You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


You are here

Can an Anglican be a Zionist? Most of us think the answer is no, because when we think of Christian Zionism, we think of fundamentalist dispensationalists with crazy eschatologies. The term calls to mind date-setting, a rapture theology that suggests that Christians will not suffer, and the refusal to entertain criticism of the state of Israel. Most Anglicans have problems with all of these presumptions.

But there is a new Christian Zionism that some Anglicans are embracing. It is willing to criticize the state of Israel, has nothing to do with premillennial dispensationalism, and is agnostic about the details of the end times. It wants justice for both Jews and Arabs. But it is convinced that the state of Israel is needed to protect God’s covenanted people, it wants to support the only democracy in the Middle East, and believes that the return of Jews from all over the world to the land of Israel in the last two centuries was a fulfillment of biblical prophecy. Those of us Anglicans who are among these “new” Christian Zionists see prophecies about this return not only in the Old Testament but also in the New Testament.

Let me explain. All Bible readers know that the Old Testament’s primary focus is on the Jews and the land of Israel. But most Christians think the New Testament authors are focused not on the tiny land of Israel but on all of planet Earth. For support they quote Jesus’ beatitude in Matthew 5:5: “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” Yet more and more scholars are recognizing that a better translation of this verse is “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the land.” Matthew was no doubt translating into Greek the Hebrew in Psalm 37:11, where it is universally recognized that the Hebrew erets refers to the land of Israel. In fact, four other verses in Psalm 37 repeat the phrase “inherit the land,” with the clear meaning of the land of Israel. The implication was that Jesus’ disciples would be able to enjoy the land of Israel in the era that he described later in this same Gospel as the palingenesia or “renewal of all things” (Matt. 19:28).

When Jesus’ disciples asked him just before his ascension, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6), Jesus did not tell them they were wrong to think there would be a future Israel that God would establish. Instead he said that the timing of that future was not to be known then.

In the same breath in which Paul predicted that someday “all Israel will be saved,” he said Israel’s “deliverer” then would “come from Zion” and he would “banish ungodliness from Jacob” (Rom. 11:26). Again, the land of Israel had a future for Paul, with a special destiny in that future for Jews.

Peter also looked forward to a special future for the land of Israel. In his second speech in Jerusalem after the Pentecost miracle, Peter spoke of a future apokatastasis or restoration that was to come (Acts 3:21). This was the Greek word used in the Septuagint—which was the early church’s Greek translation of the Old Testament—for the future return of Jews from all over the world to the land of Israel to reestablish a Jewish nation. (1)

The book of Revelation also shows that Israel as a particular land has a place in God’s plan for the future. We are told there that the Lamb will stand not on the earth in general but “on Mount Zion” (Rev. 14:1). The new earth that is to come is to be centered in Jerusalem, and that new Jerusalem will have twelve gates inscribed with the names of the “twelve tribes of the sons of Israel” (21:2, 12). At some point the nations will trample upon “the holy city” of Jerusalem for forty-two months. The author makes clear that this holy city is the one “where their [the two witnesses’] Lord was crucified” (11:2,8).

Christians are right to say that the Bible speaks of the whole earth being renewed. But not all Christians have seen that the center of that renewed earth will be Israel.

The upshot is that for the New Testament authors the land of Israel was going to be important in the future history of redemption, stretching out beyond the closure of the New Testament era. The land was holy in Jesus’ time, and it would be holy again in the future, when Jews would return to it.

So if the recent return of Jews to the land might have been predicted by the New Testament, what about the present Jewish people who live in Israel? Do they have any special significance to God? Most Anglicans have assumed that they do not, since most Israeli Jews do not accept Jesus as messiah.

I will never forget the day that I stumbled upon Paul’s insistence that Jews who rejected Jesus were still beloved by God and that God kept his covenant with them as a people. He told the church in Rome that “they are enemies of the gospel for your sake,” but they “are still beloved of God because of their forefathers” and “because the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable” (Rom. 11:28–29; my translation).

I had always assumed that Paul was talking only about Jews in the past, before Jesus came. But as I looked more closely, it became clear that Paul was talking about Jews in his own day who had heard his preaching of Jesus and rejected it.

These Jesus-rejecting Jews “are beloved” of God, he said. Not “were beloved” but “are beloved.” Not past but present tense. Even though they chose not to believe the gospel, they are still beloved of God. God still loves them. And not in the way that God loves all people, but with a special kind of love. That is clear from Paul’s long discussion of Jews in Romans 9–11.

Their “gifts and calling” were still in place. Their “calling” was their covenant, enacted when God called Abraham into a special relationship with himself, so that Abraham and his descendants would be God’s chosen people.

Paul used the word “covenants” explicitly in this passage where he discusses the majority-Jewish rejection of the gospel: “I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart... [for] my kinsmen according to the flesh... [because] to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, ...and the promises” (Rom. 9:2–4).

At first I was confused by Paul’s reference to (plural) covenants. Then I saw that Jesus spoke of the “blood of the covenant” (Matt. 26:28; Mark 14:24), suggesting there was one fundamental (Abrahamic) covenant and that the other covenants, such as the Mosaic and Davidic covenants, were aspects of that one basic covenant with Abraham.

So can Anglicans be Zionists? Most of us cannot endorse the Zionism of dispensationalism. But if we are open to learning new things from Scripture, we might see that the New Testament suggests that the land of Israel is still significant to God, and so are its people. We can support the legitimate aspirations of Palestinians while at the same time believing that the Jewish people and the land of Israel are still connected to God and His promises.

Gerald McDermott is Anglican Chair of Divinity at Beeson Divinity School. This article is adapted from his recentbook, Israel Matters: Why Christians Must think Differently about the People and the Land (Brazos, 2017). He is also editor of The New Christian Zionism: Fresh Perspectives on Israel and the Land (InterVarsity, 2016) book, Israel Matters: Why Christians Must think Differently about the People and the Land (Brazos, 2017). He is also editor of The New Christian Zionism: Fresh Perspectives on Israel and the Land (InterVarsity, 2016).