eChurch Blog

The following is a very important article relating to Christian Aid and Israel.

This article is cross-posted with permission from Christian Aid Watch, and written by Cyrus.

Hat-tip Harry’s Place

Who said that?

[T]he pro-Israeli lobby has got its grips on the western world, its financial grips. I think they’ve probably got a grip on our party.’

Who said that? Answer: a former Trustee 0f Christian Aid, and current Patron of a Christian Aid partner charity.

‘International law accepts that people living under illegal military occupation are entitled to fight against the occupiers with whatever means they have at their disposal. If the world does not like, for example, “terrorist suicide bombing” in Palestine (a weapon neither unique to the Palestinians nor invented by them), then, as one Palestinian exile said at a conference in December 2003, “Give us F-16s, Apache helicopters, missiles tanks and heavy weapons, and we’ll have a fair fight”.’

Who used these words to justify the deliberate killing of civilians? Answer: another Patron of the same Christian Aid partner charity.

Also on the roll of Patrons are a bishop who is currently a Trustee of Christian Aid; another bishop who was Chair of Christian Aid from 1998 to 2008; and his predecessor in that post. The organization claims that it ‘works for a just peace for the people of Palestine and Israel’ and ‘promotes non-violence and reconciliation’.

Introduction

I’m a Christian and a one-time Christian Aid donor who believes there’s a problem here. I started this blog to make the point (in 2005, having first raised the subject in a letter to Christian Aid in 2002 – the problem is not a new one). This is an update on these concerns which I’ve been encouraged to write having received an e-mail from a reader who belongs to a Liberal synagogue. He and others in the Liberal Judaism movement are unhappy that the movement is linking up with Christian Aid to campaign on climate change. They’re not against the link in principle, but they do think Christian Aid should clean up its Middle East campaigning act first.

Blows have been exchanged in the LJ movement’s magazine (here on page 4) but so far the debate seems just a little short on facts. Naturally it’s not for me to tell Jews what to think, but I do think they ought to know what they’re getting into. So I offer this post as a contribution to informed debate.

The Big, Big Issue

I started off my blog with a series of posts analyzing coverage of Israel and Palestine in Christian Aid News, the charity’s magazine. This is how I summed up what I found:

‘Over the last seven issues [Summer 2003 to Summer 2005] of Christian Aid News more than 17 pages were devoted to Israel and Palestine. Most of this coverage involved political criticism of Israel. The most coverage any other conflict zone got was 4.5 pages for Angola – barely a quarter as much. Sudan, scene of more than two million deaths in the civil wars of the past two decades and, in the UN’s words, “the worst humanitarian crisis in the world”, got 2.5 pages. These include a full page feature about a woman who makes perfume. It tells you her recipe.’

Has anything changed over the four years since then? You can easily see for yourself. Go to the Christian Aid website. Click on the tab marked policy. Here you’ll find policy papers filed under ten headings. Nine are for general and global issues – climate change, trade, and so on. One is for a specific area of the world: the Middle East. Click on this one: there are eight papers filed here, written between 2003 and 2008. One is a 2003 expose of alleged American theft of Iraqi wealth (did CA ever publish a ‘hard-hitting report’ on Saddam Hussein’s regime?). The other seven all deal with Israel and Palestine.

You will search in vain for even one position paper on those conflicts in Sudan (and even if there was one, you could be pretty sure it would pull its punches when it came to apportioning blame; Omar Bashir’s regime is touchy about what aid agencies say about it).

Sometimes slightly more subtle ways are found of justifying a preoccupation with a region slightly smaller than Belgium. During Lent this year Christian Aid led a ‘virtual pilgrimage‘ around the Holy Land. Now the pilgrimage is of course a venerable Christian tradition, but pious tradition is not something that usually concerns Christian Aid overmuch. In this instance the pilgrimage furnished the perfect pretext for bringing sustained political criticism of Israel to a wider audience. Given a little imagination, a virtual pilgrimage could very well range across the entire world, but Christian Aid chose to do it differently, and that choice, it can scarcely be doubted, was very much a political one.

It’s hard to see how this fixation with Israel and Palestine can be understood as (in the words of Liberal Judaism CEO Rabbi Danny Rich) ’seek[ing] to fulfil a humanitarian mandate’. On the contrary, its perverse consequence is that other areas of the world suffering human rights abuses on a vastly greater scale simply get ignored. You might expect that an international development agency like CA would be concerned to redress the neglect of many such places by mainstream media and political discourse in Britain. Instead it concentrates on the tiny scrap of land that’s already a focus for relentless media overkill.

The sheer volume of coverage would tend to create a false impression – of Israel as a rogue state without peer – even if it were all scrupulously even-handed (it isn’t). Whenever that perception is created it gives rise to undestandable anger. Not everyone is sophisticated enough to maintain a strict distinction between anger against Israel and anger against Jews (nor indeed do the sophisticated necessarily maintain it). For some the natural outlet for anger is violence and abuse. For many more it leads to a gradual desensitization to the proposition that the Jews are a people afflicted with a fundamental moral flaw.

The Tonge Connection

I’ve already hinted that my objections to Christian Aid’s coverage of the conflict have to do with more than its sheer volume. At this point I take up the thread begun with the two quotations at the start of this post.

The name of the Liberal Democrat politician Jenny Tonge, now Baroness Tonge, will be all too familiar to many Jews. In 2004 a comment suggesting that Palestinian terrorism was an understandable reaction to the conditions of occupation led to her being sacked by party leader Charles Kennedy from the Lib Dem front bench. Two years later her statement at the party conference that “the pro-Israeli lobby has got its grips on the western world, its financial grips. I think they’ve probably got a grip on our party.” was denounced by Kennedy’s successor Menzies Campbell as having “clear anti-Semitic connotations.” She is someone who has plainly moved way beyond legitimate criticism of Israel.

Earlier in 2006 Baroness Tonge had been appointed a Trustee of Christian Aid. After her conference speech the charity sought to portray it as irrelevant to her work with them. However, her position had evidently become untenable and she resigned her Trusteeship soon afterwards. I have little doubt that this was a result of pressure put on CA by responsible church leaders, but Tonge was no less certain that the pressure had come from a different quarter. As she wrote in an e-mail to a student:

‘After criticizing the lobby in a fringe meeting at conference (just after the publication of the book I mentioned [i.e. Mearsheimer and Walt, The Israel Lobby]) I had to stand down from the board of Christian Aid because they had been warned by the BOD [Board of Deputies of British Jews], that my membership would endanger projects going ahead in the West Bank and Gaza.’

So was this the end of Christian Aid’s association with this deplorable conspiracy theorist? By no means. The connection is now a little less direct, but it is nevertheless alive and well. Baroness Tonge is currently a Patron of Friends of Sabeel UK, a group which promotes the nationalist liberation theology of the Palestinian Anglican Canon Naim Ateek. Its declared aim is to work for a just peace, which it may or may not be doing; what is evident from its website is that it promotes a one-sided propagandist narrative of the conflict and its origins, and that it campaigns against the Israeli security barrier without acknowledging that the barrier is a response to the deliberate killing of hundreds of civilians.

Friends of Sabeel UK declares prominently on its website that it is a partner of Christian Aid. It can be assumed that the partnership is to FoSUK’s advantage financially; Charity Commission records shows it raising barely half as much as it spends. The honour of being a Patron is one that Baroness Tonge shares with, among others, Professor Michael Taylor, former director of Christian Aid, Michael Langrish, Bishop of Exeter and a Trustee of Christian Aid, and John Gladwin, Bishop of Chelmsford and Chair of Christian Aid from 1998 to 2008.

The point of establishing this connection is that by now it would take pretty high levels of anti-Israel obsessionalism – and a pretty insouciant attitude towards anti-Semitism – to make anyone want to make common cause against Israel with Baroness Tonge. Two Liberal Democrat leaders have distanced themselves from her; the top brass of Christian Aid are doing quite the reverse.

A Connection Too Far

The Friends of Sabeel website reveals another connection that is, if anything, even more disturbing than that with Baroness Tonge. For also on the list of Patrons is Ibrahim Hewitt, “coordinator of the Palestine relief organisation Interpal”.

The Harry’s Place blog has made something of a speciality of researching Interpal and its relationship to Hamas. Rather than duplicate HP’s efforts, I invite readers to inform themselves here and here, and specifically on Ibrahim Hewitt here. Follow the link to Mr Hewitt’s pamphlet “What does Islam Say?” and note, for example, his opinions on the proper punishments for apostates (death) and homosexuals (one hundred lashes, or death). That he is comfortable with the proposition that those converting from Islam to Christianity deserve to forfeit their lives is not only ironic given that he is himself a convert with an at least nominally Christian background, but also makes him, one would think, a remarkable bedfellow for a brace of bishops.

Agreed, that is not directly relevant to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Not so the second of the quotes at the beginning of this post, also from Mr Hewitt’s pamphlet and quoted in a recent Harry’s Place post. Here it is again:

‘International law accepts that people living under illegal military occupation are entitled to fight against the occupiers with whatever means they have at their disposal. If the world does not like, for example, “terrorist suicide bombing” in Palestine (a weapon neither unique to the Palestinians nor invented by them), then, as one Palestinian exile said at a conference in December 2003, “Give us F-16s, Apache helicopters, missiles tanks and heavy weapons, and we’ll have a fair fight”.’

Hewitt further underlines this position by quoting approvingly from “contemporary Islâmic scholar, Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi”, who has consistently upheld the right of Palestinians to resort to terrorism.

This is not, repeat not, about Mr Hewitt being a Muslim, nor is it about the fact that he sympathizes with the Palestinians. The issue is this: his argument that Palestinians are entitled to kill Israeli civilians is one which Christians must reject as morally intolerable. The claim that “international law” vindicates terrorism is of course preposterous; far less can it be vindicated by any credibly Christian ethic. I cannot justify deliberately murdering the unarmed and defenceless by appealing to a group identity which they share with others whose military might exceeds my own. To assert otherwise is, apart from any other consideration, inherently racist where the group identity in question is a racial one, as it plainly is in the case of Palestinian terrorism.

The principle I have just stated may or may not have been infringed by members of the Israeli forces in Gaza. If and to the extent it has been, that is deplorable. Where Palestinian terrorism is concerned no ‘ifs’ arise. That the infringement has occurred and that it has indeed been premeditated and deliberate is beyond question, and this infringement is precisely what Mr Hewitt seeks to vindicate in the quote above. And this presents Christian Aid and Friends of Sabeel UK with a choice. Either they can claim the moral high ground for their efforts on behalf of the Palestinians, or they can argue from political expediency that their tent should be large enough to accommodate Ibrahim Hewitt. But they cannot do both.

Christian Aid and Hamas

What, then, is Ibrahim Hewitt, a Muslim with extreme religious and political views, doing as a Patron of a Christian charity? It’s just possible that the Christian Aiders are not aware quite how extreme his views actually are. On the other hand, it’s not necessary to assume that they are ignorant of his and Interpal’s stance towards Hamas. For Christian Aid itself seems to be by no means hostile towards Hamas.

It consistently offers no criticism of Hamas to balance its repeated criticisms of Israel. It consistently avoids use of the word “terrorism”; whilst its official statements condemn “violence” in general terms, there is never any suggestion that the deliberate killing of non-combattants deserves special condemnation. Nor is there any acknowledgement that Hamas has been one of the foremost sponsors of violence of this type, nor that it is intransigently hostile to the existence of Israel, which Christian Aid is officially committed to upholding.

There is more on this theme in my response to a Christian Aid parliamentary briefing produced in 2006 and typical of an approach which has been entirely consistent before and since.

Further evidence of Christian Aid’s approach can be found on Friends of Sabeel UK’s website. The FAQ page starts with the question “Is Sabeel anti-semitic?” – revealing a certain defensiveness, perhaps. The answer begins with “No” and ends with criticism of Israel. It contains no mention of the explicit anti-Semitism of Hamas.

The events page lists FoSUK as one of the supporters of the “Free Palestine!” demonstration in London on 16 May 2009. Also in the list of supporters are the Muslim Association of Britain (”the British franchise of Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood”, in the words of Harry’s Place) and Viva Palestina, under whose auspices George Galloway made his way to Gaza to hand over a wad of cash to Hamas. Viva Palestina is under investigation by the Charity Commission following this escapade (it is, after all, illegal to fund Hamas even if you don’t have charitable status) – see this Harry’s Place post which also notes the organization’s close links with Ibrahim Hewitt’s Interpal.

The Charity Commission seems happy to grant charities a good deal of leeway for political campaigning, and only under fairly extreme provocation does it bestir itself even to launch an investigation. Personally, I believe that this degree of politicization makes nonsense of the very concept of charity; even if the Commissioners disagree, it really is not acceptable for the churches which sponsor Christian Aid to share their indulgence.

The security barrier

‘Christian Aid has expressed unequivocal support for the security of Israel and the rights of all Israeli people to live safely and securely’ writes Rabbi Rich. Indeed it has. The problem is that there is a large gap between what the organization says in bland official statements (largely to keep the Charity Commission and/or the Archbishop of Canterbury off its back, I suspect) and what it actually practises. For in practice its support for the security of Israel is hedged about by the equivocations that surface whenever Israel takes action to safeguard its citizens.

The homepage of Friends of Sabeel UK features a photo of what is described elsewhere as an “armed Israeli lookout tower on the ‘Apartheid’ Wall”. Another photo features “A Friends of Sabeel demonstration against the continued construction of the wall”.

What has the security barrier meant for Israelis? Bearing in mind that construction began in 2003, the graph here tells its own story (I would not usually rely on an Israeli – or any other – government source, but the figures are not in dispute). To bring the picture up to date, one Israeli woman was killed by a suicide bombing in February 2008 (the bomber had come across the barrier-free border with Jordan). As I write that is the most recent suicide attack to have occurred in Israel. Hamas and Islamic Jihad have both acknowledged that their attacks have been frustrated by the presence of the barrier.

When Pope Benedict visited the Holy Land he described the security barrier as one of the saddest sights of his trip, and looked forward to a future in which it would have disappeared. But he also stated clearly that this was contingent on a renunciation of violence and aggression by all sides. That was an expression of ‘unequivocal support for the security of Israel’ and a model for Christians. It is sadly not the view of the Christian Aiders gathered together as Friends of Sabeel.

It might sound outrageous to suggest that the Friends of Sabeel want it made easier for Palestinians to kill Jews. But in June 2006 Baroness Tonge wrote complainingly in a letter to the Independent ‘It should come as no surprise to anyone that suicide bombers in Iraq are Palestinians. Israel’s security wall is forcing them to export themselves to another arena [...]‘ (my emphasis). Lest we forget, Baroness Tonge is a Patron of Friends of Sabeel UK and a very special friend of Christian Aid.

To be continued

This long post has been too long in the writing. For this I offer my apologies to the reader who asked me to write it, whilst leaving further thoughts for a follow-up post.

Update: the follow-up is here.

Please click here to view the original post and also the Appendix 1 + 2

Previous related Posts:-

Controversial Muslim to be head of BBC religion

BBC supports Islam and attacks Christianity says ex-presenter Don Maclean

Church of England to confront BBC over treatment of Christianity

Muslim appointed BBC Head of Religion

There was a palpable groan of pain from the Christian world, when the Muslim believer Aaqil Ahmen was appointed to the head of religion for the BBC. The appointment seemed to come amongst a swarm of anti-christian legislation and sentiment emanating from our government and I was amongst those who felt disheartened frankly.

There is an interesting interview with Aaqil Ahmed in the Times today, where amongst other things, he mentions an upcoming 6-part TV programme for BBC 4 called, ‘A History of Christianity’, which starts next Thursday and is presented by the Oxford historian Diarmuid McCulloch.

Times

Ahmed, 40, who is accompanied throughout the interview by a BBC press officer, does not wish to be drawn on his personal faith: “Of course I’m a believer but I don’t want it to be the story,” he says. “It really isn’t relevant to the job. I don’t think for one second that being a Muslim makes my job any easier or harder.”

He expands: “I’ve worked in television for 17 years. I’m a professional. I cannot stress enough that my priority is to successfully navigate religion through the BBC.”

Well, it will be interesting to note if his beliefs do impact on his work, or if he is a consummate professional as he indicates. Only time will tell and of course it will be interesting to see which way the new series ‘slants’, if any.

Concerns were voiced, perhaps unfairly, when Ahmed was appointed, about the BBC’s commitment to Christian programming. Although he does not give a percentage (“I don’t think I have any percentages as such”) for the number of Christian programmes included in the BBC’s 163 hours of religious television each year, Ahmed says that Christianity, as the “majority faith” in Britain, is the “cornerstone” of the BBC’s religious schedule.

He is the “proud custodian” of Songs of Praise (BBC One)). Growing up in Lancashire — his parents migrated from Lahore to Wigan — he was a big fan of The Message (1976) starring Anthony Quinn. “A lot of my generation learnt about the history of Islam from that film,” says Ahmed, who named his son Hamza after Quinn’s character. Unlike his brothers, he opted not to join the family clothing business, set up by his father after a few years in a Wigan dye factory. The 4am starts to man the market stall put him off, he jokes, although they left him with a “northern Protestant work ethic”. At 16 he wanted to be a graphic designer, but then “Apple Mac and computer graphics came along”. So, after attending art school in Wigan, Ahmed took a degree in film at the University of Westminster, including work experience stints at the BBC. This led to a job as a researcher at BBC Birmingham and eventually as a producer in news and currents affairs, an area that led — and leads him still — to religion.

A self-described religion “geek”, Ahmed says that he could “bore people to death” on subjects such as the Dark Ages, the Lindisfarne Gospels, the Reformation “and what those particular chapters in British history mean today”. Ignorance of religious history, such as the evolution of Christianity, “a Middle Eastern religion that’s becoming westernised”, he finds “frustrating”. Ahmed says he is fascinated by how religion interacts with society and culture. He is the first joint head of Religion and Ethics and Commissioning Editor for BBC TV.

“Personally I don’t know how you can dismantle religion from the world we live in today,” he says.

[....]

Would he pull a programme if it offended religious believers, as BBC Three did in 2004, with Popetown , a satirical cartoon about the papacy which drew thousands of complaints? “In the six and a half years I spent at Channel 4 we never pulled anything, simply because we always knew what we were going to do. I don’t think for one second we should need to be in that position,” he replies. “Nothing should come as a surprise.” Really?

Read entire article

Previous related posts:-

Potential breakthrough in Ami Ortiz case

This important update is taken from the excellent Rosh Pina Project including all related links:-

The Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) and Israel Police have arrested an American-born Jewish settler who is allegedly behind an unprecedented series of deadly terror shootings and bombings spanning over a decade, in which two Palestinians were killed and Israel Prize Laureate Prof. Ze’ev Sternhell was injured. According to the Shin Bet, he also planted a bomb at the entrance to house of a messianic family in Ariel, seriously wounding their son, then-15-year-old Ami Ortiz.

Yaakov Teitel.
Photo: Shin Bet Israel Security Agency

Yaakov “Jack” Teitel, 37, was arrested by the Israel Police’s elite counter-terror unit YAMAM on October 7th as he was hanging flyers in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Har Nof in support of the attack on a Tel Aviv gay and lesbian youth club in August in which two people were killed. Teitel, the Shin Bet said, was not the gunman in that attack.

Teitel, the father of four from the settlement of Shevut Rahel, came to Israel in 1997 and allegedly succeeded in smuggling a pistol into Israel aboard a British Airways flight. The Shin Bet says the gun was used to kill an East Jerusalem cab driver on June 8, 1997 and two months later to shoot and kill a Palestinian shepherd near the settlement of Carmel in the Southern Hebron Hills.

Teitel then left Israel for Florida and returned three years later in 2000. According to the Shin Bet he was wanted at the time by American authorities for his alleged involvement in violent criminal activity in the US.

“He was a lone attacker,” a senior Shin Bet official said when explaining why it took some 12 years since the first attack to arrest Teitel, who has a degree in business and made a living by developing websites.

Teitel, officials said, was an “autodidact” when it came to weapons expertise. In addition to the gun smuggled by air, Teitel is alleged also smuggled another nine automatic machine guns and pistols into Israel hidden in a shipping container. His father, who now lives in the settlement of Beitar Illit, served for many years as a dentist in the US Marines and officials said it was possible that Teitel learned about weapons and explosives during his time on military bases.

Yaakov Teitel’s weapons’ cache.
Photo: Shin Bet Israel Security Agency

“He is an autodidact when it came to using weapons and assembling bombs,” the Shin Bet official said. “They were not the most advanced devices but they were pretty sophisticated and deadly.”

Teitel was actually arrested by police and the Shin Bet upon his return to Israel in 2000 based on intelligence they had obtained indicating that he was behind the 1997 shootings. The police released him after they could not find evidence to support the intelligence. For this reason, Teitel was allowed to continue to receive an official license to carry a pistol which was discovered loaded and on him when he was arrested last month.

Officials said that Teitel was extremely cautious and did not share his attacks with anyone including his wife. As an example, police said that he was nabbed in Har Nof last month hanging flyers while wearing thick gloves in order to not leave a fingerprint. However, he had been under surveillance for a period of time before then.

During his interrogations, Teitel confessed to a long list of shooting and bombing attacks. The first two attacks were the shootings in 1997. In November 2006, he planted a bomb inside a police station in the settlement of Eli. The bomb was discovered and dismantled but the Shin Bet official said that “it was sophisticated” and had it gone off “people would have been killed.”

He said he carried out the coming attack to try and deter police from providing security for a scheduled gay pride rally in Jerusalem later that month.

In April 2007, Teitel allegedly planted a bomb next to the Beit Jamal Monastery near Beit Shemesh. A Palestinian driving a tractor set off the bomb and was injured. Teitel told his interrogators that he planted the device since he heard that the monastery was seducing Jewish children with candies.

Teitel confessed to planting another bomb in the Jerusalem neighborhood Ramot near a police car on May 15, 2007. The bomb exploded but no one was injured. A month later he allegedly planted another bomb on the side of a road near the Jerusalem neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo and detonated it as a police car passed by. No one was injured.

Teitel, officials said, made the explosive devices in a room in his family’s home in Shevut Rahel. He hid the weapons cache near his home and hid another gun near the settlement of Adei Ad.

He confessed to planting a bomb on March 20, 2008 at the entrance to the Ortiz family home in Ariel, who he believed were messianic Jews and were trying to convert Jews to Christianity.

On Sept. 25, 2008, Teitel planed a bomb at the entrance to the home of Sternhell in Jerusalem, which went off and injured the well-known academic. He said he decided to target Sternhell since he understood that the professor had called to kill Jewish settlers.

He also confessed to stabbing an Arab youth in 1997 in Independence Park since he thought he was gay.

Officials said that Teitel was in the midst of planning additional attacks but would not specify against whom.

In the arms cache found near his house, police discovered a sophisticated sniper rifle, an M15 machine gun, an M16 shortened automatic rifle, a Glock pistol as well as a Browning 9mm. The gun that he said he smuggled into Israel aboard a British Airways flight and was used in the 1997 murders was not discovered by police. He said he hid it next to the Sha’are Zedek hospital in Jerusalem and despite extensive searches it was not found.

While police do not have the murder weapon, they said that Teitel confessed to the murders, reenacted them and knew details that only the murderer could have known.

Jerusalem Post: Leah Ortiz: “My blood ran cold”

Jerusalem Post: David Ortiz: State must make an example of Teitel

YNet News: Settler Suspected of Multiple Hate Crimes

Haaretz: Who is suspected terrorist Yaakov Teitel?

Haaretz: Netanyahu: Minority of violent far-rightists must be stopped

Associated Press: Israel arrests extremist Jew

YNet News: Sternhell’s arrest marks important day for Israeli democracy

Harry’s Place: Gays, Arabs, Christians, Left-Wingers: He Wanted to Kill Them All

Jerusalem Post: Yaakov Teitel’s lawyer: He is mentally unstable

YNet News: Relatives: Teitel wouldn’t destroy his family’s lives

Maan News Agency: Settler arrested for string of bombings, shootings

YNet News: Son of murdered Arab: I hope Teitel never sees the light of day

Jerusalem Post: Teitel’s Shvut Rachel community: We hope allegations will be refuted

Yesha Council: Teitel’s acts are outrageous

El Pais: Detenido en Israel un terorista judío natural de EE UU

Reuters America Latina: Policia israelí detiene colono judío acusado de asesinar árabes

Peace Now: Increase enforcement in settlements

PM on Teitel: He doesn’t represent the people

This is the second part of a fantastic article written by Yeze from the Rosh Pina Project relating to Messianic Jews.

First part on below link:-

In the Shadow of the Barcelona Disputation

I believe with perfect faith… by Yeze

Jewish polemicists in the Middle Ages developed many sophisticated theological and philosophical arguments as to why it was impossible for Jews to believe that Jesus was the Messiah. Their arguments have carried on until this day. Messianic Jews argue that in Yeshua, God became a man.

Modern anti-missionaries see this as avodah zarah, the worship of a human being, meaning that Messianic Jews are effectively idolators. Anti-missionaries have also argued that our belief that the death of Messiah could precede redemption of the world excludes us from the messianic faith of Judaism.

Some anti-missionaries use these theological polemics as a justification to exclude and boycott Messianic Jews from Jewish cultural and economic life. As a result, some Jews who believe in Yeshua have accepted that they are no longer Jews any more, as their beliefs place them outside the boundaries of their religion.

As this may entail being disowned by your father and mother, rejected by your friends and denounced by your community leaders, this is often hugely distressing for the individuals involved. So it is then deeplu frustrating to see other Jews fully accepted and integrated into Jewish society despite holding similar theological beliefs.

I welcome the inclusion of all Jews within Jewish society, but it should be fair, no matter what people believe. No Jews are more equal than others. I don’t want to see Chabad excluded, but Messianic Jews and Jewish converts to Christianity included should they choose to participate in Jewish social and community life. Just like Chabad do.

The Chabad-Lubavitch messianists believe that the Rebbe, Moses Mendel Schneerson, who died in 1994, is the Messiah. They believe his return is imminent, and will usher in the resurrection of the dead and the redemption of the world. In many cases, Lubavitch messianists will describe the Rebbe as divine.

Regarding these messianists, Saul Sadka wrote in Haaretz in 2007:

While it may seem bizarre to describe electrician-cum-rabbi M. M. Schneerson in this way, many of the people seen as messianist view Schneerson as a demigod. They are loathe to state this explicitly, but they will assign him characteristics of God, pray to him and, when pressed, suggest that there is really no difference between him and God. Since the Rebbe was perfection personified, he is greater than any man that ever lived; ergo he is godly – omnipotent, omniscient and unlimited.

Virtually no one within the movement today is willing to deny that Schneerson was the greatest man that ever lived nor that he was perfect.

None have a problem with praying to Schneerson, using his books for divination in place of the Bible. Even amongst those viewed as moderates, “the Rebbe” is often substituted for God in normal conversation, sprinkling their remarks with comments such as “may the Rebbe help you” or “the Rebbe is watching over us.”

Even among the moderate minority, the distinction between Schneerson and God is decidedly blurred. Asking adherents whether Schneerson will return as the Messiah is unlikely to yield a directly negative response.

Yet Lubavitch messianists are still considered Jews by other Jews. Lubavitch messianists are also active in Yad L’Achim, who are supposed to be combatting “idolatry”!

Chabad publicly support the work of Yad L’Achim, and Chabadniks have been known to work for Yad L’Achim.

In Russia, Chabadniks oversee the anti-missionary and anti-Messianic group Magen League (ironically in tandem with the Russian Orthodox Church).

In the UK, Rabbi Shmuel Arkush, the Director of Operation Judaism (a UK anti-missionary office), is also the Director of Lubavitch of the Midlands. Arkush thinks that for a Jew to believe in Jesus is:

“theologically without foundation. You have Jews, and you have Christians. You can’t dance at both weddings.”

So how can Arkush justify his own position within Chabad, the movement which carries so many apparent similarities to Christianity?

And why is the Board of Deputies working with “apostates” to keep out other “apostates”?

As detailed on Chabad’s website, Operation Judaism is jointly managed by Lubavitch, the Board of Deputies and the Office of the Chief Rabbi. Chabad’s page in turn carries a link to Jews for Judaism – a U.S. outfit run by Chabad Rabbi Bentzion Kravitz. An offshoot of Jews For Judaism is the Jewish Passion website, which quotes extensively from Maimonides’ writings on the Messiah. The website ostensibly argues against Messianic Jewish claims based on Maimonides’ writings.

Interestingly, Orthodox Jewish historian David Berger argues for the exclusion of Chabad messianists on the same grounds as Messianic Jews are excluded by – as idolators and practicioners of avodah zarah- also based on Maimonides’ messianic writings.

In his book The Rebbe, the Messiah, and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference (Litmann Libary of Jewish Civilisations, United States and Canada, 2001), Berger cites the Rambam’s twelfth principle of Judaism and follows it up with a comment:

(p.18) ‘I believe with complete faith in the coming of the Messiah, and even though he may tarry I await him each day, hoping that he will come.

This version of Rambam’s twelfth principle of Judaism has served as a source of faith and consolation for generations of Jews, and, in Christian countries, as a central affirmation of resistance to belief in the messiahship of Jesus.’

Which begs the question: why do Chabad only pay attention to Maimonides to argue that Jesus isn’t the Messiah, and ignore the fact that Maimonides’ messianic writings would equally exclude a Jewish belief in Schneerson as Moshiach?

Berger also takes Orthodox Jewish institutions to task for allowing Chabad-Lubavitch messianism to flourish:

p.128 ‘Through the criminal negligence of the Orthodox community, Lubavitch messianism has positioned itself to proselytise, spread, and ultimately define the contours of Orthodox Judaism in numerous cities and not a few countries all over the world.’

Indeed: when you compare the organised anti-missionary movement designed to combat Christian and Messianic missionaries (which in the case of Yad L’Achim spills over into violence and intimidation) to the resistance to Lubavitch messianism within Orthodox Judaism, there is simply no comparison.

According to Berger:

p.27 ‘most Orthodox Jews refuse to believe the true dimensions of the messianist takeover and tell themselves that ignoring it will make it go away.’

Berger argues:

p.3 ‘Virtually all Orthodox Jews, whether they believe in the Messiahship of the Rebbe or not, belong to a profoundly differentreligion from the one they adhered to in 1993.’

So why are Lubavitch messianists kosher and Messianic Jews treif?

And what’s the difference between a Chabad emissary and a Christian missionary?

Is it just a case of same theology, different Messiah?

Berger includes one compelling example which invites further consideration. Regarding Lubavitch messianism, Berger writes:

p. 173 ‘One learned Jew insisted to me that only a few lunatic could maintain this belief, but when I reacted by telling him that people with significant positions in the movement have made such affirmations, he responded, ‘Well, they do cite sources, don’t they?’ The sociology of this response is fascinating’

Quite!

Those who argue that Lubavitch messianism, unlike Messianic belief in Yeshua, is a Jewish movement would do well to remember that Christianity was predominantly Jewish for at least two centuries, and Lubavitch messianism has only been around for 15 years. And those who argue that the organised Chabad movement, unlike organised Christianity, has not been corrupted by the trappings of power would do well to learn about the case of Berel Lazar and Vladimir Putin in Russia.

Similarly, some will argue that Lubavitchers still practise the Torah, unlike Jewish Christians. Perhaps, but many Messianic Jews do keep Torah, and are often accused of deceit as a result.

David Berger describes Lubavitch messianism as a:

(p.107) ‘neo-Christian theology in the heart of the Orthodox Jewish world.’

So if contemporary Judaism is heavily influenced by a neo-Christian movement, then why would Orthodox rabbis have a problem with Jewish Christians?

The response of David Singer, Research Director of the American Jewish Committee, in his book review of The Rebbe, the Messiah and the Scandal of Orthodox Indiference was to accuse Berger of being a ‘would-be Torquemada, on the Orthodox scene, demanding a policy of “intolerance” and “exclusion” toward those he deems to be heretical to Orthodoxy.’

So in Singer’s eyes, is everyone who puts boundaries on Judaism a would-be Torquemada?

David Singer’s definition of what constitutes a ‘would-be Torquemada’ would surely render every anti-missionary as one, including the Chabad anti-missionaries such as Kravitz and Arkush.

Singer works for the American Jewish Committee, whose interfaith director Rabbi David Rosen has suggested that Jews who turn to Jesus are being called on to betray their people.

So perhaps the AJC could get their story straight, and explain why belief in Yeshua as divine resurrected Messiah is a heresy for Jews, but belief in Schneerson as divine resurrected Messiah isn’t.

The relationship between the Christian Copts and the Muslim majority in Egypt is simply spiralling downwards. As I understand it, Christian Copts make up around 10% of Egyptians and are mainly an impoverished group.

Could you imagine the vilification of Christians if they started behaving in a similar manner towards Muslims in the UK and yet reports of Christian persecution at the hands of Islam, rarely makes it into the mainstream media in the West.

As Christians we really need to pray for our brothers and sisters in Egypt and voice our concerns, raise awareness and in my opinion forgo holidays to Egypt! Believe me, Egypt is not safe for Westerners and I know this from scary personal experience.

Only a technical malfunction narrowly averted a terror attack on Israelis in the Sinai some two months ago, Channel 2 quoted security officials as saying on Wednesday.

Israel on Tuesday issued a travel warning for its nationals visting the Sinai peninsula in Egypt, advising them to leave the area immediately.

Click here for an excellent analysis of the current political situation in Egypt from Professor Barry Rubin

Assyrian International News Agency

Reports from Dairout, 313 km south of Cairo, confirm that Christian Copts are afraid to leave their homes and have stayed indoors since violence against them erupted on October 24, 2009. This collective punishment of Copts was caused by an illicit sexual relationship between a Muslim girl, Hagger Hassouna, and the Christian Romany Farouk Attallah. It was rumored that he sent videos of them intimately together to cell phones in Dairout before fleeing. This prompted the Hassouna family to kill his father, Farouk Attallah, on October 19, 2009, in revenge. Four of the Hassouna killers were detained by prosecution, leading to Muslim riots against the Copts (AINA 10-27-2009) .

According to Wagih Yacoub of the Middle East Christian Assosiation (MECA), Muslim-owned businesses are now displaying stickers with ‘Allah Akbar’ (Allah is Great) to differentiate between them and Coptic-owned businesses, as a form of pre-planning for a forthcoming wave of Muslim violence.

Handwritten leaflets (Arabic) have been circulated among Muslims in Dairout for the last two days; they call on Muslims to unite to take revenge for their religion and honor, claiming that Hagger Hassouna is innocent and that she was forced into vice, and “all Jews and Christians should come to learn that Muslim honor is precious.” The fliers state that Muslims are the masters of the world since beginning of times until the present day, and entices them to “burn and vandalize and clean the country of the evil immoral infidels.”

It also calls on Muslims to take revenge for the “rings of prostitution” which are the churches and in particular the church in the village of Ezbet Hanna. Those specifically named to be killed are Reverend Pavlos of the Church of the Virgin Mary, Coptic lawyer Gamal Youssef, two brothers who own an optometry practice, and a Copt who owns a beauty saloon and photography shop.

Muslims are asked to die for their honor and they will be rewarded with eternal paradise. “Do not say it is a matter of just a girl, no, it is a public and a serious issue, it is the biggest issue, it is Islam’s issue.” A transcript of the the leaflet (in Arabic) is published on Copts United website.

Egyptian security forces have intensified their presence in the Upper Egyptian town of Dairout, in anticipation of a recurrence of Muslim violence against Christians. Copts expressed their fear over leaflets entitled “These have to Die!” which are being distributed to all Muslims in Dairout and neighborhoods, enticing them to “burn, vandalize and clean the country of these evil immoral infidels.”

Read the rest of this depressing article

Recent related posts:-

Muslims and Christians clashed in southern Egypt on Saturday following an earlier murder of a Christian villager by attackers accusing his son of having an affair with a Muslim, according to witnesses.

Farouk Henry Attallah a Christian man was killed in southern Egypt by attackers who accused his son of having an affair with a Muslim girl, police said Sunday.

Egypt: Copts arrest Christian father for trying to rescue kidnapped daughter

A Christian on the run in Egypt – Maher El Gohary is something his Muslim compatriots can’t fathom: a convert to Christianity. He and his daughter live like fugitives, moving frequently to avoid those who’d like to see him dead

Coptic Christian’s Murder Sparks Anger, Tension in Egypt – Organized attacks on Egyptian Christians that led to the killing of one Coptic Christian and stabbing of two others, in al-Bagur town in northern Egypt have angered the Christian community.

Farouk Henry Attallah a Christian man was killed in southern Egypt by attackers who accused his son of having an affair with a Muslim girl, police said Sunday.

Police in the mostly Muslim country of Egypt have arrested at least 150 Christians over the past several days for publicly “interrupting” the Ramadan fast.

EGYPT ON THE PERSECUTION TIMELINE

Another installment from Harry’s Place on our governments apparent naivety, as they appoint an Islamic extremist sympathiser, to ‘advise’ the director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer, on incitement to racial and religious hatred issues.

The worrying question is whether the government truly is naive, or if they have appointed Azad Ali knowing his views, in an attempt to demonstrate to the Islamic world how sympathetic they really are to their cause! Maybe there are large kickbacks to be had by the government from Islamic groups? I don’t know, I’m just desperately trying to make sense of the madness.

Harry’s Place

Why is the CPS taking its advice from a man who gives some of Britain’s worst neo Nazis a run for their money in the extremism stakes?

How can this be happening?

Read Entire Post

FURTHER INTERNET LINK

Previous posts

Vatican invitation to Anglican could mean married priests – The Issue of Priestly Celibacy

Just a Few Thoughts on the Catholic Church, Anglicans and the Orthodox Church

Great analysis as usual from Damian Thompson on the impact on the Catholic church of allowing married Anglican vicars into their priestly ranks.

Telegraph

Following Cardinal Levada’s “clarification” of the Ordinariate plan yesterday, which touched on the ordination of married ex-Anglicans without giving much away, I’ve been sent an expert commentary by a priest who is an old hand at interpreting Vatican documents. I found it helpful (though not encouraging for Anglicans who hope that the Latin Church is about to sweep away its 1,000-year-old celibacy rule). Note my contact’s references to the sensitive subjects of Anglican priests in second marriages and those who were born Catholics.

On the subject of the “irregularities” that might impede ordination mentioned by Cardinal Levada, the priest writes:

“Irregularities or other impediments” could include the fact that an Anglican bishop, being married, is impeded from being ordained a bishop according to Catholic/Orthodox practice. Also, an Anglican cleric in a marriage not recognized by the Catholic Church (such as a second marriage while first spouse is living) is impeded entirely from ordination unless at a future date the marital status is resolved. You can bet former Catholic priests now functioning as Anglican priests will also be considered to have “impediments or irregularities” (i.e., a promise of celibacy they took when Catholic) that will be difficult to overcome in order to again function as Catholic priests. I suppose, too, after this comes into force, a Catholic who left, became Anglican, was ordained, and wanted to come back as a Catholic priest would face special scrutiny (e.g. did he leave as an infant or as a 20 year old trying “to game the system”).

The priest goes on to talk about the ordination of future married seminarians:

The issue will be worked out for those coming over from Anglicanism while already in the seminary–or as deacons who have been anticipating ordination to the priesthood. Right now they might allow dispensations rather freely.  In years to come I suspect none will be granted for members of the ordinariate, but they might still make some exceptions for future converts coming from Anglicanism.  Again, those candidates with marriage situations, past history as Catholic clerics, or Catholics who became Anglicans will face particular scrutiny.

So Anglican traditionalists hoping that the Ordinariate will incorporate Uniate-style provisions for married priests will be disappointed, it seems. On the other hand, given that this is a matter of discipline rather than dogma, the long-term future may hold some surprises.

The Sun newspaper reporter must be bored, uh oh, perhaps I am as well:-

HALLOWEEN threw up a spooky vision in the sky when a giant cross in the clouds appeared above a CHURCH.

The bright white shape could be seen in the clear blue skies above Sheffield city centre yesterday morning.

For several minutes the cloud, shaped like a crucifix cross, was visible from all around the city.

Motorist Pete Moxon who took the snap said : “It was really weird I was just driving into the city centre and glanced up and saw this huge cloud in the shape of a cross in a clear blue sky.

Read more:

Image from FasterPastor

This is a great post from Dan Phillips over at the PyroManiacs Blog

Every now and then I remind myself that all sorts of people happen by this blog. For the most part, we address ourselves to folks within certain niche that, while broad, is nonetheless defined. It has edges. Yet we know we have visitors and lurkers from all across the spectrum.

That’s who I’m talking to, today. I am addressing a certain group not in our normal collection of readers. There may be 500 of you, or 5, or 1. If only one, that’s fine: you are who I’m talking to.

I’m supposing that you’re an outsider, and that you know it. You know something about Christianity; maybe a little, maybe a lot. But you know you’re not a Christian, and you’re honest enough to admit it. I appreciate that.

You hear all this talk of “evangelicalism” and “election” and “sovereignty” and all that, and you’re not sure what it all means. It seems pretty hard and heady. Don’t feel bad about that. It’s hard and heady to us, too.

But here’s what you really need to know. You need to know that you should come to Jesus, right now. That’s the most important thing I have to say to you. It’s the only thing I have to say to you: you should come to Jesus.

There are countless reasons why you — whoever you are, wherever you are, whatever you’ve done — should come to Jesus. Let me give you five:

1. You really need Jesus. You’ve already begun to suspect as much. Let me earnestly assure you, you need Him far more than you know. So did I, and so do I! You need Him because you are far from God. God is not the shapeless, cuddly, Grampa in the Sky that some think. He is absolutely free from all that is wrong and wicked and sinful; He is bursting with life and purity and goodness and holiness. What is more, He cannot abide the contrary — crimes against His laws or His nature. You and I have committed those crimes. We’ve done it since we were old enough to do anything. We have lied, stolen, wanted things that weren’t ours to have. We have lived for things or personal goals, rather than for God above all. Even one such crime makes us a criminal, and God must punish such crimes. There is no appeal beyond His court. His verdict is final, and it will be terrible.
2. Only Jesus meets your deepest needs. You are a criminal in God’s eyes, and forgiveness is found in Jesus alone. You are spiritually dead, and headed for eternal horrors; and Jesus is the resurrection and the life. You are far from God; in Jesus alone, you will find God and know Him as your Father. You are a slave of sin, of Satan, of the world; in Jesus alone, you will be delivered.
3. Jesus Himself calls you to come. If He hadn’t called you, I would have no right to do so now. But Jesus says, “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light” (Matthew 11:28-30). That is a wide-open door, big enough for you to squeeze through. He says, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst” (John 6:35). What’s more, He says “whoever comes to me I will never cast out (John 6:37). To me, that is one of the most precious promises in all of Scripture. I cling to that like a drowning man to a life raft. What could possibly keep you from leaping to come, as Jesus calls you? It is a call, it is an invitation — and it is a command.
4. Jesus alone has the absolute right to call you and command you to come. Jesus was no mere sage nor philosopher. He was and is God in human nature, and He was and is Lord. He is not merely the king nor president of this nor that nation, of this nor that ethnicity — He is the head of the entire human race. He alone has the authority to call you and me, to command us, and He has the right to expect us to come — and to deal severely with us if we do not. That is, He has the right to make terrible and true threats to anyone who refuses to come. And He has the right to promise all the glorious, wonderful blessings which He gives as free gifts to all who do come.
5. When you do come, you will see that it was all a free gift of God, and that you have God alone to thank and credit for what He will do for you. Had He not drawn me, I never would have come. But because He drew me, I came. Had He not given me life, I never would have come. But He gave me life — freely! by grace! — and I came. I owe every bit of it, I must give every last ounce of credit for it, to God and to God alone. I cannot begin to tell you how much I owe Him, how much love and honor and credit and praise He deserves. For now, let me just say “ALL,” and add “to Him ALONE.”

No church can do this for you. No ritual can do this for you. No philosophy can do this for you. No self-improvement program can do this for you. In fact, no thing can do any of this for you. Only a person can do this for you, and only one Person can do this for you: Jesus Christ.

So, come to Him! Come now! Why ever would you not come? Now is the only time you know you have; tomorrow never comes. Many have died since you began reading this. Your need to come is urgent, your opportunity to come is fleeting

Come to Jesus!

If you want to read more about why it makes sense to believe Jesus, read this.

If you want to read more about why you need Jesus, and what He has done to meet the needs of people just like you, and what it means to believe in Jesus, read this.

If you do come, and believe in Jesus, and want to know where to go from here, read this.