Why does Iran hate Israel?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

quietthinker

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2018
11,911
7,775
113
FNQ
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
I have written 5 books which back up the truths of the Bibles fantastic statements. You just don't want to know.

Soon; the Lord will arise and after His terrible Day of fiery wrath, the world will never be the same again.
You have made a lot of words, that's all. The World is full of books of writers who claim truth yet live in delusion. Your statement above proves nothing....it does however flatter your imagination.

An avoidance/ deflection trajectory is standard fare for any who cannot tolerate the light of scrutiny.
 

Keraz

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2018
5,201
933
113
82
Thames, New Zealand
www.logostelos.info
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
You have made a lot of words, that's all.
My articles are aimed at promoting the Prophetic Word.
The truth of the Word contradicts you precious beliefs and your response is to make nasty accusations.

You have yet to tell us what you, personally think the Lord will do if Iran fires a nuke missile at Israel. Scripture does inform us, but you seem to reject what the Prophets say.
 

quietthinker

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2018
11,911
7,775
113
FNQ
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
My articles are aimed at promoting the Prophetic Word.
The truth of the Word contradicts you precious beliefs and your response is to make nasty accusations.

You have yet to tell us what you, personally think the Lord will do if Iran fires a nuke missile at Israel. Scripture does inform us, but you seem to reject what the Prophets say.
Thank you for being selective with my quote. Cherry picking means one can make anything say anything....but of course you never do that!
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Shittim

Shittim

Active Member
Nov 19, 2020
118
131
43
72
Iowa
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Thank you for the work you are doing for The Kingdom, Keraz.
I saw a cute cartoon yesterday- "Our eyesight may dim as we get older, but we can see through people better".
I believe that applies here.
I see nothing in the posts that lines up with Galatians v5 c22&23.
blessings
 

Davy

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2018
11,831
2,523
113
Southeastern U.S.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Most situations of the peoples and nations in today's world can be found as a result of prophecy in God's Word. This matter of enmity between Islamic clerics and the children of Israel goes back in Old Testament times especially. On Islamic websites their religious clerics even admit the start of it all pointing to back to Old Testament times.

God made a covenant with Abraham and his wife Sarah, and it was to their seed. But Sarah laughed at the idea when this was revealed to them by Christ's visit of Genesis 18 (Jesus was one of the "three men" that met Abraham at his tent door.)

Abraham and Sarah were old, so she laughed at the idea of her having children. Christ kind of rebuked Sarah for laughing, and told them it will... happen.

But what did Sarah do, with still not believing The LORD would accomplish what He promised? She brought her maidservant Hagar in unto Abraham, and Hagar conceived of Abraham, thus Abraham's firstborn son was Hagar's child Ishmael.

However, God did not make His covenant for Abraham and Hagar, but for Abraham and Sarah. Thus Ishmael was not... to be counted as Abraham's 'firstborn'. As it is written, "... in Isaac shall thy seed be called." (Gen.21:12). Isaac was the 'firstborn' son of Abraham and Sarah, and that is who God made His covenant through, and gave HIS Birthright through.

The Islamic cleric is jealous over that, because they only see per the flesh that Ishmael was the literal firstborn son of Abraham, and per God's way the 'flesh' birthright is to go to the firstborn son. (Notice I said 'flesh birthright'.)

The Birthright from God is different than a flesh birthright. How? A flesh birthright from one's flesh father involves inheritance of wares, goods, land, money, material things mostly.

But GOD's BIRTHRIGHT involves especially care of The Gospel of Jesus Christ, on which Abraham believed and God counted it to Abraham as righteousness. And also in God's Birthright is the power to control the gates of one's enemies; plenty of corn and wine, which are also material things, the best lands of the earth's resources (again blessing of the material world), and a seed as many of the stars and sands of the sea. Also included in God's Birthright is the office of an earthly king over His people Israel.

Therefore, GOD's Birthright was given first to Abraham, and then it went to his son Isaac, and then to his son Jacob who's new given name by God would be Israel, and then to his son Joseph, and then to Joseph's two sons Ephraim and Manasseh where the Birthright stops is still supposed to exist even today among those represented by the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Thus radical Islam is still jealous over God's Birthright going to Isaac instead of Ishmael (Arab peoples). This is still one of the main reasons Islamic clerics teach to hate not only Jews, but also us Christians.

Others of the seed of Ishmael that are not 'radicals' apparently see us more as co-children of God, and not as enemies that stole their birthright from their ancestor Ishmael. Prior to Israel in the middle east becoming a nation again in 1948, most of the Jews, Arabs, and Christians in Jerusalem got along together in the 1800's and early 1900's. The U.N. vote to make Israel a nation again in 1948 apparently set off the present radical elements of Islam against Israel.
 

Keraz

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2018
5,201
933
113
82
Thames, New Zealand
www.logostelos.info
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
The rise of an atomic Islamic Hitler

Khamenei's regime, much like those of his totalitarian predecessors, does not rely on popular support or democratic legitimacy. Instead, it sustains itself through oppression, propaganda, and an iron grip on power.


By Erfan Fard
Published on 05-02-2024 23:00
Last modified: 05-02-2024 23:00

In a world that grapples with the spectre of nuclear-armed mullahs, the question looms large: What does one do when faced with a theocratic regime that mirrors the dictatorial horrors of the 20th century yet wields the destructive power of the atomic age? Iran, now on a dangerous trajectory akin to North Korea's, finds its people overshadowed by an ominous future, uncertain of when the regime's vast missile arsenal might precipitate its collapse. Today, the world faces a grave dilemma: what to do with a mullah possessing nuclear bombs? What are the global implications when such a regime mirrors the dictatorial horrors of the past yet wields the apocalyptic power of the atomic age?

Ali Khamenei, Iranian regime's Supreme Leader, increasingly embodies the totalitarian and criminal archetype historically represented by figures like Stalin and Hitler. His regime, draped in totalitarian garb, is marked by fascist overtures and a criminal governance that mirrors the darkest chapters of human history. However, there exists a stark and terrifying difference—Khamenei presides over a regime potentially capable of nuclear warfare, a capability that Hitler never possessed.

Moreover, Khamenei's dangerous blend of proclaimed divine authority and political power intensifies the threat. Unlike Hitler, who did not claim prophetic or divine sanction, Khamenei's rhetoric often positions him as a messianic figure, destined to lead his followers against perceived enemies. Khamenei represents a uniquely dangerous blend of religious fanaticism and authoritarian power. This religious manipulation presents an unparalleled risk, particularly as it resonates with a certain credibility in the volatile religious landscape of the Middle East.

One must recognize that the Islamic Republic of Iran under Khamenei's rule has taken the ideological and repressive blueprints of past tyrannies and enhanced them with a veneer of religious legitimacy and nuclear ambition. The regime's official stance and actions echo the expansive and oppressive tactics of Stalin and the genocidal fervor of Hitler, but with a crucial difference: a potential nuclear capability that could escalate its regional and global threat to catastrophic levels.

Globally, the response to this threat has been tepid. The international community's response to Iran's provocations has been woefully inadequate. While the world once united against the fascist threats of the 20th century, today's global powers appear paralyzed by indecision and hindered by diplomatic inertia. The lessons of appeasement taught by history seem forgotten as the world stands largely indifferent to the rise of a new totalitarianism—this time cloaked in religious authority and armed with the potential of nukes, Khamenei's regime, much like those of his totalitarian predecessors, does not rely on popular support or democratic legitimacy. Instead, it sustains itself through oppression, propaganda, and an iron grip on power. ear warfare.

However, the consequences of continued inaction could be devastating. The regime's ability to maintain control through oppression and propaganda is coupled with an aggressive expansionist ideology. It not only suppresses its own population but also supports and fuels conflicts across the Middle East, using proxy groups to extend its influence and propagate its ideological beliefs.

The regime's narrative, steeped in anti-Western sentiment and martyrdom rhetoric, aims not just to govern but to indoctrinate, ensuring its survival through a cycle of fear, suppression, and aggressive posturing.

The international community must recognize the urgency of this situation. The Islamic Republic of Iran, under Khamenei, does not merely seek regional dominance but aims to reshape the international order to align with its radical ideology. This ambition is supported by a sophisticated network of allies and proxies, extending Iran's influence across borders and destabilizing entire regions.

As we observe the regime's actions and its impact on global security, the parallels with historical dictatorships are stark and alarming. The Islamic Republic has not only adopted the playbook of terror and oppression but has also enhanced it with a dangerous ideological zeal that seeks to export its revolutionary principles beyond its borders.

As we face this escalating threat, it is imperative that global leaders reassess their strategies and commit to a more proactive stance. The appeasement policies of the past have only emboldened the regime, allowing it to advance its nuclear ambitions and expand its terrorist network without significant repercussions. The world must unite in a clear, decisive, and coordinated effort to deter Iran's aggressive pursuits, utilizing diplomatic, economic, and, if necessary, military measures to ensure that this regime does not achieve its destructive goals.

This regime, unyielding and defiant, represents a modern crisis that combines the destructive impulses of the past with the dangerous capabilities of the present. The world must not underestimate the peril it poses—not only to the Iranian people but to global stability and peace. The threat of radical Islam, coupled with the ambitions of a nuclear-capable Iran, demands a concerted and decisive response that has been sorely lacking.

As we stand at this critical juncture, the international community must awaken from its slumber and recognize the gravity of the threat before it. The time for passive observation and hopeful diplomacy has passed. Only through a unified and resolute stance can the world hope to confront and curb the menacing ascent of this new totalitarianism, ensuring that the catastrophic history of the last century does not repeat itself under the guise of religious zealotry and nuclear ambition.

In light of these developments, the international community must revise its strategy towards Iran. Past appeasement has only emboldened Khamenei, encouraging further advancements in nuclear technology and greater entrenchment of theocratic dictatorship. A unified, decisive global response is essential, employing a combination of diplomatic, economic, and, if necessary, military measures to counter Iran's ambitions and prevent it from achieving its potentially catastrophic goals.

The emergence of an atomic Islamic Hitler in Iran is not just a regional issue but a pivotal global crisis that calls for an immediate and robust international response. The call to action is clear: the world must wake up to the harsh realities of a nuclear-capable Iran led by a regime that merges theological extremism with authoritarian brutality. Now is the time for a unified, global response to prevent a catastrophe that could echo the darkest days of the past century, ensuring that the atomic Islamic Hitler does not define our future.

Israel Hayom 5/3/2024