A voice of decency inside the church

Truthtriumphs

He is only partly right.
If it is only because the Left hates religion(which it very often does) why is none of its venom directed towards fundamentalist Muslim states which are wealthy to boot (another of the Left's bete noires) such as Saudi Arabia?
No. There are 2 distinct reasons for the hatred reserved uniquely for Israel.
1)The irrational hatred of Jews--often passed down through the generations. ie. the oldest hatred.
2)The Left hates it when downtrodden, persecuted people pick themselves and make a success of their lives, because it makes them redundant.
Which other people on the planet have re-invented themselves as successfully as the Jews?
Answer, none, and made the contribution to mankind that they have in every sphere of endeavour, wholly disproportionate to their miniscule numbers.

George Laird

Dear All

Someone agrees with Melanie and this gets a whole blog!

If two people agree then perhaps we might see a video attached.

"Having written so critically of certain Anglican attitudes towards Israel".

Don't you mean people Melanie?

This gives the impression that there is an established Anglican position within the Church.

"I was very heartened indeed to see the realistic and decent comments made by Giles Fraser, vicar of Putney".

Is it possible that there could be people who take an oppose view and that they are decent too?

Finally; I never knew that there was a Church in Putney, still some people will travel far to seek support for their view points.

But Putney, for God Sake, what is the nearest tube to it?

Isn't this place the poor man's Fulham?

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Michael B

Sensibly, refreshingly and well stated.

Jonathan Kay on the Lesson from Israel Apartheid Week: Anti-Semitism is Now a Creature of the Left, excerpt:

"People speak of anti-Semitism as if it were a monolithic evil. But it’s not. There are two distinct strains of Jew hatred. Unfortunately, our society is still fixated on fighting the one that went out of style four decades ago."

[...]

"The third reason is political: The leaders who find anti-Semitism useful today aren’t extreme nationalists such as Hitler, Stalin or Mussolini (though Hugo Chavez admittedly has been wandering into that territory). Instead, they are radical Muslims — and their allies in Western activist groups, who speak the tropes of anti-colonialism, anti-imperialism, anti-Americanism, anti-racism and all the other fashionable antis. In this left-wing intellectual climate, disparaging any race or religion per se is off limits. The preferred tactic is to disparage the allegedly colonial, imperialist, racist etc. nature of their actions."

[...]

"... The moral dimension of the conflict — terrorism versus counter-terrorism, a society seeking peace versus one that seems addicted to war — has been replaced by a sentimental Marxist inspired tale of the virtuous oppressed rising up against an evil oppressor."

h/t Dissecting Leftism

Jason from AZ

I don't think the Left's hatred of Jews and Israel is based on secularism. If that were the case, why does the Left embrace, and never criticize, Islamists, when Muslims are opposed to just about everything the Left allegedly promotes, such as women rights, gay rights, humane treatment of animals, etc., etc.

Yehuda

The mindless "left" has also traditionally viewed all Jews as class enemies, Karl Marx himself having demonised the People from whom he sprang.
A parallel case of perennial demonisation is grounded in the Christian dogma of the Jewish People's eternal damnation as revenge for Jesus' crucifixion.

TomTom

Giles Fraser ? You are cluthcing at straws. The fact is that Leftists attacking Israel are often Jewish Leftists like Steven Rose who don't like jews having a state at all.

There is clearly Anti-Semitism in the sense of a pathology of hatred towards Jews exhibited by many on the Left, but some of those who are so virulent are Jews themselves which is not in itself surprising, but indicative of a blind pathological unreasoning we see from the fanatics of Leftism - who have assumed the role of fanatics of the Right frim the 1930s.

Role-reversal is quite the thing and the Left has become so much The Establishment over the past 50 years that it has become ossified and bigoted and completely irrelevant to the needs of the moment

jose garcia

To george laird

I would like to see from all the amount of time you spend criticising Israel and melanie ,

what other writings do your campaign for human rights do on a daily basis not connected with a country Israel trying to defend their population from obliteration.

I would like to see your articles/street demonstrations criticising hamas for using human shields daily, for promoting xenophobia aganist jews in their own charter, for using women and children as walking explosives.

i would also like to see your articles against Cuban distatorship and the torture of oposition leaders , human rights breaches in russia , china,north korea,Burma, Zimbabwe and darfur.

where do you write about state torture and terrorism on a daily basis?.

or are this issues less important in your opinion?

wolf

@Michael B
The moral dimension of the conflict!!
Indeed!
Are you not confusing the golden rule with greed-politicians? Addiction to war as in the Bible? Moses being told to slaughter and rape in Gods name! Get a grip on these facts and help to eradicate religion and the churches of whatever faith-human suffering!

wolf

Das Kapital is a bestseller.Why?
Cause lots of people are fed up with the political slime,incontinence and dithering of the people we elected and changed their minds when in "power"
Hey ,Mel P if it wasn't for tip-toeing and a mid east arms race,supporting Israelis, Saudis,Jordanians,Egyptians (our allies)we probably would not have the superiority of a IDF destroying at will any obstacle in their quest for the God given land. Religion again-Moses and his delusion lives on! Wake up !

Ben

"...the very identity and existence of the State of Israel is bound up with Judaism..."

Paradoxically, the Zionist pioneers were mostly atheistic Marxists, who wanted to replace the religious bonds that held Jews together by national bonds, and to perpetuate Jewish civilization and culture by creating a Jewish majority state while discarding Jewish religion. Needless to say, things didn't quite work out that way.

And the strongest opponents of Zionism among the Jews were religious Jews - whether Orthodox or Reform - a fact that is still true today.

Then there are some who exaggeratedly decry Israel as a theocracy. Even so, some of Israel's marriage and divorce laws are religious - Halacha for Jews, Sharia for Moslems and Canon law for Christians.

zoltix

Jason has made an important point here.
The Left's warm relationship with islam is difficult to fathom.
The key to understanding this is recognising that for the left, the worst human thought is a racist thought.
It even trumps wealth. Galloway and chums walk hand in hand with wealthy pakistanis with horrific views.
Linked to this is the rule that non white beats white by definition. Generally, internationalism takes precedence.
However, zionism is special, because zionism is defined as racism. Therefore, no amount of argument can justify this 'evil'.
In the UK, the origins of this view lie in the writings of one, very influential left winger; Tony Cliff.
This founder of the International Socialists, now Socialist Workers Party, permeates academia, student politics, middle class trotskyists etc. The attempted UCU boycott was driven by the SWP as is the Stop the War Coalition.
They have always claimed a distinction between anti-Jew and anti-Israel, but that has long gone. they have lost control of the distinction and there is now a New Anti-Semitism that infers that all Jews are culpable by association.

gary ashton

left or right, they all march backwards when it comes to israel, jealous and envious that such a small country and symbol can continue to exist against all odds in a hate filled world that is falling apart. come on people admit it, you were all a lot happier when we walked into death camps head down.

Marianne

'but many argue that this anti-Semitic prejudice has morphed into the rhetoric of anti-Zionism.'

Isn't the real worry the other way round? That 'anti-Zionism' is morphing into 'anti-Semitism'?

Penny

Jose

"I would like to see your articles/street demonstrations criticising hamas for using human shields daily, for promoting xenophobia aganist jews in their own charter, for using women and children as walking explosives."

And for flying out representatives to Khartoum in support of Al-Bashir who is accused of genocide and who has just expelled 13 aid agencies, leaving 200,000 people in medical centres without assistance, and with water supplies set to last another day.

Crying 'Israeli atrocities!' to the world, and then leaping on a plane to support a man accused of genocide? How bizarre.

Penny

Wolf - although I understand the theory that religion lies at the root of all wars, I tend to think that it's a false theory.

It isn't religion per se; it's those who use it to exert their own power or aims over other people.

If religion disappeared tomorrow this human foible would still remain. Those with the desire to dominate would simply find another means with which to exert power.

Terry

The left hates Israel because it starts from the standpoint of traditional anti Americanism. The left loves islamofasicsts because they are able to give voice and action to anti Americanism by delegitimising America's ally, Israel.

This is only part of the story, of course. The mere survival of the Jewish People gives enough gravitas to religious beliefs to make support of the return of the Jewish People ot their own land, given to them by G-d wholly anathema to the left.

So of all religions, it is the Jewish religion, legitimised by the return of the Jewish People to Zion, that the left hate most. Thus, the left finds an easy stepping stone to embracing islamic racism on the basis that my enemy's enemy is my friend.

Bottom line: the left is as racist and antisemitic as their islamofascist allies, and together represent (with occasional help from the extreme right) a new nazism. The left is playing out a gruesome rerun of pre WW2 nazi europe. The left has morphed into the extreme right on the back of a shared Jew hatred.

And none of this evil coalition can work out how come the Jews aren't just surrendering to annihilation as has come to be expected over a couple of millennia in europe.

Nowadays, we fight back. And nowadays we have a Jewish State with one of the most powerful armies on earth. I fear that the left/islamic coalition of hatred will precipitate its use.

Fergus Pickering

Das Kapitalmay be a best seller, Wolf, but do it sales match those of the Bible and the Koran? And who ever READS Das Kapital? It's like a Salman Rushdie novel. I did read a hundred pages once. Bloody tedious. Not a PATCH on Genesis.

just Louise

My second attempt at posting this: It's wonderful to see Fraser's comments, and being a man of the cloth it's natural that he would think centrally of Israel's biblical and theological underpinnings. It is true that the much of the Left hates religion with a passion, but how does his argument explain the Left's love of Islamic fundamentalists? It doesn't. The fact is, that the Left as reflected in the SocialistWorkers/Trotskyites/radical feminists (the latter doing some very convoluted moves!!!) etc who make common cause with the Islamicists as members of Galloway's Respect Party (to take an example) must be motivated by some visceral hatred of Israel that transcends religion and is very much rooted in matters secular. I suggest that this visceral hatred has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with the fact that the Jews are an enduring achieving people - an "elite people", if I may be permitted to use the phrase de Gaulle once employed. It has also more than a whiff of what sociologists and historians are apt to call "rich man antisemitism", whereby Jews are perceived as plutocrats and resented accordingly. And then, of course, there is the fact that since 1967 Jews have shaken off their image of victimhood (something the Left always loved Jews for), becoming, in the Left's eyes, imperialists. The Left loved Israel when it was a pioneer socialist-Zionist state, and - in the case of Communists - when it seemed (very early in its existence) that it was going to threaten British interests in the Middle East (which is, of course, why Russia, later disabused of the notion, so quickly recognised the new Jewish State). With Israel constantly having to take tough military measures to protect its citizens from existential threats, the Left loves to bleat sanctimoniously about the country having "lost its founding idealism". Now that post-apartheid South Africa is off the Left's radar - who gets the position of the Left's number one villain? Why, the Jew/Israeli, of course.

seb

A typical rant on, say, The Grauniad site, about Gaza and the Palestinians and Israel is written by a person so obsessively anti-Western and anti-American that, surely, the two issues are inseparable in the minds of many 'progressives'. This is not to say that sympathy for the Palestinian cause in itself is wrong. Israel, to a number of my acquaintances, has nothing to do with the Holocaust, an event about which a growing number of people know absolutely nothing, despite our schools' teaching of it as a subject. Instead, Israel's merely an ally of The Great Satan, like, for example, Tony Blair. Speaking from personal experience only, I would have to say that a number of educated people I meet [sharing caring people who donate to Comic Relief because it helps AIDS victims in Africa] are anti-Semitic to a degree that would warm the heart of any lunatic.

MV

Well, not just leftists, but the US administration may also wish to distance itself from Israel:
http://www.alternet.org/audits/130891/breaking_the_taboo_on_israel%27s_spying_efforts_on_the_united_states/?page=entire

Do read it all.

Larry

It's disturbing how widespread the failure to understand leftwing anti-Semitism is, even among those disgusted by leftwing anti-Semitism, such as Melanie Phillips and other commentators here.

Jason from AZ above points out that the Left embraces Islam, and so this talk about the Left just hating Israel because of its relgious foundations makes no sense.

It is well-known what the core reason is for the Left's Jew-hatred, at least among academics and scholars of contemporary anti-Semitism. It is well-recognised what the main reason for leftwing anti-Semitism is, it is there in the scholarly literature on contemporary anti-Semitism which nobody can be bothered to read. Anybody spending enough time with these Leftwing anti-Semites (on internet forums even, in person) should know exactly where the anti-Semitism of the Left comes from, once they let their guard down that is.

It comes from the belief that the Jews are greedy Shylocks, avaricious exploiters and rich parasites on the poor. it is simply obvious that this is where the Jew-hatred of the Left comes from for the most part, and yet you all seem to miss it.

The sterotype of the Jew as the greedy kingpin in the capitalist system is what primarily drives the anti-Semitism of the political Left. there are other reasons of course, it is much more complex than this, yet this is the main delusional belief behind leftwing anti-Semitism which is not necessarily a conscious thing.

This impetus behind leftwing anti-Semitism is nothing new, it is as old as Marxism itself -and predates Marxism, that is the dishonest and stupid stereotype of the Jew as the rich greedy parasite on the poor and downtrodden.

Obviously as I stress above there are other reasons, but this one is central.

Ruairidh

I don't think you can blame secularism for the left's opposition to Israel. I'm an atheist and supporter of secularism and a supporter of Israel and I see no conflict in any of those positions.

Personally I think it is a manifestation of the ‘white man’s guilt’. The left feel guilty for our imperial sins and are more than ready to accept the blame for ongoing problems like Kashmir or African tribal conflicts but as we’ve long since left the stage there is nobody to blame or rant against. They look at Israel and see false parallels with our imperial past. They see technologically advanced ‘westerners’ beating poor downtrodden Arabs and, regardless of any nuance, context or understanding, side with the downtrodden. The fact that Israel are Jewish rather than Christian no doubt helps them detach themselves from blame but I happen to think it is not central to why the Left hate Israel. Were a white Christian country of the west to engage in a similar war with an Arab power the left would be just as quick to condemn and side with terrorists. Look at the nonsense spoken about Afghanistan or Iraq, look at the venom America gets. It’s the same people making the same points. They want the ‘west’ to suffer defeat as a catharsis for their guilt.

MV

Fraser seems to be unaware that, since their rejction of Christ, the Jewish people's claim to the land of Israel has no biblical/theological underpinning (political claims are a separate matter). Perhaps he missed John 5.37-47.

Reb Shlomo Silverstein

I have observed all too often, the argument made that the people condemning Israel are not Anti-Semitic but simply good moral leftwing anti-militarists. This argument is repeated Ad Nauseam on LBC radio. A number of Jews phoned in and asked why all the fuss about Israel when there were plenty of other wars in 2008 that were barely mentioned if at all. Their argument was dismissed out of hand as irrelevant.

A story: There was once an examiner who had to mark the exam sheets of 71 students, all from different nations. The examiner disqualified Israel Goldberg's entry on the grounds that the student had written his answers in blue ink instead of black ink. Never mind that there was no actual official policy against the use of blue ink, it was just that the examiner felt that it wasn't suitable to use blue ink for an exam.

The argument raged as to whether blue ink was sufficient reason to disqualify the Jew. Accusations of anti-Semitism were made against the examiner. His supporters defended the examiner saying that even though disqualification for the use of blue ink isnt technically official policy, it ought to be on moral grounds! In fact they argued, had the Jew not obtained a pass grade, he would have screamed "anti-Semitism" as well. A meeting was held and the University heads decided that the Jew's accusation against such a distinguished examiner was intolerable and so they expelled the Jew from the University.

Throughout this whole saga, the students as well as all the University tutors had remained silent about a little insignificant point. You see, 19 other students had also used blue ink and had received a pass grade. Other students had even used green or red ink and a few had even used pencils, officially banned by the examination rules.

Wilhelm

The Facist Left will always root for the underdog,so they root for Hamas against Israel. Osama bin liner against America, my enemies enemy is my friend, talk about errorneous thinking and nutty logic.

leo solomon

Israel was not established to provide a haven for those of the Jewish faith.It was established to provide a place where jews of whatever idealogical or religious belief or none at all could live without the prejudice,abuse and slaughter that had accompanied them ,whereever in the world they were allowed to reside,throughout history.

ian skidmore

I deeply resent being labelled as anti Jewish because I believe that countries cannot be created artificially, as both Israel and Iraq were. The only effective way is to follow the American example, so assiduously echoed in Aus and NZ and the Caribbean. Which is to virtually wipe out the native population and enslave survivors

Reb Shlomo Silverstein

Regarding MVs comments,

Despite many Christians who still maintain the ancient anti-Semitism of the church who preached that the Jews are condemned to wonder the world, cursed by "The Lord" for rejecting his son (sic), G-d, Blessed be He, has another opinion. He has safe guarded us and kept us alive, a lamb surrounded by wolves, in every generation and now, after 2,000 years, He has decided to return His Holy People to the Holy Land where we flourish and praise our G-d thrice daily who took us out of the Land of Bondage to be free in the Land of Israel. Blessed is His Name, Blessed be He.

MV, doesn't it just eat you up inside?

Suffolkbor

The left are the ultimate ideological parasites .
It is interesting to note how they have lost interest in Britains Afro Caribbean population now that they have become mainstream third generation British born and have the same aspirations as everyone else , entering high earning brackets in entertainment , sport and other areas of the economy .

They have now found their ultimate Almer Mater in Islam and Muslims with whom they share so many characteristics
such as Anti-British ,Anti-American,Anti-Capitalism and of course Anti Israel and the Jews .
Single focused sociopaths always looking for their next perceived victim group.
They long ago abandoned the white working class and frankly could not care less about them or any of the population for that matter .

Simon

MV, there's nothing in that reference you quoted that requires the Israelis to lose their land, or to face constant terrorism, or opposition from so many Moslems and non-Moslems around the world who hate them for being Jews and for fighting back. Neither noes the NT anywhere deny the Jews of "biblical/theological underpinning" for their right to live in their own land, in Eretz Israel.

Leslie

MV:
"Fraser seems to be unaware that, since their rejction of Christ, the Jewish people's claim to the land of Israel has no biblical/theological underpinning (political claims are a separate matter). Perhaps he missed John 5.37-47."

John 5:37-47 is no biblical proof whatsoever that God broke the covenant that he made with Israel.
You will have to try harder than that.

Jerry

Leftist opposition to Israel is a matter of irrational anti-Semitism. No other explanation is possible since Israeli society fit leftist policy requirements better than any country outside of Europe.
/
1) National health care for all citizens
/
2) Universal education
/
3) Strong unions - right to strike, collective bargaining, etc.
/
4) Government ownership of all land
/
5) Agricultural collectives - kibbutzim and moshavim
/
6) Floor for families in terms of welfare, social services, child allowances
/
7) Draft, rather than a professional army
/
8) Progressive tax structure that supports services to whole population
/
What is it then that remains for Israel to accomplish in terms of social structure for which the Left can ask? Only that the Jews give up the ethos and moral principles that led to the structuring of such a reasonable society!

Augustus

It is sad that the Christian Church has used the Jewish people as a scapegoat throughout the centuries of its existence. Although, even prior to the formation of Christianity the Jewish people suffered at the hands of conquerers and experienced God's anger from time to time, resulting in the children of Israel being taken captive, nevertheless, it wasn't until Christianity that individual Jews and Jewry became personal targets of deicide. But, although they committed many atrocities of anti-Semitism throughout each century, many Christians have also paid with their lives in defense of Judaism and the Jews. In WW2 Poland lost six million citizens (about one fifth of its population), three million of these dead were Polish Christians, mostly Catholic, and the other three million were Polish Jews. Another fact of the Holocaust is that the greatest number of Gentile rescuers of Jews were Poles, despite the fact that only in Poland were people executed on the spot if caught trying to save Jews. Then, as now, anti-Semitism affects everyone and Christians everywhere need to take steps to fight it, and repair the damage caused by all those generations and their misdeeds of the past two millennia.

phil

jose garcia re your question to the laird -have you ever seen pigs fly--

oh maybe in mv,s garden where the landing strip is next to the wellingtons that belong to his sheep

TomTom

I deeply resent being labelled as anti Jewish because I believe that countries cannot be created artificially, as both Israel and Iraq were. The only effective way is to follow the American example, so assiduously echoed in Aus and NZ and the Caribbean. Which is to virtually wipe out the native population and enslave survivors

So what about Pakistan which essentially recognises the Muslim invaders as having rights to Indian territory that the British Empire never sanctioned until it abdicated responsibility for The Raj ?

Raymond Joseph Douglas

Melanie, there are many British Christians who stand with, and pray for Israel ! Two of these are christian friends of Israel and prayer for Israel Bible believing Christians know, that by blessing and praying for Israel, blessing is returned to them !Psalm 122v6 and genesis 12v3 amongst others. Would that all British christian leaders would get a hold of this and stop their lefty political posturing ! May i suggest reders look at pfi.org.uk and christian friends of isreal website .

Raymond Joseph Douglas

To MV, you need to look at Romans chapter eleven, particularly verse 28-29 Your quote of John 5 37-47, does not justify your contention that God has removed his promises and blessing from the Jews. Even, if many Jews still today, refuse to recognise Yeshua as their Promised messiah.Israel and the Jews are still "The apple of his eye". Get your concordance out and look that one up MV !

Mr R

MV - Clutching at straws, are we? Your biblical/theological argument is irrelevant and you know it.

gary

"I deeply resent being labelled as anti Jewish because I believe that countries cannot be created artificially, as both Israel and Iraq were." ... and Pakistan, Bangladesh, Jordan. If Yugoslavia was not artificial, then Serbia, Bosnia, Albania must be - or vice versa. Walachia used to be part of Hungary, at another time part of the Ottoman Empire, and is now part of Romania - so if a large part of Hungary can be a large part of Romania, then how can anyone define what a non-artificial country is. China says Tibet was an artifical country. It isn't a country now. If a country can appear and then disappear, does that prove it was artifical when it existed?

So your statement, Ian, isn't antisemitic, it's just a bit of sillyness. You can only apply it to the history of countries by special pleading and cherry-picking.

Anti-Zionism is not a criticism of any particular thing Israel does. It's disallowing that Jews can decide their own national fate. Sorry, but we didn't give anyone permission to give or take that away. Anti-Zionism is a philosophical view that Jews can't act without permission from others. That's why anti-Zionism is antisemitic.

gary

"...the very identity and existence of the State of Israel is bound up with Judaism..."

"Paradoxically, the Zionist pioneers were mostly atheistic Marxists, who wanted to replace the religious bonds that held Jews together by national bonds..."

"And the strongest opponents of Zionism among the Jews were religious Jews - ..."

Ben, Jews have been handling and discussing more extreme paradoxes than this for centuries. It's part of the parcel called Judaism. If Judaism is a religion then how can it include declared atheists, and why do so many of them make sure their children remain Jewish and attend Synagogue. If Judaism is a bundle of cultural practices, then why does it not include Christians with compatible cultural practices.

Your paradox stands as a paradox only if you first define Judaism as only one of its facets.

MV

If the theological claim is that the Mosaic covenant grouns the claim to the fulfilment of promises - then a Christian cannot accept such reasoning (the quote I supplied is meant to demonstrate that - there are many others). That doesn't mean there can't be othr claims, as I said. And my point concered a "right" to the land - NOT a requirment that Jews lose the land now.
The rabbi begs the question as to who the prophecies apply to -obviously the Church holds it IS the New Israel so your poijt is beside the point. As to anti-Semitsm/wandering - these are your terms accusations - I said nothing that was AS or concerned with "wandering". I am sad that you think I must be eating up inside over your words. I'm not - I would like everyone to join the New Israel and fully accept the greatest Jew of all.

MV

Apologies - I read Rabbi for Reb.

Mark

The really common thing that these people have in common is anti "westernism" - they will even ditch Muslims if it suits that agenda which is why many of them backed Milosovic in the Bosnia Serbia war. And where it is one group of Muslims against antoher as in Darfur or Iraq v Kuwait (1990-91) they will always back the anti western side. Or again where people are of Muslim origin but are up against anti western fundamnetalists they will back the latter. - as poor Ayan Hirsi Ali found to her cost.

I challenge anyone to find a single exception to this rule.

MV

Some Biblical refernces for those who need them. It is the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church that the Mosaic covenant has been legally abrogated. Cardinal Ratzinger himself wrote in 1999 ""Thus the Sinai covenant is indeed superseded" it is therefore not legally applicable to anyone, including to Jews. There are many NT statement that teach this truth - just for starters:
Hebrews 7.18; Hebrews 10.9; 2 Corinthians 3:14; Hebrews 8.7' Colossians 2.14 (not to mention the Church Fathers, Councils etc. etc.).
The quote from John's Gospel shows Christ asking what it is to be a child of Abraham - he rejects the criteria given by his persecutors - and also shows that rejection of Him is rejection of Moses (and one simply cannot read the Gospels and the books that follow without seeing againa and again that refusal to accept Christ is precisely to betray the tradition of Moses, startling though that seemed to the people of the time).
Hence, Christians certainly cannot accept the theological argument for a right to the land of Israel - I do not comment on non-theological arguments. As to Mr R. - well, I am trying to show that the "theological arguments" FOR a right to the land cannot be convincing to a Christian. And no, I don't know what you appear to think I do - not least because I have bothered to think about the issue.

peter

We agree.

Israel often genuinely deserves criticism.

Nice to see that you agree too.

George Laird

Dear jose garcia

Thank you for taking in an interest in what I do.

What I do, when I do it and where is purely a matter for me.

The obvious question is why you think you are so special that I should bother answering?

I have read a couple of your posts and basically you seem to think that I should be writing about the whole world and set them to rights.

I have only so much time in a day.

Although I do a wee bit, you appear to do nothing.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Carl

Reb Shlomo Silverstein - and some of you call Muslims "fundamentalists"?

Leslie

MV;
"obviously,the Church holds it IS the New Israel"

What Church would that be,MV ?

MV

The Church founded by Jesus Christ and of which people like St Paul are members of.

Leslie

MV

Ah!You mean the Catholic church.

You are mixed up in your Christian theology.The Mosaic and Abrahamic covenants are two different covenants.
The first comes with conditions,the second is unconditional.

MV

The papal delcaration Nostra Aetate made the following important statement:
"True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ;(13) still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God [New Israel], the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. All should see to it, then, that in catechetical work or in the preaching of the word of God they do not teach anything that does not conform to the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ."

Leslie

MV

I'm taking it that your opinion is based on what you have been taught.
If you really are a thinking person,I hope you will consider this
http://therefinersfire.org/replacement_theology.htm

stanley Jerusalem

MV
March 12th, 2009 4:05pm

Why would you imagine that any self-respecting Jew would have any respect for a man who supports those who deny the Holocaust and started life in the Hitler Youth? Also, aside from that, it appears that God's covenant with the Jews does not appear to have been cancelled by Him. That is the claim of a series of Jew-hating and Jew-torturing clerics and their followers over a period of nearly 2000 years. Time itself lends no validity to their claims and certainly their latest advocate has not covered himself in glory recently, despite his apparently high position in his own organisation. To gainsay the perceived opposition was only a preliminary step to demonising them and we've certainly seen that happen once or twice in our history.
Ecumenism was only seen to be an acceptable alternative to the status quo when his co-religionists began to feel the draw of secularism and agnosticism.Prior to that the Roman Church brooked no dilution of dogma.
Schwer zu sein a Yid.

MV

Leslie
Thanks for the link. I am fairly familiar with the arguments but will read it carefully.
Can I recommend something in turn:
http://www.catholicintl.com/articles/The%20Old%20Covenant%20Revoked%20or%20Not%20Revoked%20for%20Culture%20Wars.pdf

It's pretty lengthy but well worth the effort.
stanley - I am not asking anyone to have respect for anyone - just asking people to look at the arguments and make their own minds up. I would, however, hope that you have respect for Christ. As to the smears directed at Benedict - these have been ably handled elsewhere - the suggestion that he somehow supports those who deny the Holocaust (implicit in your claim that he supports them QUA Holocaust denial) is demonstrably untrue and contemptible. If you don't like the idea that the Catholic Church wants to convert Jews then I suggest you take your complaint to the Jewish founder of that Church, one J. Christ, who also wanted to convert his listeners.

Penny

MV - I respect all other faiths who genuinely have respect for others.

I have had many interesting discussions with Christian friends, one of whom studied theology. We discuss matters only with interest in each other's opinions, not with any desire to convert or convince.

Personally, I think Jesus would be horrified by what has happened in his name over the millenia. Did he ever truly mean to create a new religion or is it simply something that others did - in his name?

The Nicene council appear to have played quite a part in deciding what texts should and should not form part of Christianity; for what reason did they reject the others?

It is also interesting that Jesus viewed himself as a Jew and lived his life as one. Apparently,in one of the Gospels (Mark, I think) when asked what was the greatest commandment, he quoted the Shema - the Jewish prayer (Deuteronomy 6:4), re-affirming the belief that G-d is 'one'. In this one statement, he appears to be holding fast to and promoting Judaism.

His stance on public worship appears to be almost anti formal religion, too. Didn't he say something about not being like the heathen, praying only so that others see you doing so?

I believe Jesus also said that he didn't come to change the law, but to fulfil it.

Finally, my friend's and I have discussed Jesus' words about the End Times as stated in the Gospel; it seems to us all that he believes the Jews will be in Israel at that time.

Just my humble views with no disrespect intended to yours.

Noah Aron Bashi

At the End of last year when the Hamas was throwing rockets to Israel and the Israelis stood up for their rights, a leftie friend of mine call me and said let's go and protest against Israel, I told her I am Jewish how could i do that, she left me alone, but of course she knew i was Jewish because she saw the Menorah in my house, how stupid the lefties are? they are hating people because it is fashionable or maybe they are jealous, I am Jewish and i am glad to be Jewish, and when I see a leftie I cross the road because they are such a evil people

Michael B

MV,
Firstly, this is primarily a social/political forum, not a "community of the faithful." The church, the Anglican Church and beyond, has been invoked, but, secondly, you're in hugely, vastly - and irretrievably - over your head. An entire range of historical, social, political, ecclesial, etc. issues are at stake, and you're bungling it considerably and laboriously.

George Laird

Dear Noah Aron Bashi

You don't throw rockets; you launch them.

You must credit Hamas fighters with incredible arm strength.

With regard to your friend asking you to do the right thing and go out and protest against Israel, don't worry about not going.

It takes courage to stand up and be counted, maybe you don't possess that.

Finally, doing the right thing shouldn't depend on fashion or anything else. It depends upon whether you have morals.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

MV

Michael B.
Agreed - huge issues at stake. No evidence supplied that I am "bungling it". If your post is made in good faith then I presume you would point out my errors so that I may correct. But you haven't - which makes your assertions, thus far, worthless. I suggest you read the link I supplied - hopefully it won't go over your head and it will make the position I am forwarding clear.
As to the "forum" have a word with Melanie Phillips who likes to bring up these kinds of issues in her writings (esp. for the Spectator).

MV

Penny
Thanks for this. Many issues - I would suggest you read the link as this is a huge area/ Fulfilling the law is fully compatible with superceding the covenant. re. End Times - I agree with you - but the presence in Israel of Jews talked of/predicted does not imply a divine right to be there. And a mass conversion of Jews to Christ is thought, by many exegetes, Church Fathers etc. to be predicted. I hope I do not offend you too (or anyone else - and I am sorry if some earlier posts did).

Carl

Noah - "at the end of last year" - would that be about the time that Israel launched a massive attack against a defenceless Gaza, killing and wounding many hundreds of Palestinian civilians by any chance? Not to mention wantonly destroying the infrastructure. I suppose killing 28 Policemen was also a good idea as they might of done something sinister like maintain Law and Order.

MV

Leslie
I didn't mix up the convenants - and I agree with you re. conditional and unconditional. In fact the conditional Mosaic is superceded and the unconditional Abrahamic cannot be. That supports me (where did I mix this up)? The linked to article makes this point crystal clear. If we remember that UNconditional covenants can't be superseded by Conditional can then we can see that it is at least possible that the Mosaic has been superseded. And this is the Catholic (and generally Christian) belief.
Michael B. - I am awaiting your evidence to back up your earlier assertions.

MV

Last point

The Abrahamic covenant is not restricted to the Chosen people. Hebrews 6.19-13.14 explains how Jesus Christ and his New Covenant salvation program are the centrepiece of Abraham's irrevocable covenant, not the Old Covenant with Moses. Take a look at the article re. the covenant with Abraham over physcial descendants and land. Interesting stuff, even if you disagree.

stanley Jerusalem

Penny - You got it right in one. Jesus was a Jew and in all probability would be horrified at what has been perpetrated in his name.Crusades and inquisitions for a start. Why Now Paul, on the other hand, was an opportunist and a publicist the world has inherited his 'script' of events that took place before he was born.
The rest really is history.

George you are seriously beneath contempt. You mock the English of one whose first language is patently not English in order to score a measly point instead of addressing what the man has to say. I write this is the man's defence rather than to glorify your comments with an argument.Have you tried keeping chickens instead of 'contributing' to this blog?

Leslie

MV
Thank you for the link.
My study of Old and New testaments will not allow me to agree with that theology.
As much as I'd like to discuss this with you,as Michael B has hinted,perhaps this is not the place to do that.

George Laird

Dear Stanley of Jerusalem

You state;

"George you are seriously beneath contempt".

And I should care what you think because?

"You mock the English of one whose first language is patently not English in order to score a measly point instead of addressing what the man has to say".

Prove to me and the board that Noah is a foreigner, I require third party documentation to support your claim.

Finally; I have never tried keeping chickens because I have never had pets. The answer to your question is therefore no.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Nachman

George Laird - unable to give a straight answer to a simple question - leads us to the obvious conclusion that your claim to be a Human Rights campaigner excludes the recognition of or respect for the Human Rights of Jews as a people to self determination i.e. by any definition you are an anti-Semite just be honest.

Penny

Dear MV

No, you don't offend me at all. We're grown-up people exchanging our views. Providing we remain respectful, there (hopefully!) should be no offence.

From the Jewish point of view, the Messiah had certain prophecies to fulfill outright.

These are:

Building the third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28)

Gathering ALL the Jews and bringing them back to Israel
(Isiah 43:5-6)

Usher in an era of World Peace
(Isiah 2:4)

Spread Universal knowledge of the God of Israel which will unite humanity as one.
(Zecheria 14:1)

Jesus didn't appear to fulfill these prophecies. He is said to do so in a second coming, but Jewish sources can find no mention of a second coming within their texts.

There are other 'conditions' and instances that remain unfulfilled, but perhaps the one that is more instantly recognised by most is that the Messiah will be of the House of David. In the New Testament such lineage appears to be the case for Joseph, but the concept of the virgin birth means that Joseph was not his father.

I believe Jesus' words to have been peaceful and in my heart, I cannot believe that he would have condoned the horrors and hatred that have been acted out in his name. This was man-made, power based and Nicene Council led. To me, it bears no resemblence to the man who spoke the words - in some ways, it seems almost a betrayal.

I also find confusing the notion that one must believe in Jesus, the person, as being the Messiah or face some kind of consequence. It implies there is some egotistical element here which I cannot believe would exist in G-d. Behaviour, surely, is what is important and it appears to me - from my chats with my friends - to be the main focus of Jesus' teachings.

Which would be more loved in Jesus' eyes? The one who pays lip service or the one who acts as he advised?

Anyway - I've rambled on. I trust you will take my views in good faith and with no offence to yours intended.

Linda Smith

MV: you posted "The Church founded by Jesus Christ..."

I always understood that Jesus was born and died a Jew.
If Jesus referred to God as his father, then this was in a figurative sense. The word "maid" is mistranslated from the hebrew into "virgin".

I always understood that Saul/Paul, a Jew, founded the Church, having had a vision on the Road to Damascus, some 40 years after Jesus was crucified.

Linda Smith

George Laird (12 Mar 7:16pm) pompously posted to Noah Aron Bashi:

"It takes courage to stand up and be counted, maybe you don't possess that."

Oh yes he does possess courage. Noah Aron Bashi has the courage to stand up and say he will not protest against Israel to please his friends. He has got morals and stands by them.

Neil

I am puzzled by the assertion that all anti-Semites are automatically 'lefties'. Can one not be an anti-Semite and belong to the political right also?

Australians for Non-Bigoted Thinking

Often people are flummoxed by the fact, that the Left will support groups that seem very much the antithesis of what they purport to represent. How can you reconcile this fact? You can. A political belief system whose modus operandi is revolution by stealth, implies by its very nature, that it does not play by the 'Marquess of Queensberry Rules'. When it suits their purpose, they will take any group to serve as their ‘bitch’, in order to advance their agenda.

Therefore, notwithstanding there are marked idealogical differences between the Left and Radical Islamists, the Left will tend to be apologists for them, for the simple reason that Islamists are stridently Anti-Western. They also make a ‘loud noise’ in the media.
They thus represent an excellent conduit for the Left to breakdown Western Democracy. Contrariwise, Jewish people typify the success of Western Capitalism, so are a natural target of the Left.

Noah Aron Bashi

George Laird, i am a foriegner, Stanley Jerusalem is right English is not my first language
I speak Amharic, Aramaic and Hebrew, I am Ethiopian Jewish who will always support Israel,

Shalom!

stanley Jerusalem

Any chance of your correcting his orthography and syntax now George,or might you uphold his Rights to spell english anyway he wants to?

stanley Jerusalem

Noah Aron Bashi - "i am a foriegner"

No you're not. You are an Israeli like me. Perhaps not a Cockney one but nevertheless an Israeli.
Shabbat Shalom!

MV

Linda/Penny
Matthew 16.18 has Christ appointing Peter as the visible head of His Church on earth. St Peter was the authoritative head of the Church before Paul even coverted. Paul was never a Pope but was under the jurisdiction of the Pope and Church Councils.
Yes, Jesus lived and died an ethnic Jew - this is undeniable. The point is that Jesus divided the Jews - some accepted him as the Messiah and the Son of God, some rejected him. This split gradually becamse the split between Christians and Jews (Gentiles now could be ingrafted into "the vine" - Jesus Christ along with those Jews who accepted Him). That the Jewish people are the "natural branch" of the vine is stated by St Paul. But, according to the Christian view, the natural branch has rejected the vine But anyone can reject the rejection - not a few people have.

Re. prophecies - well we could go on for ever. Just quickly on one of them:
the Lord shall give you a sign; a virgin will conceive and bear a son.’ ” It is often said that we know that the word translated as ‘virgin’, namely almah, means only ‘young woman'.
But the word can mean either, and it would hardly be a miraculous sign for a young woman to give birth!

Re. Davidic line - there is much discussion about what Luke's and Matthew's geneaoogies refer to (Mary's or Joseph's lineage) - but one might just say that Jesus is Joseph's adoptive son and so belings to the Davidic line in that way.

I agree with you re. behaviour etc. To accept the truth and act on it, to submit yourself to God's love and to love your neighbour etc. are all ways of acting in accordance with His will. Properly understood I think that such understood behaviour can lead to Christ. but yes, lip service is useless - and when I mention rejection I mean REJECTION - knowingly rejection what you think may well be true because you don't want the truth. All of us are tempted to do this - but this should not be confused with searching in good faith and trying to do one's best (something I fail daily in - unlike some of my secular friends) - that's all anyone can ask for! Re. consequence - I suppose God (and I include here the Second Person of the Trinity) wnats us to love him and give ourselves to Him as he does to us - and he knows that if we REJECT Him it will have bad consequences for us - we will radically damage ourselves. So it's not so much Him punishing us out of an egotistical rage - but rather weeping over our refusal to love and be loved (A Jewish person who does not accept Christ's claims might think about G-d this way - again if he/she were to reject G-d they would have damaged themselves radically by twisting their nature against the One who lovingly formed it). And when someone searches for truth and holds to truth and loves the truth and acts virtuosly they are, to my mind, accepting Christ, even if they don't yet know it. And we can only ne judged according to what we actually know.

Re. prophecies - although I think arguments can be made re. the prophecies matching up with Jesus being the Messiah I think that Christians generally begin, and Christianity begins, with the encounter with Christ.
We have the disciples on the road to Emmaus, the first Christians, who were Jews, experience in an encounter with the Risen Christ the opening of the Hebrew Scriptures, revealing, retrospectively, how they testify to Jesus as the Christ.

Re. the Church - no doubt terrible things have been done in Christ's name (and God's) - men will always be men. But that does not disprove the claims of the Church - and we should also not forget the enormous amount of good that has come through the Church - the very civilisation that Melanie Phillips says she is defending is based upon it - and it is a self-critical civilisation that can and sometime does, recognise its wrongs and tries to set them aright.

Now I've rambled on! Thank you Penny - you've got me thinking about things other than my gripes and plights!

Penny

Oh for heaven's sake, George, do grow up.

Judging by the academic level evident in your posts, we demand third party documentation to support your claim that you're even at University.

MV

I wrote a very lenghty response to Penny and Lisa which, inexplicably, did not appear (it took quite a time to write too!). V.quickly: Saint Matthew refers to a verse or two from the prophet Isaiah which told King Ahaz... that ‘the Lord shall give you a sign; a virgin will conceive and bear a son.’ He the word translated as ‘virgin’, namely almah, which is claimed means only ‘young woman/maid"
However, the word can mean either, and it would hardly be a miraculous sign for a young woman to give birth!

Penny re. prophecies Christ is an adopted son of Joseph - hence of the Davidic line. As to the others (and many others) I'd refer you here (obviously many layers here):
http://www.catholicintl.com/bookreviews/A_Review_of_David_Klinghoffer.pdf (from page 23 omnwards)

Most importantly - I agree with what you say re. lip service and behaviour. It is WE who REJECT (and I mean actually reject - not not recognise etc. etc.) Christ doesn't reject - and our "punishment" for rejection of Love is self-inflicted - and God (and of course I take Christ to be Second Person of the Trinity that is God) does not want anyone to inflict damage upon themselves - after all He if His essence is Love he cannot but love. It's up to us to accept that love and, through our faith and works, show our love for him
And we can only act upon what we know - you can't be judged on what you don't know.

Please post this! Many thanks.

Noah Aron Bashi

Thank you Stanley,

Shabbat Shalom!

George Laird

Dear Penny

I am sure that the rest of the board would agree with me if you could reframe from the ‘angry woman’ approach you are using on here. It could put people off entering the debate in any meaningful fashion! This, “oh for heaven’s sake’ business was just plain wrong on your part.

If you want to be upset you should direct such unhappiness to those poor souls in your interpersonal relationships that cannot get away. I am sure that a male family member will be more than willing to stand in as a ‘wailing wall’. I, on the other hand are not available so please in future have the good grace not to add me to the list of men you feel you can have a pop at.

Finally; I am terribly disappoint with your comment;

“we demand third party documentation to support your claim that you're even at University”.

Firstly, who are the “we” members? Since you are putting yourself forward as a representative of a group, I would like to know all of those in your “we”.

Secondly, where do you want the evidence sent I attend University? Most people of integrity usually accept my word as a given but there is a small section of the population who don’t. I will leave it to you to work out which group you best fit into.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Penny

I rest my case.

Penny

Dear MV

Thank you for your views - it's clear that you've taken a lot of time to present them. There is much there that I'm sure we could debate, however, I'm mindful that - as others have pointed out - this is perhaps not the forum and we might end up in the dog house!

I wish you a good weekend!

MV

Thanks Penny. Agreed - have a good weekend too and take care.

davod

"And the strongest opponents of Zionism among the Jews were religious Jews - whether Orthodox or Reform - a fact that is still true today."

You need to qualify you statement with "some"

davod

"ian skidmore
March 12th, 2009 12:48pm

The only effective way is to follow the American example, so assiduously echoed in Aus... native population and enslave survivors"

Sorry mate - A large part of the Aboriginal Genocide is false, based upon political history not facts. I draw your attention to the words of Keith Windschuttle during a debate in Melbourne in 2003 - White settlement in Australia: violent conquest or benign colonisation?

Windschuttle, a historian, and true believer of the brutal European occupation theory had cause to check the cites in a history bookm about the Tasmanian Aborigines, only to find they did not agree with what the author implied in her book. It is important that you read the coments. However, his final comments can be transferred to many subjects these days.

"Let me finish by emphasizing that all historians have a public responsibility to report their evidence fully and accurately and to cite their sources honestly. To pretend that facts do not matter and that acceptable interpretations can be drawn from false or non-existent evidence is to abandon the pursuit of historical truth altogether. Historians who do so betray their professional duty to preserve the integrity of the ancient discipline of history itself.

Unfortunately, this is what a number of the Australian academics who have written Aboriginal history have done. They have betrayed their profession and misled their country. The debate over what happened to the Aborigines is not only about the Aborigines. Ultimately, it is about the character of the Australian nation and the calibre of the civilization that Britain brought to these shores in 1788. For some reason, the academic historians who dominate this field want to portray their own country as the moral equivalent of Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Russia. They are entitled to their opinion but they are not entitled to invent the facts on which that opinion is based. Nor are they entitled to deceive their students and the public at large as they have been doing for the past thirty years."

stanley Jerusalem

davod
March 13th, 2009 10:36pm

"And the strongest opponents of Zionism among the Jews were religious Jews - whether Orthodox or Reform - a fact that is still true today."

What precisely is a religious Reform Jew? It's an oxymoron like 'deeply superficial'

felicitas

UK Christian minister been beaten up, his Cross ripped off by muslim gangs, check the Jihad watch all the details are there,
I am asking when are the muslims going to be good and behave better then the way they are behaving now? Did they say Islam religion of peace?

davod

"stanley Jerusalem
March 15th, 2009 7:35am"

The comment you refer to was not mine, I quoted it and added "You need to qualify your statement with "some".

Ann

The usual ignorant hatred from Laird:

"Finally; I never knew that there was a Church in Putney, still some people will travel far to seek support for their view points."

Just because your grasp of geography is non-existent, doesn't mean that you have to parade this fact.

"But Putney, for God Sake, what is the nearest tube to it?
Isn't this place the poor man's Fulham?"

Does this snotty nonsense pass for wit in your 'human rights organisation'?

Ann

"Isn't the real worry the other way round? That 'anti-Zionism' is morphing into 'anti-Semitism'?"

No, he got it right originally. Anti-Zionism is predicated on antisemitism. How else would you explain the toxic opposition to the Jews - only the Jews! - having self-determination in their own national homeland? Do the 'anti-Zionists' also object to Jordan or Iraq - completely artificial countries - being independent? Or to the Greeks having an independent country? No, they only hate Israel, the country of the Jews.

Ann

"It is also interesting that Jesus viewed himself as a Jew and lived his life as one"

There is nothing 'interesting' about it: he WAS a Jew.

Ann

"What precisely is a religious Reform Jew? It's an oxymoron like 'deeply superficial'"

You know, Stanley, not everyone HAS to share your prejudices. Reform Jews are religious Jews, they simply do not accept the authority of self-appointed Orthodox komissars. And your hate-filled snottiness towards them is the best proof that their position is a good one.

Ann

"Fraser seems to be unaware that, since their rejction of Christ, the Jewish people's claim to the land of Israel has no biblical/theological underpinning"

What utter nonsense. The Jews reject Christ and have no truck with the tenets of Christianity (they were there for 1000 years before Christianity, you know). Christianity has NIL authority to dictate anything to the Jews. It's their country, end of, whatever Christianity says.

Ann

"I deeply resent being labelled as anti Jewish because I believe that countries cannot be created artificially, as both Israel and Iraq were"

Tough. Resent away. Israel is not 'artifical'. It has been the homeland of the Jewish nation for 3000 years. Suck it up.

stanley Jerusalem

Ann
March 15th, 2009 8:59pm
Calm down Girl! We are talking definitions here and methinks the lady doth protest too much. It is a contradiction in terms to be a Reform Jew and be labelled an Orthodox Jew irrespective of how sincerely beliefs are held..
Your invective tells me more of your affiliations than of my attitude, which is sad as well as unecessary.As to the Jews' claim to being a nation and a state, I wholeheartedly endorse everything you have said.We have history, geography, archaeology, Balfour and the United Nations in its purer 1948 form on our side.

MV

Ann
The point was that Fraser, as a Christian, has no business claiming that the Jews have a biblically-based claim to the land (I have not discussed any other claim they might have).
The point of the Gospel quote I gave was to point out that Christ Himself poses the question as to whether those who reject him can claim to still be followers of Moses. If Christ is right and you are wrong then the true followers of Moses are those who accepted Christ. If the theological claims to the land are based upon the Mosaic covenant - that covenant has be superceded by Christ the Jew's New covenant (he came unot His own and His own received Him not) - hence the claims are invalid. Of course, you will reject this - but there is every reason for orthodox Christians to reject your assumed biblical title to the land. And of course many Jews never believed in such a claim as proposed by Zionists (a minority movement). Some still regard your kind of claims as a blasphemy (see Yakov Rabkin - The Threat From Within: Non-Zionist Opposition to Zionism).

Yehuda

Ben: those Jews who are routinely called "ultra-Orthodox" Jews are Zionists in the sense that they have a strong conviction that the restoration of Jewish national self-determination in The Land of Israel will happen.
Where they differ from mainstream Jewry is in the chronology of this revolution.

Leslie

The point is,MV,that you,as a Christian,have no business claiming that the Jewish people have no biblically-based claim to the land of Israel.
You are using the words of Jesus incorrectly,and to suit a particular agenda.
You claim to represent the beliefs of Christians in a way that offends me,as a Christian.
I find it offensive the way you are preaching to the Jewish people on this blog.

stanley Jerusalem

Yehuda - They also differ in the nature of the constitution of such an entity however they all agree that there is to be a return irrespective of timing and government.

MV

Leslie
Either my claims are true or they are not - regardless of whether you are offended. And if it is indeed the case that a Christian has no reason to believe that Jews have a biblically-based claim to the land of Israel then that is true whether Jewish people or people likey you approve of it or not.
As to the truth of the claim, you supply no arguments against it (and no explanation how I am using Christ's unambigous words incorrectly - it is one of the downsides of the internet that it appears to encourage people to sound off without bothering to make a case) and your position is directly contradicted by the Gospels, St Paul, the Church Father, numerous Church councils etc. etc. As to "preaching" I am merely making a teaching clear - the particular agenda is what Christianity he can hold in this area. I have also supplied links that go into great detail on this question, have supplied references from different parts of the Bible and have submitted tot the teaching of the Church as expressed from the earliest times up to the present (you, in contrast, have offered nothing except a complaint that your "offened").I am sorry that "as a Christian" you are offended by teaching that is undeniably Christian. In Domino.

MV

Yehuda
Yes, you are quite right. I had in mind the Zionist claim of a Present claim based on man's efforts as opposed to a future claim dependent upon God's grace at the appropriate time. The former is condemned by the ultra-Orthodox and is what is meant in everyday usage by Zionism.

phil

Penny ,Stanley. Michael B, I have been patient and read all the contributions you have made here and the answers you have provided to a religious freak,who cannot understand that Jesus was born and died a Jew and one that defended what he believed was Judaism ,a religion he loved .The first words he would have said every day was "hear O Israel the lord our God the lord is one and thou shall have no other God but me ."--He did not invent Christianity ,that came later as mV would know if in fact he knows anything other than books he selectively reads ----- This man does not represent Christianity ,he represents his own demented version and shames the millions of good and loving people who call themselves Christians .You will no doubt have read how he has insulted Leslie .Penny you are a saint to be so patient with him .

Both Christianity and Judaism represent love and compassion for our fellow men/women and not the diktats of a bigot -who cares what he thinks was in the minds of men over 2000 years ago as to the claims of people to land ?-we live in the here and now and with the needs of those that live in the present .Israel will live regardless of what this man thinks and I hope there will be a place for the Palestinians too to live in peace ,neither needs the interference of a man besotted with his ridiculous view of life on earth -he will find when he meets his maker what a fool he has been and that he should have been remembering the words of the psalm I quoted above -I suggest he reflects whilst he has time of the sin he has committed by ignoring it and begin now to make his peace with his maker

I have real Christian friends who do wonderful things for humans of all religions and never stuff their beliefs down others throats ,who would never deign to insult those that believe in a different way than them .I have commented and praised what we Jews know as righteous Gentiles who post here on many occasions ,people who put this man to shame and whose lives are devoted to kindness and good deeds -I hope you will refrain from this useless debate with one who cares nothing for us and I have no doubt just seeks to annoy us .

MV

phil
Not quite sure what caused this onslaught of venom - so lacking in the other correspondents who were prepared to argue their case and listen. I certainly do not seek to annoy etc. - nor do I dismiss others as you dismiss me. As to your statements - nothing I have said is even remotely outside of the mainstream of traditional Christian belief - nothing at all. If you doubt it read any Catechism/Church Fathers/Church Councils/The Gospels etc. Sorry that you feel the way you do - it is you who are ignorant - and ignorance that seems to result in rudeness and not a little paranoia (unlike the others you mention). I have read very widely in these areas, not least because my academic work means I have to. Sadly, there is no sign that you have, or that if you have you wish to engage with ideas rather than diatribes. You clearly did not read what I said re. biblical justifications (I never said there were no other justifications re. Israel). Unlike the others you supply no arguments open minded comments. And what the "us" - rather presumptious of you no? If you do bother to "reply" please read a few books on the relevant subject before doing so.

phil

mv- I will reply and tell you that your writing apalls me -I said above that I have been lucky to have many wonderful Christian friends ,whose only thoughts are to do good in this world ,in fact my closest friend is a committed Christian who serves her Church and congregation selflessly and never seeks to criticise others -she sets an example of love and kindness which you would do well to understand -

You use the word venom .well not from me ,only here from you, including declarations of ignorance,paranoia et al for all those that do not appreciate your sentiments -Can you find anyone who has written here with education that agrees with your bigoted views -I think not .You will never read words of hatred from me ,disagreement ,yes ,but always a request for peace and justice for all and I do not have to heed the teachings of Judaism for that ,being a caring human being is all that is needed .

-You use the word Zionism as a way to exude disdain and it is obvious you have no idea of its meaning which is simply a desire of the scattered Jewish people to live in peace in the land of Israel . I suggest you read my words more carefully and then consider making peace with your maker ,then and then only you may become a real Christian .,and not one that only finds ambiguous passages to quote that serve your purpose ,a purpose that is not peace and love to all men .
You seem to be alluding to the fact that you are a teacher of theology , I do hope you are not , because love and compassion do not display themselves in anything you write and you bear a heavy responsibility to any student who takes in your thoughts .

You will find if you look that I write in many different ways on these threads which give one an opportunity to unburden one,s soul and hopefully make a contribution to a better world .I compliment those that write with sense and compassion and I tell the odd joke when I feel it will lighten the spirits of those that are unjustly accused ,and castigate those that write with hate in their hearts ,that is the privilege that we are all afforded here ,it is the democracy that is retained by this excellent magazine and one that you would not have in the countries you seem so supportive of .

MV

phil
If I say that someone is ignorant of a topic that is what I mean. That doesn't mean I hate them etc. I don't know about educated posters agreeing here - I do know that authorities both Jewish and Catholic completely agree with me (try Rabbi Jacob Neusner and Pope Benedict XVI for starters). That is not surprising, and again I direct you to the relevant sources. Those that have disagreed with me above have done so by arguing re. certain passages, expressing their differences re. the notion of rejection etc. We disagree and we try to resolve differences by friendly debate etc. I'm afraid you have not done that in your posts. You seem to claim I support repressive regimes. That is a lie (or at least a gross misrepresentation) and you can, of course, provide not one jot of evidence for your claim. Not one. This rather undermines your protestations re. your own decency I'm afraid. Elsewhere you asked me where I have written postively of Israel (state, people, religion of???). Well, you imply I have written negatively of Israel - but again no evidence (just a smear apparently). Again, where is the hatred or misrepresentation in my writings? I am interested in the truth of the matter. My claim here was minimal - is Fraser justified, in terms of the Christian theology he is supposed to uphold, justified in making a theological claim that supposedly grounds the title of the present state of Israel to its lands. I argue not. It was not an argument about Zionism (the early Zionists would not recognise Fraser's assertions in any case, as they were largely atheists) - nor have I opined about Zionism. Another false claim on your part.
You then take it upon yourself to talk of my students. I'd be happy to introduce you - you would learn from then the need for evidence, compassion, love of God and neighbour, argumentation with truth as its aim and, importantly, that smearing is a sin. I do not teach with hatred - I teach my students to respect persons of good will and lead virtuous lives regardless of race, color or creed. I do, however, teach them to beware of sophists and those who engage in witless ad hominem attacks that they cannot defend. Such an approach is, I agree, basic to Jewish and Christian moral thinking. All the more of a shame that you appear to abjure such teaching. In the meantime may I recommend Salvation is From the Jews by Roy Schoeman - Do find time to read it - as I am finding time to read the links/references given to me by posters interested in debate and who have a different opinion from mine. Only by doing such can any of us hope to make any progress. A better world is not generally made in other ways - but it takes hard work, sensibility, virtue and a willingness to read and explore. If I have failed in charity towards you then I ask your forgiveness. But I cannot let your false assertions about me go unanswered. If I have ever done likewise to you I apologise and hope and pray that I have not made you bitter through an injustice.

phil

MV-"-phil
"If I say that someone is ignorant of a topic that is what I mean."--- may I tell you what I mean ? I would say that is your opinion and perhaps others have different opinions .you certainly are not the Pope and you are not infallible .You are being arrogant and is that not a sin?-

Now it is probably apparent by now that I am not religious in an orthodox manner ,but I have learned by example from many wonderful people about standards of behaviour .Whether or not I believe Jesus was the son of God or born to a virgin has no relevance to the way I behave or think -I do in fact believe he was a person who wanted the world to be a better place and a world in which people loved and cared for one another and I try to live my life in accordance with those precepts not because of religion but because I believe it is right .

The discussions we are having here are because of the state of Israel and the land that you seem to want to deprive them of because of your interpretation of words "spoken" 2000 years ago ,and later by those that knew little or nothing other than what they had been told by others who knew little or nothing -I am not a flat earth man ,I seek pragmatism ,peace and justice ,so quoting ancient texts and words from those that were responsible for the deaths of multi millions of all religions have no influence on me other than to say I believe there is a GOD and I think he would be appalled by what your preachers of religion has caused . Those on the crusades seemed to think they were right as recently have the Serbs and Bosnian Muslims and Croats .I suspect arafat never thought he was right but he did it anyway

.Does Israel have any rights to the land because of the 6000 years plus of Jewish life there ,who knows and for me who cares'? they are there because the world voted for it and because of the guilt that was felt for abandoning them to the filth that had power over them including the abominable grand mufti who was with hitler inciting those murders ,do his descendents have better rights now that they call themselves Palestinians when in fact they are a mixture of Jordanians ,Syrians and other ethnic groups who became Palestinians when they left ? The lies continue that they were thrown out ,anyone with an ounce of historical, knowledge knows that is not true ,some were terrified and left and some were forced out by Arab threats and promises to murder every Jew and give them all their properties

.In your bible it says I believe God promised the land to the Jewish people I do not believe that but it seems you have to -ironic is it not ? We will never see peace until those that dispute the Jews right to live in that so precious peace and that will not happen so long as you and others continually quote your texts and fail to calm the flames of hatred .

Your last paragraph offers an apology in case I feel bitter -I do not but if I did it is not me you need to apologise to as I cannot offer you forgiveness .it is those that are being harmed by this continuation and God himself .By now we are alone here I am sure so these words are entirely for you -less scholarly than some you have read but nevertheless to the point .For the record I do believe you want to be a good person but perhaps pragmatism needs to enter your life in order to progress .I have certainly learned a lot from some less educated than me but miles ahead in morality and kindness .

MV

phil
Thanks for this. Re. ignorance - I am very ignorant of very many things (too ignorant of my own faults!) - but it needn't (I say needn't - I am, of course, highly fallible) be arrogant to point this out to me. That is all I aimed to do. And I certainly learn every day from people less "educated" than I - not least because they are often morally better people.
Believe it or not I agree with you - the best way to teach others is by the example of our lives - and so I thank you for your correction (and I mean what I am saying here).
re. Israel - the whole debate revolves around what "Israel" means after the coming of Christ. I don't see how a Christian can hold the biblical justification model that many religious Jews do. That was my main point. Believe it or not I think that the Jewish people would be best off not trying to justify title to Israel on biblical grounds (most don't anyway). That seems to me one way in which to dampen the flames of hatred. I have never denied that there can be OTHER justifications for the existence of the state of Israel (as with other states which people don't complain about or think an argument for their existence is needed). I am sorry to have upset people. I think it's good for people to be clear where they stand so as not to get the wrong idea. I know that I am often ready to jump to conclusions about people and their views - esp. dangerous n comboxes. It would be better if people could meet!
Anyway, apologies for my rudeness before phil. We will not agree on certain things, but I do thank you for some of your comments. Take care.

phil

MV thank you and I wished we could have started out this way -you have shown that you are a proper person by your apology and as far as I am concerned that is accepted -I hope I have not stopped your contributions and that I have managed to make my own thoughts clear. You are most welcome to disagree but I hope in future we will conduct our "arguments" in good humour You may not realise this but what we have achieved today makes all my writing worth while .This is obviously out of context especially from one like me who is not religious in an orthodox way but I do remember that Judaism teaches that to save one life is to save the world regards phil

Linda Smith

Phil and MV: the fundamental problem re the existence of Israel is that, for religious Moslems of which there are many, a Jewish State cannot be allowed to exist.
"Land for peace" is a red herring. The only "land for peace" deal that religious Moslems will accept is Israel replaced by a Moslem State.

All the rest is sophistry.

Otis Blue

Note how phil, unlike MV, flings around a false accusation and never once even appears to consider apologising "bigoted views! etc. etc. It's standard far for people ready to smear. The difference in approach is telling. Sorry, but the hypocrisy is stunning - apologies are wasted on such people.