The
Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church(U.S.A.) has published a study guide, with a CD, on Zionism. The
study guide is entitled
Zionism Unsettled and
contains various subjects including religions, history, liberal
theologians and evangelical Christianity, all having to do with
Zionism. [1] The booklet is filled with historical statements that
are so simplistic that they change historical truth and insults
lobbed at both orthodox Judaism and orthodox Christianity. The
identity of contemporary Jewish people,within the context of the
authors' views on Zionism, is denied. Above all, historical Zionism, contemporary Zionism, and Zionism in general, are maligned and insulted.
Vilifying Zionism: For example in section eight, the author,
after quoting Dr. Mustafa Abu Sway, who explains how respectful
Muslims and the Qur'an are toward other religions, writes, “Zionism, however, has not
reciprocated this respect for all peoples. Instead says Abu Sway,
Zionism is by nature a system of discrimination and exclusion.” (50)
Mixing religion with their views of
Zionism the authors, in section five, quote Dr. Rev. Naim Ateek:
What is quite clear from a Palestinian
Christian point of view … is that the emergence of the Zionist
movement in the twentieth century is a retrogression of the Jewish
community into the history of its very distant past, with its most
elementary and primitive forms of the concept of God. Zionism has
succeeded in reanimating the nationalist tradition within Judaism.
Its inspiration has been drawn not from the profound thoughts of the
Hebrew Scriptures, but from those portions that betray a narrow and
exclusive concept of a tribal god.
Here the authors have slipped into a
gnostic view of the Hebrew Bible and the Hebrew God. In a different
section they tear apart the beliefs of any monotheistic believer who
views the tenets of their faith as true. Of the Jewish and Christian
belief that God called the Jews to be a unique people, a people
chosen by God, they quote Rabbi Brant Rosen:
To put it plainly, a voice that affirms claims of theological superiority in the name of one people cannot be the voice of God. A voice that asserts God's word to humanity was vouchsafed exclusively to the children of Abraham cannot be the voice of God. A voice that looks to the messianic day in which all nations will ultimately serve the God of Israel cannot be the voice of God. (italics Rosen) (30)
Interesting enough this is part of the
ending of a section that deals with Christian views of Jews and
Judaism, a section that seemingly attempts to point out where
Christian antisemitism lies. But instead, carefully choosing a Rabbi
to do the dirty work, it treats orthodox Judaism and other forms of
Jewish religion with contempt.
And as I have stated above,
orthodox Christians are judged in just the same manner. The author
opines, “...many contemporary Christians choose to modify our
traditional theology by saying that the life, death, and resurrection
of Christ is the most complete revelation of God that we
know and that we have experienced. This
statement affirms the revelation of God in Christ while at the same
time recognizing the limits of our knowledge and experience ...”
(30) (italics and underlining authors) Those evangelical Christians
who are aligning with the Israel/Palestine Mission Network should
take note that this booklet undermines their faith. [2]
Leaving out the whole story:
The section on political Zionism begins with
different
quotes which attempt to define Zionism by both its adherents and its
detractors. This is the section with simplistic historical statements
that change the truth of the birth of Israel and its history. The
authors look at five Zionist leaders: “Theodor Herzl, Vladimir
Jabotinsky, David Ben-Gurion, Menachem Begin, and Binyamin
Netanyahu.” After writing a very short section on Herzl and his
reasons for founding the Zionist movement the authors and editors of
Zionism Unsettled
attempt to make a case for early Zionism's detractors, those they
refer to as cultural Zionists. And since many Jews in Europe were
experiencing greater freedom as well as assimilating into western
culture there was resistance against political Zionism.
The historical
problem here is that IPMN, as they write of immigrants who came from
Russia to the Holy Land, fail to mention the horrific pogroms
(persecutions) that were occurring in Russia and other Eastern
European states against the Jews. So something is left out. The same
is true when the IPMN authors and editors write about the birth of
Israel:
In November 1947
the United Nations adopted a plan to partition Palestine into areas
designated for a Jewish state and an Arab state. Each state would
consist of both Jewish and Arab citizens, but tragically no provision
was made for an interim United Nations military force to protect the
rights of the minorities during the transition. As expected war broke
out between Jewish and Arab forces when Israel declared independence
in May 1948.
The authors go on
to insist that two months before independence, Ben-Gurion adopted the
Dalet plan to expel the Palestinians from their homeland. But they
leave out what occurred just after the 1947 UN mandate to partition
Palestine. They leave out most of what happened after Israel declared
her independence and they don't tell the truth about Ben-Gurion's
plans.
According to
Efrain Karsh, professor and head of the Middle East and Mediterranean
studies program at Kings College, London, after the UN vote to
partition Palestine, a criminal gang overtook two buses filled with
Jews and killed and wounded many of them. Arab prisoners in the main
Palestine jail attacked the Jewish prisoners. Karsh records that
many more were harassed and some killed in various cities. He goes
on:
The next day
brought no respite to the violence. Shootings, stonings, stabbings,
and riots continued apace. Bombs were thrown into cafes, Molotov
cocktails were hurled at shops, a synagogue was set on fire. To
inflame the situation further, the AHC [Arab Higher Committee]
proclaimed a three-day nationwide strike to begin the following day.
Arab shops, schools, and places of business were closed, and large
Arab crowds were organized and incited to take to the streets to
attack Jewish targets. … In a single week, from November 30 to
December 7, 1947, thirty -seven Jews were killed and many more were
injured. By the end of the year another 180 Jews had been murdered.
[3]
Walter Laqueur,
historian and author of
A History of Zionism: From the French
Revolution to the Establishment of the State of Israel, also
writes about the period after the partition mandate by the UN:
The next morning
the Palestinian Arabs called a three-day protest strike, and Jews in
all parts of the country were attacked. On that first day of rioting
seven were killed and more injured; the fighting continued to the end
of the mandate. The next months, as chaos engulfed Palestine were a
time of crisis for the Jewish community. … The most pressing task
facing the Jewish population was to strengthen its defenses, since
the Arab countries had already announced that their armies would
enter the country as soon as the British left. Syria was not willing
to wait that long: an 'Arab Liberation Army' inside Palestine was
established in February with the help of Syrian officers as well as
irregulars.[4]
Laqueur's last
sentence in the above paragraph is the rest of the story. Rather than
the simplistic statement by IPMN's
Zionism Unsettled, “As
expected war broke out between Jewish and Arab forces when Israel
declared independence in May 1948,” the new state, Israel, was
attacked by five Arab nations. And this after continuous attacks on
Jewish citizens, after the UN's positive decision for partition..
So what about
Ben-Gurion and the Dalet plan which was supposedly about expelling
the Palestinians?
Laqueur writing in
1972 and republishing in 2003 simply states that some insist that the
Arab refugees were forced out by Jewish massacres and threats of
massacres, while others insist that the refugees left because Arab
leaders encouraged them to do so. Both Laqueur and Karsh, who
published his research in 2010 agree that there was a massacre of the
village of Dir Yassin, 254 men, women and children were killed.
(Karsh puts the number at 100.) And they agree that there was
retaliation by Arab forces against a convoy of Jewish doctors and
nurses:
Three days later,
a Jewish medical convoy on its way to the Hadassa hospital on Mount
Scopus was ambushed in the streets of Jerusalem with the loss of
seventy-nine doctors, nurses and students.[5]
This was a war,
and an extremely bloody war at that. But, Karsh who has done
extensive archival work on the question of whether there was a
planned expulsion of Palestinian Arabs gives an absolute
no to
the idea that Ben-Gurion or any one else planned to expel the
Palestinians. His notes are massive and primary rather then
secondary, that is, they are not taken from an author who quotes
another author's document. He writes a whole chapter on this
question:
On March 18,
shortly after the launch of plan D, the Jewish Agency denied any
intention to expel the Arab population of the prospective Jewish
state, emphasizing instead that it “considered them as citizens,
safeguarded their interests and livelihood and intended that they
should participate in the government provided they were not
implicated in incidents or let (sic) by saboteurs. [6]
Breaking the
Link: Finally there is the matter of the identity of the Jewish
people. In section 9 of
Zionism Unsettled, which is written by
Naim Ateek, who I quoted above, there is an accusation against the
Jewish immigrants to Israel which is as racist a statement as any
bigot, such as David Duke, might make. It calls into question the
legitimacy of the identity of many Jews. He writes:
Zionism commits
theological injustice by its appeal to God, history and race. Zionism
claims the right to Eretz Yisrael on the basis of Yahweh's
promises to the ancient Hebrew tribes in the Torah; the age-long
dream of religious Jews to return to Zion; and the erroneous claim
that all Jews are racial descendants of the Israelites of biblical
times. Thus, Zionism is considered “far from Christian teaching.”
Part of my ethnic
heritage is English and I am well aware that may include Normans,
even Vikings and perhaps a bit from the Romans. But still my English
is English. The Jewish immigrants who fled to Palestine from Europe
were Jewish. Only rabid anti-Semites say they are not. (It is
interesting that “race” rather than “ethnicity” was used in
the quote and in
Zionism Unsettled.) Words do matter.
Those who read and
accept the words of this booklet,
Zionism Unsettled, will
eventually find themselves walking down the same roads that too many
racists and anti-Semites have walked. One of the historians I have
used in my review, Laqueur, agrees with some concerns of the
Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).
He is concerned about the settlements, the fear of strangers, the
ultra orthodox, yet he writes honest history and does not insult his
subject, Zionism.
The Presbyterian
Church (U.S.A.) can do a better job of caring for the Israelis and
the Palestinians. They do not need to insult Zionism, Jews or
orthodox Christians. And they can tell the truth that the 1948 War
for Israel's independence was started by the Arab nations. They can
admit that war is bloody—it always has been and always will be. Now
is the time to dialogue and speak out for peace—it is not the time
to encourage hate as this booklet does.
[1] There are nine
main sections in the booklet and smaller one page sections as well as
inset boxes. All larger sections give the name of one or several
authors and state the section is based on their material or is a
condensed and edited version. In most cases there is little way of
knowing what might be an extra statement that does not belong to the
original authors.
[2]Despite this
disregard for orthodox beliefs, that Jesus Christ is God's complete
and final salvation, the IPMN authors and editors nonetheless use
Gary Burge who claims that to see two covenants, one for the Jews and
one for the church, “negates biblical texts that claim salvation is
through Christ alone.” (47)
[3] Efraim Karsh,
Palestine Betrayed, (New Haven: Yale University Press 2010)
100-101.
[4]Walter Laqueur,
A History of Zionism: From the French Revolution to the State of
Israel, paperback reprint, With a new preface
, (New York:
Shocken Books 1972-2003)
582-583.
[5]See Laqueur,
Zionism, 584; and Karsh,
Palestine, 122.
[6] Karsh,
Palestine,236; This is the extensive citation done on this one
paragraph: “Commander of the Jerusalem District and Brigade,
“Appointments of Governors in Conquered Territories,” May 15,
1948, IDFA/5254/13. See also: “Plan D – March 1948,”
Matkal/Agam, Mar. 10, 1948, HA 73/94, pp. 5-8; “Guidelines for
Treating Surrendering Villages,” Apr. 22, 1948, IDFA 1949/4663/84,
p. 12; IDF Chief of Staff, “Discipline,” July 6, 1948, ibid.,
p. 19; “Summary of Meeting of Arab Affairs Advisers in
Natanya,” May 9, 1948, ibid.,p.30; “Proposal for the
Administration of Surrendering Arab Cities and Villages,” Apr.
1948, IDFA 1949/481/14; Matkal, “Abandoned Property,” May9, 1948,
Part III, p.68.”
On Presbyterian Voices for Justice there is a link to Plucky
Presby Blog, owned by teaching elder John Russell Stranger.
Evidently the Presbytery
of New York City had a debate on the 28th of January,
on same gender marriage. They were voting on both an authoritative
interpretation and an overture. Stranger took the progressive side in
the debate and teaching elder Clark Bradley the orthodox view.
Stranger has placed his speech on his blog.
