|
By now the 2004 national Presbyterian Church USA General Assembly
statements about Israeli-Palestinian relations are well known around the
world, to Jews and Israelis especially. They raise questions about
possible antisemitism among Presbyterians, emboldening other mainline
churches such as Episcopalians and Anglicans to entertain a similar
approach about a situation the leaders of these churches appear to know
all too little about.
There are several basic pronouncements made by the PCUSA national
directors this year that are especially irksome. Israeli soldiers
stationed in the Palestinian-controlled territories were referred to as
“occupiers” who can be chastised and induced to leave, as white leaders in
apartheid South Africa responded to international pressure through the
economic pressure of divestiture. In a “clarifying statement,” the clerk
of the 2004 General Assembly said Zionism was never compared to apartheid,
but the implication is there.
In fact, the Israeli government has tried every possible approach to reach
a peaceful accord with Palestinian leaders (none of whom has been elected,
kept his promises to stop terrorism or showed good faith or even respect
for the right of Israel to exist). Israel tried turning territories over
to the control of the Palestinian Authority in the past, but it turned out
to be too dangerous to Israeli citizens. Israeli soldiers have had to
re-enter the disputed territories, with reluctance, for their own
protection, just as police in America would attempt to protect us from
mass-murderers.
How would we in the U.S. feel if we had to face world pressure to
negotiate with Osama bin Laden after the 9/11 attacks instead of using the
only approach that would eliminate the danger, namely overthrowing the
Afghan government under his control and destroying his followers who, like
Yasser Arafat’s terrorists, have dedicated their lives to blind hate,
destruction and evil?
The Israeli governments, over the course of the existence of the modern
State of Israel, have alternated between being doves and hawks,
negotiators and hard-liners, but in the end Israeli citizens appear to be
safer when firm and unequivocal actions are taken. Palestinian leadership,
never elected, never democratic, forever fostering hatred of Jews among
the young, glorifying suicide bombers as martyrs, have never wavered from
their goal of taking over the entire State of Israel for Islamic extremism
under the control of Yasser Arafat or whoever replaces him.
It is quite a statement about the life of somebody like Arafat that
millions will be relieved that he is dead, qualified only by the fear that
somebody more reprehensible might replace him. Countless attacks on
innocent civilians originated from his domination of the Palestinian
territories and could not have taken place without his approval, so strong
was the fear he commanded over Palestinians.
The Presbyterian Church USA is not among the largest of churches, but its
influence is far reaching - presidents, congressmen, bank presidents,
leaders of corporations (as well as the disabled, manual workers and the
indigent) have peopled this church.
Presbyterians, unlike Jews, have never in modern history had to experience
continuous danger from completely unreasoning and deceptive enemies.
Presbyterians pride themselves in diversity of opinion within their
church, just as American Jews and Israelis enjoy exercising their freedom
through lively debate on a variety of topics.
In the past Presbyterians have attempted to speak out on human rights, but
never before have they been more confused about who the underdog is and
disagreed so strongly with Israelis about the true source of conflict in
the Holy Land.
Presbyterians, Methodists and other mainline churches wonder why they lose
so many members to evangelical, theologically conservative churches, a
trend that has been going on for decades. Could it be that they are
getting too far from the teachings of the Bible, both in the letter and
spirit of the law, and replacing it with Leftist politically correct
thinking, which too often leads them to inaccurate analyses and false
conclusions?
Israelis have learned that, more and more, they can rely on theologically
conservative churches to support them in humanitarian and substantive
ways.
The PCUSA General Assembly stated that Christian Zionism is based on
‘idiosyncratic’ interpretations of the Bible incompatible with Christian
reform theology. And yet some of the strongest support for Israel is
coming from Dutch Reform churches. The Presbyterian Church of Canada, in a
short statement, has completely distanced itself from the PCUSA position
on Israel, stating among their reasons that the PCUSA refuses to make the
distinction of the democratic nature of Israel and the fact that no other
true democracy exists in the Middle East. (The possibility for increased
democracy may exist in Afghanistan and Iraq, with the help of U.S.
guidance and support.)
There are too many places in the Hebrew Bible prophesying the return or
ingathering of the Jews to Israel to list them all here. These scriptures
are scattered throughout the major and minor Prophets. Although the oral
prophets in the historical part of the Bible warned corrupt kings of
ancient Israel again and again that their failure to adhere to the law
might result in the fall of their nation, they were also reminded
repeatedly that the Jews are a special people, chosen by God not because
of their size or power, but for their potential to be a light to the
gentiles through their humane values.
When the Jews failed to be God’s light to the gentiles in their own
kingdom, the Jewish religion became more mystical and scholarly. Faithful
Jews such as Daniel, Esther, Ezra and Nehemiah rose to positions of favor
in foreign kingdoms and were able to help their people through their
influence. Jews returned to Israel during pre-Roman times, constituted a
conspicuous presence there before the fall of the Second Temple in 70 C.E.,
then were crushed after a final revolt against the Romans and forcibly
dispersed throughout the Roman empire.
In the post-Biblical era of the last 2,000 years, the survival of the
Jewish people in the face of the most adverse conditions is a challenge to
unbelievers. If there is no God, how can the Jews still be here? They have
survived persecution in Russia beyond the Pale, pogroms in Poland,
killings by the Crusaders and during the Inquisition. Finally, they
survived the Holocaust in Germany, which could not have occurred had not
centuries of antisemitic teaching by Christians created a climate that
made the Holocaust possible.
The survival of the Jews, if one believes in the God of the Bible (which
Presbyterians repeatedly affirm they do) constitutes nothing less than the
miraculous action of God in human history. The Jews of today number around
13 million, or 1/3 of one percent of the global population. Whether one
takes a believing or ‘idiosyncratic’ view of the Bible, if God is behind
their survival, and spectacular achievements in so many fields of endeavor
- in science, in the arts, in philosophy, as a friend of mine once said,
it is better to have God for a friend than an enemy.
It is best for nations and organizations not to do anything that would
have the effect of undermining the already strained economy of Israel or
their ability to defend themselves against vicious and unrelenting
enemies. As the Bible says, in Genesis 12:3 to Abraham about him and his
descendants, “I [God] will bless those who bless you [the Jewish people]
and curse those who curse you.”
The PCUSA General Assembly objected to the Security Fence Israelis have
built to protect themselves from terrorist attacks on civilians. What is
so objectionable about a fence? A fence is a neutral thing, and can be the
most peaceful and rational solution at hand. Already there appears to be a
diminution of terrorist incidents thanks to the building of the Fence.
Now, after centuries of acts of terror of their own against Jews,
Christians should be attempting to help Jews, in Israel especially, where
they are surrounded by hostile antisemitic leaders. Instead, modern
Presbyterians have chosen to blame the victim and inadvertently make
things easier for Palestinian and other terrorists who have repeatedly
tried to destroy Israel, through four wars and innumerable acts of terror.
If Presbyterians do not like Christian Zionism, what would they prefer
instead? Not antisemitism, I hope! Christian neutrality cannot be
maintained while democracies are being honorably defended against the
hostile efforts of undemocratic, tyrannical terrorist states.
It has been said that Jesus called us to be peacemakers, but there is a
certain kind of misguided sense of peacemaking that, in actuality,
compounds violence and invites aggression. The best example is that of
Neville Chamberlain who, after negotiating with Hitler (and many
antisemitic Muslim terrorists admire Hitler) proclaimed “peace in our
time.”
Chamberlain’s oft-quoted statement came shortly before the outbreak of
World War II, which claimed 50 million lives.
|
