Resolving the Three Oaths Problem: A First Look

Resolution of the "Three Oaths Problem" seems like an important area for deep theological work in Christian Zionism. I only have a limited amount of time left for my writing this Monday evening, and there is still much that I feel I need to get recorded before retiring, so I will try to confine this post to a set of links for further study:

 

• Three Oaths | Wikipedia
• The Three Oaths and the Opposition to Zionism | Nefesh B'Nefesh
• The Blogs: Exposing the 'Anti-Zionist' Lie About the Talmudic 'Three Oaths' | Micah Ben David Naziri | The Times of Israel
• Kotzk Blog: 504) The ‘Three Oaths’: Theologies of Cancellation and Resurrection

I've scanned all four articles and read the middle two fairly closely in their entirety. They are all salient. The contrast in the Wikipedia article between the Anti-Zionist Arguments and the Zionist Arguments is particularly helpful. Hopefully this is a subject I can return to for a second look. But I suppose I should say for now in closing that while the Anti-Zionists seem to make a couple of important points, I lean with the Zionists overall. I think the Jews are in rebellion against the nations if they don't reconstitute a Jewish state in Palestine. At the same time, I think the nations have oppressed Israel unfairly by backtracking on their responsibilities to the Jews under the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine.

Ah, I've just found two more articles that further deepen the discussion:

• The Satmar Are Anti-Zionist. Should We Care? | Tablet Magazine
• A Reply to Shaul Magid on Satmar Rebbe Yoel Teitelbaum’s Anti-Zionist Theology | Tablet Magazine

For next time, God-willing.