27 thoughts on “Reactions to Christ at the Checkpoint

  1. I think it should be called ‘ Christ is the Checkpoint ‘ and should be how we can reach both Jews and Arabs with the Gospel . Because whoever does not believe in the Lord Jesus will be lost forever .

  2. By using the term “checkpoint” in the conference title, there is a strong implication Jesus is identified with the Palestinians being checked and submitting to Israeli soldiers for admittance into Israel. Second, the title implies Jesus is identified more with the Palestinians as the “underdog.” The title is fallacious for two reasons: Palestinians are stopped at the checkpoint to see if they are carrying weapons or explosives to destroy innocent lives. Jesus was not a terrorists. If he was part of the Zealots perhaps the title would be appropriate, Second, identifying Jesus with the “underdog” Palestinians is a ploy used by Palestinian Christians that Jesus always went for the underdogs like them. A culture that votes in a terrorist group to run their government is not an underdog, Palestinians are not underdogs but pawns in a great game orchestrated by the Arab nations to demonize the Jews and to convince the world that a Jewish state is not legitimate. The Palestinians are in full control of the perception they are creating and ignorant evangelical Christians are going over to the Palestinian territories to spend time with Palestinian families to be indoctrinated against Israel. Very clever but it won’t work because the truth is more powerful than a counterfeit portrayal of the Middle East conflict.

    1. Louis Lapides,

      It’s nice to have an actual Messianic Jewish Bible scholar on RPP. I am sure you have heard every Jewish anti-missionary argument a million times, but I have many new ones that I have been working on for a long time that I think you have never heard of before. I was hoping that you would look at my ideas on my site http://www.messianicmistakes.com/

      Kenneth Greifer

      1. Well, that’s sweet, Kenneth. Would you say that your lack of concern for peoples’ souls is equal to, or outweighs your lack of concern for cohesive thought and intelligible writing? To be perfectly honest, while I’m indifferent as to whether or not you care about the well-being of others – even though you’re commanded to love them as yourself (unless, that’s one of the “quotes” with which you disagree) – it’s difficult to remain indifferent to the lack of content, concepts, or even, well-constructed sentences in your writing.

        As I’ve mentioned previously, I’ve undertaken the arduous task of trudging through your word clusters (on more than one occasion) looking for something – anything of substance. Have you drastically re-worked your material recently? Enough to warrant plugging it (once again) on a thread concerning a completely different topic?

      2. Luke,

        You can say my sentences are unintelligible word clusters, which is a funny description of my writing, but you can’t say my work lacks content and concepts.

        Have you ever read commentaries” that discuss technical details of the Hebrew words? I don’t think they are easy, fun books to read because they are technical. My work involves a lot of technical details too, and I don’t think you are judging it fairly.

        Kenneth Greifer

      3. Kenneth, I really don’t know where to begin with you. As I mentioned, I’ve examined your work and it leaves more to be desired than any other I’ve encountered. I’m being more than fair in my judgment. Further, I’ve even implored others here to not take my word for it, but to follow your link and see your word clusters for themselves.

        You wrote, “Have you ever read commentaries that discuss technical details of the Hebrew words? I don’t think they are easy, fun books to read because they are technical. My work involves a lot of technical details too, and I don’t think you are judging it fairly.”

        To answer your question, I have. The issue with your statement is that I never said writings should be “easy” or “fun”, though. I’ve encountered a wealth of material over the years that has couched highly technical concepts in well-crafted word pictures and sentences – making the communication of information and processing of it by the reader a worthwhile endeavor. Your writings are not among, nor comparable to these.

        To illustrate my point, let’s take a quick look at a few of your clusters, shall we? I went to the first chapter of your first book and copied a grouping of sentences from one of the first few paragraphs. There are, literally, thousands that would provide a better example, but I wanted to be as random as possible. What do we find?

        “Jewish tradition has a rule that the words of the Hebrew Bible have to be spaced carefully (Kurzweil 236), so some people believe that the letters could not have been divided into words wrong. Maybe scribes did not follow this rule, or maybe this rule was made after people had already written the Hebrew Bible with spaces in the wrong places for a long time. Or maybe this rule was only for the first Five Books of Moses.”

        Highly technical details, Kenneth? Interesting concepts and content? Hardly.

        If you disagree, perhaps you could paste just one or two of your more intriguing concepts here for us all to peruse. According to you, we’re all wrong to one extent of another. You alone have the answers – and have somehow managed to write four books rendering those answers into highly technical commentaries for our benefit. You obviously have no issue promoting your work here, so could you please indulge us in a slightly more substantial promotion?

        If that’s alright with Gev and Joseph, of course…😉

  3. This conference is seriously slanted in one direction. Most of the speakers are pro-Palestinian, which is ok, as it is good to be pro-people, if their pro-Palestinian wasn’t so anti-Zionist/anti-Israel. Of those who may put a different perspective to things, just how true to their convictions can they be in Bethlehem, how safe would a pro-Israel speaker be in the PA controlled area? This should have been in a neutral venue with equal numbers of speakers from both sides of the spectrum represented, then it would have been a true discussion and dialogue, in its present form it will just be another Israel-bashing exercise by middle class theologians who want to have a racier and radical gospel in order to feel more relevant in a post-modern world that is increasingly more sceptical of religion.

    1. Indeed, the integrity of this conference is totally compromised by those who organise it who have such a poor history when it comes to their connections to and cooperation with terror supporting regimes, unashamed anti-Semites, Holocaust deniers and apologists for violent ‘resistance’.

  4. The Conference has no integrity. The fact that its stars will be the likes of Sizer, White and Awad tells us everything we need to know.
    Why any person with even a modicum of decency would want to be associated with that bunch astounds me.
    Why any Messianic Jew or self-proclaimed Zionist would even be invited raises many questions.
    The chief question there is simply this:
    Why would the organisers (a bunch of antisemites and assorted …….) WANT a person at their hate-fest?
    They certainly wouldn’t invite anyone with the intention of “hearing the other side”. . . . .

  5. You wouldn’t go in to a brothel to preach to the clients and prostitutes, for fear of association.

    Likewise, you wouldn’t go to an anti-semite meeting, no matter how decent your motives.

    1. Hey Levitt,
      The world itself is a brothel, and Yeshua had no apprehension about speaking to prostitutes and others in need of truth, though I understand your analogy.

      As you well know, but for the benefit of others, the stark difference between Yeshua’s speaking and that of CatC is that His was to enable the world to covenant with G-d’s chosen people, Israel – and bring man into true fellowship with G-d. These CatC wolves are trying to persuade people to go against Israel, thereby bringing them into fellowship with the world and its errant views – subsequently, that much closer to G-d’s judgement.

      Is there really such a shortage of anti-Semitic Christians out there that they need to hold training seminars? Do the people that attend these things really not see that they’re just being duped into adopting the prevailing view of the world?

      1. “Is there really such a shortage of anti-Semitic Christians out there that they need to hold training seminars?”

        Very true Luke, sadly!

  6. The Anglican vicar Rev. Stephen Sizer maintains that that “Zionism, both political and Christian, is incompatible with biblical truth” As a Catholic lay missionary I believe that this is totally wrong and I wrote to Stephen saying this, to which he has not yet replied. I fear that Stephen, sadly like some other evangelical Protestant and Pentecostal leaders involved with the “Christ at the Checkpoint” conference, has embraced replacement theology.

    Wikipedia defines Zionism as “a Jewish political movement that, in its broadest sense, has supported the self-determination of the Jewish people in a sovereign Jewish national homeland” and Christian Zionism “a belief among some Christians that the return of the Jews to the Holy Land, and the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, is in accordance with Biblical prophecy.”

    There are 120 Scriptures in the Old and New Testament which state that God would one day bring the Jewish people home to Israel. Many theologians in all the mainline Christian churches support this. Leading Catholic theologian – Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa – writes in his book – The Mystery of Christmas that

    “Christians must love Israel not only in memory, but also in hope; not only for what it was, but for what it will be. Their fall says the Apostle, ‘is not forever’ and God ‘has the power to graft them in again’ (Rom. 11:11, 23). If their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? (Rom. 11:15)….. We share with the Jews the Biblical certainty that God gave them the country of Canaan forever (Genesis 17:8, Isaiah 43:5, Jeremiah 32:22, Ezekiel 36:24, Amos 9:14). We know that the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable (Romans 11:29)…. The reconstitution of the Jewish Nation is a wonderful sign and opportunity for the Church itself, the importance of which we are not yet able to grasp. Only now can Israel take up again the question of Jesus of Nazareth and, to a certain degree, this is what is happening. Quite a few in the Jewish religion have started to acknowledge Jesus as ‘the glory of Israel’ They openly acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah and call themselves ‘Messianic Jews’. These help us to overcome certain gloomy prospects of ours, making us realise that the great original schism afflicting the Church and impoverishing it, is not so much the schism between East & West or between Catholics & Protestants, as the more radical one between the Church & Israel.”

    Accordingly like Fr. Raniero I see both political Zionism (as defined) and certainly Christian Zionism as being totally compatible with biblical truth.

    I see many of the 120 scriptures like Ezek 37 implying process ie that God would bring the Jewish people back to their land and then back to Him … v 12 “I will bring you back to the land of Israel”, followed later with v 14 by “I will put my Spirit in you and you will live” This is surely what is happening – as you probably know there is at least one Messianic Jewish congregation in nearly every town in Israel.

    I don’t know how Sizer and others explain away these Scriptures unless they see the church as having replaced Israel, but this is a wrong teaching which has led to the persecution of the Jewish people over the centuries, for which I know the Catholic church has repented of.
    Patrick Monaghan

    1. Absolutely spot on, Patrick. Thank you so much for writing this – and for voicing your concerns to Sizer himself, no less. If your letter to him was half of what you’ve written here, I’m very pleased at the thought that it might be the only truth he’s heard in quite some time. I wonder if you included Fr. Cantalamessa’s quote. Excellent stuff to be sure.

      If Christians can’t trust G-d’s myriad promises to Israel, how can they have any hope for their own future?

      1. Excellent, Patrick. Please keep us informed as to whether or not Sizer responds. When he’s not reading the nefarious rantings of madmen, he actually stops in here, apparently. Perhaps your mention will elicit some response.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

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