How can one kill the One who has destroyed death?

Ancient myths are full of god slayers; they are easy. Imagine a humanlike god whose parent, also god or goddess, have mistreated him. He simply yields a sword and lops off their head. But what of the god slayer who calls himself a pastor and a Christian. You can kill almost any god with enough words, but how do you put to death the one who has already died and is resurrected. How do you kill the One who has destroyed death.

John Shuck may think he is, with his words and misguided scholarship, undoing the reality of the eternal Creator of the universe—the Redeemer of sinners, but the Hound of Heaven is in the chase. Our steps are manifold but if his mark is on us they only lead to Him, the crucified and resurrected One. A history of humanity’s creation of a monotheistic god? Monotheogenesis: The Emergence of One God, is utter nonsense.

Even if some scholars believe all of the early books of the Hebrew Bible were not written until the Jewish Babylonian captivity, as Shuck insists, they were nonetheless compiled from earlier writings. They didn’t emerge out of nothingness. They are the words of God written by human authors.
 
The early Christians were considered atheists because they did not believe in any of the god’s of the empire and certainly not in the deity of the emperor. But, unlike the pastor mentioned above, they did believe in the Lordship of Jesus Christ. As the apostle John writes:

For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, he has explained him. (John 1:17-18)

We are nearing Easter and lent is just ahead; Ash Wednesday is upon us. So we enter a period of contemplating our sin and death—our mortality. But for the believing Christian mortality is only a little death, not final. Athanasius, an early church father who witnessed the last terrible persecution of Christians by a Roman emperor, according to C.S. Lewis’ introduction to Sister Penelope Lawson’s translation, was undoubtedly friends with many of the martyrs. Athanasius asks his readers in his writing, On the Incarnation:

If you see with your own eyes men and women and children, even, thus welcoming death for the sake of Christ’s religion, how can you be so utterly silly and incredulous and maimed in your mind as to realize that Christ, to whom these all bear witness, Himself, gives the victory to each, making death completely powerless for those who hold His faith and bear the sign of the cross.

But what of that one who calls himself a Christian and yet denies the Lord, for that matter what of him or her who utterly rejects God. I have quoted Walter Wangerin, a Lutheran pastor, before. Because he understands there to be many kinds of deaths a human experiences, he refers to the final death as the fourth death or dying absolute. That which a believing Christian does not experience. He writes:

"The fourth death is the only death that deserves our deepest dread. It is to be distinguished from the third. ...

Hear, then of the death those who trust in Jesus shall not die. Hear and tremble and give thanks to God.

It is the Dying Absolute. It is the sundering of every relationship for good, forever, and for all. It is more than the cutting of earthly relationships, for it is the experience of eternal, irrevocable solitude. It is perpetual exile from God. From love. It is perhaps (though I do not understand this) the death that knows it is dead. Now, finally, one knows what love is, though one is severed forever from loving and being loved. Now one knows God both in goodness and in glory, and fears him, and honors him, and would even believe in him, but cannot, for God has departed from that one eternally. This is the death of every holy alternative: what is, must be the same forever.

It is a divine and solemn irony, for God hath finally granted the sinner, now in his fourth death, what he took from God in the first: complete independence, a perfect autonomy, a singularity like unto nothing in all possibilities--except the singularity of God before he began to create. But he who has died the fourth death is not God; he could never create, and now he can accomplish nothing. He is the god of a little realm that admits one god only, his impotent self. He can only know despair. He is lost, and 'lost' is all he may say of himself forever, no attribute, no other characteristic, no past nor future, that single thing. 'I perish.' Apollumai

The utter state of solitude is the Dying Absolute. Outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Throughout the generations, its common name has been Hell."

As we contemplate our sin, our death, our mortality in the coming weeks let us not only pray God’s mercy and kindness upon ourselves but pray fervently for the unbeliever. Pray the cross will begin to shadow our every step and the Hound of Heaven’s hot yet cooling breath will fall on our disbelieving companions. Pray that the one who would kill God with his words will be made alive by the blood of the living One.  

Zionism Unsettled: the insufferable actions of the Israel/Palestine Mission Network-Update

Update: A friend sent me this information: "For several years now, all kinds of entities of the PCUSA have published stuff on the same web address that PNS uses. However, PNS has no responsibility for anything that is not clearly published by PNS itself. The article about Zionism Unsettled says it was published by The Israel Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). They are free to do what they want, including opening up the possibility for responses, without PNS doing the same thing for their articles, and they don’t need PNS permission for it."

This changes most of my thoughts on this posting. Everywhere I have placed the Presbyterian News Service I should put the Israel/Palestine Mission Network, except for the article by the PC (U.S.A.) So I am changing it now, including the title.

This is insufferable and awful! The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) really doesn’t want to hear the voices of their own members if they disagree with any supposedly progressive organization in the denomination.  On the other hand the Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the PC (U.S.A.) advertised their publication on the news service with an article about Zionism Unsettled. “Presbyteriannetwork opens new dialogue on Zionism” was published on January 21^st. They immediately allowed comments about the publication. They listened to any bigot who wanted to write a comment. The last one by George Duke being:

The Jewish supremacists should take this report seriously. It shows that the church will not shill for their lies any more.

The other news article about Zionism Unsettled was the PC (U.S.A.) attempting to take a neutral position. That article, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) remains committed to peace for Israelis and Palestinians” was published February the 13^th. The PNS did not allow comments, not even for several days after I asked the author, Kathy Francis, the PC (U.S.A.) communications director why none were allowed. Then after burying the article in their archives they finally published some of the comments. I say some because one of the now published comments is by Presbyterian Dr. Martha E. Leatherman who is asking why her comment was not published and I see no other comment by her.

But back to the other article, the one which lifts up and highlights Zionism Unsettled. While there are comments by Presbyterians on the first article, “Presbyteriannetwork opens new dialogue on Zionism,” there are also well known, and unknown bigots with comments such as the one above.

One of the ant-Semites is Tom Usher. He wrote and IPMN published it:

Zionism is anti-Christ. Ask the Jewish-Zionists. They aren't interested in God's and Jesus's message of loving their neighbors. They stomp on their neighbors trying to get them to submit under Jewish supremacy. They steal their land by force of arms. Have you heard the racism and ethnic bigotry coming out of Jewish-Zionist leaders? It's wicked. How can the Church not stand opposed to twisted, worldly Zionism? Peace, love, and truth, Tom Usher

Usher writes on a blog, Real Liberal Christian Church. One article he connects to on his blog is from Veterans Today and it is the idea that Israel was the instigators of 9-11. It is an interview by Gordon Duff, chairman of Veterans Today.

Another commenter is Tyron Parsons.  He writes and IPMN allowed:

This is good news. Finally a traditional Christian org in America stands up to the uber hypocritical "Jewish" Zionist power structure. Its about time. Fact is, Jewish Zionism is based in Judaism/Talmudism as an all encompassing outward expression of other Jewish controlled movements such as Marxism-Communism. Its end goal is a world Gov seated by the main Anti Christ. Zionism is Judaism and it is the so called "Jews" common law where as true Israelites (European/white/Christians) common law is Christian/Natural law. Both of these common laws show the difference between the DNA/spirit of Esau "Jews" and European/whites-Christians (Jacob-Israel/Judah). The so called Jews, "Israelis" bid for World Gov will happen but it is destined to be replaced by God's people (Authentic Christians) when the true lord returns, exposing the false and planting HIS kingdom on their apostasy. (By the way- don't even try and calling me "anti semitic". I will post "Jewish" admissions to all I have said above, all day long". 95% of the so called "Jews" don't have natural links to the tribes of Israel. They are impostors (Rev 2 and 3) coming from Maternal links to Esau and Ashkenaz who are from Japeth, not Shem (Genesis 10:3).

Another commenter, Charles Carlson, who sells historical revisionists (denying the Holocaust) books states:

 Bravo PCUSA: I cannot wait to get my copy of Zionism Unsettled. Based on all reviews, including desperately distorted ones from some who share in the guilt. This is a vital need fulfilled. And PCUSA will not be the last. For too long Christian Zionist in American evangelical churches, including, Richard L. Land of the Southern Baptist convention, have blame the victim for every act of brutality against them, and getting away with it. But the movement to discover and expose what Occupation is, is rooted and growing in the traditional churches like the PCUSA, who know abut [sic]missions. Scripture is on their side. "Blessed are the Peacemakers." Restated: Who would Jesus Bomb, or imprison for sixty years? From one who has seen Gaza from the inside, Charles E Carlson

I have written about Charles Carlson here: Who is Charles E. Carlson & why does he picket churches?.

This is a true picture of what happens when one opens the door to darkness, all the minions of hell will waddle in through the door. It also a picture of what happens when you ignore the voices of your own denomination. It may be that the Israel/Palestine Mission Network speaks to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) but so do all of the other members and their voices have real meaning. I believe an apology needs to come from the Office of the General Assembly and from the Israel/Palestine Mission Network. And while we are in the business of apologies the Jewish people need an apology for all of the trash allowed in the comments.

And I should apologize to the Presbyterian News Service because I thought they were involved in the problem.

 

"She has failed to proclaim with sufficient emphasis that our bodies belong to the Body of Christ"

I too lived in the south, Springdale, Arkansas, when segregation was not only rampant but the law, and many white people hated blacks. I was not quite a teenager but I understood how sinful it was. In Springdale no black was allowed at all. I once saw attendants at a filling station turn and walk inside when an African American family drove up for gas; the same thing happened when they drove across the street. But this is not the same thing at all as this article, When ‘Religious Liberty’ Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia, portrays it.[1]

I saw the article because the Presbyterian Voices for Justice posted it on their Facebook page.  The article itself is overshadowed by a picture that is supposed to remind everyone that Christians who don’t want to engage in ceremonies that they believe to be sin are like these bigoted KKK people.

 

However, all of the people we have read about who are being fined and harassed because they won’t provide flowers, or cakes, or pictures for same gender weddings don’t hate homosexuals. Most of them have provided their goods to gays and lesbians, they simply do not want to be a part of a ceremony they believe is unbiblical.

They have not turned anyone away from essential needs and would not. They wouldn't refuse to sit beside them and intend to be friends.

But the truly hateful thing to me is the way Presbyterian Voices of Justice uses such articles to malign those they supposedly believe to be brothers and sisters. In this context the call for unity and reconciliation in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is absurd.

I do have a few suggestions for those being forced to participate in ceremonies that are sinful. Perhaps one could say to each person as they pin a corsage or flower on before the wedding, Jesus loves you and died for you. Perhaps as the baker carefully sets up the cake they can softly sing  "Oh to be Like Thee Blessed Redeemer… (pure as thou art.)"

Perhaps as the photographer moves about taking pictures ….well on that one I have no idea. But perhaps you have a suggestion. Of course, I am not serious. But here is a serious suggestion, that some organization, a group of churches or others, set up an account whose sole purpose would be to aide individuals who are fined for refusing to go against their faith. And let us pray for Presbyterian Voices For Justice. I have seen some good things on their site such as tributes to African American women and quotes by Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

But not this one:

The Church confesses ...She has found no strong and effective answer to the contempt  for chastity and to the proclamation of sexual Libertinism. All she has achieved has been an occasional expression of moral indignation. She has rendered herself guilty of the loss of the purity and soundness of youth. She has failed to proclaim with sufficient emphasis that our bodies belong to the Body of Christ. (Ethics)

 

---

[1] For a good explanation of what the Arizona bill was about read: No, this is not Jim Crow for gays, Part Two.

A reposting of my 2011 Presbytery presentation against Belhar

I saw on my feed someone looking at the presentation on Belhar I gave on March 24, 2011. I thought perhaps it would be helpful to some people again in this next round of voting at General Assembly. I am reposting:

My presentation against Belhar at Sacramento Presbytery

At Sacramento Presbytery's last meeting, in February, before we voted on the three big amendments, two presenters gave a short, five minute presentation, one for and one against. I gave the presentation against the Confession of Belhar. Just in case my presentation has any thoughts that will be helpful I am posting it here.

Adding a confession to the PCUSA’s Book of Confessions is a very serious action. So serious that it requires a two/thirds vote by the Presbyteries and a second vote by the following General Assembly. The Confession of Belhar, within its text, must above all confess Jesus Christ as Lord in order to be a true confession of faith. That is what we must consider as we vote.

On the Racial Justice web page of the PCUSA, one finds information about Belhar which includes this: “It [Belhar] calls the church to a deeper appreciation of the values of unity in diversity in relation to the divisions of race and culture and many other facets of the human condition.”

History: Belhar was written by the Dutch Reformed Mission Church of South Africa in the midst of apartheid; black Christians of South Africa were sinfully excluded from fellowship with their white brothers and sisters. A statement about such horrific conditions was needed, Belhar fulfilled that need. It was faithful in its context. But it is not a universal confession. Although structured in the same manner as the Theological Declaration of Barmen it does not confess Christ in the same manner rather it confesses unity.

Unity: Belhar calls for an unqualified unity. In one place it states: “We reject any doctrine “which absolutizes natural diversity or the sinful separation of people in such a way that this absolutization hinders or breaks the visible and active unity of the church ...” In another place it states, “a refusal earnestly to pursue this visible unity as a priceless gift is sin,” and still further, “anything which threatens this unity may have no place in the church and must be resisted.” While “true faith in Jesus Christ” is mentioned as a boundary it is not defined.

So let me ask, are we, as a church, called to be in unity (that is in agreement) with those who deny the deity of Christ, the authority of scripture, or justification by faith? Unity without qualification could mean that we, as a connectional church, would be denying the faith.

And notice, as I have pointed out, the Racial Justice page interprets Belhar’s unity in terms that not only include unity in the midst of racial diversity but also unity in the midst of “many other facets of the human condition.” But, the human condition is broken and sinful. Unity needs a foundation; a Savior who transforms. We must confess Jesus Christ before we confess unity.

Racism: There are only two small references to racism in Belhar. But both the Confession of 67 and the Brief Statement of Faith speak to racism and diversity in the context of the United States’ particular problems. The Confession of 67 speaks of fair housing, education, work and even political rights. And both the Confession of 67 and the Brief Statement of Faith carefully confess Christ.

The many uses of the Belhar Confession: Because Belhar does not, above all else, confess Jesus Christ, as he is known in Scripture, it may be used for unintended purposes. Insisting on the oneness of Islam, Christianity and Judaism is one suggested use. Others are the ordination of GLBT people, the ‘racism’ of Israel and power sharing. Now you may agree with one or all of these, (certainly the first is not a confession of Christ) but you may agree. Nonetheless you can see the danger of having a document in our Book of Confessions which can, so easily, be used for any particular group’s cause.

Some have countered this argument with the thought that even the Bible has been misused. That is true. But the Bible has corrections within it. One of Belhar’s weaknesses is that it does not.

The need for a Confession from the Southern Cone: Some have suggested that we have no confession from the Global South and Belhar meets this need. But even the racial Justice page admits that the Nicene Creed is a Global Southern Creed. And so is the Apostle’s Creed, since some parts of it were formed in Africa. However, the important point here is that we do not choose Confessions on the basis of where they come from but because it is time to confess anew Jesus Christ. A Confession confesses Jesus Christ that is its purpose.

Please, vote no on the adoption of the Belhar Confession.

Zionism Unsettled: Why Islam over Judaism & Christianity in a Christian book?

 

Several writers and leaders, both Christian and Jewish, have stated that since the Israel/Palestine Mission Network gets its tax free status from its connection to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) then their new publication, Zionism Unsettled is truly a PC (U.S.A.) publication. And that is technically true, and yet we have no idea who actually donated money to make the publication possible because IPMN is sheltered by their relationship within the PCUSA.

So alongside that thought about finances is this question: ‘Why does a supposedly Christian book lift up Islam and the Qur’an but in many ways treats the Holy Scriptures of Judaism and Christianity shamefully?’ Why is the history of radical Islam’s past and contemporary assaults on Christians and Jews mostly neglected while the history of Jewish and Christian sins are emphasized?

Beginning on page seven the authors critique all three monotheistic religions using the idea of religious exceptionalism. That is, the belief that one’s religion is the one true faith or the completed revelation about God. This is how the authors of Zionism Unsettled put it, “the belief that ‘my people’ are unusual, unique, or special.” While IPMN’s authors do not see that view as acceptable, they do see as positive the idea that each religion has a special calling to be a blessing to the nations.

And interesting enough in writing about Zionism and exceptionalism, the authors intertwine Zionism with Judaism. One becomes the other. The authors believe that exceptionalism has a dark side. And sometimes it does, yet that dark side is not clearly or honestly detailed in Zionism Unsettled.

So what is the actual exceptionalism of the three religions? Zionism Unsettled explains in several places what that means for Christians and Jews but not what it means for Islam.

The authors are undoubtedly referring to the Jewish belief that they are the chosen people who have a special covenant relationship with God which includes blessing the nations with God’s law. They point to God’s promise of land to the Jewish people.

The authors are also referring to the Christian claim, to have in Christ the complete revelation of God and the unique way of salvation by means of Christ. But nowhere is the Muslim’s claim that Mohammed is the final prophet and the Qur’an is ultimate truth, spoken about or pointed to as exceptionalism. Yet for many Muslims their kind of exceptionalism includes sharia.  And sharia is too often forced on believer and non-believer alike.

Nonetheless the authors do point out their views of the results of exceptionalism in all three monotheistic religions. Most of their blame is directed at Zionism which they conveniently mix with Judaism.

Beginning their account of Christian exceptionalism the authors write, “Christian exceptionalism beliefs and actions contributed to the Nazi Holocaust, the genocide of Native Americans, and countless other instances of tragic brutality.” Of Islam they write:

Exceptionalist doctrines and behaviors within Islam have contributed to grievous human rights abuses as the massacres during the closing days of the Ottoman Empire, which crescendoed with the Armenian genocide in 1915.

These two statements also need to be unpacked. The Christians first. It should be pointed out that it was not Christian exceptionalism that contributed to the Holocaust but just the opposite. The orthodox Christian believes that Jesus Christ is the final revelation, the only way to God. The German faith movement and the German Christians who contributed to the Nazi’s rise believed that another revelation stood equally beside Jesus as Lord. They believed in an earthly kingdom with Adolf Hitler as a revealed Savior. And in fact, all of the sins, genocide and racism, festering in the above quote have to do with a divergence away from orthodoxy as a means of holding on to some cooperate sin, be it greed, racism or some other self-indulgence.

The reference to Islam, as it was represented by the Ottoman Empire, while true, conveniently leaves out one of the most devastating events of contemporary times—that is the world-wide persecution of Christians in many Muslim countries. Also there is, at the moment, discrimination against Jewish communities in most Muslim countries. There is no need to go back so far into history. It appears with this that IPMN was fearful of insulting the Islamic community.

Most of Zionism Unsettled deals with what the authors see as the main problem and their focus is Zionism exceptionalism. In a small box where religious exceptionalism is explained the authors write of Zionism, which they have, in this case, turned into a religion:

The dark side of Zionist exceptionalism today is the ethnic cleansing and land confiscation of Palestinians justified by an appeal to God’s will derived from biblical texts.

The author’s do give a second negative critique of a radicalized Islam although they do not put it in historically truthful words:

We believe that justice, peace, and reconciliation will become possible for the Jewish, Muslim, and Christian inhabitants of the Holy Land when Israel and its supporters around the world comprehend the impossibility of resolving the crisis through the exercise of power, and radicalized Muslims relinquish the dream of an Islamic theocracy.

The historical untruthfulness here is defining radical Muslim’s Islamic theocracy as a dream. In many Arab states it is a reality and not a dream. In Gaza under Hamas it is a reality and a threat to any democracy. And for radical Islam, with such entities as Hamas—it is also about power.

And then when speaking of holy texts, and I have already written on how the biblical text is used in Zionism Unsettled, whether one is speaking of the Hebrew Bible or the Christian Bible which contains the Hebrew Bible, the Muslim Qur’an gets lifted up by using a Palestinian Muslim. The authors write:

Abu Sway contrasts what he calls the inclusive theology of the Qur’an with the exclusive theology of Zionism, which makes use of the Old Testament to justify separatism, domination, and ethnic cleansing.

After referring to Old Testament texts (Psalm 137:9) which speak of crushing a baby’s head against rocks and of the stories of God’s command to kill all of those in the cities of the ancient promised land the author’s go on to write:

There are many texts in the Qur’an that affirm God’s love for all people, demand that humans act justly toward others, and condemn any form of discrimination. The Qur’an insists that Muslims demonstrate God’s special respect for Jews and Christians because God is revealed in all three Abrahamic faiths.

So once again we need to unpack all of this information. As far as genre or type is concerned the Bible is a very different book than the Qur’an; but not different as far as exclusivity is concerned. The difference is the kind of writing. And yet in the Qur’an we find instructions without mercy. In his book, The Teachings of Jesus and Muhammad, Mateen Elass, born into a Muslim family and now a Presbyterian pastor, lists some of Jesus’ and Muhammad’s words about how to treat enemies. His conclusion is:

 The Qur’an frequently depicts as enemies those who refuse to submit to Allah, who stand opposed to the advance of Islam, who themselves reject the claims of Muhammad to be a true prophet. The prevailing teaching of Muhammad is that enemies are to be shown no mercy unless and until they repent and submit to the authority of Islam; hence the widespread commands for Muslims to fight (In the armed struggle of jihad) against all the enemies of the Prophet. (35) (Italics authors)

The texts the authors of Zionism Unsettled have chosen to pick from the Bible, include the honest thoughts of a person in anguish (the Psalms), it is not a commandment to do so. The commandment by God to kill all of the people in cities of the Holy Land must not be considered easy texts. But we do know that God was calling down judgment on a people who had been warned for over 400 years. They were a people whose false religion included the burning of babies to the god Moloch and the giving of their young people for prostitution.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with that section of Scripture the Qur’an is not more inclusive than the Old or New Testament. And it is shameful that a Christian publication lifts up the Qur’an over the Bible. It does raise questions about the publication, Zionism Unsettled, and its publishers, as well as those who unwittingly or knowingly funded the booklet.

Here is a video, which among other persecutors of Christians, Buddhists for example,  points out the persecutions by Islamic radicalism. It is not silent as is Zionism Unsettled. And keep in mind that many of these countries do not allow Jewish communities.

 

A game of deceit: the Presbyterian News Service and the PC (U.S.A.)

I recently wrote about the Presbyterian refusal to say anything negative about the booklet Zionism Unsettled written and published by the Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). You can read my posting at “The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) refuses to criticize Zionism Unsettled. The Presbyterian News Service article was left at the top of their page since Feb. the 13^th. Today, the 20^th, it was moved into the archives without anyone’s comments being published.  But there is more to the story, as usual.

Yesterday I called the communications director, Kathy Francis, Sr., whose telephone number, 502-569-5194, was placed with the article. I called to ask why the comments others had written had not been published. She seemed surprised and stated that she had just looked and saw no comments and wondered why. Francis informed me that she had written the article and that she had expected a lot of comments. Francis also said she would ask why none were published and promised to call me and let me know if there was a problem.

This morning the article, “Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) remains committed to peace for Israelis and Palestinians,” had been moved and I looked for it in the archives. It is empty of comments and I have not heard back from Francis.

This is typical PC (U.S.A.) communications, but it doesn’t work and it won’t fix the problem. Weary and outraged Presbyterians alongside discouraged and outraged Jews are still, just that, weary, outraged and discouraged.

An Evangelical Presbyterian Pastor on Zionism Unsettled

David Fischler at Stand Firm has written a comprehensive and excellent critique of the Israel/Palestine Mission Network’s Zionism, “PCUSA and the Propagation of Anti-Semitism,” Fischler begins:

“The Presbyterian Church (USA) has a lot of problems, from declining membership and attendance to fleeing congregations to heresy run rampant in its seminaries and pulpits. By and large, those are internal concerns. What the rest of the Christian world should be concerned about is its growing embrace of anti-Semitism, a phenomenon recently highlighted by the publication of a so-called “congregational study resource” called Zionism Unsettled by the Israel Palestine Mission Network (IPMN).

The IPMN–“mandated,” according to a recent press release, by the PCUSA General Assembly in 2004–has had its share of controversy. It has a disturbing habit of relying on the scribblings of known anti-Semitic writers and web sites, even having to shut down its Facebook page so as to try to scrub away its dirty laundry (it keeps popping up, over and over again, on their Twitter feed, however). Now, however, they decided to do a “greatest hits” collection of sorts, combining all of their various tropes into one handy package.

Let’s just say that reading Zionism Unsettled was right up there with plunging steak knives into my eyeballs as a fun way to spend an afternoon. Here are a few examples of why.”

Fischler spends some time exposing the lack of any true historical detail about the atrocities committed against the Jews in Palestine, the attacks by Arab states at the birth of Israel and the persecution of Jews in Arab lands. He lifts up the idea of a Jewish State of Israel and shows how off the mark Zionism Unsettled is when they refer to a Jewish “ethnocracy”. In total Fischler, who is a Presbyterian pastor in the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, exposes the character of Zionism Unsettled with its writers and publishers, and he does this with skill and historical acumen.  You will better understand the many concerns raised by those writing against Zionism Unsettled after reading “PCUSA and the Propagation of Anti-Semitism.”