How the Christian Zionism Ideology Enslaves Christians

Dispensationalism vs Supersessionism 

One would think that 1800 years after Christ’s death and resurrection is an awfully long time to wait to create new beliefs that radically change all that preceded it. Well, one with historical knowledge and a little common sense would. However, we have the Enlightenment Era to thank for the overturning of both.

In that time of Revolution and “Reason”, all sorts of men were running off and creating their own religions. Joseph Smith evokes scoffs from many, but rarely, if barely at all, does anyone give credit to John Darby(1800-1882)for systematizing the religious beliefs that would over time, grow to dominate the mainstream conservatism of Post-War America. Such a success over such a short period,(early 19th century-1945)relatively speaking, seems like it was almost meant to be. The U.S. foreign policy since the Post-War era has almost seamlessly mirrored these religious beliefs, hearkening back to a twisted version of medieval times, when Church and State worked together in pursuit of common goals.

The theology of John Darby is Dispensationalism, a theology that teaches Premillennialism, Christian Zionism, and a Rapture that will precede the 2nd Coming of Christ. Premillennialists believe that there will be a millennia-long earthly golden age in which the world will be thoroughly Christianized. They believe that it will occur after the Second Coming when Christ reigns physically on earth during the millennium. They believe that the Final Judgment will occur only after the millennium is over. 

Premillennialists devote considerable attention to the concept of the “Rapture,” a doctrine envisioning the elect being raised and transformed into glory upon Christ’s return. According to this belief, both the deceased elect and the living will ascend to meet Christ.

Traditionally, it was widely held among Christians that the Second Coming would follow a period of intense tribulation and persecution of God’s people. This period termed the tribulation, was believed to culminate in the Rapture just before Christ’s return, a viewpoint known as the “post-tribulation” perspective. However, in the 19th century, a shift occurred when some proposed that the Rapture would precede this period of persecution. This belief termed the “pre-tribulation” view, gained traction through the teachings of Darby.

Darby’s pre-tribulation stance found further dissemination through C. I. Scofield, who incorporated it into the footnotes of his Scofield Reference Bible. Despite its absence from Christian theology for the preceding 1800 years, many Protestants adopted the pre-tribulation perspective.

It spread across the United States like wildfire, sweeping through the Evangelical Movement with the help of pastors like James Inglis and Dwight L. Moody. Cyrus Scofield propelled Dispensationalism’s popularity further with his controversial early 20th-century Scofield Reference Bible, which many saw as changing the meaning of the original translations into something that blatantly supported Dispensationlist claims. The rise of Dispensationalism parallels the creation of the civilizational-changing term “Judeo-Christian,” which many conservative Christians of various stripes use today to describe their shared beliefs with Judaism. Ironically, liberal Christian theologians of the 1800’s ran with this term. It means that Judaism shares equal footing with Protestantism and Catholicism as an “ennobling,” tradition, which goes against the traditional theology of Supersessionism.  It was radical for its time. 

 However, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox,  and some Protestant denominations alike held to the ages-long theology, generally speaking, of Supersessionism.

Unlike the recently contrived Dispensationalism, Supersessionism teaches that the Christian Church has superseded and replaced the Old Law, the Jewish people, and have become, the new Chosen People. Catholics claim that their universal Church is the new Israel, regardless of whether or not the Catholic is an ethnic Jew or Gentile.

Even the Founding Fathers, many of whom were liberal Protestants, believed in this way of thinking. They were not Dispensationalists. 

Fast forward to the time of Billy Graham, and one finds that most Evangelicals believe in the aforementioned tenets of Dispensationalism. The other Protestant denominations that had once dominated Christian life in America had eroded themselves to such a degree that they provided no substantial opposition to this rising belief.

Zionism naturally found an unwavering ally in the Dispensationalist camp. But it wasn’t merely a handful of well-funded preachers who spread this theological viewpoint, but powerful politicians in Britain who not only agreed religiously with John Darby but also saw that his theology coincided with British foreign policy in the Middle East. Sound familiar? These men like Lords Shaftesbury, Lloyd George, and Balfour were not even the original political proponents of a Jewish state in the Middle East. The honor of the first political leader to propose that was none other than Napoleon Bonaparte. “The Enlightenment on Horseback,” wrote the following words concerning his support, which also saw his foreign policy mingling with his liberalism.

Bonaparte, Commander-in-Chief of the Armies of the French Republic in Africa and Asia, to the Rightful Heirs of Palestine. Israelites, a unique nation, whom, in thousands of years, lust of conquest and tyranny were able to deprive of the ancestral lands only, but not of name and national existence … She [France] offers to you at this very time, and contrary to all expectations, Israel’s patrimony … Rightful heirs of Palestine … hasten! Now is the moment which may not return for thousands of years, to claim the restoration of your rights among the population of the universe which had shamefully withheld from you for thousands of years, your political existence as a nation among the nations, and the unlimited natural right to worship Yehovah in accordance with your faith, publicly and in likelihood forever.”

 The father of modern political Zionism, Theodore Herzl, even endeavored to garner the Catholic Church’s support for a prospective state of Israel(the year was 1904). However, he found nothing but disappointment in the audience of Pope St. Pius the X, who politely yet firmly said:

We cannot give approval to this movement. We cannot prevent the Jews from going to Jerusalem—but we could never sanction it. The soil of Jerusalem, if it was not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church, I cannot tell you anything different. The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.” 

Whereas Herzl found plenty of support amongst Evangelical Protestants, he would find none with the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church, which believes in Supersessionism, was religiously and politically devasted following the 2nd Vatican Council in the 1960s. The vacuum in society was naturally filled by those who strongly believed in the shaping of a One World Order, insofar as the One World Order was centered around Israel.

Local Wars for International Masters

The Dispensationalists, or Zionists, are now the biggest kids on the conservative block. The Republican Party is their mouthpiece, and their theology is the foreign policy of the Republican Party as well. Such power is in the hands of those who commonly call out against the union of church and state when it comes to their Supersessionist rivals, but more on that later. Most other Christians, and even non-Christians bow down to this tenet of their theology, that Israel must be protected, for it is biblically ordained that it is their land. Thousands of American lives and billions of American dollars have been spent to support this theological foreign policy, which has also destabilized the entire Middle East, leading to a cascading effect of crisis upon crisis.

However, due to ongoing events in Gaza, this undying support for Israel is not what it used to be. Evangelicals are growing increasingly worried about their fracturing power. Take for example one of the most conservative “Red” counties in the whole country, Kootenai County. The county is home to multiple Evangelical churches, all of which adhere to Dispensationalism. Chief among these is Candlelight Christian Fellowship. The county also holds one of the biggest populations of Traditional Catholics in the whole country. These Catholic churches adhere to Supersessionism. When people run for local offices and positions from these two theological camps, they usually run as Republicans. This inevitably leads to conflict, for by and large, despite having membership in the same party, their ideas on God, Religion, and Country vary immensely.

Candlelight Christian Fellowship in particular has always had a specific angst with Catholics. In one live-streamed conference Catholics appeared to be compared to Muslims, with criticisms ranging from innate Antisemitism in Catholicism to violent means used for obtaining conversions. Again the main thrust for the accusation of Antisemitism boiled down to the Roman Catholic Church’s adherence to Supersessionism.

Even more recently, Candlelight Christian Fellowship held a town hall-esque session attended by locals and some local Republican leaders in which Nicholas J Fuentes was named as an instigator of infiltration and takeover of the KCRCC.

The Kootenai County Republican Central Committee (KCRCC) has been the premier Republican Central Committee in Idaho, as proven by the past several State Conventions. Its Chairman, Brent Regan, is assertive and practical. His top people are active in their communities. They are Christians of various denominations and unlike many aspects of the broader Republican Party, they care about social conservatism.

With all of this in mind, the success of the KCRCC comes down to emotionally intelligent leadership, strong convictions, and well-applied talent. Its advertising is sharp, its messaging sharper, and its allies statewide more enthused and least it was before prophets of doom began to circle.

The prophets of doom are the handful of local evangelical churches that have many congregants and have been longtime donors, supporters, and assistants in helping the KCRCC in the past. 

So began the long, exhaustive, awkwardly local social media wars. Of secret groups convening and trying to pick off the feeble-minded in the local party, attempting to gain support from a who’s-who of disaffected old warhorses, talentless failures, and enterprising interlopers. The Evangelicals’ two main prongs of attack are the terms and ideas of ‘Groyperism’ and Monarchism. Under these two umbrellas, they cite a list of modern contrived evils, Antisemitism, Nazism, Fascism, etc…(It is hilarious that self-serious men and women are using Groyperism as a term).

The most influential church in these accusations has been Candlelight Christian Fellowship. Candlelight has been seemingly pressuring the KCRCC on the monarchist menace and on several precinct committeemen and local Republicans whom they deem either as Antisemites, Groypers, or Monarchists. Some have been named by them, but most haven’t. Due to this pressure, on April 23rd of this year, the KCRCC passed a resolution affirming Republican values in which it “rejects historically destructive ideologies.”

It is easily argued that any idealogy that allows the murder of 60 million plus infants is historically and presently destructive, yet it is the golden man of the Maga Movement himself, Donald Trump, who recently said:

The states will determine by vote or legislation or perhaps both. And whatever they decide must be the law of the land. Now, it’s up to the states to do the right thing.” If Monarchism gave us “taxation without representation,” and is claimed to be historically destructive,  then popular sovereignty, with its mass infanticide and unnatural lifestyles, has no room to speak whatsoever.

Catholicism Responds

In the aforementioned townhall, one of the leaders of the session said that they’re not attacking Roman Catholics,(in reference to Groyperism, Monarchism, and Antisemitism), but rather, those problems are an infection in the Catholic Church. This couldn’t be further from the truth.

Groyperism aside, which is an umbrella word they use for a menagerie of things that shock modern, politically correct sensibilities, Monarchism and opposition to Judaism have always played an important, necessary part in the Catholic Church. 

  1. The Catholic Church, in its Philosophy, prefers what is called temperate monarchy. That is a monarchy that has certain rules it cannot undo. There is a moral law which the monarch must follow. The Papacy is also a temperate monarchy, for the pope cannot alter the faith, he has a religious “Constitution”  he must follow. St. Thomas Aquinas, the most respected and eminent of Catholic philosophers, says in his work De Regno(On Kingship)that a temperate monarchy is the best and most just form of government.

So this is not an infection of the Roman Catholic Church, as the Zionist who claimed it was said, but rather, it is inherent in Catholicism. This is not a dangerous idealogy or opinion at any time, let alone in modern America, for it is also in the Catholic Church’s philosophy to be against revolution and any form of violent upheaval, whereas most monarchies were overthrown in a torrent of blood and violence.

  1. The Catholic Church, in its Theology, believes in Supersessionism. Pope St. Pius the X put it perfectly:

“The Jewish religion was the foundation of our own, but it was superseded by the teachings of  Christ, and we cannot concede it any further validity.”

It is exactly that, the fulfillment of the Old Law. It stands completely against the Dispensationalist model of biblical interpretation. This is the stance of the Catholic Church from the Apostolic Age, to St. John Chrysostom, to Pope Innocent III, and Pope St. Pius X, til now. Many Dispensationalists claim the superiority of their translations and accuse Supersessionist, or Covenant Theology, of spiritual antisemitism. They claim that biblical literacy was deficient before their time, and some 1800 years after Christ’s death and Resurrection, and only then, was it finally perfected. While there are better places to argue the opposing theological viewpoints, it is frankly preposterous to “finally get it right” and compel others to follow your newfound beliefs that change old ones long after the Ascension of Jesus into heaven. With their logic, the next Schofield to come along will make authoritative study notes proving the existence of Extra Terrestrials.

The Golden Calf

What is deemed as antisemitism by these Evangelicals is a disbelief in their inventive theology. They use this as a bully stick to bash Christians into following their theological foreign policy plan for a One World Order. 

Dispensationalists want to continue to dominate the Christian core of the Republican Party, whether it is a state or national one. They will allow you into their movement, but only if you share their all-too-important foreign policy theology. Otherwise, you are considered an antisemite and an anti-American. You will be condemned, and you will no longer have the support of their votes or coffers. It’s a plantation, and voters and lawmakers alike will always be slaves to foreign powers and this recently contrived theology as long as they allow themselves to be. AIPAC cannot do it alone. No foreign meddling can match the kind of control that a zealous body of people have who are too blind and too fanatical to see their own spiritual and national destruction in pursuit of a pseudo-messianic One World Order. Dispensationalist Evangelicals will never put Christ or America First, and it is clear that one people and one country matter more than Christ and America: Jews and Israel.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts