Michelle from Seattle wrote: I just saw the above referenced piece (Scripture Plucking to Justify Land Theft and Murder). Well done. I hope you will forgive me though if I take issue with you on one important point. You write, "Abraham is part of the history of a new faith." Actually, the orthodox Christian position is that the faith of the Church is not new; Jesus is the alpha and the omega—.
Happy Christmas, Michelle:
OK, no problem with me on and old Jesus. Some New Testament scripture seems to say this too, so who am I to disagree. Your argument is soundly based on mainline church theology. But you and all those who use it need to know it is the same argument Christian Zionists stretch to "prove" (they say) that Jesus would not oppose the USA initiated wars now going on in the Middle East, and they say Jesus would approve of the slaughter of the Palestinians today just as he did the Philistines in Joshua\’s Old Testament time. Christian Zionists, such as John Hagee, expand this to say the USA needs to bomb Iran.
The purpose of this Judeo-Christian biblical distortion, now called Christian Zionism, is to convince us that Christ following is merely an extension of Judaism. Paul of Tarsus and the Apostles had to overcome this argument in the first century, else there would be no Christianity today.
I don\’t think it is a stretch to refer to Christ following two thousand years ago as a new faith because Jesus called it a New Covenant, and in the eyes of Jesus\’ Disciples and followers it was very new. By “new faith” I refer to the New Covenant and the New Testament Ecclesia, which includes Roman Catholicism and all the Orthodox churches today. The church of Paul and the apostles came before any of the organized ones you mention. Check me if I am wrong, but don\’t those Orthodox leader and patriarchs you have named all acknowledge the “New Covenant” in Jesus, and the “New Testament,” as do all Protestant churches? All, that is, but the most radical Christian Zionists, which is why we say they are not new covenant Christians but are, in fact, a cult only 150 years old.
I affirm the valid point you make, that God\’s plan has always been there. It is totally logical that if God is God, then He would know His total plan before he laid the keel. God would not build like men do, changing our minds and plans from day to day. And if Jesus was in God\’s mind in the “beginning,” then I agree Jesus is "old" and his plan for us is older than the new covenant. Everyone from Orthodox to Southern Baptists seem to agree that Jesus was not an afterthought…with one exception.
Evangelical (Judeo-Christians) are the lone exception, they have invented theology that suggests God\’s plan failed the first time God tried it on man because the surviving Israelites were so stubborn and evil as not to accept Jesus as the Christ. They have it that God had to go back to the drawing board and work out a second Jesus re-run to fix the broken plan…therefore, they conclude His kingdom is yet to come.
As strange as it may seem, trained evangelicals at dozens of churches where our teams have interceded, come forth and used your very argument against us to prop up their desperately weak position that Jesus might indeed bomb the Palestinians, and murder the Iraqi children…an accomplice to the old Israelite barbarism. They tell our protesters:
“Oh no, Jesus is not against killing when it is deserved. He was there in the beginning, in the Old Testament, he is the Alpha and Omega, when God commanded Joshua and others to wipe out the Philistines he was on hand and was in on the righteous slaughter…so if Jesus approved killing the Philistines and other evil tribes he would also approve of the Israelis cleaning up the Philistine\’s\’ descendants, the Palestinians, who are also terribly evil and have adopted an evil religion….etc.” (evangelicals say this, I do not.)
This is why we always hand critics a New Testament and ask them to show us where Jesus would support killing. Invariably they hand it back and say "its in the Old Testament." The most telling response we have found for this false logic is to assert that if Jesus did not affirm an Old Testament practice in the New Testament it should be ignored. There are lots of Old Testament statements Jesus upheld by reference, but not once did he affirm killing anyone. Blessed are the peacemakers is all encompassing. “Show me,” is the best answer. No one has! He is the Prince of Peace.
Michelle, thanks for your thoughtful letter. I could go back and add some words of explanation to my story, but I don\’t think it would be productive. In deference to your excellent comment I will give this little paper to those who ask, and I think it will be valuable. Yes, you are right, Jesus\’ New Covenant was not a new idea to God.
May you have Joyous Christmas.
Chuck Carlson and WHTT
Michelle\’s complete letter:
I just saw the above referenced piece(Scripture Plucking to Justify Land Theft and Murder). Well done. I hope you will forgive me though if I take issue with you on one important point. You write, "Abraham is part of the history of a new faith." Actually, the orthodox Christian position is that the faith of the Church is not new; Jesus is the alpha and the omega.
It is past time for the modern/post-modern Church to apologetically recover the teachings of the ancient Church: Namely, that the ancient faith of the Patriarchs and the Prophets is the faith of Jesus and his followers (see Hebrews 11-12:2; I Cor. 10:1-4).
As the early Church Father Eusebius (c. 240-309) wrote: "… we must regard the religion proclaimed in recent years to all nations through Christ\’s teaching as none other than the first, most ancient, and most primitive of all religions, discovered by Abraham and his followers,
God\’s beloved". (The History of the Church from Christ to Constantine* 1:4:10) It is stated succinctly in the Episcopal Book of Common Prayer in the ordination rites for a bishop: "Your heritage is the faith of patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and martyrs, and those of every generation who have looked to God in hope."
