The Israel/Palestine Mission Network & Zionism Unsettled denies the uniqueness of Jesus Christ

I am surprised that no one protested loudly about denying the unique Lordship of Jesus Christ. Maybe all of those who care are those who have left or are in the process of leaving the denomination—but I must be wrong, surely I am wrong. I, just a few days ago, posted a book review where I told you that the Israel/Palestine Mission Network, a Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) organization, not only had insisted that Zionism was evil at its roots, they also insisted that it was possible that God was intending a greater or fuller revelation then Jesus Christ. That is what this quote taken from Zionism Unsettled means:

“...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)

 Perhaps it is because I did not include some other quotes from Zionism Unsettled. After writing the above quote, the author states:

From a logical standpoint, only someone who had entered deeply into the faith and experience of every religion could claim to know from an insider's perspective that God's revelation in Christ is “the most complete revelation.”

In other words, unless you have a deep faith commitment to all other faiths you can't know if Jesus is God's most complete revelation.

And after trying to explain that Augustine and Anselm's insistence that we believe “in order that we might understand,” has some kind of relevance to the question of the uniqueness of Jesus, the authors write:

With Augustine's and Anselm's perspective in mind, the traditional view (that the life, death and resurrection of Christ is “the most complete revelation that God has granted to humankind”) claims more than any individual can know. Claims like this won't attract new members or keep existing members from falling away; in a pluralistic world any attempt to circle the wagons may alienate as many as it attracts.

Don't you see that in one swift move the IPMN has resurrected the old German Christian idea that there could possibly be another revelation of God to set beside the one we know in Jesus Christ? Don't you understand that with those words the Declaration of Barmen is wiped out?

In Barmen we hear the words of Scripture:

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber. … I am the door; if anyone enters by me, he will be saved.“(John 19:1, 9.
And beneath the Scripture in the Confession:

“Jesus Christ as he is attested for us in Holy Scripture, is the one Word of God which we have to hear and which we have to trust and obey in life and death.

We reject the false doctrine as though the Church could and would have to acknowledge as a source of its proclamation , apart from and besides this one Word of God, still other events and powers, figures and truths , as God's revelation.” 8.10-8.12

One either believes that Jesus Christ is God's complete revelation or one does not believe it and denies that Jesus Christ is Lord. God is not asking us to play games but to affirm the truth. Christians all over the world are dying because they affirm this truth. Why are we all so weak in our faith that we will not stand up against the Israel/Palestine Mission Network? Why would we listen to anything they have to say when they deny Christ.

The German Christians didn't like Zionism or Jews, and especially not the confession that Jesus Christ is the Only Lord, either. But we must, if nothing else, stand for Christ and love our neighbor.

Telling stories that hurt and destroy: A review of Zionism Unsettled

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.”

Is this anti-Semitic? Does it matter?

If you read this statement:
 
“Netanyahu, like most other Israeli leaders, is a pathological liar who lies as often as he breathes oxygen. He knows deep in his heart that what Israel has been doing and the way it has been behaving ever since its birth 63 years ago represents the ultimate contradiction to true Christian values, the values that Jesus preached and because of which he incurred the wrath of the Jewish establishment of his time.”


Along side this statement about the horrible terrorist attack in Norway:


“Who gains and loses from every terror incident must also be asked, certainly not suspects charged, convicted and imprisoned. Geopolitical interests are central. This time Western and Israeli ones are key.”


Plus this statement about the same attacks:


“I am not in a position at present to firmly point a finger at Israel, its agents, or its sayanim -- but assembling the information together, and considering all possibilities may suggest that Anders Behring Breivik might indeed, have been a Sabbath Goy.




Within its Judaic mundane-societal context, the Sabbath Goy is simply there to accomplish some minor tasks the Jews cannot undertake during the Sabbath. But within the Zion-ised reality we tragically enough live in, the Sabbath Goy kills for the Jewish state. He may even do it voluntarily."

And that author pointing to another author (at Veterans Today) who wrote:

"Israel has two difficulties with Norway that would be handled with a “false flag” terror attack. Certainly Anders Behring, the suspect in custody could easily be managed in a number of ways, led, perhaps assisted, augmented as it were. Any intelligence agency can do such things. One probably did. Israel’s difficulties are:

Norway’s national oil company has decided to boycott Israel because of the violence in Gaza. This is a huge issue with Israel, seen as a threat to their national security and is likely to draw a violent response. A car bomb near their oil company headquarters is very much a standard warning, “government to government” as it were. Adding the slaughter of children to it is a Mossad signature."

And if you knew that all of these quotes came from various articles on the same news and opinion site except the last one would you link to one of the articles as a reliable article?


The Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A) did link to the one with that third quote. The article, Was the Massacre in Norway a reaction to BDS?, was written by Gilad Atzmon. And Atzmon placed the link to Veterans Today and its Senior Editor, Gordon Duff’s article, “Norway Notes – Updated: Breaking Story the second tragedy is the lies,” in his article. Atzmon is also on the staff of Veterans Today. That is where my last quote came from.


The rest of the articles came from MWC News: Media With Conscience. They use many of the same writers as Veterans Today the site that uses veteran’s news articles and helps as a front for its rabid anti-Semitism.


Now having read all of these articles and knowing that IPMN keeps linking to Veterans Today and other sites that use the same writers I have to say that I do not apologize for writing my last posting on IPMN entitled, An example of the German Christians of 1933 ..... although someone has suggested I should be defrocked (whatever that means for a ruling elder?).1 When members of IPMN keep up this kind of unfruitful contention I must repeat:


"The Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the PC(U.S.A.) is the American post-modern example of Germany’s 1933 German Christians. When I close my eyes and envision members I can’t help but see them in German Church attire giving the Hitler salute. I realize this is a very insulting thing to write but their lack of concern for who they link to on their Facebook page is either a case of extreme ignorance or absolute hatefulness."


And I have something more to say. To identify oneself or one’s organization as Christian and continue to uphold such awful propaganda about the Jewish people is to deny the Lord of the Church. Jesus reminded the woman at the well that “salvation is from the Jews.”


Many members of the IPMN, are, perhaps, unconsciously, some outright, holding a grudge and even hatred against the Jews. They will not be the people to help bring peace to the Middle East. They cannot, because they have lost the kind of perspective that is needed to bring the two sides together. They may speak to the church as their motto states, but the Church must stop listening to them. In humility, before Jesus Christ, we have sin to confess.


Hat tip to David Fischler at Reformed Pastor, Exploiting the Norwegian Tragedy
[1] Scroll down on the defrocked link.

An example of the German Christians of 1933 .....

The Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the PC(U.S.A.) is the American post-modern example of Germany’s 1933 German Christians. When I close my eyes and envision  members I can’t help but see them in German Church attire giving the Hitler salute. I realize this is a very insulting thing to write but their lack of concern for who they link to on their Facebook page is either a case of extreme ignorance or absolute hatefulness.

Their aim at Jewish groups in the United States has all of the ear-marks of twentieth century anti-Semitism from Henry Ford and his articles on the International Jew, (In which he accused the Jewish people of influencing the media of the United States) to the Brown Shirts of Germany, who accused the Jews of troubling the whole world). German Christians did not care who they befriended as long as their own particular prejudices were upheld; neither does the IPMN.

Just this evening, July 18, 2011, they have linked to an article on the site, Intifada Voice of Palestine. The article they have linked to is Declassified: Massive Israeli Manipulation of US Media Exposed[VIDEO] The article is mostly a video of Grant F. Smith whose books and web site are a constant volley against Jewish organizations in the United States.

Above the article link IPMN quotes Smith:

"Files declassified in America have revealed covert public relations and lobbying activities of Israel in the U.S. The National Archive made the documents public following a Senate investigation."

The information in the video lacks any real reference points- including names. But the important thing I want to point out is that once again, Carol Hylkema, Jeffrey DeYoe, Walt Davis, Noushin Framke and all the other leadership of IPMN have linked to a site that is connected to the anti-Semitic site Veterans Today. In fact almost all of the writers who write for Intifada Voice of Palestine write for Veterans Today. (And this is not the first time that they have linked to either site.)

Along side the video by Smith is an article with video by the editor of Veterans Today, Gordon Duff. He is, as usual, insisting that Israel along side the United States government were the instigators of the 9-11 disaster. Why don’t we care about what this small group of people are doing?

As I have repeatedly pointed out Veterans Today even carries articles insisting that Jewish Rabbis in American should be hung. And there is this statement in an article by Bob Johnson:

This could be to the general enlightening of people on the cruel practice of kosher slaughter and of the kosher scam overall. It also reveals the sense of Jewish superiority which has Biblical roots in Deuteronomy 7:6 which puts these words in God’s mouth regarding the ancient Hebrews/Jews: “For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.” Who would ever want to do business with people who believed things like that about themselves?

God’s justice in the Bible is linked with telling the truth. In fact, it is about truth. Those who use other’s lies are not doing justice, they are hurting justice and they will not bring peace to the Middle East.

When do we seek agreement, when do we, instead, stand for righteousness?

Someone, who I respect in many ways, offered me some advice in the comment section of an article linked to several weeks ago at CHURCHandWorld.Com. The article “The Presbyterian-Jewish Divide that Need Never Be,” had to do with both a controversy between the Simon Wiesenthal Center and supposedly the Presbyterian Church; the article had as its background the Middle East peace problems.[1] I suggested that many Jewish people and organizations are confused because they see the actions of the Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) as the actions of the whole Presbyterian Church.

In disagreement the commenter wrote, “Viola, how about working for how we can AGREE with one another, rather than how we DISAGREE? Maybe God’s shalom will break through if we don’t help the sides rub salt in the wounds.”

And this is an issue that I think needs to be addressed because it is an important statement about how issues are sometimes, but not always, resolved. We want reconciliation and are even willing to compromise in order to reach peaceful agreements. Sometimes that is good and right. But sometimes it isn’t. The truth is that sometimes we are so desirous of seeking reconciliation that we become confused about the difference between standing for righteousness and dialoguing for unity.

And so questions ensue. What does one do in the face of evil? And how should we as Christians, who are often seen as peacemakers, oppose evil. When is a compromise a good position to take and when is it wrong? When do we quit looking for what we agree on because the other person or group has become so involved in evil that all we can do is stand and oppose them?

Israel and the Palestinians with their horrendous problems and the PCUSA’s IPMN’s involvement in their problems are perhaps the ultimate reasons for answering those questions. I believe that Rev. Dr. Byron Shafer, a member and lone dissenter, of the past PCUSA Middle East Study Committee, gave the clearest answer in his speech at the GA breakfast for Presbyterians for Middle East Peace. We must love both sides, Israel and the Palestinians, and act accordingly.

So where and how can Christians and Presbyterians agree with the IPMN. We can not and, please, listen very carefully to why I say this. Many of us oppose most of the settlements, we may oppose where the wall is placed, we must oppose any racism, we must criticize Israel as well as the Palestinians, but we cannot discuss issues or talk about agreement on Middle East issues with the Israel Palestine Mission Network. They have crossed a line that must never be crossed again by any church or Christian organization in the modern or post-modern eras. Here is their offense:

1. They have slandered the Jewish people of the United States without apology. That also happened in the past and was part of the many acts of anti-Semitism against the Jewish people that led to the holocaust.[2]

2. They have allowed themselves to be pulled into a circle of vile anti-Semitic writers who are willing to tell lies about Israel and the Jewish people. Some of the writers even advocate for the death of the Jews, insisting they are trying to take over the world.[3]

3. They promote a one state solution and insist that Israel should not be a Jewish State, thereby denying the Jewish people any place of safety.[4]

4. They make common cause with and defend those who believe that Jewish refugees are not genetic Jews and that they should be pushed out of Israel and return to the countries in which they were persecuted.[5]

5. They make light of the Holocaust equating the death of six-million people with the suffering of the Palestinian people.[6]

If we make common cause with the IPMN we will be on the side of those who do nothing but rub salt in the wound of the Jewish people and their wound is deep, cruel and very, very old. If we unite with IPMN around any common agreement we will be connected to that other part of them which is now so deeply entrenched in anti-Semitism that it causes our whole denomination to reek with the same odor that drifted over the world in the 1930’s.

William Buckley, that great conservative who loved debate, knew when to do so and when to cut away that which would poison his own morals. He refused connections to the John Birch Society because of their early anti-Semitism and their conspiracy theories; he severed Patrick Buchannan from conservative fellowship because of his anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism has no place in the life of a Christian individual or organization. I pray that all who are members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) will begin to move away from any connections with those who are tainted with such immorality.

The Lord of the Church is truly Lord of the Church. No ideology, no group of advisors tainted with prejudice and bigotry, no leadership which allows worldly lies to enter our decision making has a right above his rights. Salvation is “from the Jews” Jesus told the woman of Samaria. Our heritage is in both the New and the Old Testament. We are not allowed to cut ourselves free from any of those pages. We are forever connected to God’s promises to Israel that through them he would bless the world. As we hold that blessing, Jesus Christ, close, we will not allow his Hebrew children to be maligned and hated.

May Christ Jesus have mercy on us and help us.

[1] I have it from a very good source that the original title of the article sent by the SWC to the Wall Street Journal was not Presbyterians but mainline denominations. The WSJ changed it.
[2] See An overture filled with fury: anti-Semitism again and Slandering the Jewish people-more on overture 08-09
[3] For further information on this see, Veterans Today: anti-Semitism moving from the right to the left and IPMN: More From the Gutter. Also click on the link provided above, vile anti-Semitic writers which is an article prepared by the ADL.
[4] The IPMN’s endorsement of the Kairos Document, which condemns the idea of Israel as a Jewish State (Which it is) and this article is part of this problem: Israel is a Jewish State: IPMN's Noushin Framke would like that to end
[5] See Were Holocaust victims linked genealogically to biblical Israel?
[6] The footnotes for this could go on forever I will just leave it at that.

The Israel/Palestine Mission Network, James Wall and conspiracy theories

It isn’t going to end soon, there are too many radical anti-Semitic sites that many of us, who don’t make a habit of reading conspiracy driven web sites, know nothing about. But obviously James Wall of Wall Writings, along with the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)’s Israel/Palestine Mission Network is very aware of such sites. They link to them, use material from their sites, and in Wall’s case, write for them.

After being totally rebuffed by moderator, Carol Hylkema, of IPMN in my plea that they not use James Wall since he writes for, praises and cites writers for such web sites, they are again linked to Wall, and he is using and is linked to another radical anti-Semitic site, Sabbah Report.

Wall has written an article entitled, “Could Israel Be Using Wikileaks to Prepare US for Air Strike Against Iran?” He begins his article by referring to Jeff Gates and quoting, with some approval, from Gates article on Sabbah Report. That article is “Wikileaks: More Israeli Game Theory Warfare.” Both writers, stuck in their anti-Semitism, are suggesting that the Wikileaks were perpetrated by Israel as a means to cast a bad light on the United States and to further war plans against Iran. And in fact all of these sites are at the moment pushing this particular conspiracy idea.

Besides Wall Writings, Sabbah Report and Israel/Palestine Mission Network, one can include, My Catbird Seat, Veterans Today, Salem-News.com and Wake Up America: Your government is hijacked by Zionism. All of these sites, and there are others, use each other’s material; they all feed off of each other. They are all guilty of spewing hate in America.

The way it works is one writer writes about conspiracies such as this article, Is the "Times Square Terrorist" more Field-based Warfare, in which Gates, the writer Wall used in his article, blames, among other things, the destruction of the two ancient Buddhist statues in Afghanistan, the destruction of the World Trade Center towers in New York, the assassination of former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, etc., etc. on Israel. Everyone picks up those parts that either interest them or that they find credible. And it is supposed that if enough people write about the theory it must be true.

The IPMN is starting to do this by connecting to all of the writers through Wall’s writings. It is an easy way to slam not only Israel but also the Jewish people of the United States.[1] It is an easy way to avoid doing real homework about your main subject. It is an easy way to spit on the roots of your faith and deny the grace of God given through that One Jew on the cross.


[1] One Jewish Rabbi, Rabbii Gershon Steinberg-Caudill, who comments on the IPMN Facebook links is seemingly getting a bit more discerning about what they post. after reading Wall's posting he writes, "I think the movie [Fair Game: a movie Wall uses to make his point.] should be required viewing while I do not believe that Israel has any relationship with Wikileaks.'

After another link, Encountering Peace: Five minutes to midnight, about whether Israel can be a Jewish State and a Democracy at the same time, the Rabbi states: "There CAN be BOTH a Jewish State AND a Democracy. England is a Christian State and a Democracy. It CAN be done." In what appears to be a sassy contradiction to the Rabbi, IPMN's Noushin Framke writes:"Yes. But only if being Jewish doesn't give citizens any privileges. Problem is, Israel is based on Jewish exceptionalism."

Perhaps some other friends of IPMN will start speaking out.

Please see also, "James Wall: At It Again" by David Fischler at Reformed Pastor, and Disturbing Signs of Anti-Semitism in the PC(USA) by Greg Scandlen at Greg Scandlen's American Awakening

Please share my anger: IPMN, James Wall & hanging Jewish people

Eric Metaxas, author of Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy, writes of Bonhoeffer’s “holy anger” over the suffering of the Jews in Germany on Kristallnacht (night of the broken glass). That was the night when most of the synagogues and Jewish businesses in Germany were destroyed and burned. I hope the anger I am feeling at the moment has at least a tiny amount of holiness.

How do you feel when you read the statement below?

This is the way the world is, and this is Israel, the remorseless, unprincipled barbaric in the most and truest sense, of nations. I think the ruthless barbaric sense of superiority and invincibility Israel is, is in the myth of their “Nation” if not their blood, for there is no such thing as an ethnic or blood Jew or “people.” These God’s chosen people? My God!

I tire of this charade, and it is time someone began calling these shenanigans, what it is, spades are spades, and naming Zionist Israelis for what they are and, not simply calling them to account, but going to their house, knocking on their door, dragging them out, holding their feet to the fire and calling them to account… at the end of a figurative rope if necessary, and virtual ropes if at all possible!

The quote is by Debbie Menon, writing on a site that is a blog connected to Veterans Today, the horribly anti-Semitic site I wrote about several days ago. The site, My Catbird Seat, has many of the same writers that Veterans Today has including VT’s Senior Editor, Gordon Duff, who pushes the theory that Israel conspired to down the twin Towers on 9-11. My Catbird Seat has a list of their contributing writers. At the bottom of the list the name James M Wall is listed.

James Wall, once the Editor and Publisher of The Christian Century and now a contributing editor, is a writer often used by the Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) In fact; they have several of his articles on their web page. And on their Facebook page they just recently linked to one of his article from his blog Wall Writings, “US Offers Bibi 20 F-35 Fighters, The Jordan Valley and a Free UN Pass.”

Pastor David Fischler at Reformed Pastor has just written about Wall’s article, James Wall: Sewer Dweller (UPDATED). Fischler points out that Wall in his article was using resources from Veterans Today. He also raises some great questions and suggests that The Christian Century, for the sake of their own integrity, needs to rid themselves of any connection with Wall. “He [James Wall] has inextricably linked and identified himself with them through the sites he writes for and uses as sources. He is a blot on the Christian Century, and on the mainline churches that have looked to him for journalistic wisdom.”

I believe the same question needs to be asked of the Israel/Palestine Mission Network as well as the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Rarely does the IPMN miss linking to Wall’s articles if they are about the Middle East. If they realize that he is connected to such extreme groups will they disconnect from him? Will the PCUSA ever understand that they have an organization, the IPMN, with too many connections by linkage, to radical anti-Semitic groups?

The truth is, after looking at many of the posts on My Catbird Seat, I realize that their articles and links are not that much different then the ones posted at IPMN. Only those that have to do with 9-11 conspiracy theories and rabid ant-Semitism are missing form the IPMN site. Other wise the articles and authors are mostly the same. And the continuous rant about Israel and Jewish people and organizations in the United States are also the same.

I am angry. It is almost Thanksgiving, I have a review to write, pies to bake, great grandchildren to read to, but still I am angry. I will go to the mountains for dinner with my oldest son and his wife, and I will go angry. I will carry this anger with me not from hate but from love. Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, has called us to peace and truth. He is truth; how can we hold such dishonesty in our hearts. How can we use information and organizations that tell lies about those God chose to bless the world with his great grace, Jesus Christ? How can we in any way be connected to those who wish to use “virtual ropes” on the Jewish people? Please share my anger.

The Israel/Palestine Mission Network and the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Movement: ignoring PC(U.S.A.) policy

I am a member of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) but first of all I am a Christian. I belong to Jesus. That means in all things I must try to be fair and honest. That means I must love others. All others, as Jesus loved me. That means I must love the Palestinians of the Palestinian territories and those who are citizens of the State of Israel. And I must love the Jewish people of the State of Israel. And that is why I am outraged at the Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). And I am outraged at my denomination that will not rein in the IPMN.

The IPMN have in my and other Presbyterian names joined the Boycott Divestment Sanctions Movement which is a movement pushing against the whole State of Israel.

On the IPMN web site they have posted this Presbyterian Mission Network Joins BDS Movement. They begin the statement by suggesting that they will be boycotting products coming from Israeli settlements. But with the title and the end of their statement, they have, in fact, joined the whole BDS Movement which encourages not only the boycotting of products coming from Israel but also intellectual boycotts of published material and visiting professors.

The IPMN refers to The Amman Call but also to the Kairos Palestine: A Moment of Truth. The IPMN is a Presbyterian organization. The 219th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted against boycotting Israel. And they did not endorse the Kairos Palestine document but instead commended it for study. This was in part because of many objections by Presbyterians and others over its call for total divestment and boycotting of Israel.

IPMN constantly flaunts its supposed right to do whatever it pleases despite the fact it is a Presbyterian organization. It posted a video about Israel by a radical Palestinian and took ten days to remove it without apology. See The Israel/Palestine Mission Network posts a film put together by those espousing radical Islamic views of Israel. UP-date.

They produced a booklet, which accused the United States media of being controlled by the Jews and Israel. It also suggested that immigrants to Israel after World War II were not linked genetically to ancient Israel. See Were Holocaust victims linked genealogically to biblical Israel?

During the 219th GA they pushed a paper which stated that Jewish organizations in the United States had burned down a church and sent a package to the Presbyterian headquarters which possibly contained a bomb. Both were lies which IPMN later suggested was accidently left in their paper. They did not apologize. See I have no words: Carol Hylkema's answer to my e-mail also see An overture filled with fury: anti-Semitism again.

Recently on their Facebook page they have been linking to articles suggesting that there should be a one state solution to the Middle East problems, but that is not Presbyterian policy. It is time for the PCUSA to unlink from the Israel/Palestine Mission Network. Then with a great sigh of relief we can all try a little harder to love the other including both the Palestinians and the Israelis.

A friend just sent me this thought and I think it is a good suggestion: "With this public declaration of the IPMN joining the Israel-targeted international BDS movement, it might also seem timely and appropriate for the PCUSA's General Assembly Mission Council (GAMC) to remove the IPMN for the tax-exempt donation status that it currently enjoys with its numbered account status as a PCUSA Extra Commitment Opportunity (ECO) program budget line item under the control of the PCUSA treasurer."

Israel was founded illegally and has the worst record on human rights?

The long piece below is taken from the Israel/Palestine Mission Network. It is about a horrible video displayed on You Tube by an Israeli soldier doing a belly dance around a bound Palestinian Woman. There is no question that this is outrageous and criminal. But how is this outrageous act being used by the IPMN? To plead for peace? To shame the soldier? No, it is being used to defame all of the State of Israel. That is why I have posted the whole interchange between Noushin Framke and Samer Hassouneh.

"Israel Palestine Mission Network There are no words to describe this 1 minute video of an IDF soldier taunting a bound Palestinian woman. BEYOND SHAMEFUL.


YouTube clip shows IDF soldier belly-dancing beside bound Palestinian woman
http://www.haaretz.com/
A number of IDF soldiers have over the last year faced investigation and penalty for documenting themselves performing questionable acts in front of Palestinian prisoners or while on patrol.


Noushin Framke What a country!
7 hours ago ·

Samer Hassouneh Noushin, a country that was founded illegally, came to being by force, and has the worst record for human rights abuses. Not surprising really although still disturbing.
6 hours ago ·

Noushin Framke ‎@Samer : exactly! "

Framke, who is the chair of the communications work group for IPMN, has agreed to several lies in the name of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).
1. Israel was founded illegally
2. Israel came to being by force. (This is a half-lie-Israel came to being by force because she had to fight against the surrounding Arab nations.)
3. Israel has the worst record for human rights abuses.

Israel's Jewish Character-should Presbyterians be debating that?

Whoever puts the links up for the Israel Palestine Mission Network on Facebook has linked to a Huffington post, “Israel's Jewish Character Is Subject for Debate.” [1] The article is by Ahmed Moor a Palestinian freelance journalist. The sad part about this is not the Palestinian writer. He has his opinions. It is rather the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)’s IPMN’s comments to their link.

“Is what this article says really that controversial?” they ask. So what does the author of the article say? He insists that the state of Israel should not be a Jewish state and he also insists that the problems should be solved by a one state solution. But for a PCUSA organization which is supposed to be representing all of us as a church to ask why it is controversial for an article to suggest that neither a Jewish State nor a two state solution is viable in that troubled land is absurd. Strangely, in their progressive stance the people involved in IPMN are leaning far to the extreme right.

Moor writes:

Zionism is the belief that Jewish people ought to be privileged in Palestine/Israel solely because of their race. Moreover, non-Jewish indigenous people -- the Palestinians -- must be forced off the land so that it can be settled by Jews. That's what happened in 1948 and that's what's happening today in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Many liberal Zionists don't like to acknowledge it, but the process that yielded the land west of the green line was just as wrong as anything the setters have done. Its scale was also several magnitudes larger.

First of all this is not a completely true statement, because it is not complete history. But secondly, and more importantly it is a statement that means Israel as a state, and yes a Jewish State, should never have happened. So the leaders of IPMN believe that statement is not controversial. That is why I state that they are leaning very far to the right as far as the Jewish people and the nation of Israel are concerned.

Moor goes on to write:

It's astonishing that this is a controversial view in the 21st century. It's surely a feat of Zionist historicizing that otherwise intelligent and moral people in the West continuously affirm the "right of Israel to exist as the Jewish state." The racism inherent in this statement -- Jewish privilege exists through ethnic cleansing and apartheid -- is appalling. Yet, people uncritically affirm that "right."

Let me correct Moor's statement before continuing on with what I wish to say about IPMN. It is not and was not ethnic cleansing. It was a battle between one state and the many others who attacked that state. There were atrocities on both sides. Some Palestinians were pushed out by Israel, some fled because they thought they could come back after the Arab nations who had attacked Israel destroyed her.

A Jewish Israel exists because wise and compassionate peoples believed that after 2000 years of persecution a state for the Jews was the answer to that problem. Israel is a haven that all Jews acknowledge. The ancient homeland of the Israelites was chosen for the very reason that it was the ancient homeland of the Jewish people. (Uganda & the United States were considered.) It was also chosen because Jewish people were already living in the land. The attribute ‘indigenousness’ belongs as much if not more to the Jews as it does to any other people living there.

There already exists, in the Middle East, as well as several other areas Islamic nations. If a one state solution were used in solving the problems between the Palestinians and Israelis there would soon no longer be a safe haven for the Jews in the Middle East. History has already shown that in the midst of a crisis within a nation the Jews are often the scapegoat. It would seem that the Palestinian writer does not want a two state solution because he does not want a Jewish State. Does the IPMN want a Jewish State?

I do not know if Ahmed Moor is a Muslim or a Christian, I do know that the members of IPMN are Presbyterian and hopefully Christian. Several Christian theologians have written and spoken about the place of the Jew within God’s keeping love. And they have seen the land of Israel as a sign that God keeps his promises.

For instance, I have quoted David Torrance and his list of ways that God is confronting the nations through the Jews. Of the State of Israel he writes:

Their presence in the promised land reminds us in the twentieth century that our destiny is not in our hands. The nations do not hold their destiny in their own hands. It is not in the hands of their governments. Our destiny is in the hand of God who personally intervenes in history challenging the nations to humble themselves and to obey him, even as he challenged Pharaoh.
....
Israel’s return to the land of promise, following as it does an attempt under Hitler to obliterate everything Jewish, reminds us not only that God is the Lord of history but also that events seem to be moving fairly fast toward the ultimate goal of history.

And Karl Barth reminds all of those who disparage the Jew that we do so because the Jew is a sign that we must all live by the grace of God. (The Christian is that too.) Barth writes:

Why do we so dislike to be told that the Jews are the chosen people? Why does Christendom continually search for fresh proof that this is no longer true? In a word, because we do not enjoy being told that the sun of free grace, by which alone we can live, shines not upon us, but upon the Jews, that it is the Jews who are elect and not the Germans, the French or the Swiss, [or the Arabs or Americans] and that in order to be chosen we must, for good or ill, either be Jews or else be heart and soul on the side of the Jews. ‘Salvation is of the Jews.” It is in their existence that we non-Jews come up against the rock of divine choice, which first passing over us is primarily made by Another, a choice which can concern us only in that it firsts concerns Him and cannot affect us except in Him and through Him.

Barth goes on to point out that we must not reject the One Jew, looking down from his cross. But his point is clear and Barth goes on explaining with the thought that to be chosen means we are guests in the house of the Jews. While we need sometimes to criticize the State of Israel we should not be suggesting that the place of safety provided for the Jewish people in the Holy Land should not exist. And I say ‘we’ here because the IPMN has pulled the whole Presbyterian Church in after them. They are we so we must keep apologizing for their/our actions.

We are in great danger of joining in history’s goosestep with the IPMN’s kind of thinking.



[1] It may be Noushin Framke, since she is the chair for the IPMN’s communications work group.

[2] picture by Christopher Juncker

Divesting from Israel: extreme Islam, Presbyterians and Socialism all in California

Reading a news item on Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Israel/Palestine Facebook, "Noushin Framke, Israel Palestine Mission Network: a divestment ballot initiative for California," I discovered there is a campaign to put an initiative on the ballot in California to require that “California's public retirement systems, the State Teachers' Retirement System (STRS) and the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS),” “sell stocks held in companies that support Israeli settlements or provide military equipment and services to the State of Israel.”

The paper linked to by the IPMN is a weird alternative news paper, The Smirking Chimp, and it seems obsessive for a Presbyterian Middle East organization to link to such an outlet. However, the link does bring up multiple issues such as questions about where such funds really go. But the bigger problem I see is the list of individuals and organizations that are attempting to put the divestment initiative on the ballot.

The list of individuals includes at least six ministers. Three of them are Presbyterian. There is at least one Rabbi. But what I find somewhat offensive is the many Islamic organizations backing this campaign. Several of them are quite practical and helpful to both the Muslim community and probably the larger community. But one in particular bothers me immensely. The Muslim Student Associations of the West offers resources about Islam, some from Saudi Arabia.

Writing about the misconceptions about Islam MCA states:

“Islam is the name of a way of life which the Creator wants us to follow. We avoid the word religion because in many non-Islamic societies, there is a separation of "religion and state." This separation is not recognized at all in Islam: the Creator is very much concerned with all that we do, including the political, social, economic, and other aspects of our society. Hence, Islam is a complete way of life.”

In writing of human rights they refer to 4:59 in the Qur’an and then write:

“From this verse, it is clear that the state's obligation of obedience to the Creator is as important as the obedience of the individual. Hence, the Islamic state must derive its law from the Qur'an and Sunnah. This principle excludes certain choices from the Islamic state's options for political and economic systems, such as a pure democracy, unrestricted capitalism, communism, socialism, etc. For example, a pure democracy places the people above the Qur'an and Sunnah, and this is disobedience to the Creator. However, the best alternative to a pure democracy is a democracy that implements and enforces the Shari'ah (Islamic Law).”

I left the links in the above paragraph since they refer to the government of an Islamic state and show how violence is considered an acceptable way to spread Islam.

On the list, aligned with this type of Islamic organization, are many other organizations that are involved in extreme socialism. No novelist could imagine a more diverse alliance of potential enemies, potential enemies to each other that is. But then one thinks of the past and an emperor who was supposed to be god matched with a failed painter who imagined that he would begin an empire that would last a thousand years (they didn’t like the Jewish people either) and one sees that history is often full of evil/ tragic characters.

Even in California, I believe this push to divest from Israel will fail. God forgive us if it does not.

Questions abound! GA, Israel/Palestine Mission Network & hate?

I am troubled. When I go to the General Assembly Mission Council page for groups and networks under World Mission Networks I find that the only listing for Israel and Palestine is the Israel/Palestine Mission Network, including all of their awful links.

Questions abound! Why did the IPMN bother to Twitter this bit of information. “Jewish leader in Egypt convicted of fraud http://bit.ly/d9u9pQ 6:33 AM Jul 14th”? It’s not about Israel but about a small barely surviving group of Jews in Egypt. Sometimes I think that the people of the IPMN hate the Jewish people.

Another question. Why has IPMN’s linked to this article on James Wall’s blog. “This is No Longer Your Daddy's Presbyterian Church (USA)” I dislike many things about this article but two in particular:

First, the article comes with a picture. The woman in the picture is a friend of mine. She is a pastor and she is always in prayer as you see her in the picture. In fact, there are several waitresses in Minneapolis who were surprised when she asked “When we say grace what may we pray about for you.” The picture is from the LA Times, and there the reporter pointed out that she was in prayer. But not Wall.

He is using the picture to suggest she is the parent who can no longer claim ownership of the PCUSA. Besides misusing someone’s picture just to make a point, Wall seems to forget that any Christian church or denomination belongs to the Lord Jesus Christ. Unless, of course they have kicked Jesus out and are following the enemy of their souls. But then he still has power over them.

Second, Wall glosses over the good editing done on the Middle East Study Committee’s report and hurries on to Item 08-09. That was the overture asking the GA to refer the two papers, "Christians & Jews, A People of God," and “Toward an Understanding of Christian-Muslim Relations”.

I wrote constantly about this overture because it included a paper from the Israel/Palestine Mission Network which stated that the Jewish organizations in the United States had threatened Louisville with a package which was possibly a bomb and had burned down a Church.
If commissioners wanted to refer the Jewish paper they should have voted 08-03 down and not passed 08-09.

The Muslim paper passed and it is far more troubling then the Jewish paper since in one paragraph it equates the Muslim god with our Christian God. I hope Wall is wrong when he writes, “What happened to the Jewish-Christian dialogue study paper is nothing less than an ecclesiastical tectonic shift in the history of the Presbyterian Church (USA).”

Here is one more why question with a link and I believe it connects with my thought that IPMN hates the Jewish people. They hate them so much that they seem to hate those who sometimes speak for them.

Noushin Framke, the chair of the communications committee for IPMN, on her blog, which is connected to the IPMN site, writes of an organization I belong to. (This means that her blog is on the PCUSA site.) Her blogging is about the Presbyterians for Middle East Peace’s General Assembly breakfast:

“7 am breakfast at the "Presbyterians 4 Peace" event. This is a group with an Orwellian name - Why Orwellian? because they think working for peace means to stand in the middle and not take sides... meantime, everything they stand for makes for anything but peace ~ many of the people who had shown up expected the breakfast to be an IPMN event and they found out it was run by IPMN's opposition within the church. The purpose of the breakfast was to attack the MESC report and cmt."

I was at that breakfast with my husband. It was a wonderful event which brought a lot of clarity. The lady we sat beside was a commissioner. She was not pro Israel but she was there because she wanted the information. She knew where she was. A reporter sat behind us.

“Henderson of Auburn Sem spoke, then a J-Street rep, then Byron Shafer who was on the MESC cmt and i guess resigned in the end of the process?? not sure - maybe not - but he was the sole dissenting vote. Word is that the MESC bent over backwards to please him and he strung them along and then bailed on them at the end - nasty. Henderson and Shafer's pro-Israel propoganda [sic] was hard to sit through and they both had an air of lecturing from on high... and Henderson kept calling anyone who doesn't agree with her ‘partisan.’”

“Word is” is not very convincing- I would suggest that the reader go to the Presbyterians for Middle East Peace site and listen to all of the speeches and find out what they really did say.

“the J street rep basically said that you presbyterians are great to work with but you need to NOT take strong positions (unless they are our positions) - and if you do, we will have to stop working with you - Is that a threat, i thought to myself, and the next thing i hear, the rep says "and i don't mean this as a threat, but...."

But what did Rachel Lerner, the Vice President of J Street, actually say:

“When I read this proposed study document I felt myself moving into a self-protective position. I was truly so disturbed by what I was reading unable to find a familiar or even a balanced narrative in these pages I found myself using language I don’t normally use clinging to defensive positions which surprised me to be honest ….

Every activist I talked to who read the "letter to our American Jewish Friends," the recommendations of the committee, the "Kairos Document," had the same reaction why would they do this, how could they do this, How can we work with them now?

This is to say that our grassroots who are standing up for justice in the Middle East who should be your partners who likely come down on so many issues and policies precisely where you do, who share your goals will not be able to work with you for peace if this document is adopted because this document will push them into a corner and force them into a defensive stance and I want to clear about this I do not mean this as a threat. If this report is passed we will not be issuing a directive to our locals that they cannot partner with Presbyterian Churches but with the passage of this study the Church will alienate us and as a result our actives will not want to work with you and this will damage terribly the possibility of a future relationship this would be a tragedy it would be a terrible shame not to have you at the table with us because we need you …”

This is a Jewish organization that wants an end to the Gaza blockade and an end to the settlements. If the Israel/Palestine Mission Network can listen to that being said and still put out such hateful speech-we still have very deep problems. Perhaps we need a new Presbyterian organization alongside IPMN dealing with peace in the Middle East. One that, as Byron Shafer says in his speech, will love both sides. And perhaps even love their fellow Presbyterians.

Israel in tents in Haiti

The Israel/Palestine Mission Network is now featuring a blog called GOD BLISS by Gila Svirsky.

On the blog posting Svirsky takes the time to make disparaging remarks about Israeli help in Haiti, She writes:

"Last night I watched a popular weekly TV satire called “A Wonderful Country”, reprising Israel’s good deeds in sending a field hospital and PR team to Haiti. PR team? Yes, and well worth it, with the Israeli doctors saving lives and delivering babies enough to warrant many press releases. “Good job, good job, Israelis!” gush the patients. From under the rubble, one Hatian peers out and moans, “It was almost worth having an earthquake to meet all you wonderful folks from Israel.”

Svirsky then goes on to write about the problems in Gaza and how Israeli is to blame for everything. But I was amazed at her inability to allow anything good to be said of Israel. To see what the show, 'A Wonderful Country' was making fun of here is the real thing, not the satire, a video from MSNBC and the nightly news.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

But better still is a letter written home by an Israeli soldier:

IDF Soldier's Eyewitness Account In Haiti
The Delegation to Haiti - Sent by an IDF soldier in Haiti to his parents.Translated from the
Hebrew, by Jameel @ The Muqatahttp://muqata.blogspot.com

In the lifesaving IDF Medical Corps Delegation to Haiti which is housed in tents, doctors prevent disabilities. They administer aid to the sick, provide warmth, love, and a human touch. They love the wounded.In the IDF Medical Corps Delegation to Haiti which is housed in tents located in the middle of a hell, every complex medical case has an ethics review board.

In the IDF Medical Corps Delegation to Haiti which is housed in tents, the chances of success are debated whether to amputate the entire leg of a child: the chances of a premature infant to survive while on a ventilator in a preemie unit in the tent.

In the IDF Medical Corps Delegation to Haiti which is housed in tents, there were no rods left to brace complex fractures. Each rod costs 5000 Euros. Money is not the problem. There simply isn't any. An emergency room nurse had an idea. She went with with Munitions NCO to take similar rods to a local metal shop where they made dozens of new rods. They continue to save lives.

In the IDF Medical Corps Delegation to Haiti which is housed in tents, there is a networked computer system for patient management and tracking. X-rays taken in the radiation tent are viewed on a digital viewing system in the orthopedic tent.

In the IDF Medical Corps Delegation which came from Israel in the Middle East to Haiti, there are American volunteer doctors. They have no other useful installation in which to work in. A doctor and nurse from Germany came. They heard this is best hospital in Haiti. An emergency room team from Colombia arrived with all their equipment and asked if they could set up next to us to be part of our hospital. England is the enlightened country in Europe, the one which has an academic boycott of Israel; twenty British doctors and nurses asked to work with us.

All these people, without exception, stand together at the morning formation at 7 AM in the flag square. The flag of Israel. The flag of a country which was established after the USA was already superpower. After the British left a land under their control. After Colombia was already an established country. After the Holocaust against the Jewish people."

The rest of this can be found at the Muoata.

Islam's connection to Christianity versus Judaism's connection

He turned his eyes about him; his mouth opened and his lips curled back over his teeth. Then he seemed to make an effort towards control, and began to mutter something to himself. ‘Not much yet, lord god!’ Richardson heard. ‘Slowly, lord, slowly! I’ll make sacrifice—the blood of the sacrifice,’ and at that a sudden impatient anger caught the young man.

‘Fool,’ he cried out, ‘there’s only one sacrifice, and the God of gods makes it, not you.’ (Charles Williams The Place of the Lion)

Many years ago, when I began college, I took some classes that would give me knowledge about some of my immediate experiences. For instance my husband and I, with our six children, often made trips to an orphanage in Baja so I took a class on Mexican history. The teacher was intrigued with the history of the Aztec period so we didn’t get very far into the modern history of Mexico. We stood far too long around the bloody altars of the Aztec’s human sacrifices.

To supplement my knowledge of the Hebrew Bible I took a wonderful class on Jewish history taught by Mrs. Gabriel. That class was one of my favorite classes even though the teacher used the book The Passover Plot to teach about the beginning of Christianity. Yes, I understand that Jewish people do not believe Mary was a virgin or that Jesus rose from the dead after being crucified.

So Walid Khalidi, the scholar who spoke at the UN this year (2009) on the "Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people" did not shock me when he inferred that Jewish scholars held some very poor views of Jesus and Mary.

But I was shocked while listening to the videos of Khalidi’s UN speech posted at the Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Khalidi, who is speaking about his concern that Israel is trying to make Jerusalem a Jewish Capital, in the second video, attempts to make the case that Islam is closer to Christianity than Judaism because of the former’s high regard for Jesus and Mary.

But while Islam does hold Mary and Jesus in high regard one might ask, “Which Jesus and Mary would that be?” Or “Why is the Hebrew Bible Sacred to Christians but not the Qur’an?” And of great importance to those who love Jesus and love their brothers and sisters in Christ, “Why in light of Khalidi’s appeal to the relationship between Muslims and Christians do most Islamic countries persecute those Christians who evangelize Muslims?”

Khalidi believes it is wonderful that the Muslim God did not allow Jesus to suffer crucifixion and instead raised him to heaven to return at the end of time. And he also sees the Islamic belief that Mary was a virgin as a sign of Islam’s strong connection to Christianity. But Islam’s connection to Christianity falls and is broken on the person of Jesus Christ as do all other attempts at redefining the biblical Jesus.

To the Muslim, Jesus is not God and so, although Mary may have been a virgin, she was not carrying God in her womb, but merely a perfect human who was to be a prophet. And if Jesus was neither God nor died on the cross, and therefore was not raised from the dead, then as Paul stated, our Christian faith is worthless and our sins are not forgiven. (The sacrifice of Jesus on the cross for our sins is the holy Trinity’s great gift.) But this worthlessness of the Christian faith is doubly certain without the Hebrew Scriptures for then Christ for us would have no meaning at all.

John Calvin was quick to remind his readers that the Jewish sacrifices and their sacraments looked forward to Jesus Christ the perfect sacrifice. And when Jesus taught his disciples, it was always from the deep riches of the Hebrew text. When Jesus walked the road to Emmaus with two of his disciples after his resurrection, he explained his mission, suffering and resurrection from the Hebrew Scriptures, including the law, the prophets and the writings. His words, “Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into his glory?” It is from the Old Testament text that we know Jesus not from the Qur’an.

If Khalidi wants to prove there is a close connection between Christianity and Islam he must go to the biblical text and understand who Jesus Christ is within that text. He could then reframe his assertion offering a true understanding of who Christians believe Jesus is. Next he must understand the close connection between the Jewish and Christian community since they share the same sacred text, the Hebrew Bible. They also share the same biblical understanding about God and humanity. That is that humans are all sinful and in need of God’s forgiving grace. And God, for both peoples, is the one who provides the sacrifice:

“Then Abraham raised his eyes and looked and behold, behind him a ram caught in the thicket by his horns; and Abraham took the ram and offered him up for a burnt offering in the place of his son. Abraham called the name of that place The Lord Will Provide, as it is said to this day, ‘In the mount of the Lord it will be provided. (Genesis 22:13-14)”

Finally Khalidi must plead for his own faith leaders to stop persecuting Christian converts as well as those Christians whose communities have existed since the first centuries of Christendom.

Shlomo Sand's book "The Invention of the Jews" from a Christian perspective

I have not finished reading Shlomo Sand’s book The Invention of the Jewish People. But I have made a good beginning and have some thoughts that could be placed beside the videos of an interview of Sand’s that is on the Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).

My first impression has to do with the theologian Paul Tillich. His idea of symbols and whether they can be broken were helpful in looking at Nazi and other totalitarian ideologies and their symbols. Tillich felt that what he saw as the great symbol of Christianity, the cross, was important because the cross as a symbol could be so easily broken. Here I believe he ran up against both a reality and an absolute. The cross is more than a symbol and the whole world is changed if it can be broken.

Sand’s ideas about nations and history are also meant to deal with Nazi ideology and totalitarian nations. With empathy I see him attempting to make sense out of his past. That is, as a Jewish man who is the child of those who suffered under Nazi rule he must be looking through the lens of the question which shape all survivors, “why.”

He is also a historian who knows that it was an idea of essentialism which invaded the thought processes of nations and created the climate for Nazism to rise. And he sees the word ethnos operating in the same manner. As Sand puts it:

”The murderous first half of the twentieth century having caused the concept of race to be categorically rejected, various historians and other scholars enlisted the more respectable concept of ethnos in order to preserve the intimate contact with the distant past. Ethnos, meaning ‘people’ in ancient Greek, had served even before the Second World War as a useful alternative to, or a verbal intermediary between ‘race’ and ‘people.’ But its common ‘scientific’ use began only in the 1950s, after which it spread widely. Its main attraction lies in its blending of cultural background and blood ties, of a linguistic past and biological origin in other words, its combining of a historical product with a fact that demands respect as a natural phenomenon.” (28)

So how does a Christian use Sand’s book? Hopefully, to understand that it was essentialism on the whole that helped to create a totalitarian nation; that it is perhaps ethnos that might lead to the same problems anywhere. A people who see themselves as superior to others because of their past, their culture or their particular strengths tend to look down on others. But still there is a problem with Sand’s book. And this is where Tillich enters the picture for me.

Sand like Tillich believes that by eliminating an absolute, the nation as essential, the nation which arises out of an eternal people and their culture; there can be a prevention of totalitarianism. But he has run into an absolute that cannot be broken on his rock.

The Jewish people are God’s people, his beloved. They are a people with roots in antiquity and this is Sand’s particular anti-theme. Sand sees Israel as he sees other nations. There is no Israel but what belongs to myth and modern history. In other words Israel is an invented nation with myth for its history. For Sand there is no Israelite tribes, no Abraham, no Moses, no Kingdom of David, no exiles.

Sand looks at the Jewish historians based in the Zionist outlook and attempts to show that they were intent on providing a mythological foundation for Israel. He quotes Yitzhak Baer, after writing about his criticism of another Jewish historian who failed to write Jewish history from an ‘organic’ beginning. As Sand puts it the historian had “detached Jewish monotheism from its homeland in the first stage of its appearance, and then erroneously depicted an idealized and fairly comfortable exile. There was no description in his work of the longing for a natural existence in the homeland or the aspiration for sovereignty that had accompanied and defined Jews throughout their wanderings in history.” (101)

But one must disregard the Hebrew Bible as well as such Jewish historians in order to follow Sand. And for the Christian there is no faith without the truthfulness of the Hebrew Bible. When Jesus walked the road to Emmaus with two disciples after his resurrection he taught them about himself by reference to the whole Hebrew Bible. “Then beginning with Moses and with all the Prophets, he explained to them the things concerning himself in all the Scriptures.” (Luke 24: 27)

Also: “Now he said to them. ‘These are my words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” (Luke 24: 44)

Added to Sand’s rejection of the ancient history of the Jews is his rejection of the Jews of Europe and the Middle East as those who are descended from any ancient Hebrew peoples. While this kind of thought has been used by various anti-Semitics, Sand does not intend it that way. But those Christians who use it will eventually fall into such categories if they pick up and use other exaggerated views about the Jewish people.

With empathy and care for the author, still one must not accept the main idea in Sand’s book about the history of the Jews. To use his book or his ideas and interviews as a means of discounting a Jewish State is from a Christian point of view an unfaithful exercise. The idea that Sand’s ideas are helpful can only mean an endorsement of secularism and in many cases anti-Semitism.