reSee.it - Related Video Feed

To restore balance between the US and Israel and sane public conversation, the speaker says we must get our theology right. This message is aimed at Christians—the largest group of Israel supporters in the US—whose view is colored by a Christian heresy: that God prefers some people based on DNA. The chosen people, he argues, are 'the people who choose Jesus' and that is the universal Christian message. He cites Lindsey Graham and others, calling this 'not Christianity' and 'heresy.' Examples: 'Israel is our friend. They're the most reliable friend we have in the Mideast.' 'This is not a hard choice if you're an American.' 'If America pulls the plug on Israel, god will pull the plug on us.' 'God will kill you if you don't support Bibi Netanyahu.' He contends this uses God as a weapon, and 'the killing of the innocent' is forbidden; 'that person is committing heresy.'

A partnership between Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Friends of Zion Museum led to an unprecedented visit, marking the first time Israel officially partnered with 1,000 strategic pastors to commission them as ambassadors to combat antisemitism and reach the youth of their generation. Dr. Mike Evans states that Israel's fight is not just on the battlefield, and that there is currently an ideological war that Israel's losing, so they need the evangelicals and the Zionists to fight an ideological war. One of the gathering's goals is to strengthen Christian support during a time of growing global antisemitism, with the message that the pulpit must speak louder than the propaganda. A speaker emphasizes that pastors should go to their pulpits to speak with clarity and boldness, pushing back on the antisemitism and bigotry directed toward Jewish people and toward the people of Israel. Another speaker notes that the pulpit has become quiet about these issues, and that cultural voices have spoken louder than pastors on these topics, making it motivating to return to the message of who Israel is to the Lord and to reaffirm Christians’ role in supporting and praying for Israel. There is a concern about a growing cancer within the evangelical movement in America, where people think Israel doesn’t matter and that nothing biblical supports the relationship to Israel, which is described as very dangerous. Ambassador Huckabee, a former pastor, warns of rising danger in the church, arguing that the idea that God will break His covenant or has broken His covenant with the Jewish people borders on blasphemy, because if God will break His covenant with the Jewish people, he questions what would prevent Him from breaking His covenant with Christians as well.

Before the late 1800s, beliefs about Israel were different. CI Scofield, a controversial figure, published a Bible promoting pro-Israel views. This Bible, backed by wealthy businessmen, influenced many young preachers. The idea of blessing Israel is based on Genesis 12, but Scofield's interpretation differs from the original text. Many Christians today follow Scofield's notes rather than New Testament teachings.

Genesis: 'And God said, I will curse those who curse Israel' and 'And through you, I will bless all nations.' These quotes were spoken to Abraham. He asks, 'are Israelites or are Jews still God's chosen people?' and answers, 'No.' He cites Galatians: 'There is neither Jew nor Gentile slave nor free nor is there male or female for you all are one in Christ Jesus.' 'If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise.' He claims this provides 'clear and undeniable evidence from scripture that God said that if you are one in Christ, you are God's people, and you are the seed of Abraham.' He states, 'the modern day Jews that reside in the state of Israel are not God's people. It is the Christians, the people who are one in Christ.' He urges, 'Read these passages, read the context around them, and don't just go based upon one little pluck from the bible to base your entire belief system off of when it comes to who are God's people.'

Speaker 0 recalls watching Charlie Kirk’s memorial in Malaysia and an “extremely coordinated onslaught” by high-level actors who claimed the passage was “not just offensive, but was one of the worst blood libels ever uttered in a public setting since World War two” and that it “intended to imply that Israel was behind the killing of Charlie Kirk.” Speaker 1 frames the passage as the Christian gospel: “Ultimately, he was a Christian evangelist” who “tells the truth about the people in power” and that “they hate it and they become obsessed with making him stop”—“they end up torturing him to death to kill him, and then... it becomes the world's biggest religion.” He says he did not intend to attack Jews, criticizes antisemitism and Zionism for seeing everything as about Jews, calling that attitude “sick” and “bad for this country,” and urges treating Israel as a country with overlapping interests. He cites ADL pressure and stresses repentance in the Christian message.

The segment discusses a recent effort in which Israel hosted about 1,000 American Christian pastors who were invited to sign forms pledging to be ambassadors for Israel within their congregations, including receiving plaques and certificates. A crowdsourced list of these pastors, compiled by a popular X user known as Gen X Girl, shows a concentration in the American Southwest (California, Texas, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado) with denominations including evangelicals, Baptists, Methodists, and many nondenominational churches. The participants’ willingness to pledge allegiance to a world government is emphasized as a point of concern, with the claim that “their allegiance belongs to God and no foreign government.” Pastor Jay Chase Davis of The Well Church in Colorado (not on the list) comments that the event is “pretty wild” and offers two understandings. First, he suggests understanding Israel’s political instincts and the biblical reality of how Christians should think about nation-states, citizenship on earth, and citizenship in heaven. He notes that Americans naturally favor an “American first” attitude, but asserts that the political entities of Israel relate to America because America is the global superpower, and that evangelicals have been fed a “twisted” scriptural interpretation about Israel and God’s redemptive plan. He posits that Israel is courting evangelical support because evangelicals form a large voting block, and that these pastors are being brought over to become ambassadors who will defend Israel in various capacities. He asserts that some dispensationalist teachings have led to views that could imply salvation apart from Jesus, which he labels as heretical, and argues this makes evangelicals vulnerable to manipulation. Speaker 0 asks why Orthodox and Catholic pastors aren’t on the list and what doctrinal reasons would exclude participation, while Speaker 1 explains that the trip likely targeted a specific demographic (evangelicals) due to their historical theological training (often influenced by dispensationalism) and political leverage. He describes the goal as a tour with credentialing to defend Israel and align evangelical leaders with Israeli interests, noting susceptibility due to confusion about Israel’s modern political actions and salvation doctrines. Philip’s question raises concern about evangelizing Israelis during such visits, suggesting it would not be well received; Speaker 1 confirms mixed reception and expresses suspicion that the mission may be more about indoctrination and political outreach than evangelism. For viewers concerned about their church’s alignment, Speaker 1 advises asking questions, emailing pastors, and potentially seeking a different church if the church’s stance becomes incompatible with one’s beliefs. He recommends consulting historic confessions (e.g., Westminster Confession of Faith, London Baptist Confession 1689) and engaging with educational resources such as his podcast Full Proof Theology and his work with the Center for Baptist Leadership.

America must consider the price of its alliance with Israel and how it has benefited. Contrary to claims that supporting Israel blesses America, the speaker argues that Christian Zionism is a heresy originating from the Scofield Bible and fueled by televangelists. The speaker claims Jews lost their chosen status by rejecting Jesus, transferring it to Christians. Despite trillions of dollars in American aid, the speaker suggests America has not been blessed. They cite the rise of LGBT values, abortion, economic decline due to open borders and mass immigration, and increased crime and drug abuse as evidence. The speaker claims Tel Aviv is the gay capital of the world and corrupts other nations. The speaker claims real Christians, including those in occupied Palestine, reject Christian Zionism, citing the Jerusalem Declaration. The speaker concludes that Christian Zionism is a satanic cult that has cost America lives and treasure. The speaker urges Christians to stand with Jesus and act accordingly.

In the early nineteen hundreds, around the Federal Reserve’s founding and the Balfour Declaration, the Rothschild family hired a pastor in the Deep South who made a new version of the Bible called the Scofield Bible, with new interpretations. They didn't change Jewish influence. Yes. Literally. That's where Judeo Christianity kinda came from. And the idea that Israel is this modern Israel thing is the Israel of the Bible. It came from that Bible. And the Scofield Bible was funded by the Rothschild family. Then it was pushed because they owned the publisher that publishes like all the books. I think it was Oxford Press. And so they had the deals that they could make to get that Bible into all the mega churches across whole denominations of Christianity. And so that was when Christianity got kind of Jewified.

The speaker claims that the "Zionist occupation of Palestine that calls itself Israel" is built on lies and theft, having stolen the name "Israel." The name originates from the Old Testament, where Jacob was renamed Israel, and his descendants were the Israelites. Those who accepted covenants with God were part of the House of Israel, later the Christian Church established by Jesus. Rejecters of Jesus were the Jews, a pejorative term for those who rejected Christ. The speaker asserts that the true Israel is the Church, not a birthright or DNA privilege. Christian Zionists are deceived in believing today's Jews are still in covenant with God from the old covenant with Abraham. The speaker rejects Calvinist theology and predestination. In 1948, Zionists stole the name Israel to mislead evangelicals and religious Jews. Only religious fanatics in Puritan circles supported Zionism, misinterpreting scriptures. The speaker believes evangelicals are not Christians, the chosen people are not chosen, and Israel is not Israel. The true Israel is a spiritual fellowship of people with faith who follow Jesus. The Zionist occupation is a Jewish military dictatorship that has fooled religious fanatics and the secular masses.

To restore balance between the United States and Israel, the speaker says we must get our theology right. This is not a message aimed at Israelis or Jews; it targets Christians, the largest group of Israel supporters in the United States. He calls the belief that God favors some people by DNA 'the oldest of the Christian heresies' and says, 'The chosen people are people who choose Jesus.' He declares, 'That is not Christianity. It is heresy.' He warns that if America pulls the plug on Israel, god will pull the plug on us, and, 'God will kill you if you don't support Bibi Netanyahu.' He argues that 'The Christian message is universal' and that, 'If you find anyone leveraging the message of Jesus to justify the killing of innocents, that person is committing heresy.'

The discussion argues that the true Christian faith centered on Jesus Christ has been replaced by a fake faith centered on Israel’s land, a deception said to have progressed through religious media over decades. The speakers trace the origin of the rapture doctrine and the idolizing of the state of Israel to the Plymouth Brethren in Great Britain, led by John Nelson Darby, who was described as a disgruntled Anglican cleric pushed out of the Anglican Communion. The Exclusive Brethren, a super-radical subgroup within the movement, were said to have produced dispensationalism—the idea that God deals with humanity in distinct dispensations. This view, they claim, held that Christ would reign for a thousand years after his return (pre-millennial), would come before the tribulation (pre-tribulation), and would establish a Jewish kingdom in Israel seven years later. The speakers coin the term “Dipsyism” (D for dispensationalism, P for pre-millennial/pre-tribulation, Z for Zionism) to describe this framework, arguing it exists to promote Zionism and the establishment of Israel. Charles Spurgeon, a Reformed Baptist pastor in Britain, is described as a critic of the Plymouth Brethren, warning Christians in London to stay away from them as heretical. The conversation asserts that the Brethren’s doctrines later spread through American Protestant churches and became widely accepted, influencing denominations such as Baptists, Pentecostals, Assemblies of God, and others. The role of Cyrus Scofield is central to the narrative. The speakers recount that Scofield, described as not a doctor despite the title “Doctor Scofield,” was a Confederate Army participant who allegedly embellished his Civil War record. They allege he deserted the army, received safe passage to St. Louis, helped a Jewish lawyer named John Ingalls become a U.S. Senator from Kansas, and was appointed U.S. District Attorney for Kansas at age 29, a position he allegedly held under a cloud of scandal including bribery, land transfers, and forged bank-note withdrawals. After abandoning his wife and children in Kansas, Scofield later became a pastor in Dallas, Texas, marrying a woman from his church while concealing his previous marriage. In the early 1900s, Scofield is said to have joined the Lotus Club of New York City, sponsored by Samuel Untermyer, a Jewish lawyer described as an agent for the Rothschilds who supported Zionist liberation and helped influence Woodrow Wilson to enter World War I. Untermyer is also claimed to have written the Senate bill that established the U.S. Federal Reserve banking system and to have become the first lawyer for the IRS. The narrative claims Untermyer arranged Scofield’s trip to London, where he met Oxford Publishing executives and returned with a contract to publish John Nelson Darby’s Zionist Notes in a Christian Bible—the Schofield Bible—thereby introducing Zionist propaganda into American churches through Darby’s notes. The conversation asserts that Oxford distributed Schofield Bibles widely for free, which led to their adoption in rural American churches and among denominations, shaping the doctrine in North America. It cites Moody Bible Institute, Dallas Theological Seminary, and others as heirs to Scofield’s influence. Finally, the speakers challenge Dallas Theological Seminary, Moody Bible Institute, and rapture advocates to name where Cyrus Scofield earned a Doctor of Divinity degree, insisting no such institution exists and accusing Scofield of being avowedly dishonest. They name Arlo Graebelin as a rabid Zionist Christian pastor allegedly connected to Scofield’s editing and assert that Scofield was not a real medical doctor or theologian, accusing the present institutions of perpetuating the lie.

Speaker 0 delivers a public apology for criticisms of Israel, stating he is deeply sorry and that it is a learning moment with six lessons from his grave mistakes. He admits making videos that heavily criticized the Israeli government while attempting to distinguish that he was not criticizing Jewish people or Israeli citizens, but he says hostile comments convinced him that he was talking about Jews, not the government. He notes that comments calling him a Jew hater and anti-Semite changed his mind, and he acknowledges feeling intimidated by such remarks. He describes how some viewers, including one commenter who said, “you moron,” helped him realize he was engaging in Jew hate. He says that the hostility, insults, and character smearing from haters were effective in shaping his views, and asks what those people believe, intending to emulate them. He mentions the existence of a poll showing that those using hostility are in the 5.5% minority, while 94.5% do not want hostility to be used to persuade them. He also notes that many haters have Israel flags in their bios and contrasts this with perceptions about Ukraine, asserting that Israel is our greatest ally and that he stands with Israel—now more strongly. He then recounts a conversation with two Jewish friends, where he apologized for hating them. He says they rejected his framing, explaining that criticizing Netanyahu does not equate with hating Jews. They mention that only 40% of Israelis trust Netanyahu, that many Israelis have concerns about him, and that citizens in Israel are God’s chosen people while Netanyahu is their leader. They challenge his views on dispensationalism and Zionism, arguing for different biblical interpretations of Israel and God’s chosen people, and suggest many Israelis do not have DNA from the Middle East, referencing DNA testing bans in Israel. He responds with hostility, saying, “God, I hate you people,” and notes that the friends did not accept his apology because they weren’t convinced he genuinely hated them. He also mentions JP Sears and accusations of Jew-hating for profit, and alleges financial success from such views. The six lessons from his mistakes are: 1) Align with the side censoring you, since censorship is “on the right side of history,” encouraging support for politicians trying to criminalize criticizing or boycotting Israel. 2) Distrusting any government makes you a stupid sack of shit, and thinking otherwise marks you as hating Jews. 3) When faced with tribalism and intimidation, you should comply to align with truth and gain freedom as an individual. 4) Israel has no influence over the US government or its politicians, and lobbying connections are not indications of influence; claiming otherwise is antisemitic. 5) Thinking it’s a crime or evil to commit genocide, prisoner rape, or killing children is not true; such beliefs are antisemitic. 6) Do whatever it takes to fight an ongoing war with Iran, unrelated to Israel, trusting the government on this, and hoping for actions to uncover supposed WMDs in Iraq. Speaker 0 closes with an apology and a final appeal to learn from these mistakes.

The speaker argues that “Christians evangelists here in America, which almost all of them are Republicans, they probably all gonna vote for Trump” and that they are “very poor Israel.” He says, without Christianity, the U.S. has little to do with Israel, noting “The only things they are helping us is because of religion reason.” He contends they’re “not doing it for us. They are doing it only for themselves.” He warns, “Make no mistake. They all believe that once we will go back to the holy land and JC Penny will show up to redeem the world, he will put us all to be burned in hell,” because “we've never accepted him, and we won't accept him.” He questions why “a lot of the people who made Aliyah, it's Christian money,” adding “They get hundreds of millions of dollars donation from them.” He says “the Messiah would come,” but “They just have the wrong identity of the Messiah. That's it. They believe that it's actually JC.” “They would dump all the Christian symbols you know well because it would be so obvious that it's all fake. Mhmm. Rabbi Thay”

Amid concerns about violence against Christians and attacks on Christian sites, a Christian speaker questions why some Christians support the state of Israel. He discusses the influence of dispensationalism, a theology that connects certain verses of the Bible to the modern state of Israel, and how it has been promoted through the Scofield Bible. The guest, Alison Weir, explains that many Christians are misled by the US media's portrayal of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and highlights the suffering of Palestinians living in Gaza. She also addresses the manipulation of fear and hatred towards Muslims and emphasizes the need for accurate information and understanding.

"As Christians support the government of Israel, we are commanded to support Israel." "It says that those who bless you, Abraham, this was before Israel, will be blessed by God." "And those who curse you, Abraham, will be cursed by God." "For not all who are born into the nation of Israel are truly members of God's people." "Being descendants of Abraham doesn't make them truly Abraham's children." "Israel didn't have a nation or a land to call their own for almost two thousand years since the destruction of the temple in the year seventy AD." "The nation of Israel was recreated through some political operatives after World War II." "I think the scripture makes it clear that it's about whether you're blessing or cursing the true children of Abraham, those who believe the promises of the gospel."

The speaker challenges the idea of being "pro-Israel" based on biblical interpretations. She argues that dispensationalism, a modern church teaching, incorrectly identifies the nation of Israel as still being God's chosen people. Referencing Matthew 21, she states that the kingdom of God was taken away from the Israelites after they rejected Jesus. She cites Matthew 8, stating that many non-Jews will feast with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, while the "subjects of the kingdom" (Jews) will be thrown into darkness. She asserts that earthly Jerusalem is no longer the Jerusalem of God, replaced by the heavenly Jerusalem described in Revelation 21. Using Galatians 3, the speaker identifies Christ as the true seed of Abraham, and those baptized into Christ, regardless of ethnicity, as Abraham's seed and heirs. Therefore, prioritizing the state of Israel over Palestine is a distortion of scripture. She concludes that in Christ's eyes, a Palestinian who loves and is baptized in Jesus is more of a "real Jew" than a Jew who rejects Jesus.

A new political military Israel was promoted through the Scofield Study Bible, funded by the Rothschilds, to gain Christian support for a one world government. However, the true promise to Abraham was a heavenly kingdom, not a physical nation. The misunderstanding of Israel's purpose led to conflict in the Middle East. The real descendants of Abraham are those who walk faithfully with God, not a specific ethnic group. This spiritual seed is what truly matters, not political or military power.

Bible is crystal clear. Jesus said to the Jews, the kingdom of God shall be taken from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. In the Old Testament, Israel was God's chosen people. God chose Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and he used the nation of Israel as a pattern; they were supposed to be a light to Gentiles. They failed in that mission. The Lord Jesus Christ came as the Messiah, and he came unto his own and his own received him not. The Bible squarely places the blame for the death of Jesus on the Jews. In Acts, the Romans protect Christians, while the Jews try to rip them apart and stone them; Romans restore law and order. This is why I reject Zionism and being pro Israel. I read the Bible cover to cover, 20 times, and I didn't see it because you're brainwashed.

The transcript argues that Oxford University Press launched a deliberate attack on Christianity by publishing the Schofield Reference Bible in 1908, a Bible whose notes purportedly inject reinterpretations that connect the future state of Israel to access to God. It states the book’s importance led OUP to open its first American branch, publishing it and promoting it through key American seminaries and Bible schools, thereby shaping future pastors’ beliefs to align with a peacemaking tradition favorable to the state of Israel. The speakers claim many pastors were unaware of the danger at the time, and that the Schofield Bible would later be used by secular powers to steer Christians toward political and financial servitude to present-day Israel. They assert American Christianity became increasingly Zionized after 1948 with the appearance of the state of Israel, aided by Oxford University Press’s Zionist influence and its New York publishing branch, which published the Schofield Reference Bible as a foundational document for Christian Zionism and evangelicalism, contributing to its growth through deception. The narrative links the founders of world Zionism, especially Chaim Weizmann, to efforts to involve the United States in World War I and to gain land in Palestine, arguing that a small number of dominant American scientists influenced President Wilson to enter the war, resulting in substantial American casualties while enabling Zionist aims in Palestine after the Balfour Declaration. The Schofield Reference Bible is described as copyrighted in 1909, an old and new testament with many notes added originally in the Old Testament, with later additions in the New Testament and a radical 1967 revision. The cover features Cyrus I. Scofield and an editorial board including James M. Gray, president of Moody Bible Institute, and other seminary leaders. Distribution allegedly occurred through seminaries, influencing new pastors who returned to churches with the Schofield Bible in hand. A critical examination of a page from Genesis 12:3 is used to illustrate the alleged distortions: the verse, part of the Torah and quoted in the Koran, is presented as a basis for Christians and Zionists to claim that present-day Israel should own all land in the Middle East beginning with Palestine. The 1967 Scofield edition reportedly contains more footnotes than the 1909 version, with a footnote claiming an unconditional promise of land to Israel forever, which the speakers assert is not stated in the passage. They argue that the footnotes render Abraham’s promise as a perpetual land grant to Israel, and that the note uses the later term “Jew” unjustly to describe biblical figures from before the existence of Judah or the Jews. The transcript contends that Oxford’s notes imply blessings or curses based on support for Israel, and that a nation’s supposed sin for not aiding Israel would invite divine judgment, a claim the speakers label as a form of antisemitism manufactured by Christian Zionism. They argue that the concept of national sin is flawed, and that individuals alone sin, not nations. Historical figures like Philip Morrow and Doctor F. Furman Curley are cited as Orthodox Christian critics who warned against dispensationalism and Christian Zionism. Morrow warned in 1927 that Schofield Bible had usurped authority from Scripture, while Curley in 1983 linked premillennialist advocacy of Israel to wars in the Middle East and urged Christians to seek peace rather than war, criticizing figures like Hal Lindsey and Jerry Falwell. The final note emphasizes that Jesus’ simple New Testament teachings do not support Christians taking life abroad, urging a reconsideration of the doctrine behind Christian Zionism.

Speaker argues that 'you and the Likud party are cut from the same ideological cloth as Trump and the GOP in America.' They reference 'Charlie Kirk's assassination, who was a big mentor of mine' and say 'Evangelicals, from all my research, evangelicals are the reason that Israel has been supported in public sphere outside of just Jews.' They note 'So with Charlie's assassination and with the kind of trajectory that we see with, like, Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson.' They ask 'what's another game plan if we lose evangelical support for the state of Israel.' 'What's our backup plan to be strong, like outside of the diaspora?'

Over the past year and a half I became closer to Charlie Kirk, joining a group chat he called his 'brain trust.' We discussed Israel, Jewish–Christian relations, antisemitism. He was an adamant opponent of antisemitism. Campus talks exposed him to questions, including about the Talmud, and he provided 'very good answers'—'better answers than probably 98% of Jews probably could offer there.' We strategized to turn back the tide against rising antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment. Charlie said roughly half, 50% of the questions that he got asked were all on Israel, Jews. He organized a Zoom call the night before Utah Valley University event, the first stop of a tour, with me, Pesach Willicki, producers, and one Christian pastor. The fact that he was seeking our counsel... calls into question this narrative that he was getting ready to renounce his lifelong support for the Jewish people, for the state of Israel.

I attended a TPUSA faith event expecting politics to be shaped by biblical principles, but the experience did not meet that expectation. The event opened with a speaker who immediately criticized Candace Owens, calling her evil and antisemitic, and stating that what she’s doing is evil. I wanted to leave, but security was intense—armed men were stationed all around the venue, and there was even an armed man on stage with a hand on his gun. The security presence made me uncomfortable. Inside, the speaker talked extensively about Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens, portraying them as evil and antisemitic. He argued that Christians should support Israel because Jesus was a Jew and Judaism underpins Christianity, while claiming that what Israel is doing is evil and corrupt. He suggested that refusing to support Israel would be anti-Semitic. I disagree with this framing, and it struck me as not aligning with what I expect from biblical politics. I also noted that the speaker referenced Charlie Kirk (though I recall it as Charlie Cook) and suggested that Kirk would not endorse the positions being discussed, referencing Kirk’s and Owens’ friendship and his past critiques of Israel. Throughout, the speaker’s preaching style resembled name-calling rather than traditional preaching. He labeled the political left as “idiots,” “freaks,” and “losers,” and spent much of the time denigrating liberals rather than offering constructive biblical guidance. This approach felt discordant with Christian teachings I associate with Jesus, who, as the speaker himself stated he loves, “ate with sinners,” including prostitutes. I felt the message was spreading hate rather than embodying the inclusive example I expect from Christian doctrine. A major concern was the impact on young attendees. Teenagers and young Christians appeared to be absorbing the message, treating this figure as a leader and a future guide for their faith, which raised alarms about further division within the Christian community. In summary, the event did not teach the biblical political perspectives I anticipated. The emphasis was on discrediting the left and on framing Israel in terms of Jewish loyalty, rather than engaging with broader Christian concerns. The speaker’s approach—name-calling of political opponents, calls for aggressive stances, and a heavy focus on left-wing critique—left me feeling that the session did not align with constructive faith-based political discussion. The speaker also touched on issues like men in women’s sports, but stated this was not the most important topic for Christians to discuss amid broader national concerns.

The speaker challenges the idea of being "pro-Israel" or pro-Zionist, asserting it stems from a misinterpretation of the Bible and dispensationalism. They claim the New Testament indicates the nation of Israel is no longer God's chosen people, but rather the church. Using biblical passages, the speaker argues that the kingdom of God was taken from the Israelites after they rejected Jesus. They state that believers in Jesus, regardless of ethnicity (Jew or Gentile), are the true seed of Abraham and heirs to the promise. The speaker contends that earthly Jerusalem lost its significance after rejecting Jesus, replaced by the heavenly Jerusalem. They equate Zionism with being anti-gospel and anti-Christian. The speaker questions favoring Israeli children over Palestinian children, asserting Jesus loves all equally. They believe those who die in Christ are perfected and united in love in Jesus' presence, transcending earthly divisions.

The speaker asserts that Israel is not Israel and that the Zionists steal everything, including property and food. The Zionist occupation of Palestine, which calls itself Israel, is described as built on lies and theft and evil, with the name Israel stolen and misappropriated to deceive the world. The name supposedly originates from the Old Testament: Jacob, renamed Israel, had twelve tribes, and over time covenants with God defined who was in the House of God or Israel, later associated with the Church of the Desert. Crystallizing through Jesus, those who accepted the New Covenant were grafted into this House of God, becoming the Christian church established by Jesus and his apostles at Pentecost, before the New Testament was written, completed, and canonized. Those who rejected the covenant were deprived of salvation, and most outspoken rejecters of Jesus were Jews, though some Jews accepted Christ and entered the New Covenant, becoming Christians. The speaker denies the existence of a Messianic Jew, asserting it is fraudulent, a Jew who wants to retain privileges while posing as a Christian. In the New Testament, “ Jew ” is presented as a pejorative term for those who rejected Christ in favor of Barabbas, with Romans presenting Jesus’ crucifixion after Judeans chose Barabbas. Some prefer the term Pharisee to avoid antisemitism accusations. Through Christ, God opened up Israel to everyone, while Israel itself remained the same, though evangelism was not initially part of God’s plan; Jesus later instructed his apostles to spread the Word to all humanity. Gentiles were grafted into the house of Israel, i.e., the Christian Church, and the true Israel is the Church. Salvation is not a birthright; bloodline does not grant spiritual privilege, and entering Heaven requires effort amid temptation. A covenant has terms and conditions that must be adhered to, and if not, the contract is void. This is criticized as a mistake by Christian Zionists, who allegedly ignore this. The speaker questions whether today’s Jews are actual descendants of Abraham, noting that behavior matters and a contract requires mutual respect; God keeps his promises, but man does not. The discussion moves to Jesus as Messiah and the Logos Incarnate, denying that Jews today are God’s chosen people or that there is divine DNA or a birthright. Calvinist predestination is condemned as biological determinism, implying questions about free will and the relevance of behavior. The Enlightenment and Darwinian theory are cited as developments following Reformation-driven shifts toward determinism and new denominations, implying a lack of verifiable genetic continuity between modern Jews and ancient Israelites and stressing that behavior remains irrelevant to such claims. Fast forward to 1948, when Zionists established a state under the name Israel, described as stolen to mislead evangelicals and religious Jews within the Zionist movement. The claim is made that Zionism arose from Judaism, with early Jewish advocates like Moses Hess and his work Rome and Jerusalem supporting a Jewish state as an alliance between secular and religious Jews. The speaker contends that Christians who supported Zionism were not truly Christian, and that Protestant splintering led to divisions, Judaization of many groups, and efforts to witness the arrival of messiahs. A spiritual conflict is described where evangelicals, not true Christians, support a “chosen people” and a regime calling itself Israel. The true Israel, the speaker concludes, is not a territory or physical location but a spiritual fellowship of people who follow Jesus. The Zionist occupation of Palestine, named Israel since 1948, is described as a Jewish military dictatorship masquerading as a country, fooling both religious and secular audiences, with control of media and Hollywood obscuring the truth. The claim ends with an analogy: a name does not make something real, just as a person can call himself Jesus but not be the Messiah. A counterfeit dollar is used as a comparison.

Christians should support the biblical Israel, not the current state of Israel. Criticizing those who claim to be Jews but are not is mentioned in the Bible. Questioning and criticizing should be allowed, as it is a red flag when certain groups or narratives cannot be questioned.