yes children can be cruel, but I'm sure you would agree that the way in which they are cruel reflects the biases of the culture they are raised in.
Now to speak more directly to the post.
The post pretty strongly implies and sometimes states that it is about the Jews as a whole. You say: "a meticulous Biblical perspective on just how much _the Jews_ in the time of Jesus harassed him..." Not "some Jews," not "Jewish leaders," not "powerful Jews," just "the Jews." Was this a slip up? I hope so. Though I think the overwhelming sense of the text throughout is the same even if you drop the "the."
You mention that "Jews ... paid a Jewish friend of Jesus to betray him." Again true, but the context that all of his friends (aka Apostles) were Jewish, very much changes the connotation of the story.
Coming up with an exhaustive list of all the crimes that "Jews" committed against Jesus without providing in significant measure the context that nearly everyone in the story is Jewish certainly gives the appearance than you are making the case not just that the people who opposed Jesus in the story are Jewish but that their Jewishness has some relationship to violent or evil tendencies. You do mention "his fellow Jews", once showing that Jesus is Jewish, but the bulk of the narrative paints Jews as the villains of the story which is accurate only insofar as it is a Jewish story.
It's like saying "The PRC leadership, who are Chinese, oppress Christians." That is a true statement, but the Christians they oppress are also overwhelmingly Chinese. Or that the Greeks killed Socrates. Who else would have killed him? He was a Greek man in a Greek culture.
You make a point of calling out Jews even when more specific descriptors are given, but only for the villains:
"Matthew 9:10-11: …When the Pharisees saw it, they said to his disciples, "Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?"
Opponents: Pharisees (Jewish sect); Action: Criticism."
Who were the tax collectors and sinners? They were almost certainly also Jews.
Matthew, the author of the Gospel, was a Jewish tax collector.
If I were to give an exhaustive list of Germans who did bad things, taking care to point out in each instance that the person as German even when it is fairly self-evident from context, you might think I had a problem with Germans. "Hitler, who was a German politician, was the key architect of the Holocaust. Nazis, who were German, were guilty of human rights violations. Goebbels, who destroyed synagogues, was German." All of those statements are true, but after reading that--not each isolation but as a collection of statements--do you now think I have a problem with Nazis or do you think I have a problem with Germans?
Or perhaps I should go through the Bible pointing out negative actions taken by men, making sure to point out that they were men? " Cain, who was a man, killed Abel. David, who was a man, sent Bathsheba's husband to his death. Amnon, who was a man, raped Tamar. Moses killed an Egyptian; please note, Moses was man." You might think I had a problem with men. You might also note that a lot, in fact the majority, of named figures in the Bible are men, including many of the victims mentioned, and they do both good and bad things.
Now when you get into Acts, it does get a little more complicated. The history of Jewish prophets talking to the people of Israel as a body comes into play here. I think this falls under, if you're a comedian, you can make bad jokes about your own ethnicity/race that someone else can't make. A Jewish Apostle of Jesus trying to evangelize the Jewish people is quite different from a modern non-Jew using that same language as a decree of guilt. Context matters. Perhaps you are making the argument that if Jesus had landed in Spain or China, the outcome would have been all sunshine and butterflies. I don't know how to refute that counterfactual, except that it seems inconsistent with the Story which says that "all have sinned."
Early in the piece you say that typically people talking about Jesus' persecution in the manner that Carlson did "were not talking about modern day Jews." Then you go on to say "I reject outright that these ancient texts are irrelevant to modern day Israel or modern day Jews." What exactly is the relevance to which you are referring? Are you saying that the fact the villains of the Gospels were Jewish stands as evidence that modern day Jews are inclined to vile actions? That seems like the most obvious interpretation. If not, then what? I actually didn't focus on this statement on my first read. Of course if this is what you think then all these words are likely wasted, but I've already spilled the ink, so here you go.
I too find your finding this to be anti-Semitic puzzling. Even Paul pointed out the Jews who were complicit. It is clear in the scripture the Jewish leaders were to blame, not every Jew in existence. Are we truly to the point where we cannot criticize the self serving actions of leaders without being accused of hating a people as a whole?
It’s strange Ken. I truly don’t understand it.
Ken, I also agree that the biblical story is clear on the point that it was a collective of Jewish religious leaders and not the Jewish people whose actions should be criticized (though as I mentioned the translations should be examined). As nearly everyone in the story is Jewish any other interpretation is ridiculous on its face. I have family obligations but will respond directly to Shaun as to why I think this post goes beyond that as time allows.
To be clear, I just want you to know that your principled response is welcomed. I disagree that it was just religious leaders like I disagree that was Israel is doing to Gaza is just Netanyahu.
Since you were a Christian and a preacher Shaun, and very learned in the Bible, Old and New Testaments - I have often wondered how many Christians go back and forth between the Old and New - I do know the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 5, verse 17, where he states: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them" and he lived the moral of the Law as no one else could successfully do. He also spoke on how what is in our hearts is far more important than total obedience to Jewish rules of behavior. Yeshua also stated He was bringing a New Covenant (don’t know the exact verse) and as well because Yeshua said He was here to fulfill the prophecies and, for instance fully supporting the Ten Commandments, this is why Christians go back and forth between the two? SOMETIMES it comes across as a matter of convenience in making a point. I’m also aware that Yeshua taught “Love one another as I have loved you.” - is this why, okay, one reason why Christians support Israel?
The extreme Christian support for the State of Israel is actually a very modern phenomenon that did not exist until a few generations ago.
Deeply moving, I can’t put into words, how your writing & descriptive explanations makes me feel, we must have goodness in this world. We must
Thank you my friend.