Rabbi Fears "Holy City" Becoming "Homo City"
A story in the Agape Press (Aug. 7) -- Orthodox Jewish rabbi Yehuda Levin fears that the welcome of “WorldPride Week” into the City of David is turning Jerusalem--the “Holy City”--into a “Homo City.” Levin is outraged and asserts that the homosexual pride event could be the beginning of the judgment of God, which could lead to a spiritual and physical Armageddon.
Anecdotally, Rabbi Levin “notes that Israel's prime minister, Olmert and Hezbollah's leader, Nazrallah cannot explain why they had gone to war when they did. Coincidentally (?) at the same time, the Israeli government was rejecting an effort to have the permits for the WorldPride event rescinded.
Levin “believes they may have had no choice” and that they are “literally puppets of Almighty God.”
This is interesting reading and filled with complex questions—how to respond in such limited space…
God is sovereign and we know from historical precedent that He can and does at times intervene in the events of the world to bring about his purposes. When you read something like Romans Chapter 9 concerning God hardening Pharaoh’s heart, Levin’s comments do not seem so preposterous. But we know the situation in Egypt with Moses and Pharaoh because has revealed it to us; He has not done so concerning the events in Israel and WorldPride Week.
One needs to be very careful about painting with such a broad and simplistic sweep of a theological brush. It’s too easy to paint way outside the lines with such a massive instrument.
That being said, we cannot ignore that Jerusalem—the City of David—the City of God, is indeed special. “The LORD loves the gates of Zion more than all the other dwelling places of Jacob. Glorious things are spoken of you, O city of God.” (Psalm 87:2-3)
So while there seems to be a convenient correlation making Levin’s assertion seem less than far fetched, the fact is Israel in general, and Jerusalem in particular have a more serious problem than the rejection of sexual morality, namely, the rejection of Jesus as the Messiah.
The Scriptures are clear that no one, Jews included, reaps eternal condemnation for homosexuality—or any other sin for that matter, but for rejecting the One and Only Savior of mankind.
So while Rabbi Levin has reason to be angry over the flaunting of sexual sin, he might look in a mirror to behold a fellow sinner who is as far away from God Almighty as the homosexuals he decries. Jesus did not stutter when He said, “I am the WAY, I am the Truth, and the Life, NO ONE comes to the Father but by me.” Not even those whose sins are more subtle.
Anecdotally, Rabbi Levin “notes that Israel's prime minister, Olmert and Hezbollah's leader, Nazrallah cannot explain why they had gone to war when they did. Coincidentally (?) at the same time, the Israeli government was rejecting an effort to have the permits for the WorldPride event rescinded.
Levin “believes they may have had no choice” and that they are “literally puppets of Almighty God.”
This is interesting reading and filled with complex questions—how to respond in such limited space…
God is sovereign and we know from historical precedent that He can and does at times intervene in the events of the world to bring about his purposes. When you read something like Romans Chapter 9 concerning God hardening Pharaoh’s heart, Levin’s comments do not seem so preposterous. But we know the situation in Egypt with Moses and Pharaoh because has revealed it to us; He has not done so concerning the events in Israel and WorldPride Week.
One needs to be very careful about painting with such a broad and simplistic sweep of a theological brush. It’s too easy to paint way outside the lines with such a massive instrument.
That being said, we cannot ignore that Jerusalem—the City of David—the City of God, is indeed special. “The LORD loves the gates of Zion more than all the other dwelling places of Jacob. Glorious things are spoken of you, O city of God.” (Psalm 87:2-3)
So while there seems to be a convenient correlation making Levin’s assertion seem less than far fetched, the fact is Israel in general, and Jerusalem in particular have a more serious problem than the rejection of sexual morality, namely, the rejection of Jesus as the Messiah.
The Scriptures are clear that no one, Jews included, reaps eternal condemnation for homosexuality—or any other sin for that matter, but for rejecting the One and Only Savior of mankind.
So while Rabbi Levin has reason to be angry over the flaunting of sexual sin, he might look in a mirror to behold a fellow sinner who is as far away from God Almighty as the homosexuals he decries. Jesus did not stutter when He said, “I am the WAY, I am the Truth, and the Life, NO ONE comes to the Father but by me.” Not even those whose sins are more subtle.
posted by PB at 9:22 AM
2 Comments:
Be careful of “straw man” arguments. I couldn’t agree with you more about man kind being condemned due to individual sin and not condemned due to rejecting the One and Only Savior of mankind. I think you may be mired in the age old quagmire of the Arminian/Calvin debate.
It is a quagmire that has not been settled since it arose centuries ago and there are wonderful people of faith on both sides of the debate. I don’t intend to settle it here.
To be honest I am much more in the camp of the sovereignty of God than I am human responsibility, but I am not ready due to many scriptures, to jump into what can become a fatalism with no human responsibility at all. If that were the case–as some hyper-calvinists seem to want to assert, any and every notion of mission, evangelism, witnessing and being ready to give account of the hope that lies within...” become not only moot, offensive. I’m not there yet.
So when it comes to Israel, you have to deal with the fact that God has clearly revealed that He has hardened their hearts for a season until the fullness of God’s plan (for the Gentiles) comes to pass.
I think there is an "e-mail" disconnect of a serious situation. The written word has its limitations as evidenced that God took on human form and became the Word incarnate.
I see our differences as symantical, not theological--my apologies!
Post a Comment
<< Home