The news headlines preceding Christmas 2016 were frightening – massacre in Germany, major threat averted in Australia, bombing in Syria, Libyan plane hijacked, and the list goes on. None of those events suggest that we are experiencing peace on earth.
Interestingly, the same could be said of the world in which Jesus was born. The philosophical and religious backgrounds of paganism in the first century left a sense of emptiness among many. For instance, belief in the reality of the ancient gods and goddesses of classical mythology resulted in widespread agnosticism.
Many sceptics deduced that the gods were originally men who had distinguished themselves either as warriors or benefactors of mankind, and who after their death were accorded divine honors.
What was aptly termed “the failure of nerve” characterized the moral and religious vacuum that many felt but could not overcome, despite the panaceas offered by a welter of competing teachers, philosophers, priests, astrologers and quacks.
Epictetus, a first century Roman historian and philosopher said of this era: “while the emperor may give peace from war on land and sea, he is unable to give peace from passion, grief and envy. He cannot give peace of heart, for which humanity yearns more than even for outward peace.” As emperor, Caesar Augustus ruled the nations, but could not conquer the human heart.
That was the religious and philosophical world into which Jesus came. That was the world which heard the angels say, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom His favor rests” (Luke 2:14). So unlike today’s understanding of peace, the angels were not referring to the absence of war. They were declaring God's desire for harmonious relationships between men and nations.
Like with the Hebrew word shalom, peace means completeness, wholeness, health, welfare, safety soundness, tranquility, prosperity, perfectness, fullness, rest, harmony, the absence of agitation or discord. Shalom comes from the root verb shalom meaning to be complete, perfect and full.
That understanding of peace is so different from those who believe that assuming a posture of strength dissuades potential attacks, consequently leading to peace – the absence of war. But peace is much more than the absence of war.
In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul linked peace to a person, and not merely to an ideology. He contended, “for He (Jesus) is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility... (Ephesians 2:14).
Hundreds of years earlier, the prophet Isaiah predicted of the coming Messiah, that He would be sar shalom – Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6). Jesus, who Christians believe is that Messiah, said to His disciples, “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you...” (John 14:27). For this reason, Christians see Christmas as the arrival of the Prince of Peace.
Despite the isolated cases in history of using Christianity to incite and initiate wars, the Christian message is universally known as a message of peace.
Christianity influenced the abolition of slavery and infanticide. In addition, it is because of the Christian ethic that the outrage against euthanasia, sex trafficking and abortion persists.
Because Christians are expected to demonstrate the life of Christ as a lifestyle, we should constantly pursue peace. The biblical teaching is unambiguous, “... as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone” (Romans 12:18). Christmas provides tremendous opportunities to illustrate this truth.
In 2015, an estimated $373 billion was received for charities from Americans. About $119 billion of that amount went to religious charities – including churches and para church organizations. That is more than what is spent by the federal government on education or human services. Interestingly, most of that money was received within ten weeks before Christmas.
This fact reminds me that every hour, during this month of December, there is a performance of Handel’s Messiah somewhere in the world. Since the musical was premiered on April 13, 1742, the response around the world has been phenomenal.
George Frideric Handel personally conducted more than thirty performances of Messiah. The millions of dollars that Handel’s performances raised for charity led one biographer to note, "Messiah has fed the hungry, clothed the naked, fostered the orphan . . . more than any other single musical production in this or any country."
In essence, the proceeds have brought peace to many. It is that message of peace, about the Prince of Peace, that continues to bring wholeness and harmony to billions around the world. For this reason, there is no need for anyone to live in turmoil, knowing that God’s peace is available in the Christ of Christmas.
Showing posts with label war and peace. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war and peace. Show all posts
Monday, December 26, 2016
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
What is ISIS?
After last week’s gruesome killings in France, some have concluded that the group which claimed responsibility is a group of psychopaths. In the past year, President Obama even referred to this group, as “not Islamic” and as al-Qaeda’s “jayvee team”. My research leads me to believe otherwise.
The Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) is a religious group with a well-reasoned beliefs. As mentioned in an earlier commentary, ISIS is committed to a seventh century legal environment (caliphate) and ultimately to bringing about the apocalypse.
Agreed, ISIS has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers comes from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.
Graeme Wood, in a lengthy exposé of ISIS in The Atlantic, contends, “virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, ‘the Prophetic methodology,’ which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail.”
ISIS is identified with the jihadist wing of a branch of Sunni Islam called Salafism, after the Arabic al salaf al salih, the “pious forefathers.” These forefathers are the Prophet himself and his earliest adherents, whom Salafis honor and emulate as the models for all behavior, including warfare and family life.
Princeton University scholar Bernard Haykel, is a leading expert on Islamic theology in ISIS. According to Haykel, “the ranks of ISIS are deeply infused with religious vigor. Qur’anic quotations are ubiquitous.” He regards the claim that the Islamic State (ISIS) has distorted the texts of Islam as “preposterous, sustainable only through willful ignorance.”
In Haykel’s estimation, the fighters of the Islamic State are authentic throwbacks to early Islam and are faithfully reproducing its norms of war. This behavior includes a number of practices that modern Muslims tend to prefer not to acknowledge as integral to their sacred texts like, slavery, crucifixion, and beheadings.
Like today’s ISIS followers, early Muslims were surrounded by non-Muslims. For this reason, ISIS believes it is perfectly in order to follow the practices of early Islam. According to Professor Haykel, “Islamic State fighters are smack in the middle of the medieval tradition and are bringing it wholesale into the present day” (The Atlantic, March 2015).
The Qur’an specifies crucifixion as one of the only punishments permitted for enemies of Islam. The tax on Christians finds clear endorsement in the Surah Al-Tawba, the Qur’an’s ninth chapter, which instructs Muslims to fight Christians and Jews “until they pay the jizya (tax) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” The prophet Muhammad imposed and practiced these rules.
Leaders of ISIS see emulating Muhammad as a strict duty, and have revived traditions that have been dormant for hundreds of years. What’s striking is not just the literalism, but also the seriousness with which ISIS reads these texts. Haykel contends, “there is an assiduous, obsessive seriousness that Muslims don’t normally have.”
ISIS believes its behavior is consistent with the turmoil expected in the last days. Both branches of Islam believe a period of global turmoil must precede the coming of their Mahdi. Both branches are committed to hasten the coming of this Prophet.
ISIS members devoutly believe that they are fighting in a cosmic war in which they are on the side of good, which allows them to kill anyone they perceive to be standing in their way, or representing evil.
Within recent years, thousands of foreign Muslims are thought to have immigrated to Syria, to join ISIS. Many want to become members of the new caliphate (Islamic State). The last caliphate was the Ottoman Empire, which reached its peak in the 16th century and then experienced a long decline, until the founder of the Republic of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, demolished it in 1924.
This new caliphate must be preceded by global turmoil. Such turmoil is what we saw in France last week, in Kenya a few months ago and continues to be promised in many major cities of the world.
ISIS has attached great importance to the Syrian city of Dabiq. There was much celebration when Dabiq was conquered. It is here, the Prophet reportedly said, that the armies of Rome will set up their camp. The armies of Islam will meet them, and Dabiq will be Rome’s Waterloo.
Following this battle in Dabiq, some believe an anti-Messiah, known in Muslim apocalyptic literature as Dajjal, will come from a region in eastern Iran and kill a vast number of the caliphate’s fighters. Just as Dajjal prepares to finish them off, Jesus—the second-most-revered prophet in Islam—will return to earth, kill Dajjal, and lead the Muslims to victory.
The Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) is a religious group with a well-reasoned beliefs. As mentioned in an earlier commentary, ISIS is committed to a seventh century legal environment (caliphate) and ultimately to bringing about the apocalypse.
Agreed, ISIS has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers comes from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.
Graeme Wood, in a lengthy exposé of ISIS in The Atlantic, contends, “virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, ‘the Prophetic methodology,’ which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail.”
ISIS is identified with the jihadist wing of a branch of Sunni Islam called Salafism, after the Arabic al salaf al salih, the “pious forefathers.” These forefathers are the Prophet himself and his earliest adherents, whom Salafis honor and emulate as the models for all behavior, including warfare and family life.
Princeton University scholar Bernard Haykel, is a leading expert on Islamic theology in ISIS. According to Haykel, “the ranks of ISIS are deeply infused with religious vigor. Qur’anic quotations are ubiquitous.” He regards the claim that the Islamic State (ISIS) has distorted the texts of Islam as “preposterous, sustainable only through willful ignorance.”
In Haykel’s estimation, the fighters of the Islamic State are authentic throwbacks to early Islam and are faithfully reproducing its norms of war. This behavior includes a number of practices that modern Muslims tend to prefer not to acknowledge as integral to their sacred texts like, slavery, crucifixion, and beheadings.
Like today’s ISIS followers, early Muslims were surrounded by non-Muslims. For this reason, ISIS believes it is perfectly in order to follow the practices of early Islam. According to Professor Haykel, “Islamic State fighters are smack in the middle of the medieval tradition and are bringing it wholesale into the present day” (The Atlantic, March 2015).
The Qur’an specifies crucifixion as one of the only punishments permitted for enemies of Islam. The tax on Christians finds clear endorsement in the Surah Al-Tawba, the Qur’an’s ninth chapter, which instructs Muslims to fight Christians and Jews “until they pay the jizya (tax) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” The prophet Muhammad imposed and practiced these rules.
Leaders of ISIS see emulating Muhammad as a strict duty, and have revived traditions that have been dormant for hundreds of years. What’s striking is not just the literalism, but also the seriousness with which ISIS reads these texts. Haykel contends, “there is an assiduous, obsessive seriousness that Muslims don’t normally have.”
ISIS believes its behavior is consistent with the turmoil expected in the last days. Both branches of Islam believe a period of global turmoil must precede the coming of their Mahdi. Both branches are committed to hasten the coming of this Prophet.
ISIS members devoutly believe that they are fighting in a cosmic war in which they are on the side of good, which allows them to kill anyone they perceive to be standing in their way, or representing evil.
Within recent years, thousands of foreign Muslims are thought to have immigrated to Syria, to join ISIS. Many want to become members of the new caliphate (Islamic State). The last caliphate was the Ottoman Empire, which reached its peak in the 16th century and then experienced a long decline, until the founder of the Republic of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, demolished it in 1924.
This new caliphate must be preceded by global turmoil. Such turmoil is what we saw in France last week, in Kenya a few months ago and continues to be promised in many major cities of the world.
ISIS has attached great importance to the Syrian city of Dabiq. There was much celebration when Dabiq was conquered. It is here, the Prophet reportedly said, that the armies of Rome will set up their camp. The armies of Islam will meet them, and Dabiq will be Rome’s Waterloo.
Following this battle in Dabiq, some believe an anti-Messiah, known in Muslim apocalyptic literature as Dajjal, will come from a region in eastern Iran and kill a vast number of the caliphate’s fighters. Just as Dajjal prepares to finish them off, Jesus—the second-most-revered prophet in Islam—will return to earth, kill Dajjal, and lead the Muslims to victory.
Sunday, October 25, 2015
Who Owns The Western Wall?
Every year, millions of visitors to Jerusalem, visit the Western Wall. A few years ago, my ENT specialist was among those visitors. Like thousands of Jews, he took his son there to mark his Bar Mitzvah. Soldiers serving in the Israel Defense Forces swear loyalty to their nation and homeland at the Western Wall Plaza.
People from all over the world pay their respects to the Jewish people’s magnificent history by visiting this special site. The ancient, 2,000-year-old stones of the Western Wall have witnessed the Jewish people’s birth, exile, and redemption. This is where the Jewish nation’s past mingles with its hopes for the future.
How then could Muslims claim that the Western Wall is a part of the Al Aqsa Mosque compound in the Old City? The claim was made a few days ago before UNESCO, the United Nations’ Paris-based agency that tries to protect cultural treasures around the world.
In 2010, the British Advertising Standard Agency ruled that an Israeli tourism advertisement containing a picture of the Western Wall with the Dome of the Rock in the background was misleading. The agency felt that the ad implied that the area in which the Wall was located belonged to Israel – for the agency that was false advertising.
To whom does the Wall really belong – to the Jews or to the Muslims? What is the Western Wall anyway?
In the year 37 BCE, Herod was appointed king in Jerusalem by the Romans – shortly after he initiated a huge renovation project for the Temple. He hired many workers who toiled to make the Temple more magnificent. He widened the area of the Temple Mount and built four support walls around it. The Western Wall is the western support wall built during this widening of the Temple Mount Plaza.
Just a few days ago I shared with a group of students what Israeli archaeologists found in 2007. They discovered the source of the huge stones King Herod used to reconstruct the Second Temple in Jerusalem. The stones were found at a quarry, along with coins and pottery, dating back to King Herod. Geological and other tests clearly link the present Western Wall to the quarry.
The Second Temple (which King Herod built) was destroyed in the year 70 CE. Despite the destruction that took place, all four Temple Mount support walls remained standing. Throughout the generations since the Temple’s destruction, the Western Wall was the remnant closest to the site of the Temple’s Holy of Holies that was accessible to Jews. Therefore, it became a place of prayer and yearning for Jews around the world.
In the year 135 CE, the Romans crushed a Jewish uprising and seized total control of Jerusalem - the Jews lost official links to the region. The Romans renamed the region Palestine.
The name Palestine was taken from Israel's most hated historical enemy, the Philistines, and was given to the area by the Romans as a means of humiliating the Jews to show them the land no longer belonged to them. With a destroyed Temple and no official homeland, the Jews found much solace in the Western Wall, the only remnant of the destroyed Temple.
Many of those emotions were shattered when the Muslims invaded the Holy Lands in 638. By 691, at the order of Ymayyad Caliph, Abd al-Malik, the Dome of the Rock was completed on the site where the Jewish Temple was destroyed. As is evident today, the Western Wall was retained as the foundation.
The Muslim presence remained unchallenged until the Crusades in the eleventh century. The Western Wall never seemed important to Muslims because they were in control and the Jews were not strong enough to challenge them. However, the Jewish interest in the Wall never died.
That ongoing interest was evident again in 1929 when violence erupted because a divider was placed at the Wall. In 1948, in keeping with a UN decision, the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, including the Western Wall, fell to Jordanian hands. Jewish homes were destroyed and among those killed was the Western Wall’s first rabbi who refused to leave the Wall or his home - he was killed in the bombings.
The Old City of Jerusalem, and the Western Wall within it, were not in Jewish hands from the War of Independence in 1948 until the Six Day War in 1967. During those 19 years of Jordanian rule, Jews were not able to reach the Wall and prayed in front of its ancient stones.
People from all over the world pay their respects to the Jewish people’s magnificent history by visiting this special site. The ancient, 2,000-year-old stones of the Western Wall have witnessed the Jewish people’s birth, exile, and redemption. This is where the Jewish nation’s past mingles with its hopes for the future.
How then could Muslims claim that the Western Wall is a part of the Al Aqsa Mosque compound in the Old City? The claim was made a few days ago before UNESCO, the United Nations’ Paris-based agency that tries to protect cultural treasures around the world.
In 2010, the British Advertising Standard Agency ruled that an Israeli tourism advertisement containing a picture of the Western Wall with the Dome of the Rock in the background was misleading. The agency felt that the ad implied that the area in which the Wall was located belonged to Israel – for the agency that was false advertising.
To whom does the Wall really belong – to the Jews or to the Muslims? What is the Western Wall anyway?
In the year 37 BCE, Herod was appointed king in Jerusalem by the Romans – shortly after he initiated a huge renovation project for the Temple. He hired many workers who toiled to make the Temple more magnificent. He widened the area of the Temple Mount and built four support walls around it. The Western Wall is the western support wall built during this widening of the Temple Mount Plaza.
Just a few days ago I shared with a group of students what Israeli archaeologists found in 2007. They discovered the source of the huge stones King Herod used to reconstruct the Second Temple in Jerusalem. The stones were found at a quarry, along with coins and pottery, dating back to King Herod. Geological and other tests clearly link the present Western Wall to the quarry.
The Second Temple (which King Herod built) was destroyed in the year 70 CE. Despite the destruction that took place, all four Temple Mount support walls remained standing. Throughout the generations since the Temple’s destruction, the Western Wall was the remnant closest to the site of the Temple’s Holy of Holies that was accessible to Jews. Therefore, it became a place of prayer and yearning for Jews around the world.
In the year 135 CE, the Romans crushed a Jewish uprising and seized total control of Jerusalem - the Jews lost official links to the region. The Romans renamed the region Palestine.
The name Palestine was taken from Israel's most hated historical enemy, the Philistines, and was given to the area by the Romans as a means of humiliating the Jews to show them the land no longer belonged to them. With a destroyed Temple and no official homeland, the Jews found much solace in the Western Wall, the only remnant of the destroyed Temple.
Many of those emotions were shattered when the Muslims invaded the Holy Lands in 638. By 691, at the order of Ymayyad Caliph, Abd al-Malik, the Dome of the Rock was completed on the site where the Jewish Temple was destroyed. As is evident today, the Western Wall was retained as the foundation.
The Muslim presence remained unchallenged until the Crusades in the eleventh century. The Western Wall never seemed important to Muslims because they were in control and the Jews were not strong enough to challenge them. However, the Jewish interest in the Wall never died.
That ongoing interest was evident again in 1929 when violence erupted because a divider was placed at the Wall. In 1948, in keeping with a UN decision, the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, including the Western Wall, fell to Jordanian hands. Jewish homes were destroyed and among those killed was the Western Wall’s first rabbi who refused to leave the Wall or his home - he was killed in the bombings.
The Old City of Jerusalem, and the Western Wall within it, were not in Jewish hands from the War of Independence in 1948 until the Six Day War in 1967. During those 19 years of Jordanian rule, Jews were not able to reach the Wall and prayed in front of its ancient stones.
During the more than one thousand years Jerusalem was under
Muslim rule, the Wall was often used as a garbage dump, so as to humiliate the
Jews who visited it. However, following the Six Day War of 1967, The Western
Wall and Temple Mount were liberated, the city of Jerusalem was reunified, and
the Jewish people were again able to come to the Western Wall to pray.
The recent attempt at the UN for Muslims to regain control
of the Western Wall, would most likely deprive Jews of their most holy site and
return the area to a garbage dump.
Furthermore, to justify the return of Islamic control of the
Wall would be to legitimize the Muslim invasion of Jerusalem in the seventh
century. Such justification would also ratify the UN’s insensitivity to
Israel’s religious heritage. In 1948, when establishing boundaries for the new
nation, the UN was wrong to divide Israel’s 3,000 year-old claim to the city of
Jerusalem.
In terms of modern history, Israel’s return to her ancestral
home is phenomenal. Unlike under the reign of Joshua in the Old Testament, she
cannot kill those who shared the land with her, before independence. The nation
must pursue peaceful co-existence. That requires a respectful use of sacred
sites, including the Western Wall.
Sunday, August 23, 2015
Apocalyptic Islam!
There is a difference between radical Islam and Apocalyptic Islam. Radical Islam is a militant, politically activist ideology whose ultimate goal is to create a worldwide community, or caliphate of Muslim believers. Adherents of Radical Islam insist on a literal and fundamentalist reading of the Qur’an. They resist progress in human rights, gender-equality and democratic reforms.
Apocalyptic Islam is different. It is not driven by political ideology as Radical Islam. Rather, it is a theological ideology with a specific emphasis on End Times or Eschatology. Islam believes that their messiah, known as the Mahdi, will come at any moment. According to Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, chairman of the Islamic Supreme Council of America: “The coming of the Mahdi is established doctrine for both Sunni and Shi’a Muslims, and indeed for all humanity.”
Both Shi’a and Sunni branches of Islam have different strategies to hasten the arrival of the Mahdi. Both branches of Islam believe a period of global turmoil must precede the coming of their Mahdi. Both main branches are committed to hasten the coming of the Mahdi. According to Shi’a Muslims, the Mahdi, also known as the Twelfth Imam, is a great spiritual savior.
There are many signs that will precede this Mahdi, “a general and very important sign is that he will come at a time when there is great confutation, intense disputes and violent deaths. When people are afflicted by disturbance and experiencing great fear. It is then that Imam Mahdi will be sent.”
As they work to expedite the coming of the Mahdi, ISIS members, representing Sunni Islam, devoutly believe that they are fighting in a cosmic war in which they are on the side of good, which allows them to kill anyone they perceive to be standing in their way.
Furthermore, they believe that they are the vanguard, fighting a religious war, which Allah has determined will be won by the forces of true Islam. In an upcoming book, authors Berger and Stern explain that "violent apocalyptic groups, tend to see themselves as participating in a cosmic war between good and evil, in which moral rules do not apply."
Iran, representing Shiite Islam, uses a different strategy to prepare for the coming of the Mahdi. It was former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who attributed his role to that of a forerunner for the Mahdi. He believed he was told by the prophet Mohammed that he was “the chosen one to hasten the return of the Muslim’s messiah by creating chaos throughout the world.”
Bernard Lewis, a professor emeritus of Near Eastern studies at Princeton University, warned in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece a few years ago that “President Ahmadinejad seems to believe that the hand of God is guiding him to trigger a series of cataclysmic events which could precipitate the return of the 12th Imam.” As a theocracy, Iran is uniquely poised to administer this apocalyptic role.
New York Times bestseller Joel Rosenberg contends that Iran’s purpose for wanting to build up its nuclear arms program is to be more equipped for the coming of the Mahdi. For Iran, the destruction of Israel, representing Judaism, and America, representing Christianity, is critical in its pre-Mahdi mission.
According to a 2012 report by the Pew Research Center, “in most countries in the Middle East and North Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia, more than 750 million Muslims believe they will live to see the return of the Mahdi.”
When asked to comment on Apocalyptic Islam, Joel Rosenberg said, “For the first time in human history, we now are faced with two nation-states whose leaders are driven by an end-of-the-world [theology]. ISIS is trying to build the end-of-the-world kingdom, or caliphate, for the Mahdi to come and rule. They are not waiting, like the Iranians are, to build genocidal weapons. ISIS is trying to bring about genocide of the infidels right now.”
Egyptian born Dr. Michael Youssef told the Christian Post recently, "To be quite honest, I am not really afraid as much from jihadists as I am fearing that the evangelical church is losing its moorings on the biblical authority for all kinds of different reasons. The challenge from Islam can only be met by a strong Christian church, rather than a weak and indecisive, spineless Gospel preaching."
Like Muslims, Christians believe we are living in the end times. However, the instructions from our Commanding Officer, Jesus Christ, is to ensure that we share the message of salvation with the entire world. We are “to occupy until He comes.” In other words, we prepare for His coming with vigilance, not violence.
Apocalyptic Islam is different. It is not driven by political ideology as Radical Islam. Rather, it is a theological ideology with a specific emphasis on End Times or Eschatology. Islam believes that their messiah, known as the Mahdi, will come at any moment. According to Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, chairman of the Islamic Supreme Council of America: “The coming of the Mahdi is established doctrine for both Sunni and Shi’a Muslims, and indeed for all humanity.”
Both Shi’a and Sunni branches of Islam have different strategies to hasten the arrival of the Mahdi. Both branches of Islam believe a period of global turmoil must precede the coming of their Mahdi. Both main branches are committed to hasten the coming of the Mahdi. According to Shi’a Muslims, the Mahdi, also known as the Twelfth Imam, is a great spiritual savior.
There are many signs that will precede this Mahdi, “a general and very important sign is that he will come at a time when there is great confutation, intense disputes and violent deaths. When people are afflicted by disturbance and experiencing great fear. It is then that Imam Mahdi will be sent.”
As they work to expedite the coming of the Mahdi, ISIS members, representing Sunni Islam, devoutly believe that they are fighting in a cosmic war in which they are on the side of good, which allows them to kill anyone they perceive to be standing in their way.
Furthermore, they believe that they are the vanguard, fighting a religious war, which Allah has determined will be won by the forces of true Islam. In an upcoming book, authors Berger and Stern explain that "violent apocalyptic groups, tend to see themselves as participating in a cosmic war between good and evil, in which moral rules do not apply."
Iran, representing Shiite Islam, uses a different strategy to prepare for the coming of the Mahdi. It was former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who attributed his role to that of a forerunner for the Mahdi. He believed he was told by the prophet Mohammed that he was “the chosen one to hasten the return of the Muslim’s messiah by creating chaos throughout the world.”
Bernard Lewis, a professor emeritus of Near Eastern studies at Princeton University, warned in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece a few years ago that “President Ahmadinejad seems to believe that the hand of God is guiding him to trigger a series of cataclysmic events which could precipitate the return of the 12th Imam.” As a theocracy, Iran is uniquely poised to administer this apocalyptic role.
New York Times bestseller Joel Rosenberg contends that Iran’s purpose for wanting to build up its nuclear arms program is to be more equipped for the coming of the Mahdi. For Iran, the destruction of Israel, representing Judaism, and America, representing Christianity, is critical in its pre-Mahdi mission.
According to a 2012 report by the Pew Research Center, “in most countries in the Middle East and North Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia, more than 750 million Muslims believe they will live to see the return of the Mahdi.”
When asked to comment on Apocalyptic Islam, Joel Rosenberg said, “For the first time in human history, we now are faced with two nation-states whose leaders are driven by an end-of-the-world [theology]. ISIS is trying to build the end-of-the-world kingdom, or caliphate, for the Mahdi to come and rule. They are not waiting, like the Iranians are, to build genocidal weapons. ISIS is trying to bring about genocide of the infidels right now.”
Egyptian born Dr. Michael Youssef told the Christian Post recently, "To be quite honest, I am not really afraid as much from jihadists as I am fearing that the evangelical church is losing its moorings on the biblical authority for all kinds of different reasons. The challenge from Islam can only be met by a strong Christian church, rather than a weak and indecisive, spineless Gospel preaching."
Like Muslims, Christians believe we are living in the end times. However, the instructions from our Commanding Officer, Jesus Christ, is to ensure that we share the message of salvation with the entire world. We are “to occupy until He comes.” In other words, we prepare for His coming with vigilance, not violence.
Monday, March 9, 2015
Prophet or Politician?
During his speech before the U.S. Congress last week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appealed to the Jewish Purim holiday. He cited the biblical deliverance of Jews from genocide under ancient Persian Empire rule and called attention to the story of a Jewish girl named Esther, who rose to become Queen of Persia.
Queen Esther, a courageous Jewish woman exposed the plot and gave the Jewish people the right to defend themselves against their enemies. According to Prime Minister Netanyahu, "The plot was foiled, our people were saved. Today the Jewish people face another attempt by yet another Persian potentate to destroy us.”
According to the Old Testament book of Esther, during the time of King Ahasuerus, Haman, a minister to the king, sought to annihilate the empire’s Jews in retaliation for being insulted by a Jewish man named Mordecai. The man learned of Haman’s plan for retaliation and warned his cousin Esther, who had become queen of the empire but whose Jewish identity had been kept secret.
On the 13th day of the Hebrew month of Adar, following several days of fasting and prayer, the Jews rose up against their enemies and were victorious. The Jewish festival of Purim is celebrated every year in early spring to commemorate the Jewish rise against the Persian Empire – the Prime Minister’s speech coincided with that annual observance.
Some 2,500 years earlier the Esther story unfolded. Then, as today, the threat against Israel is real. Instead of a Haman scheming to kill the Jews, it’s Iranian mullahs who are accused of plotting to wipe Israel off the map, and being aided in the process by the soon realization of a goal more than 20 years in the making – obtaining a nuclear arsenal.
In a November 14 sermon aired on Iran’s state-run television, Ayatollah Ali Movahedi-Kermani made the following statement: “The Sejjil ballistic missile can hit and raze to the ground any place in Israel, as well as any American base in the region.” Crowds listening to the speech shouted: “Death to America! Death to England! Death to Israel!”
Like the biblical character Esther, Prime Minister Netanyahu sees himself in a strategic position. Esther’s cousin Mordecai asked her, “And who knows but that you have come to royal position for such a time as this?”
To this Esther replied: “...I will go to the king, even though it is against the law. And if I perish, I perish” (Esther 4:12-16). Other than Esther, the Jews seemed to have no other option – they were defenseless. That is no longer the case.
According to Business Insider, Israel has the most powerful military in the Middle East, followed by Turkey and Saudi Arabia. In addition to being battle-tested against a variety of enemies, the Israel Defense Forces have a qualitative edge over all other militaries in the region, as well as a highly-capable air force. "Pilot to pilot, airframe to airframe, the Israeli air force is the best in the world."
From that position of military strength, much restraint is necessary from Israel. Despite the current divisions among countries in the Middle East, any aggression from Israel, can position the nation to become a common enemy – that will certainly unite militants in the region.
One must not forget that the regional dislike for Israel is less political and more ideological. The most serious threat we face in the Middle East and North Africa is what some call “Apocalyptic Islam.”
Imam Mahdi is a messianic figure often referred to as the twelfth imam in Shiite Islam. According to one Islamic website, there are at least four signs that will precede the coming of Imam Mahdi. All of these signs include some kind of battle. Interestingly, both ISIS and Iran see themselves as key players in these apocalyptic battles.
Some analysts believe “Iran is controlled by religious hardliners afflicted with a messianic fervor whose primary goal is to hasten the return of the Mahdi.
This is to be accomplished by annihilating Israel, waging war against infidels and sowing chaos. The price for Iran may be national martyrdom, for which its causalities will be richly rewarded in the afterlife, while survivors will enjoy the favor of the returned Mahdi.”
Queen Esther, a courageous Jewish woman exposed the plot and gave the Jewish people the right to defend themselves against their enemies. According to Prime Minister Netanyahu, "The plot was foiled, our people were saved. Today the Jewish people face another attempt by yet another Persian potentate to destroy us.”
According to the Old Testament book of Esther, during the time of King Ahasuerus, Haman, a minister to the king, sought to annihilate the empire’s Jews in retaliation for being insulted by a Jewish man named Mordecai. The man learned of Haman’s plan for retaliation and warned his cousin Esther, who had become queen of the empire but whose Jewish identity had been kept secret.
On the 13th day of the Hebrew month of Adar, following several days of fasting and prayer, the Jews rose up against their enemies and were victorious. The Jewish festival of Purim is celebrated every year in early spring to commemorate the Jewish rise against the Persian Empire – the Prime Minister’s speech coincided with that annual observance.
Some 2,500 years earlier the Esther story unfolded. Then, as today, the threat against Israel is real. Instead of a Haman scheming to kill the Jews, it’s Iranian mullahs who are accused of plotting to wipe Israel off the map, and being aided in the process by the soon realization of a goal more than 20 years in the making – obtaining a nuclear arsenal.
In a November 14 sermon aired on Iran’s state-run television, Ayatollah Ali Movahedi-Kermani made the following statement: “The Sejjil ballistic missile can hit and raze to the ground any place in Israel, as well as any American base in the region.” Crowds listening to the speech shouted: “Death to America! Death to England! Death to Israel!”
Like the biblical character Esther, Prime Minister Netanyahu sees himself in a strategic position. Esther’s cousin Mordecai asked her, “And who knows but that you have come to royal position for such a time as this?”
To this Esther replied: “...I will go to the king, even though it is against the law. And if I perish, I perish” (Esther 4:12-16). Other than Esther, the Jews seemed to have no other option – they were defenseless. That is no longer the case.
According to Business Insider, Israel has the most powerful military in the Middle East, followed by Turkey and Saudi Arabia. In addition to being battle-tested against a variety of enemies, the Israel Defense Forces have a qualitative edge over all other militaries in the region, as well as a highly-capable air force. "Pilot to pilot, airframe to airframe, the Israeli air force is the best in the world."
From that position of military strength, much restraint is necessary from Israel. Despite the current divisions among countries in the Middle East, any aggression from Israel, can position the nation to become a common enemy – that will certainly unite militants in the region.
One must not forget that the regional dislike for Israel is less political and more ideological. The most serious threat we face in the Middle East and North Africa is what some call “Apocalyptic Islam.”
The term “Apocalyptic Islam” introduces the topic of end-of-the-world religious ideology. According to a 2012 report by the Pew Research Center, “in most countries in the Middle East and North Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia, more than 750 million Muslims believe they will live to see the return of the Mahdi.”
Imam Mahdi is a messianic figure often referred to as the twelfth imam in Shiite Islam. According to one Islamic website, there are at least four signs that will precede the coming of Imam Mahdi. All of these signs include some kind of battle. Interestingly, both ISIS and Iran see themselves as key players in these apocalyptic battles.
Some analysts believe “Iran is controlled by religious hardliners afflicted with a messianic fervor whose primary goal is to hasten the return of the Mahdi.
This is to be accomplished by annihilating Israel, waging war against infidels and sowing chaos. The price for Iran may be national martyrdom, for which its causalities will be richly rewarded in the afterlife, while survivors will enjoy the favor of the returned Mahdi.”
Monday, September 8, 2014
Another Beheading
The recent beheadings of US journalists James Foley and Stephen Sotloff in Iraq were savage acts. Many watched the videos of their murders by Islamist State militants and were horrified. Muslim organizations around the world distanced themselves from the militants and decried the brutal slaying, making it clear that the acts did not represent Islam.
Our opinion of associating beheading with barbarism is consistent with a modernized view of capital punishment. For instance, the Romans were brutal and beheading was not uncommon. In the New Testament there was the case of John the Baptist’s head on Herod’s platter. Interestingly, the Romans considered beheading to be more honorable than crucifixion. They beheaded their own people but limited crucifixion to non-Romans.
Beheading was widely used in Europe and Asia until the 20th century. Interestingly, all the European countries that previously used beheading have now totally abolished the death penalty. As recent as 2007, 153 men and three women were beheaded in Saudi Arabia. Beheading is still practiced in Iran.
Apart from being used as a means of capital punishment by a state, the act of beheading is used to obliterate enemies. According to Ian Tuttle of the National Review Institute, “beheading is not just a warning or a promise; it is a ritual expression of an ideology. That this ideology seeks to annihilate and tyrannize is clear from the jihadists’ beheading method; not a quick, clean blow, but a slow, agonizing sawing motion that keeps the victim alive to experience his own execution.”
The vicious murders of the journalists were not done as acts of capital punishment – like Daniel Pearl of the Wall Street Journal, they committed no crime. The beheadings were done in the name of religion. It would seem as though Islamists practice beheading because they believe that God has ordained them to obliterate their enemies in this manner. Their intent is to weaken the will of opponents.
According to Professor Timothy Furnish, “Islam is the only major world religion today that is cited by both state and non-state actors to legitimize beheadings” (The Middle East Quarterly: Spring 2005. Volume 12: Number 2).
Jihadist groups justify the decapitation of opponents with Qur’anic Scripture. In chapter (sura) 47 verse (ayah) 4 of the Qur’an it says: “When you encounter the unbelievers on the battlefield, strike off their heads until you have crushed them completely; then bind the prisoners tightly.” With little variation, Muslim scholars have translated the verse as, “When you meet unbelievers, smite their necks.”
Many modern interpretations of this verse remain consistent with those of early Islam. In his Saudi-distributed translation of the Qur’an, Abdullah Yusuf Ali wrote that the injunction to “smite at their necks,” should be taken both literally and figuratively. “You cannot wage war with kid gloves,” he argued (The Meaning of the Glorious Qur’an, p. 1378).
In Islamic history, beheading of captives is a recurring theme. The practice of beheading non-Muslim captives extends back to the Prophet himself. The earliest biographer of Mohammad is recorded as saying that the Prophet ordered the execution by decapitation of 700 men of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe in Medina for allegedly plotting against him (‘Abd al-Malik Ibn Hisham, [translated]).
Since Mohammad’s time, many Islamic leaders have followed his model. History is replete of examples of decapitation, of both the living and the dead. For instance, the Ottoman Empire was often referred to as the decapitation state. Upon their victory over Christian Serbs at the battle of Kosovo in 1389, the Muslim army beheaded the Serbian king and scores of Christian prisoners. In the early 19th century, even the British fell victim to the Ottoman barbarianism. An 1807 British expedition to Egypt resulted in “a few hundred spiked British heads left rotting in the sun outside Rosetta.”
So much for history – we do not expect such barbaric behavior in the 21st century. As people groups migrate, they take their religious ideas with them. In the process migrants are expected to live with people who share differing worldviews. As we share opportunities for advancement, we should be free to learn about the religious or irreligious views of our neighbors.
For Christians, migration brings opportunity - opportunities to learn from others and to share with others. Like Paul on Mars Hill (Acts 17), we must be ready to share our faith in the marketplace of ideas. We must listen and learn how to share our faith without attempting to destroy others who may disagree with our approach to life.
Jesus clearly taught us how to deal with people who disagree with us. He never taught violence as an option. Instead, He instructed us to pray for those who disagree with us. As an evangelistic strategy, compassion is always more effective than confrontation.
Our opinion of associating beheading with barbarism is consistent with a modernized view of capital punishment. For instance, the Romans were brutal and beheading was not uncommon. In the New Testament there was the case of John the Baptist’s head on Herod’s platter. Interestingly, the Romans considered beheading to be more honorable than crucifixion. They beheaded their own people but limited crucifixion to non-Romans.
Beheading was widely used in Europe and Asia until the 20th century. Interestingly, all the European countries that previously used beheading have now totally abolished the death penalty. As recent as 2007, 153 men and three women were beheaded in Saudi Arabia. Beheading is still practiced in Iran.
Apart from being used as a means of capital punishment by a state, the act of beheading is used to obliterate enemies. According to Ian Tuttle of the National Review Institute, “beheading is not just a warning or a promise; it is a ritual expression of an ideology. That this ideology seeks to annihilate and tyrannize is clear from the jihadists’ beheading method; not a quick, clean blow, but a slow, agonizing sawing motion that keeps the victim alive to experience his own execution.”
The vicious murders of the journalists were not done as acts of capital punishment – like Daniel Pearl of the Wall Street Journal, they committed no crime. The beheadings were done in the name of religion. It would seem as though Islamists practice beheading because they believe that God has ordained them to obliterate their enemies in this manner. Their intent is to weaken the will of opponents.
According to Professor Timothy Furnish, “Islam is the only major world religion today that is cited by both state and non-state actors to legitimize beheadings” (The Middle East Quarterly: Spring 2005. Volume 12: Number 2).
Jihadist groups justify the decapitation of opponents with Qur’anic Scripture. In chapter (sura) 47 verse (ayah) 4 of the Qur’an it says: “When you encounter the unbelievers on the battlefield, strike off their heads until you have crushed them completely; then bind the prisoners tightly.” With little variation, Muslim scholars have translated the verse as, “When you meet unbelievers, smite their necks.”
Many modern interpretations of this verse remain consistent with those of early Islam. In his Saudi-distributed translation of the Qur’an, Abdullah Yusuf Ali wrote that the injunction to “smite at their necks,” should be taken both literally and figuratively. “You cannot wage war with kid gloves,” he argued (The Meaning of the Glorious Qur’an, p. 1378).
In Islamic history, beheading of captives is a recurring theme. The practice of beheading non-Muslim captives extends back to the Prophet himself. The earliest biographer of Mohammad is recorded as saying that the Prophet ordered the execution by decapitation of 700 men of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe in Medina for allegedly plotting against him (‘Abd al-Malik Ibn Hisham, [translated]).
Since Mohammad’s time, many Islamic leaders have followed his model. History is replete of examples of decapitation, of both the living and the dead. For instance, the Ottoman Empire was often referred to as the decapitation state. Upon their victory over Christian Serbs at the battle of Kosovo in 1389, the Muslim army beheaded the Serbian king and scores of Christian prisoners. In the early 19th century, even the British fell victim to the Ottoman barbarianism. An 1807 British expedition to Egypt resulted in “a few hundred spiked British heads left rotting in the sun outside Rosetta.”
So much for history – we do not expect such barbaric behavior in the 21st century. As people groups migrate, they take their religious ideas with them. In the process migrants are expected to live with people who share differing worldviews. As we share opportunities for advancement, we should be free to learn about the religious or irreligious views of our neighbors.
For Christians, migration brings opportunity - opportunities to learn from others and to share with others. Like Paul on Mars Hill (Acts 17), we must be ready to share our faith in the marketplace of ideas. We must listen and learn how to share our faith without attempting to destroy others who may disagree with our approach to life.
Jesus clearly taught us how to deal with people who disagree with us. He never taught violence as an option. Instead, He instructed us to pray for those who disagree with us. As an evangelistic strategy, compassion is always more effective than confrontation.
Monday, August 11, 2014
Peace in Palestine?
For many Christians, peace in Palestine is impossible. They share the view that without Jesus, the Prince of Peace, peace in the Middle East is not possible. If that were the case then, why “pray for the peace of Jerusalem” (Psalm 122:6)? Furthermore, was it not Paul who taught us to pray for “those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives...”?
Christians should always pursue peaceful options. Agreed, the Israeli-Palestinian scenario is very complex and at times appears to be an exercise in futility. However, we must not forget that the conflict first involves people and not land. For this reason, greater attempts must be made to foster ideas among people in cross-border activities.
Ron Pundak, in the Palestine-Israel Journal (Volume 18 No. 2 & 3, 2012) makes the point, “in order for peace to come about, decisions need to be made by state officials at the highest levels. But in order for it to be digested, accepted and implemented, grassroots activities must take place before, during and after an agreement.”
Such grassroots activities have been in place for many years. In the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, one can find people-to-people peace building activities taking place in various forms and at various levels. Cases of dialog between non-official, yet influential individuals from both sides, continue to exist.
Because of our dependence on the media for information, we are often subject to the agenda of the media. That agenda focuses primarily on diplomatic conversations among politicians. That level of diplomacy is necessary but cannot be effective without strong grassroots activity.
In preparing this blog, I became so much more aware of ongoing attempts among academics, research groups and entrepreneurs – all determined to foster better relationships among Arabs and Jews. Through the dissemination of information and while making the public see that there is a realistic plan as well as a credible partner on both sides, the architects of grassroots efforts hope to change the political mindset of the people, who would then themselves pressure their political leaders to change.
For instance, some change can begin in the media. Joint educational programs for journalists or young leaders are one way of reaching the masses indirectly. Another is by establishing “values of peace” through meetings between school children, joint sporting events and the performing arts.
My research tells me that there is some dialog taking place between professionals. There is joint-discussion on topics of mutual interest like the environment, water and agriculture. Limited dialog is also taking place among doctors who jointly conduct breast cancer research, as well as other areas of medical science. While the participants in these activities mainly discuss professional matters, they still create an environment that is conducive to changing attitudes regarding each other and to the spreading of knowledge and ideas.
The most difficult area of dialog is religion. Both Jews and Arabs claim a common heritage in Abraham. As descendants of Abraham, Muslims believe the promises God made to Abraham, were intended for them. Jews disagree. They believe the promises were intended for the descendants of Isaac, not Ishmael, Abraham’s other son who became the father of the Arab world. The spirit of disagreement and conflict was seen very early in the history of both groups. Interestingly, it was said of Ishmael and his people, “and they lived in hostility toward all their brothers” (Genesis 25:18).
Hundreds of years later, Mohammad appears on the scene. He is born in Mecca and as an Arab has a cultural link to Ishmael/Abraham. However, when Mohammad was born, followers of Abraham’s monotheism in the Arab world were called Jews.
Even a cursory study of Islam, the religion practiced by most Arabs, will show that Mohammad was unable to convince Arabian Jews that he was a prophet sent from the God of Abraham. Actually, monotheism as practiced by Abraham, was far removed from what was practiced by Arabs.
Those religious differences brought about hostility between Islam and Judaism – and that hostility continues to be evident today. For example, in Islam’s Hadiths (Bukhari 52:177), “Allah's Apostle said, the Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say ‘O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.’"
Muslims who adhere to that ideology contend that there should be no attempt at peace with Jews. This provides fuel for Hamas and other Muslims who resent Jews. Thankfully, all Muslims do not adhere to this ideology – with such Muslims, it is possible to live peacefully with Jews.
Christians should always pursue peaceful options. Agreed, the Israeli-Palestinian scenario is very complex and at times appears to be an exercise in futility. However, we must not forget that the conflict first involves people and not land. For this reason, greater attempts must be made to foster ideas among people in cross-border activities.
Ron Pundak, in the Palestine-Israel Journal (Volume 18 No. 2 & 3, 2012) makes the point, “in order for peace to come about, decisions need to be made by state officials at the highest levels. But in order for it to be digested, accepted and implemented, grassroots activities must take place before, during and after an agreement.”
Such grassroots activities have been in place for many years. In the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, one can find people-to-people peace building activities taking place in various forms and at various levels. Cases of dialog between non-official, yet influential individuals from both sides, continue to exist.
Because of our dependence on the media for information, we are often subject to the agenda of the media. That agenda focuses primarily on diplomatic conversations among politicians. That level of diplomacy is necessary but cannot be effective without strong grassroots activity.
In preparing this blog, I became so much more aware of ongoing attempts among academics, research groups and entrepreneurs – all determined to foster better relationships among Arabs and Jews. Through the dissemination of information and while making the public see that there is a realistic plan as well as a credible partner on both sides, the architects of grassroots efforts hope to change the political mindset of the people, who would then themselves pressure their political leaders to change.
For instance, some change can begin in the media. Joint educational programs for journalists or young leaders are one way of reaching the masses indirectly. Another is by establishing “values of peace” through meetings between school children, joint sporting events and the performing arts.
My research tells me that there is some dialog taking place between professionals. There is joint-discussion on topics of mutual interest like the environment, water and agriculture. Limited dialog is also taking place among doctors who jointly conduct breast cancer research, as well as other areas of medical science. While the participants in these activities mainly discuss professional matters, they still create an environment that is conducive to changing attitudes regarding each other and to the spreading of knowledge and ideas.
The most difficult area of dialog is religion. Both Jews and Arabs claim a common heritage in Abraham. As descendants of Abraham, Muslims believe the promises God made to Abraham, were intended for them. Jews disagree. They believe the promises were intended for the descendants of Isaac, not Ishmael, Abraham’s other son who became the father of the Arab world. The spirit of disagreement and conflict was seen very early in the history of both groups. Interestingly, it was said of Ishmael and his people, “and they lived in hostility toward all their brothers” (Genesis 25:18).
Hundreds of years later, Mohammad appears on the scene. He is born in Mecca and as an Arab has a cultural link to Ishmael/Abraham. However, when Mohammad was born, followers of Abraham’s monotheism in the Arab world were called Jews.
Even a cursory study of Islam, the religion practiced by most Arabs, will show that Mohammad was unable to convince Arabian Jews that he was a prophet sent from the God of Abraham. Actually, monotheism as practiced by Abraham, was far removed from what was practiced by Arabs.
Those religious differences brought about hostility between Islam and Judaism – and that hostility continues to be evident today. For example, in Islam’s Hadiths (Bukhari 52:177), “Allah's Apostle said, the Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say ‘O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.’"
Muslims who adhere to that ideology contend that there should be no attempt at peace with Jews. This provides fuel for Hamas and other Muslims who resent Jews. Thankfully, all Muslims do not adhere to this ideology – with such Muslims, it is possible to live peacefully with Jews.
Monday, August 4, 2014
Palestine and Palestinians
Palestine is not a country. Historically, it is a geographical region where Jewish and Arab people live. The term “Palestine” (Falastin in Arabic) was an ancient name for the general geographic region. It is believed that the name was derived from the Philistines who invaded the area between the eleventh and twelfth centuries, before the Common Era.
The Romans corrupted the name to “Palestina,” and the area, under the sovereignty of their city-states, became known as “Philistia.” Six-hundred years later, the Arab invaders called the region “Falastin.”
Throughout subsequent history, the name remained only a vague geographical entity. There was never a nation of “Palestine,” never a people known as the “Palestinians,” nor any notion of “historic Palestine.” The region never enjoyed any sovereign autonomy - remaining instead under successive foreign sovereign domains from the Umayyads and Abbasids to the Fatimids, Ottomans, and British.
Interestingly, the term “Palestinian” was used during the British Mandate period (1922-1948) to identify the Jews of British Mandatory Palestine. The non-Jews of the area were known as “Arabs,” and their own designation of the region was balad esh-Sham (the province of Damascus).
In early 1947, when the United Nations was exploring the possibility of the partition of British Mandatory Palestine into two states, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs, various Arab political and academic spokespersons spoke out vociferously against such a division. They argued, the region was really a part of southern Syria, no such people or nation as “Palestinians” had ever existed, and it would be an injustice to Syria to create a state ex nihilo at the expense of Syrian sovereign territory.
Following the Six-Day-War (1967), there was a strategic change in language among Arabs. The term “Palestinian” was coined to lend legitimacy to claims for the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
This ploy was revealed, perhaps inadvertently, in a public interview with Zahir Muhse’in, a member of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee. In this March 31, 1977 interview, with the Amsterdam-based newspaper Trouw, Zahir Muhse’in said:
The revisionist narrative contends that Israel as a racist, war-mongering, oppressive, apartheid state, illegally occupies Arab land and carries out genocide of an indigenous people that had stronger claim to the land than Israel itself.
That is the argument that fuels the Israel-Palestine conflict. That is the rationale behind the preamble of Hamas’ Charter: ″Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it″.
I am not suggesting that Israel should obliterate Hamas instead. I dislike war. As a Christian, I am encouraged to pursue peace. I am also encouraged to pray for persons in leadership – “that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness” (1 Timothy 2:2).
However, I recognize that governments have a responsibility to protect their people. The apostle Paul, in the context of governmental authority, referred to the barbaric Roman government as “God’s servant” (Romans 13:1-7). Similarly, Israel has a responsibility to protect and pursue peace for her people.
RECOMMENDED
“Why the Jews” and “Jerusalem” (earlier blogs)
The Fight for Jerusalem by Dore Gold
Why the Jews by Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin.
Epicenter by Joel Rosenberg
Video: The Middle East Problem
The Romans corrupted the name to “Palestina,” and the area, under the sovereignty of their city-states, became known as “Philistia.” Six-hundred years later, the Arab invaders called the region “Falastin.”
Throughout subsequent history, the name remained only a vague geographical entity. There was never a nation of “Palestine,” never a people known as the “Palestinians,” nor any notion of “historic Palestine.” The region never enjoyed any sovereign autonomy - remaining instead under successive foreign sovereign domains from the Umayyads and Abbasids to the Fatimids, Ottomans, and British.
Interestingly, the term “Palestinian” was used during the British Mandate period (1922-1948) to identify the Jews of British Mandatory Palestine. The non-Jews of the area were known as “Arabs,” and their own designation of the region was balad esh-Sham (the province of Damascus).
In early 1947, when the United Nations was exploring the possibility of the partition of British Mandatory Palestine into two states, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs, various Arab political and academic spokespersons spoke out vociferously against such a division. They argued, the region was really a part of southern Syria, no such people or nation as “Palestinians” had ever existed, and it would be an injustice to Syria to create a state ex nihilo at the expense of Syrian sovereign territory.
Following the Six-Day-War (1967), there was a strategic change in language among Arabs. The term “Palestinian” was coined to lend legitimacy to claims for the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
This ploy was revealed, perhaps inadvertently, in a public interview with Zahir Muhse’in, a member of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee. In this March 31, 1977 interview, with the Amsterdam-based newspaper Trouw, Zahir Muhse’in said:
"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality, there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism. For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."Wow! In the absence of sound history, we have come to believe revisionist history – a mythic narrative that teaches that Zionists, with the support of the British, have stolen Palestinian land, exiled the people, and initiated a reign of terror and ethnic cleansing.
The revisionist narrative contends that Israel as a racist, war-mongering, oppressive, apartheid state, illegally occupies Arab land and carries out genocide of an indigenous people that had stronger claim to the land than Israel itself.
That is the argument that fuels the Israel-Palestine conflict. That is the rationale behind the preamble of Hamas’ Charter: ″Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it″.
I am not suggesting that Israel should obliterate Hamas instead. I dislike war. As a Christian, I am encouraged to pursue peace. I am also encouraged to pray for persons in leadership – “that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness” (1 Timothy 2:2).
However, I recognize that governments have a responsibility to protect their people. The apostle Paul, in the context of governmental authority, referred to the barbaric Roman government as “God’s servant” (Romans 13:1-7). Similarly, Israel has a responsibility to protect and pursue peace for her people.
RECOMMENDED
“Why the Jews” and “Jerusalem” (earlier blogs)
The Fight for Jerusalem by Dore Gold
Why the Jews by Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin.
Epicenter by Joel Rosenberg
Video: The Middle East Problem
Monday, January 6, 2014
JERUSALEM!
My prediction for 2014 – the city of Jerusalem will be in the news more than any other city in the world. At the moment, Secretary of State John Kerry is on his tenth visit to Jerusalem since assuming office one year ago. Kerry has visited Jerusalem more than any other foreign city since taking office.
What really is so significant about Jerusalem? In his book, The Fight for Jerusalem, Dore Gold, former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations, makes the point: “No city is more important to the peace of the world than Jerusalem.” Jerusalem is one of the oldest cities in the world and has been destroyed twice, besieged 23 times, attacked 52 times and captured and recaptured 44 times in its long history. Probably film producer Anthony Bourdain was correct when he said, “Jerusalem is easily the most contentious piece of real estate in the world.”
History confirms that King David subdued the Jebusites, the city's Canaanite founders, more than 3,000 years ago. Later, the Babylonians and Romans routed the Jews and Jerusalem. Muslims booted the Byzantines. Christian Crusaders mauled Muslims and were, in turn, tossed out by the Tartars.
The Ottomans followed, then Britain, then Jordan, before finally, in 1967, the city came nearly full circle when Israel annexed East Jerusalem. That sparked another cycle of violence, this time between Israelis and Palestinians.
Unlike many major cities of the world, Jerusalem is not known for any major river or coastline. The city, just about 45 square miles, with some 800,000 people, is actually situated in the heart of the Judean Mountains and is built on a hilltop. It is about the size of the city of Salem in Oregon, which borrowed its name from the biblical idea of peace.
There are no natural resources, no unifying language or attractions that would make the city of Jerusalem particularly popular. Then, what attracts an average of 3.5 million tourists to the city every year? The answer is simple – religion.
Jerusalem is home to some of the holiest sites of the world’s three major religions. The Temple Mount is the most sensitive location. A hilltop platform complex, the thirty-five acre Temple Mount is the former Mount Moriah of 2 Chronicles 3:1. There, the first Temple, built by King Solomon was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BCE.
The Second Temple was constructed on the same site in 515 BCE, until the Romans demolished it in 70 CE. Despite this history, the Temple Mount is now largely off-limits for organized Jewish prayer. Jewish prayer is instead conducted at the Western Wall, a retaining wall from the Second Temple, located adjacent to and just below the Temple Mount. Although this history is clearly verified in various forms, some revisionists are choosing to deny the history and ultimately Israel’s right to the area.
The Temple Mount is also the third holiest site to Muslims. It is now home to two major Islamic shrines. The first of these, the Dome of the Rock, built in the late seventh century, houses the rock from which Muhammad is said to have ascended to heaven. The second site is the al-Aqsa Mosque, the largest mosque in Jerusalem, completed in the eighth century.
The Church of the Holy Sepulcher stands relatively close to the Temple Mount. The church was originally built by the Roman emperor Constantine in the fourth century at Golgotha, the site where it is believed, Jesus was crucified.
So what you may ask - what if three religions want to make claim to the city of Jerusalem? What does that have to do with the prominence of Jerusalem in the news for 2014? Part of that answer has to do with the prominence of religious news from the Middle East and Jerusalem in particular during 2014.
The three major religions of the world, often referred to as the Abrahamic faiths, believe a messiah-like figure will play a major role in bringing about peace in Jerusalem. According to Islam, a messianic figure known as the Mahdi, will appear and establish his headquarters in Jerusalem. Jesus (Isa) will also appear and with the Mahdi, wage war against the Antichrist.
Based on Zechariah 12:2-3, Jews contend that Jerusalem will play a role in end-time prophecy. Among other things, the Prophet Zechariah quotes the Lord as saying, “I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock for all the nations.”
When asked to comment on the timing of His return, Jesus said, “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near” (Luke 21:20-24).
In essence, the major religions believe that both Jerusalem and a messianic figure will play major roles in the future of the world. Is it just possible, that the present turmoil is indicative of apocalyptic activity? In our quest for peace, I believe it would be irresponsible to ignore that point of view.
What really is so significant about Jerusalem? In his book, The Fight for Jerusalem, Dore Gold, former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations, makes the point: “No city is more important to the peace of the world than Jerusalem.” Jerusalem is one of the oldest cities in the world and has been destroyed twice, besieged 23 times, attacked 52 times and captured and recaptured 44 times in its long history. Probably film producer Anthony Bourdain was correct when he said, “Jerusalem is easily the most contentious piece of real estate in the world.”
History confirms that King David subdued the Jebusites, the city's Canaanite founders, more than 3,000 years ago. Later, the Babylonians and Romans routed the Jews and Jerusalem. Muslims booted the Byzantines. Christian Crusaders mauled Muslims and were, in turn, tossed out by the Tartars.
The Ottomans followed, then Britain, then Jordan, before finally, in 1967, the city came nearly full circle when Israel annexed East Jerusalem. That sparked another cycle of violence, this time between Israelis and Palestinians.
Unlike many major cities of the world, Jerusalem is not known for any major river or coastline. The city, just about 45 square miles, with some 800,000 people, is actually situated in the heart of the Judean Mountains and is built on a hilltop. It is about the size of the city of Salem in Oregon, which borrowed its name from the biblical idea of peace.
There are no natural resources, no unifying language or attractions that would make the city of Jerusalem particularly popular. Then, what attracts an average of 3.5 million tourists to the city every year? The answer is simple – religion.
Jerusalem is home to some of the holiest sites of the world’s three major religions. The Temple Mount is the most sensitive location. A hilltop platform complex, the thirty-five acre Temple Mount is the former Mount Moriah of 2 Chronicles 3:1. There, the first Temple, built by King Solomon was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BCE.
The Second Temple was constructed on the same site in 515 BCE, until the Romans demolished it in 70 CE. Despite this history, the Temple Mount is now largely off-limits for organized Jewish prayer. Jewish prayer is instead conducted at the Western Wall, a retaining wall from the Second Temple, located adjacent to and just below the Temple Mount. Although this history is clearly verified in various forms, some revisionists are choosing to deny the history and ultimately Israel’s right to the area.
The Temple Mount is also the third holiest site to Muslims. It is now home to two major Islamic shrines. The first of these, the Dome of the Rock, built in the late seventh century, houses the rock from which Muhammad is said to have ascended to heaven. The second site is the al-Aqsa Mosque, the largest mosque in Jerusalem, completed in the eighth century.
The Church of the Holy Sepulcher stands relatively close to the Temple Mount. The church was originally built by the Roman emperor Constantine in the fourth century at Golgotha, the site where it is believed, Jesus was crucified.
So what you may ask - what if three religions want to make claim to the city of Jerusalem? What does that have to do with the prominence of Jerusalem in the news for 2014? Part of that answer has to do with the prominence of religious news from the Middle East and Jerusalem in particular during 2014.
The three major religions of the world, often referred to as the Abrahamic faiths, believe a messiah-like figure will play a major role in bringing about peace in Jerusalem. According to Islam, a messianic figure known as the Mahdi, will appear and establish his headquarters in Jerusalem. Jesus (Isa) will also appear and with the Mahdi, wage war against the Antichrist.
Based on Zechariah 12:2-3, Jews contend that Jerusalem will play a role in end-time prophecy. Among other things, the Prophet Zechariah quotes the Lord as saying, “I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock for all the nations.”
When asked to comment on the timing of His return, Jesus said, “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near” (Luke 21:20-24).
In essence, the major religions believe that both Jerusalem and a messianic figure will play major roles in the future of the world. Is it just possible, that the present turmoil is indicative of apocalyptic activity? In our quest for peace, I believe it would be irresponsible to ignore that point of view.
Monday, August 19, 2013
Fellow-Christians in Egypt are in Trouble
Across Egypt, at least sixty churches have been targeted by Muslim extremists, along with Christian schools, homes, businesses and even an orphanage. Some Christian homes and businesses have received leaflets warning them to leave or face reprisals.
According to Catholic World Report, Muslim extremists torched a Franciscan school and then paraded three nuns on the street like “prisoners of war”. Also, a Bible Society of Egypt statement posted online Wednesday reported the "complete burning and destruction" of its bookshops in southern Egypt.
Egypt's Christian minority has been the target of a number of attacks in recent years. The bombing of a major church in Alexandria in January 2011 killed 21 persons and sparked worldwide condemnation.
The situation has only become worse since Egypt's popular revolution overthrew former President Hosni Mubarak in 2011.
In the past two-and-a-half years, Christians in Egypt have witnessed more deaths than in the last twenty years. Interestingly, Christians have been in Egypt since the first century and were, for centuries, the majority. Some 90% of Coptic (Egyptian) Christians still live in the country, making up the largest Christian community in the Middle East.
These Egyptian Christians were targeted by the Muslim Brotherhood because they were widely seen as being supportive of the military that kicked the Muslim Brotherhood administration out of power. Actually, Coptic Orthodox Pope Tawadros II, the leader of Egypt’s largest Christian denomination, publically supported the move.
Paul Sedra, an associate professor of history at Simon Fraser University, believes that the violence is an extension of an ongoing demonization campaign by the Muslim Brotherhood against Christians.
According to Professor Sedra, “since the Muslim Brotherhood has been deposed from power, they have engaged in explicitly sectarian appeals that have aimed to vilify Copts as their chief antagonists in Egypt.” When Islamists are loathed to attack the state directly, they often settle for attacking Copts, because they are an easy target.”
One would expect that Muslims, who are not extreme in their worldview, would display outrage against the Muslim Brotherhood. Instead, there is a deafening silence:
The REAL Muslim Brotherhood (8.14.13)
When I heard that the American Muslim Political Action Committee (AMPAC) was planning to hold a Million Muslim March in Washington D.C., I honestly thought the objective was to take a stand against what was happening in Egypt. I thought, since they did not march when Muslim extremists showed their anti-American position after 911, AMPAC was now covering lost ground.
I was wrong. The Million Muslim March has nothing to do with protesting about what is happening in Egypt, or what happened by Muslim extremists in Benghazi last year. Instead, they are using the 911 anniversary date to demand that the free speech rights of American Muslims be protected.
This is how the event is described on AMPAC’s website – “we are demanding that laws be enacted protecting our first amendment. We are asking President Obama to fulfill his promise from his first campaign... Lastly, we are asking for the release of the 911 commission report to the American people.”
AMPAC distances itself from the events of 911. As a matter of fact, the current leader of AMPAC believes the events of 911 were conspiracies involving Israel. Hence, according to AMPAC, there is no need to condemn something for which Islam is not even tacitly responsible.
Thankfully, Egyptian Christians are choosing to react differently from others in history who were provoked and attacked by Muslims. Rather than resort to “crusader tactics,” today’s Egyptians are choosing instead “to pray for those who hate you.”
Some have returned to the charred house of worship, with their pastor vowing the violence suffered by his flock will make them better Christians. This will teach us to be better Christians," said Pastor Sameh Ibrahim. In that community, some fourteen churches were reportedly attacked in recent days.
For Christians, revenge is not an option. In writing to the Romans, the apostle Paul said we must “hate what is evil.” In addition he says, “do not repay anyone evil for evil...do not take revenge...but leave room for God’s wrath...do not be overcome by evil but overcome evil with good” (Romans 12:17-21).
As our brothers and sisters in Egypt seek to live out true Christianity, let us pray that God would grant to them courage and hope, so that their faith would not crumble under pressure.
According to Catholic World Report, Muslim extremists torched a Franciscan school and then paraded three nuns on the street like “prisoners of war”. Also, a Bible Society of Egypt statement posted online Wednesday reported the "complete burning and destruction" of its bookshops in southern Egypt.
Egypt's Christian minority has been the target of a number of attacks in recent years. The bombing of a major church in Alexandria in January 2011 killed 21 persons and sparked worldwide condemnation.
The situation has only become worse since Egypt's popular revolution overthrew former President Hosni Mubarak in 2011.
In the past two-and-a-half years, Christians in Egypt have witnessed more deaths than in the last twenty years. Interestingly, Christians have been in Egypt since the first century and were, for centuries, the majority. Some 90% of Coptic (Egyptian) Christians still live in the country, making up the largest Christian community in the Middle East.
These Egyptian Christians were targeted by the Muslim Brotherhood because they were widely seen as being supportive of the military that kicked the Muslim Brotherhood administration out of power. Actually, Coptic Orthodox Pope Tawadros II, the leader of Egypt’s largest Christian denomination, publically supported the move.
Paul Sedra, an associate professor of history at Simon Fraser University, believes that the violence is an extension of an ongoing demonization campaign by the Muslim Brotherhood against Christians.
According to Professor Sedra, “since the Muslim Brotherhood has been deposed from power, they have engaged in explicitly sectarian appeals that have aimed to vilify Copts as their chief antagonists in Egypt.” When Islamists are loathed to attack the state directly, they often settle for attacking Copts, because they are an easy target.”
One would expect that Muslims, who are not extreme in their worldview, would display outrage against the Muslim Brotherhood. Instead, there is a deafening silence:
The REAL Muslim Brotherhood (8.14.13)
When I heard that the American Muslim Political Action Committee (AMPAC) was planning to hold a Million Muslim March in Washington D.C., I honestly thought the objective was to take a stand against what was happening in Egypt. I thought, since they did not march when Muslim extremists showed their anti-American position after 911, AMPAC was now covering lost ground.
I was wrong. The Million Muslim March has nothing to do with protesting about what is happening in Egypt, or what happened by Muslim extremists in Benghazi last year. Instead, they are using the 911 anniversary date to demand that the free speech rights of American Muslims be protected.
This is how the event is described on AMPAC’s website – “we are demanding that laws be enacted protecting our first amendment. We are asking President Obama to fulfill his promise from his first campaign... Lastly, we are asking for the release of the 911 commission report to the American people.”
AMPAC distances itself from the events of 911. As a matter of fact, the current leader of AMPAC believes the events of 911 were conspiracies involving Israel. Hence, according to AMPAC, there is no need to condemn something for which Islam is not even tacitly responsible.
Thankfully, Egyptian Christians are choosing to react differently from others in history who were provoked and attacked by Muslims. Rather than resort to “crusader tactics,” today’s Egyptians are choosing instead “to pray for those who hate you.”
Some have returned to the charred house of worship, with their pastor vowing the violence suffered by his flock will make them better Christians. This will teach us to be better Christians," said Pastor Sameh Ibrahim. In that community, some fourteen churches were reportedly attacked in recent days.
For Christians, revenge is not an option. In writing to the Romans, the apostle Paul said we must “hate what is evil.” In addition he says, “do not repay anyone evil for evil...do not take revenge...but leave room for God’s wrath...do not be overcome by evil but overcome evil with good” (Romans 12:17-21).
As our brothers and sisters in Egypt seek to live out true Christianity, let us pray that God would grant to them courage and hope, so that their faith would not crumble under pressure.
Monday, January 9, 2012
HOLY WAR IN Peaceful Bethlehem
At a time when thousands of Christian visitors were hoping for peace in Bethlehem during the Christmas season, they were greeted to a fight among some priests. The fight had nothing to do with terrorism, which often plagues the area; it was a scuffle among Christian orthodox priests.
Bemused visitors looked on as 100 priests fought with brooms while cleaning Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity. Greek Orthodox priests set up ladders to clean the walls and ceilings of their part of the church. However, the ladders encroached on space controlled by Armenian priests. For about fifteen minutes bearded and robed priests laid into each other with fists, brooms and iron rods. A Bethlehem police officer saw it as a trivial problem, in that fights among priests occur every year. Thankfully, no one was seriously injured and no one was arrested "because all those involved were men of God," said the police.
The Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem is one of the oldest continuously operating churches in the world. The 1,700 year-old-church was built over the cave that tradition marks as the birthplace of Jesus. The church is administered jointly by Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic authorities. Clashes among Orthodox priests which share the administration, have often been sparked by perceived territorial encroachments.
In reporting the story, AlJazeera News reminded readers that Christmas is traditionally a time for putting disagreements aside. "But peace and harmony were put aside at the Bethlehem Church." Honestly, if these fights are mild, according to the police, then why should the story generate such interest in the media around the world?
Firstly, the behavior is so inconsistent with what the Church of the Nativity represents. If the location is correct, this is where the angel announced the birth of Jesus to the shepherds. In reporting the story, Luke quoted the angel: "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom His favor rests" (Luke 2:14).
In addition, the behavior of the priests was not consistent with the teachings of Jesus. In His Sermon on the Mount, Jesus gave clear guidelines as to how we should relate to those with whom we differ (Matthew 5:43-48).
We cannot avoid meeting people who differ from us and even hate us. Some share differences of opinion in politics, in sports and more so in religion. For the Orthodox Churches, their differences go as far back as the fifth century. In 1852 custody of the Church of the Nativity was granted to the Roman Catholic, Armenian and Greek Orthodox Churches. Unfortunately, the rivalry among these churches extends even to Jerusalem, at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher (Church of the Resurrection). It is believed that this church was built on the spot where Jesus was crucified.
When confronted with a history of rivalry, what is the best course of action to break the curse? At such times we need to establish boundaries to determine what actions we would take from what we would not take. In addition, our actions must always be consistent with who we are and for what we stand. We must never forget that people will remember us more for what we do than for what we say.
Sometimes it is so easy to judge the priests in Bethlehem but overlook the ongoing bitterness we cause in family and church encounters. Like the priests, we maintain generational hurts by transferring bitterness to our children, and ultimately to the next generation.
History is replete with stories of pain that could have been avoided. One such story comes from the eleventh century, when Pope Urban II launched the first crusade against the Muslims. Agreed, the Seljuk Turks were wrong when they took control of Jerusalem and prevented Christian pilgrimages. Here we are, 1,000 years later, and some historians still throw the excessive reactions of eleventh century Christians in our faces.
Interestingly, Pope Urban II had access to the non-violent words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. So did the Hindu, Mahatma Gandhi, when he studied law in London. Gandhi practiced the words of Jesus and became known as the father of non-violence. The Christian leader, Pope Urban II did otherwise.
Bemused visitors looked on as 100 priests fought with brooms while cleaning Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity. Greek Orthodox priests set up ladders to clean the walls and ceilings of their part of the church. However, the ladders encroached on space controlled by Armenian priests. For about fifteen minutes bearded and robed priests laid into each other with fists, brooms and iron rods. A Bethlehem police officer saw it as a trivial problem, in that fights among priests occur every year. Thankfully, no one was seriously injured and no one was arrested "because all those involved were men of God," said the police.
The Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem is one of the oldest continuously operating churches in the world. The 1,700 year-old-church was built over the cave that tradition marks as the birthplace of Jesus. The church is administered jointly by Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic authorities. Clashes among Orthodox priests which share the administration, have often been sparked by perceived territorial encroachments.
In reporting the story, AlJazeera News reminded readers that Christmas is traditionally a time for putting disagreements aside. "But peace and harmony were put aside at the Bethlehem Church." Honestly, if these fights are mild, according to the police, then why should the story generate such interest in the media around the world?
Firstly, the behavior is so inconsistent with what the Church of the Nativity represents. If the location is correct, this is where the angel announced the birth of Jesus to the shepherds. In reporting the story, Luke quoted the angel: "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom His favor rests" (Luke 2:14).
In addition, the behavior of the priests was not consistent with the teachings of Jesus. In His Sermon on the Mount, Jesus gave clear guidelines as to how we should relate to those with whom we differ (Matthew 5:43-48).
We cannot avoid meeting people who differ from us and even hate us. Some share differences of opinion in politics, in sports and more so in religion. For the Orthodox Churches, their differences go as far back as the fifth century. In 1852 custody of the Church of the Nativity was granted to the Roman Catholic, Armenian and Greek Orthodox Churches. Unfortunately, the rivalry among these churches extends even to Jerusalem, at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher (Church of the Resurrection). It is believed that this church was built on the spot where Jesus was crucified.
When confronted with a history of rivalry, what is the best course of action to break the curse? At such times we need to establish boundaries to determine what actions we would take from what we would not take. In addition, our actions must always be consistent with who we are and for what we stand. We must never forget that people will remember us more for what we do than for what we say.
Sometimes it is so easy to judge the priests in Bethlehem but overlook the ongoing bitterness we cause in family and church encounters. Like the priests, we maintain generational hurts by transferring bitterness to our children, and ultimately to the next generation.
History is replete with stories of pain that could have been avoided. One such story comes from the eleventh century, when Pope Urban II launched the first crusade against the Muslims. Agreed, the Seljuk Turks were wrong when they took control of Jerusalem and prevented Christian pilgrimages. Here we are, 1,000 years later, and some historians still throw the excessive reactions of eleventh century Christians in our faces.
Interestingly, Pope Urban II had access to the non-violent words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. So did the Hindu, Mahatma Gandhi, when he studied law in London. Gandhi practiced the words of Jesus and became known as the father of non-violence. The Christian leader, Pope Urban II did otherwise.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)