Amazon.com Widgets

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

According to this article, Religion can be barrier to peace in Middle East, a group of about 50 Methodist visitors to Jerusalem were treated to a presentation by representatives of three faiths -- Christianity, Judaism and Islam:

One of these things was not like the other, however, as Rabbi Levi Weiman Kelman was a self-described Zionist who believed very clearly in Israel's right to exist:

...Kelman, describing himself as a Zionist, said he believes "the Jews deserve a right to national self-determination just like everyone else."

"I believe the Jewish people have the right to a state," Kelman said. He reminded his listeners that the Jewish people suffered during the Holocaust and were not helped by European or U.S. Christians.

"You failed that test as Christians," he said. "Our history at your hands, for 6 million of us, is an immoral position. To choose to be weak is an immoral position.

"Our biggest problem as Jews is that we have power," he said. "You love us when we're weak. But many Christians have a hard time dealing with Jews who have power."...

Well said. Kelman's still a fairly left-wing guy who believes in a withdrawal to the '49 borders, though. But that's nothing compared to the other guys he was on stage with.

One was Mustafa Abu-Sway, a man who has been described by the Israeli Government as a "Hamas activist," and by others as an Islamist. Daniel Pipes has a page of links containing all sorts of background for him here.

According to this article at Christianity Today (subscription required to read the whole thing), "Mustafa Abu Sway remarked, to audible gasps from Jews in the audience, that he wished the state of Israel ‘would disappear'." and, according to Jerusalem Jewish Voice (link and quote from Pipes) "he wished the end of the state of Israel, and [stated] that Islamic law proscribes war against any nation in dar-el-islam, land once occupied by Moslems, including Spain and Israel."

In a 1991 article by Yossi Klein Halevi, Holy War, Holy Peace (not online that I could find):

Mustafa Abu Sway, a former lecturer at Bethlehem University, is now completing his doctorate in Islamic philosophy at Boston College. Even when defending the most inflexible Islamic doctrines, he remains soft-spoken. "Theologically there is no possibility of accepting a Jewish state," he says. "But Jews should trust Islam. They will be treated justly in an Islamic state, because they'll be under the protection of Allah."

For Muslim extremists, then, there can be no solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict short of Israel's dismemberment. The very notion of "autonomy" offered to Palestinians by Likud governments is a theological affront. By turning Muslims into some modern form of dhimmi, Israel reverses the natural spiritual order.

There is much more of this sort of stuff from Abu Sway, but that taste should give you the idea. He is a man who's Islamist and anti-Israel proclivities are clear.

Oh, did I mention that Abu Sway was President of the Islamic Society of Boston from 1990 -1992?

The third man on the stage was someone who likes to portray himself as a man of peace, but who clearly has more in common (see the first linked article) with Dr. Abu Sway than he does with Rabbi Kelman -- none other than Reverend Naim Ateek of the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center:

..."I believe, ultimately, the best solution is one state," Ateek said. "This is one country. We can live together in peace. It will have to be a democracy."

But Ateek said he and the Sabeel Institute are working for a two-state solution, "to lessen the fears of my neighbors."

"The Israeli government has a great fear of demographic change," Ateek said. "They fear that there will be more Palestinians in this area than Jews. This is a problem the Zionists did not think of.

"We are working for a two-state solution," he said, "so the Israelis will feel more secure."

"The Palestinians always wanted their own state," he added, "but, ultimately, I hope that in 50 years or so, both groups will say let's have one state."

Said Sway: "We are neck to neck in this situation because the land is holy. But the behavior is not so holy.

"Both sides, until they cool down, they need some space," Sway said. He too expressed hope for a single state for both peoples. "Everyone agrees to an open city in Jerusalem. If you agree to that, you can agree to an open state. After all, it is a very small place."...

As a side note, I found this bit rather amusing:

All three speakers admonished members of their own faith groups who misinterpret scripture.

Ateek was particularly critical of Christian Zionism, calling it "a very serious problem within the Christian church." And he urged Christians to "interpret our scriptures for the good of all people, without excluding others."

Saying that Ateek was self-critical by talking about Christian Zionists is like writing about a Wahabist who criticizes Shiites and saying, "Well...he was very critical of people of his own faith."

In any case, here is yet another illuminating example of the nature and true feelings held by a man set up on a pedestal by many well-meaning American Protestant mainliners. Naim Ateek clearly has more in common with hard-line Islamist-rejectionist and former ISB president, Mustafa Abu Sway, than he does with even a very left wing Jewish Rabbi.

1 Comment

Once again it seems that a mainline protestant group, this time the United Methodists, go to the mid east on a fact finding trip and are unable to find any Israel Governmental Officials to meet. Instead, they easily find the left wing Jewish and Christian radicals who sing the same songs as they.

This bias is long standing among the mainline protestant churches. Go to this website and see the many times presbyterian leaders went on fact finding trips to the mid east and NO Israeli Governmental Officials were available.

http://www.libertymuseum.org/faithsforfairness/rev.htm

On the other hand these mainline protestant seem to have no problem meeting with Arafat, Assad, or Hezbollah.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Search


Archives
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]