Lux Lucet

Locke writes, “The last days division in the ‘Church’ will be between those that unflinchingly stand and support Israel and those who are so woke and non-discerning that they stand with media-infused Palestinian oppression.  THAT’S IT FOLKS!!!” 

I have to say, I appreciate a man who states clearly what he means, even if he is profoundly wrong in what he says.  I will say categorically that there is no command in Scripture for Christians to “unflinchingly stand and support [the nation-state of] Israel.” I would go further than this and say that not only is there no command to “stand and support Israel,” but that it is actually sinful for Christians to do so.  For supporting the nation-state of Israel – and by supporting, I assume that Locke means that Americans must at minimum support the federal government’s policy of forcibly taking tens of billions of dollars in taxpayer money from Americans and giving them to the government of Israel and probably also agreeing with the attacks on our Constitution, specifically the First Amendment, by (mostly Republican) politicians influenced by agents of the Israeli government operating in the U.S. to suppress criticism of Israeli government policy and Jewish Zionists – means supporting the false, violent medieval religion of Judaism, for Israeli officials and Israeli partisans consistently call Israel “the Jewish state.”[2]

Locke is wildly off base in these assertions. Let’s consider the hundreds of billions of dollars sent by our federal government to the nation-state of Israel over the decades, including the $25 billion more Congress just voted to send to Israel a couple of weeks back.  Ask yourself this question, one what basis does Congress send American taxpayer money to Israel or any other foreign country?  Nothing in the Constitution supports it.  Nothing in the Scriptures supports it.  In Romans 13, Paul tells us that the civil magistrate has two jobs: punish those who practice evil and reward the good, by which is meant laws supporting Christian morality, things such as prohibitions against theft, murder, sexual immorality, etc.  There is no authorization in the Scriptures or the Constitution for Congress to give Americans’ tax money to foreign nations for any reason.  All such foreign aid is properly considered theft.  Why is a Christian pastor such as Greg Locke calling for theft from the American people and calling this a Christian obligation?  Surely his is a confused mind.

Another point of confusion is Locke’s mistaking the nation-state of Israel for the Israel of God. The Israel of God in the New Covenant is all those who are saved through belief in the Lord Jesus Christ alone, regardless of their ethnicity.  It is not the nation-state of Israel.  Locke quotes Romans 11 when he writes, “God has not cast off His people,” which in the context of Romans 11 is a reference to the Israelite nation.  But Paul goes on to answer the question, “Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.”  Paul is teaching here that the promise of salvation through faith alone in Christ Jesus extends to Jews as well as to Gentiles and using himself as an example of this.

Locke continues with his diatribe, referring to ethnic Jews as “GOD’S CHOSEN PEOPLE.” This capitalization is in the original.  Locke cannot make his points without writing in all caps.  But writing in all caps does not make his claim true, as it is specifically denied in Scripture.  Consider what Peter wrote, “But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy” (1 Pet. 2:9, 10).

So just who is this chosen generation, royal priesthood, holy nation, and God’s own special people who have been called out of darkness into the Lord’s marvelous light?  Is it ethnic Jews only, regardless of whether they believe in Jesus Christ?  No.  It is all those who are “elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 1:2). That is, the chosen generation, royal priesthood, holy nation, and God’s own special people are Christians, Jew and Gentile, the elect according to the foreknowledge of God. It is not ethnic Israel. 

This is made abundantly clear in Romans 2 as well.  There Paul writes “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God” (Rom. 228, 29).  Being a Jew, that is being counted among God’s chosen people, is not about being a physical descendent of Abraham.  It is for those who are of the faith of Abraham.  That’s what Paul means by “circumcision of the heart.”   Paul makes this clear in Romans 4 where he tells us that the reason that salvation is by grace through faith is so that the promise to Abraham “might be sure to all the seed,” that is, to all – Jew and Gentile – who believe the promise of the gospel.   

Locke concludes by writing (in all caps again), “So again, as you watch all of this play out, you will see it clearly.  The final division and persecution will boil down to two groups: THOSE WHO STAND WITH ISRAEL AND COWARDS.” 

In a word, no.  As I noted above, if standing with Israel means taking tax dollars from Americans and sending them to the government of Israel, that is theft and, therefore, sinful.  Some will defend this practice by arguing “God blesses those who bless Israel.”  But the Israel of the New Testament is not a nation-state in the Middle East, Israel is the church of God made up of all believers, some of whom are American taxpayers who are having their goods plundered at the behest of the Israel lobby and sent to support activities of a foreign government.

Locke’s concluding paragraph seems to be a twisting of Revelation 21: 6-8.  But there, the division is not between “THOSE WHO STAND WITH ISRAEL AND COWARDS,” but between those who believe the gospel of Jesus Christ and those who don’t.  “I will give the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts. He who overcomes shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and she shall be My son. But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” When John writes “He who overcomes shall inherit all things,” John is talking about those who believe in Jesus Christ.  The clue for this interpretation is found in 1 John 5:5, “Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?” 

According to God, the final division is not between “THOSE WHO STAND WITH ISRAEL AND COWARDS,” it’s between those who believe that Jesus is the Son of God, that is, those who believe the gospel of Jesus Christ, and those who do not. 

By substituting “standing with [the nation-state] of Israel” for “believing that Jesus is the Son of God,” Greg Locke errs greatly and teaches those who follow him to err greatly as well.

---

[1] I am aware that Rome makes a distinction between dulia (veneration) which they claim they offer to saints and (hyperdulia) which is directed to Mary, and latria (worship) directed only to God, and would take issue with my calling their veneration of Mary worship.  In the opinion of this writer, it is a distinction without a difference.

[2] Some Jews will argue that Zionism and Judaism are not the same thing, and in fairness, not all Jews are Zionists.  But in the common usage of the terms “Zionism” and “Judaism,” a usage repeated constantly by figures such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and countless others, they are so closely identified as to be inseparable.  Israel is repeatedly referred to as “the Jewish state” by its supporters and Israel is founded upon Zionist theory. But even if one wishes to maintain that Judaism and Zionism are not the same thing, Talmudic Judaism of the non-Zionist variety is still a medieval, violent, and false religion.      

Pages: 1 2