Did Israel Hate the Moabites?

 

” So he took his oldest son, who was to succeed him as king, and offered him on the city wall as a sacrifice to the god of Moab. The Israelites were terrified[d] and so they drew back from the city and returned to their own country.”

It is my contention that Jesus was the Kinsman Redeemer of the Moabite branch of the House of Judah who came to reclaim the land around the temple, Bethlehem, and the Mount of Olives. Jesus was a human sacrifice to Chemosh, the deity that Solomon worshipped on the Mount of Olives with his wives, Was one of these brides Jesus’ great grandmother? Was Mary Magdalene of the royal Moabite bloodline?

This blog, Royal Rosamond Press predicted the chasm Netanyahu and the neo-Confederate Republicans deliberately created between the Jews of America, and the Jews of Israel. This is a racists divide. The Republicans were elected to tend to the affairs of all the people of the United States, and not to create a schism with a foreign nation in order to garnish Jewish votes. Because the evangelical leaders in our Congress and Senate see this riff as a victory for them – and God/Jesus – I am going to step up my efforts to destroy the evangelical cult. I must publish a book that will reach more people.  I need to get on CNN and debate the Cultish Children of Satan’s Heresy that hates the forty-five million black voters, as much as Netanyahu hates the Arab voters of Israel.

I found a very curious passage that suggests Elijah was a foreign prophet.

“

Elisha consents, and asks for a musician to accompany him, and inspire him. Here is a Muse, a Spirit that will fill Elisha with the Holy Voice of God.

As the musician played his harp, the power of the Lord came on Elisha, 16 and …..?

I survived my operation for prostate cancer.

Jon Presco

Washington (CNN)With relations between Israel and the White House at a new low, Republicans are seizing on the opportunity to peel Jewish voters away from their historic home in the Democratic Party.

GOP politicians are stressing their enduring bonds with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and criticizing President Barack Obama for giving the Israeli leader the cold shoulder.

http://www.yeshuasharvest.org/resources/the-ruth-less-church/prophecy-in-ruth

History of MoabAlthough the Moabites refused passage to the Israelites, Moab did not fight against Israel while they were neighbors for more than 300 years. In fact, Deut. 2:29 makes no complaint about hostility either of Edom or Moab, only mentioning that Moab lacked hospitality and hired Balaam to curse Israel.There is no hint that either nation hindered Israel in its passage along the borders, although Edom did stand ready to fight should its territory be encroached upon. Deut. 2:29 indicates that trade was carried on. The Moabites were much too friendly, in fact, sending their daughters to cultivate friendly relations with Israelite men and to entice them into idolatry. Num. 25:2 (note feminine of verb) The Moabites peaceful character and their many possessions may account for the terror of Moabite King Balak at the approach of the Israelites. He took rather special means to guard against them. Instead of sending his army out, he first consulted with the leaders of Midian. Moab and Midian were kin by virtue of their common descent from Terah, Moab through Lot from Haran, and Midian from Abraham by Keturah. Gen. 11:27; 19:37; 25:2 The result of this conference was that the two nations united in sending for the prophet Balaam. Num. 25

http://www.realtime.net/~wdoud/topics/moabites.html

The Book of Ruth, on the other hand, testifies to the existence of a friendly intercourse between Moab and Bethlehem, one of the towns of the tribe of Judah. By his descent from Ruth, David may be said to have had Moabite blood in his veins. He committed his parents to the protection of the king of Moab (who may have been his kinsman), when hard pressed by King Saul. (1 Samuel 22:3,4) But here all friendly relations stop forever. The next time the name is mentioned is in the account of David’s war, who made the Moabites tributary.^[5] Moab may have been under the rule of an Israelite governor during this period; among the exiles who returned to Judea from Babylonia were a clan descended from Pahath-Moab, whose name means “ruler of Moab”.

The restoration of Israel to the land promised to her by God will take place at the second coming of Christ.  It is then that He will act as Israel’s Kinsman-Redeemer and restore her to the land that was promised to them by God in a covenant that was unconditionally secured and to be performed by God alone.  This was first promised to Abraham, then to Isaac, and then to Jacob and his descendants.  The whole of the area promised to them by God has never been fully realized, yet.  After Christ returns and performs as Kinsman-Redeemer, Israel will in fact take possession of the fullness of the land for the first time in history.

So, what events will lead up to Israel’s being restored not only to the land, but spiritually as well?  Unfortunately they are going to be pushed to the wall during a time that is commonly known as The Tribulation, or the Seventieth Week of Daniel (see Daniel chapter nine).  This seven year period will be a time of judgment and testing for all those who dwell on the earth at that time.  The second half of this seven year period, known as The Great Tribulation, will see two-thirds of the world’s Jews exterminated by the one commonly called the anti-Christ.  (To put this in perspective, during WWII one-third of the world’s Jews were exterminated in Hitler’s concentration camps.)  Much of the Old Testament prophets’ writings deal with this time period as well as the subsequent Millennial reign of Christ.  But in the book of the Revelation we are given a glimpse into what will be taking place in heaven during this time period.  In Revelation chapter five, there is an interesting scene.  The apostle John is speaking:

Republican House Speaker John Boehner announced Friday that he’ll be visiting Israel later in the month. Though his office said the trip was long in the works, it will take place less than a month after Boehner hosted Netanyahu for a controversial address to Congress in which the prime minister ripped into Obama’s Iran diplomacy.

He added, “I think 2016 does present an opportunity for Republicans to massively improve their performance with Jewish voters.”

Mackowiak noted the issue appeals to two core constituencies of the GOP base.

“Evangelical Christians in the United States strongly support Israel, and they do it from a biblical position,” he said. “National security hawks strongly support Israel, too.”

Though Jewish Americans have traditionally voted Democratic, there’s evidence that could be shifting. American Jews’ support for the Republican Party has been growing as the population becomes more Orthodox and as some have become more critical of Obama’s policies in the Middle East.

According to a Pew Forum analysis of exit poll data on midterm House elections, 33% of Jews voted for Republicans in 2014, up from 12% in 2006.

Iowa Rep. Steve King crystallized the implicit, if elsewhere mostly unstated, Republican argument to Jewish voters in an interview on Boston Herald radio Friday.

Jewish Democratic strategist Matt Dorf dismissed the Republican rhetoric as bluster and simply an effort to curry favor with wealthy Jewish donor Sheldon Adelson.

READ: Boehner to meet with Netanyahu in Jerusalem

“This is a storyline that gets promoted every two, and certainly every four years in a presidential cycle, and it’s never true,” said Matt Dorf, former Jewish liaison for the Democratic National Committee.

Dorf said regardless of how supportive Republicans are of Israel, their policies are “too out of step with the values that Jewish Americans have, which is this intense responsibility for the most vulnerable among us.”

But Mackowiak pointed to slipping support for Israel among Democrats, suggesting that the party isn’t the best choice for those who care about the Jewish state.

“Israel is a wedge issue in the Democratic Party. It’s not a wedge issue for us.”

But missing from the movie is any depiction of even one Jewish rabbi participating in the Selma crusade.  The omission of Heschel is particularly conspicuous because of the well-known iconic photograph of him — with his long white beard and his yarmulke/beret, looking like the stereotype of a Biblical prophet — joining King in the front row of the Selma protest.  Including Heschel would not diminish the film’s emphasis on the centrality of African Americans in the civil rights struggle, but it would have lent the film more historical accuracy, not simply about one man but as a representative of the role Jews played in the freedom struggle

On election day itself, he sank lower still. In a Facebook video, he posed in front of a map of the Middle East, as if in a war room, and used the idiom of military conflict to warn that “Arab voters are advancing in large numbers towards voting places” and that this was “a call-up order” for Likud supporters to head to the polling stations.

It’s worth pausing to digest the full meaning of that move. The enemy against whom Netanyahu was seeking to rally his people was not Islamic State or massed foreign armies, or even the Palestinians of the West Bank or Gaza. He was speaking of the 20% of the Israeli electorate that is Palestinian: Arabs who were born in, live in and are citizens of Israel. A prime minister was describing the democratic participation of one-fifth of the country he governs in the language of a military assault to be beaten back.

Imagine if a US president broadcast such a message, warning the white electorate that black voters were heading to the polls in “large numbers”. Or if a European prime minister said: “Quick, the Jews are voting!” This is the moral gutter into which Netanyahu plunged just to get elected.

It worked. Not because it won fresh recruits to the right camp, but because it summoned disenchanted hawks back home. That’s the small consolation. The numbers suggest Israel did not lurch rightwards on Tuesday. Indeed, the nationalist and religious right bloc merely held steady, gaining just one seat. Netanyahu’s success came by recutting that pie to give himself a bigger slice.

But it is a cold comfort. For the Likud leader was able to siphon off votes from the far right by absorbing its message of belligerence and bigotry. Some will say that’s hardly new. Only the naive could look at Netanyahu’s nine years in office (spread over three decades) and conclude he was ever serious about either equality or the pursuit of a two-state solution. But now we have his explicit word, confirming that everything his harshest critics said of him was true.

The result is despair – in liberal Tel Aviv, where Bibi’s Labor challenger, Isaac Herzog, topped the poll; in foreign capitals, who will note that Netanyahu has now officially disavowed the near-universally preferred solution for the Israel-Palestine conflict; and in the Jewish diaspora, which has long clung to the hope that Israel at least wants to end the post-1967 occupation, even if it has still not managed to do it.

Mindful of the damage his win-at-all-costs moves had wrought, Netanyahu lost no time trying to unsay what he had said. In his victory speech, he promised to be prime minister of all Israelis, Jewish and non-Jewish alike. And in a US TV interview on Thursday, he insisted that he does want a “sustainable, peaceful two-state solution” after all, so long as “circumstances” change.

But it’s too late. I know of at least one European leader who now says privately that Netanyahu’s “credibility is shot” and that “no one will want to work with him”. And in the fellowship of world leaders, that will not be a minority view.