I couldn't sleep so I was looking on RF and saw this. Amethyst, you are NOT WRONG.
It's late and I can't remember exactly where it is, but I think it might be near the end of Jeremiah, but the Bible does have a statement that when the Jews return the second time that they would never again be cast out of their land.
Now that is an exceptionally important scripture and requires some history to understand it.
The Jews never fully returned from their Babylonian diaspora, the dispersion that happened when Daniel was carted off to Babylon.
We know this for 2 reasons-- the presence of Jews of the diaspora in Jerusalem for Pentecost AND the history of the Jews in Babylon and around the whole Mediterranean basin. In fact that was how the Babylonian Talmud was compiled, by the Jews in Babylon.
It's important to remember that not all the Jews returned to the land with Ezra and Nehemiah. Many remained in Babylon and the Persian Empire thru the period leading up to our Lord, and long long afterwards.
When Rome expelled the Jews again in 135 AD after a revolt led by Bar Kokhba many were led out into slavery and Rome renamed Israel after their worst enemies the Philistines hence Palestina. That was from the land, AD 70 was from Jerusalem. 2 different Roman expulsions. And that just continued the ongoing diaspora since Babylon took them out of the land.
IF this scripture I can't find off the top of my head, was referring to that period of time, then God didn't keep His word, because He said they wouldn't be plucked out, uprooted again after they came back to their land. So that proves that that verse I remember doesn't fit the return with Ezra and Nehemiah, not all the Jews came back. Many perhaps most, remained in exile.
There were still plenty of Jewish settlements all around the Mediterranean basin, over in Babylon, into Persia and on up into what is now Ukraine. Over time they migrated north into Russia and Europe and those are called Ashkenazi Jews while the Sephardic Jewish group migrated to Spain where that group remained until the time of the Spanish Inquisition. That group fled into North Africa and Egypt with some going to other Islamic areas and settling there.
My point is that the Jews never fully returned to the land after the Babylonian exile, and the Roman expulsion simply removed the group that had relocated back into Israel back out into the larger diaspora again. During all those years they really hadn't had their own land back under their full control with the exception of a few years during the Maccabees. But that fell apart quickly within a generation or two and it was back to problems that brought Rome into the mix.
Because of that-- once they returned and formed their nation again, even though the borders are not all what they have a right to, the Lord promises that they will not be removed again. Even during the flight to safety during the mid point of the Trib, not all the Jews leave. In fact there is some consideration that only a few make that exit to safety, leaving a lot in peril at the mercy of the AC.
Rather like AD70 when the believing Jews in Jerusalem left when the Romans stopped the siege briefly because they remembered what Jesus told them about seeing the armies around Jerusalem. Not one of them accord to Josephus perished while much of Jerusalem's remaining Jews died.
There are 2 passages - similar but referring to 2 times when the Jews have to flee. The one in 70 AD is a forerunner of the AOD in the midst of the Trib.
Anyway thats a long winded explanation of why you are not wrong to think the way you do.
And your pastor is not wrong about everything else. Newspaper exegesis hammers scripture to fit the newspaper headlines rather than noting when the headlines seem to fit scripture.
Hal did a fair bit of that at the start. But in his defence (and I was around to read his first book at the age of 14) he was one of the first to say hey, maybe we should be listening to the prophetic scriptures. Yes there were others, but he was the first one who wrote about it in popular easy to read ways. He got things out there, and people began to pay attention.
BUT newspaper exegesis leads to some crazy conclusions. It's important to let Scripture interpret Scripture and where it is silent, we shouldn't hammer it to make it fit our preconceived notions based on what's happening around us. Hal was convinced that the Lord was going to return before the 80s were done. He didn't date set although he was accused of it. He did hammer scripture to fit the current times back then though, and it led a lot of people down that path to disappointment.
People like Walvoord and Pentecost were quietly teaching prophecy in seminary, training up the next generation of good theologians including many of the very good ones today. They disagreed with Hal but they weren't in the news, they weren't writing bestsellers so they were ignored.
But if you look for it, you'll find the passages referring to God's promise to Israel to never again uproot them from their land. I think it's the end zone of Jeremiah, but Ezekiel is also a likely one, maybe Isaiah, could be Zechariah, lol the list goes on. I'll try to look it up in the next few days, and meanwhile see if you can find it.
It's in there.
Caution though, if your pastor has his mind really firmly made up -- he will find ways to sideline that scripture and set it aside. Whether he views the scripture as pertaining to the millennial reign (and it might be so) or referencing something else it's likely that he may not hear you so pray first, present scriptures if you feel the Lord asking you to, then pray even harder and let the Holy Spirit work.
Don't let that trouble you. It's wonderful you've found one who actually preaches the whole Word of God and we all have points of disagreement.
