Christian Post has long been a Jewish propaganda outlet, that promotes a neoconservative agenda. Occassionally, they publish good takes, but as often they promote feminism and pagan talking points. One such pagan propaganda comes from a Christian Zionist Gerald McDermott, the same guy who didn’t think the Antioch Declaration was woke enough. He denounces antisemitism and Joel Webbon as heresy in his latest column. But the argumentation is as nonsequitur as it gets.
Webbon’s views are characterized as follows:
Bible Church pastor Joel Webbon is one of the loudest and most malicious of them all. He argues that the New Testament is not concerned with physical Jews, only with those who accept Christ. He cites Paul’s statement in Romans 2 that “no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly” because “circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit.” Therefore, Webbon alleges, we Christians are to “put no stock in the flesh” of Jews unless they accept the Jewish Messiah.
This means that God has terminated His eternal covenant with the Jewish people and has no concern for them unless they convert to Christianity.
But Webbon does not stop there.
He attacks Jewish character with shocking calumny. In a recent post on X, he pronounced that “those of Jewish descent are generally marked by subversion, deceit, and greed.” In words that are light years from what Jesus and Paul uttered about second-temple Judaism, Webbon writes that the Jewish religion is “parasitical.” We have not heard such antisemitic invective since the mass rallies of Nazis in the 1930s. Christians who wonder why so many in the German churches looked the other way when Jews started to disappear should take notice.
McDermott has based his argument on theological presuppositions that are minor in nature and highly debatable. It is debatable whether Modern Jews have any covenant with God. There is only one New Covenant and it was delivered by Christ. Thus Webbon’s words resemble Paul in Galatians writing about who the sons of Abraham are.
But then McDermott gets butthurt over Webbon’s claims about obviously true stereotypes and insulting a pagan religion. To Christian Zionism, the Holocaust is the pinnacle event of history, so Webbon’s words are measured sin accordingly.
McDermott relies on a Romans 11 argument, despite the fact that Paul was not talking about Ashkenazi Jews in the text, and Palestinian Christians bare the most genetic similarity to Ancient Israel. Ironically, it is the modern Palestinian who can claim the most lineage to the Ancient Israelites, throwing a wrench in Christian Zionism.
Webbon proclaims proudly that “the state of Israel is not biblical Israel.” This is a strawman. It is not a claim that most Christian Zionists make. Instead, the New Christian Zionism is more subtle but biblical, that the state of Israel is a necessary protection for the covenanted people, whose return to the land in the last three centuries fulfills biblical prophecy.
Webbon did not combat a straw man here, as this is a common Christian Zionist argument, articulated by Ted Cruz in a high-profile interview with Tucker Carlson.
Historians agree that a massive return of Jews to the land began in the eighteenth century. Webbon and his cohorts, such as Calvin Robinson (who has heroically fought for biblical truth elsewhere but sadly endorses Webbon’s diatribes), ignore Peter’s prophecy.
They also ignore Jeremiah 31, where God says that as long as the sun, moon, and stars remain in the sky, the Jewish people will always be a nation before him (vv 35-36). The implication of their claims is that God changed His mind about this promise, which would mean that Jesus was wrong when He proclaimed in Matthew 5:17-18 that every stroke of the pen in the Old Testament is from God.
McDermott asserts Dual Covenant Theology by asserting that Jeremiah 31 speaks to a group other than God’s elect, meaning there would be 2 new covenants, instead of one. He also ignores the glaring history of God destroying the Jewish nation in 70AD.
Like Marcion, Webbon and his allies suggest that the God of the Old Testament is different from the God of the New Testament, which implies that the New Testament errs when it testifies that God loves the Jewish people, that they are still his Chosen People, Â and that the land promise is still in place. Marcion agreed with what these influencers suggest, that only some parts of the New Testament are inspired.
Like Arius, Webbon and his allies reject the profound Jewishness of Jesus and His apostles, and Jesus’ commitment to the revelation of the Old Testament.Â
Like Pelagius, Webbon and his allies suggest that God’s history of redemption is based on human works and not grace. They imply that God’s covenant with the Jewish people is based on Israel’s performance and not his sovereign will.Â
Now this section is a conjecture sandwich where McDermott equates not being a dispensationalist to Marcionism, as opposed to recognizing a continuous plan for the elect in Scripture.
Concerning Arianism, it’s not the Jewishness of Christ that is denied, but that of the Modern Jew. And according to McDermott, it is Pelagian not to believe in a second new covenant.
Christian Zionism is statistically dying, and is not going to experience a resurrection with laughable arguments born in idolatrous hysteria.
6 Responses
The claim that “God has terminated His eternal covenant with the Jewish people” misrepresents both the nature of God’s covenants and the broader biblical narrative. The Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) are full of examples where God’s covenantal blessings are contingent on obedience (see Deuteronomy 28–30), but nowhere does God declare that He will terminate His covenant with Israel outright due to disobedience. Rather, He promises restoration—even after judgment.
For instance, in Leviticus 26:44–45, even after listing severe consequences for disobedience, God says:
“Yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not spurn them, neither will I abhor them so as to destroy them utterly and break my covenant with them, for I am the Lord their God. But I will for their sake remember the covenant with their forefathers…”
This is echoed by Jeremiah 31:35–37, where God explicitly states that Israel will never cease to be a nation before Him:
“Thus says the Lord: If the heavens above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth below can be explored, then I will cast off all the offspring of Israel for all that they have done…”
Even the New Testament affirms this. In Romans 11, Paul addresses the idea that God has rejected Israel and emphatically denies it:
“I ask, then, has God rejected His people? By no means!… For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Romans 11:1, 29)
Thus, disobedience affects Israel’s experience of the covenant blessings, but it does not nullify God’s covenantal faithfulness. The covenant is not ineffective due to God, but due to human sin—a distinction that preserves both divine justice and divine mercy.
It’s incomprehensible that people like Webbon, Calvinists, who would push the Decreed position on Salvation, would then turn around and say God has not Decreed a future for the Nation of Israel either. Some of ya’ll need to go back and read your Old Testament again.
Also as a side bar.
2 New Covenants?
Where did this verbiage originate? There was one New Covenant yes, but Covenants with God have been many since the time of Creation. The way some people want to pick and choose what God said in the Old testament as still being active or not, is frankly dubious.
They never read Matthew 3:10, where John the Baptist is saying that the axe is already laid to the root of the tree and unless Israel repents right now its gonna be cut down. It was cut down and the church replaced Israel, because rather than repent, Israel killed the Messiah.
“Like Marcion, Webbon and his allies suggest that the God of the Old Testament is different from the God of the New Testament”
No, because Marcion didn’t believe in replacement theology. Marcion believed the Jews have a continuing covenant with their lesser god, and Christians have a new covenant with a better God. Webbon believes that the church replaces Israel. He may phrase it slightly different, like the church as the continuation of Israel, but basically that. They are closer to Marcion in believing that the Jews have a continuing covenant of their own.
“Like Arius, Webbon and his allies reject the profound Jewishness of Jesus and His apostles”
These guys have no clue what Arius was about. Arius just maximized divine simplicity to the point that he rejected Jesus being part of the Father’s substance and thus declared him a secondary created god with a new essence creation ex nihilo. Arius didn’t have anything to do with denying the Jewishness of anyone.
“Like Pelagius, Webbon and his allies suggest that God’s history of redemption is based on human works and not grace. They imply that God’s covenant with the Jewish people is based on Israel’s performance and not his sovereign will.”
The reality is THIS is the covenant of works vs covenant of grace. As John says “The Law came by Moses but GRACE and truth came by Jesus Christ.” That is, the Old Covenant was a covenant of works, and the New Covenant is the covenant of grace. Paul himself says that the Law says “He who does all these works shall live by them” in Galatians 3:12.
Calvinists generally make the mistake of saying the Garden of Eden was the covenant of works and that the covenant of grace was established with Abraham and that the old and new covenants are the same covenant. Joel may officially make this mistake, but due to felicitous inconsistency and being so steeped in Scripture, he accidentally hits upon the truth when discussing the Jews, and clearly we find shining through the old Presbyterian heresy of mono-covenant theology, a realization that the Old Covenant was the Covenant of Works and the New Covenant alone is the Covenant of Grace.
“Calvinists generally make the mistake of saying…that the covenant of grace was established with Abraham and that the old and new covenants are the same covenant.”
If they are mistaken, so is the Apostle Paul in Galatians 3 and Romans 4.
I have found that those who comment on Ray’s insightful articles are generally better informed than the average nominal Christian; so, I have been dismayed that, without exception, the commenters of this site also conflate the word “Jews” with the House of Israel and/or the House of Judah as set forth in Scripture.
Please consider viewing the following 4-minute videos if you would like to better understand the critical distinction between “Jews” and “Israel” of the Bible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i7e0FIO56w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcOgm6kn9mQ