A Sad Discussion on Scot McKnight’s Blog

I’m definitely a Scot McKnight fan and I’m not putting this link here to suggest in any way that I have a problem with him. I think if you read carefully what Scot says in this post, you will see he has not gone too far into the anti-Israel crowd (he is mostly reacting in his post to some imbalanced views held by Zionist Christians and has been persuaded by Gary Burge’s writing — but I have hope for him to change his views nonetheless).

But what I want you to notice are the comments, which I participate heavily in. It is quite a discussion.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2010/04/jesus-the-land-and-christian-t.html

About Derek Leman

IT guy working in the associations industry. Formerly a congregational rabbi. Dad of 8. Nerd.
This entry was posted in Messianic Jewish, Replacement Theology, Supersessionism. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to A Sad Discussion on Scot McKnight’s Blog

  1. judahgabriel says:

    Yep, saw that this morning. I read the post, skimmed a few comments, and didn’t bother involving myself in the horrible mess therein.

    Good luck.

  2. judahgabriel says:

    >> Derek, you keep invoking the Hebrew scriptures. But the Hebrew Bible has its fulfillment in Christ and the New Covenant people of God.

    Yeah, Derek, quit invoking those Hebrew Scriptures. Messiah and his disciples would never do such an ugly thing.

  3. jroush81 says:

    I read this blog earlier today without reading the comments…it was the first time that I had heard this particular viewpoint (although I’ve heard the general idea bantered around in brief before).

    “The land is Christ himself and we are “in Christ”…”

    To the naivé it sounds so…nice and neat…what a wonderful though…devoid of any real grounded doctrine. What a complicated answer that turns out to be…

  4. rgbg says:

    Shalom,

    Guess they think the Hebrew scriptures are part of the Koran based on how some were acting. I had forgotten how bad it was out there.

    Replacement Theology at its best.

  5. As a Christian I am saddened by the comments made by some so-called Christians on McKnights blog. When I was growing up in the Church I very rarely heard replacement theology. Most of the teaching I heard from Pastor’s and teachers was very pro-Israel, but this seems to be getting less and less every year. I now know very view Christians personally who are pro-Israel whether in regard to the Land or the Jews etc. I have tried discussing with many of them in person and on my blog from time to time but it doesn’t seem to do any good. It ends up in an argument and then simply walk off. I believe this is because they know that their arguments hold no water but they want to be so politically correct they can’t bring themselves to think for themselves.
    Sorry for rambling on. I just wanted you and your readers to know that there are still some Christian who are pro-Israel and proudly so.
    Peter

  6. O one other point, if it wasn’t for the Hebrew scriptures and wouldn’t understand most of the rest of the Bible. These people who don’t need the Hebrew Scriptures obviously must be smarter that I am:)

  7. Wow. Just … wow. So this is where two-house theology leads.

    I won’t be as gracious as you, Derek, because it’s the implications of this theology that matter worlds more than how nice it sounds or how well-meaning the author is.

    Implications, logical extensions, rational conclusions … these matter far more.

    • judahgabriel says:

      >> So this is where two-house theology leads.

      Did you mean replacement theology? I don’t think anyone there is Two House. (I am though, and I side with Derek. :-))

  8. warland52 says:

    This debate also goes on within the Catholic Church (neither view is prescribed to my knowledge). I stand with the late Fr. Elias Friedman (convert and founder of the Association of Hebrew Catholics)who I quote:

    “Was the very idea of a Jewish State in Palestine a moral one? It is notorious that Arabs do not think so. Whatever be the rights and wrongs on either side, the Christian should hold 6nnly to a transcendental point ofview about the Judeo-Arab conflict. The return of the Jews to the Holy Land after two thousand years of exile is a sign of the times and a fulfilment of prophecy, the capture of Jerusalem in 1967 no less so, though no Christian interpretation of these events will ignore the legitimate rights of the Palestinians.
    Zionist ideology may have collapsed, leaving the State of Israel without a goal but not without a function, for it assures the security of Israeli Jews, a providential absolute.
    A. N. Whitehead, in his day, foresaw nothing but catastrophe for the Zionist experiment. As one who has lost his faith, he had deprived himself of the higher wisdom which the eschatological perspective offers to the Christian.”
    – From “Jewish Identity”

    I think this is succinctly goes to the heart of the matter.

    ToddV

  9. warland52 says:

    that strange typo in my post should read “the Christian should hold firmly…”

    ToddV

  10. jennbrooke says:

    That was a really disheartening conversation to wade through, on the other blog. Wow. Particularly vexing with the “apostate” comment. :-(

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s