The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in to your account.Don't have an account? Register
Catholics, much more than all other Christian denominations put together, were always very emotional: wherever Jewish lives and wellbeing were 'in play' they cried uncontrollably while burning them alive (the Inquisition) or gassing them to death (the Holocaust following the Concordat with Hitler and Mussolini).
Now, when these human approaches went out of style, a new one was created by these pious Catholics: murder the 7 million Israeli Jews by delivering them lock, stock and barrel to the 13 terrorist organizations that dominate the Arabs living in Cisjordan. It is an interesting approach that apparently Jews from all over the world don't seem to agree to.
To the dismay of European 'Christian democracies', Americans keep siding with the Israelis. President Donald J. Trump had the audacity of going against that trend that was defended and promoted by Barack HUSSEDIN Obama, the previous President and a known 'closet Muslim' elected solely because of the color of his skin.
As it happens, the American nation is 100% behind many decision implemented by the Trump Administration, the so-called "Jerusalem move" being one of them. This means that many radical steps will follow in short order including the
"Black List" of those countries that vote against US while shamelessly accepting American help.
All in all, Donald Trump is a very interesting President, one worth watching.
Jerusalem has been the capitol of Israel for only the last 4,500 years. Tel Aviv was eyewash, declared capitol by the British in their failed Palestine decrees in 1919.
I am a Catholic. And President Trump did the right thing.
According to international law, the capital of the modern state of Israel, which has existed for less than 70 years, is Tel Aviv. Claiming to establish your capital in a city that's not even all part of your country is either wishful thinking or an attempt to fool gullible people.
Jerusalem was the capital of the ancient kingdom of Israel, which was killed, crushed, dried, and blown away almost two millenia ago. That ancient, short-lived kingdom, one of many that had temporary control of that area, has no connection with the modern state of Israel. I have read of the strong objections of Orthodox Jews to the creation of Israel, on the grounds that a religious state should be established by God (or G-d to my Jewish friends) and not as the vile fruits of a corrupt arrangement and declaration in a colonial power hundreds of miles away.
The modern state of Israel exists. I think it was founded unjustly, on lands given to the Jews by Britain, which were not Britain's to give. But, it's there, and it isn't going away. Fine. But don't let's allow Israel to chip chip chip away over the years at the lands outside its boundaries, including East Jerusalem.
Politics dictated by doomsday-nonsense is a bit Shitler, isn't it.
Looking forward to ending the species isn't really something that inspires sane policy making.
It is more important to study Muslim scriptures and beliefs. The Whites will be only reacting to Muslim insanity. Too many Whites don’t go by the Biblical interpretation. After the humiliation of Islam you jokers talk about irrelevant scriptures which haven’t been the guiding geopolitical policies for a 1000 white years.
The Muslim fanatics have done their worst. They have indicated to the idiot Whites that they are not going to stop “jihad”. The Muslim world hasn’t done shit to hurt the fanatics. Instead of picking on Trump, maybe you should be examining all the Muslims who have given Trump the opportunity to humiliate them. Muslims ain’t going to stop this insane jihad. The point is Jerusalem is not going to be given back by the Jews, so what difference is any of this recognition of Jerusalem going to make? The low IQ Muslims may now try harder to get the nuclear bombs. These guys are not chess players like the North Koreans,or Chinese.
An intelligent, knowledgeable, and balanced analysis -- unlike most of the comments.
Is Trump’s Decision to Move US Embassy to Jerusalem Based on His Hate for Muslims? Can It Make Russia Even More Stronger in Middle East? http://real-politique.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/is-trumps-decision-to-move-...
The article puts the finger to the point, but to exactly and not trong enough.
Distinguish from evangelists, who support Israel due to the theological reasons, two other streams oppose Israel due to the theological reasons.
“Traditional” Christians, both Catholics and Protestants, say that the Old Covenant of God with Jews is cancelled after the New Covenant by Christ. Thus Jews, who do not recognize Christ shall disappear from the Earth. But Jews not only refuse disappearing, they establish the new blooming country with capital in the Jerusalem, city of Christ. That makes "traditional" Christians crazy
Atheists or seculars believe in non-existence of God and in the “science”. According to the scientific approach Jews should disappear long ago. Not only Jews have not disappeared, they united as one nations coming from different edges of the world with Hebrew, ancient language that should disappear long ago. All this according to the prophecies in the Bible, that should be in the best case the piece of literature, but not the description of future events. And so all the idea of Israel as blooming Jewish state makes the atheists crazy.
There is a secular way of viewing Israel.
I am skeptical that foreign policy in the 21st century AD should be based on what God is alleged to have said to Abraham during the Bronze Age. Many Jews and Christians may feel I am wrong in my belief and they have as much evidence on their side as do I on mine. None of wandered among the Patriarch's flocks, tents and wives when that supposed conversation occurred. For everyone of us since, it is hearsay.
But, there is a fact on which all MUST agree. There are 5-6 million people who live in Israel and identify themselves in various ways -- linguistically, ethnically, religiously . . . as Jews. They have lived on that small plot of land for the better part of of a century and generations have been born and passed in that place and knew nowhere else as their home.
The past is past. The presence of these 5-6 million people is just that -- the Present. They labor and should enjoy the fruits of that labor. They procreate and are entitled to see their grandchildren prosper. For the most part, they go about their business the same way as do people who live in Cairo or Beirut.
The Past is full of "crimes," real and imaginary. Let the dead bury the dead. Whether one is a Believer, whether one is an historian with a grudge -- none of that matters. Israel is as much a fixture in today's world as Holland or Indonesia. What sane person wishes to obliterate those two states and their populations? The most distressing thing about anti-Zionism is that its ultimate goal is genocide. Would we approve such a goal for the Dutch? Then, why do some justify such a goal for the Israelis?
Why not put aside someone's Scriptures in favor of simple humanity and and right to life of those 5-6 million who have cultivated that land now for generations. I don't know what God wants. What most of us SHOULD want is to let people live in peace -- and put their capital wherever they please.
Some of what you say makes good sense, but some of what you say is also non-factual. There has been a Jewish presence in the region known as Palestine that goes back well beyond the 100 years you indicate. In fact, Jews were the majority population in many areas of Galilee as well as Jerusalem even after the Roman Diaspora. Jews never left the area so the whole story about Jews only being there in the last 100 years is factually incorrect. Census records available from the Roman Christian as well as the Islamic eras back this up.
Fast forward to the Ottoman Turk Caliphate and the region known as Palestine is nothing more than a backwater, under populated, region that didn't even rate its own governor. It was mostly wasteland except for the traditional port areas as well as the regions around Galilee and along the Jordan river. The Ottomans were more than happy to sell this desolate land to Jews from Europe who were emigrating back to the area due to ongoing and unrelenting European anti-semitism. Even after the 1948 UN Partition and the subsequent Arab-Israeli War it wasn't until the early 1960's that any of the surrounding Arab states even mentioned that Palestinians were somehow separate and distinct from the rest of the surrounding Arabs. In fact, what remained of the areas that were supposed to form the Palestinian state as a result of the UN partition agreement didn't even have their own governments, everything was run by either the Egyptians(Gaza Strip) or the Jordanians (West Bank). Why was that? Because Palestine and the concept of Palestinians didn't historically exist.
The truth is that Islam is the virulently anti-Semitic at its core and as a result, no matter what they say, the governments in the area will never accept the existence of a Jewish state in Israel or anywhere else in the middle east. Also remember that many of the Jews living in Israel today actually came from Jewish communities that existed throughout the region for thousands of years until they were forcibly expelled by Islamic dominated governments in the post WWII era. Much like the expulsion of Greeks and Armenians from Turkey in the post WWI time frame. These people had no choice but to leave and no place to go but Israel.
These too are facts that must be acknowledged.
I was completely unaware that the Almighty could not act without the assistance of President Trump.
In fact, I am still unaware that the Almighty has that need.
Were this presidential faux pas not certain to cause the death of thousands and the displacement of millions, it would really be rather droll. In fact, it is merely tragic.
Sound right to me about the Almighty. Maybe America has a Super-Almighty. At least some Americans believe it does. They say: Believe and you will be saved.
In any event, I have a Q for you. If it puts you on the spot, please ignore me. It will be totally OK. Also, I only ask the Q of you, no one else.
I have never understood why Christianity came to be splintered into so many different "brands". Given that the Christian Bible says there is only one Jesus (I don’t think this interpretation of the Bible is in dispute, not yet) , the phenomenon is more than dizzying to contemplate.
Allow me to explain. In the beginning, there was Jesus. Then this Jesus died on a cross - the outcome of a betrayal by one of his disciples who liked silver more than his teacher's teachings.
After Jesus died, the remaining disciples, excluding the one who betrayed him, went about spreading his teachings which, in the main, said: Love Thy Neighbor (I think I got this part right. I am pretty sure Jesus didn’t say: Hate everyone; better yet, kill them).
Some time later, the followers of Jesus' teachings splintered into 2 groups - the Roman Catholic and the Protestant.
Still later, a third group made its presence pronouncedly and prominently known. This was the Eastern Orthodox Church.
So now there are 3 main Christian Churches - Roman Catholic, Protestant, Eastern Orthodox (Skip the part about the many “denominations” under Protestant that now approach a 3-digit figure).
So far, so good (or not so good, depending on whom you talk to).
IN THE MEANTIME, something entirely different developed in terms of splintering. The development happened in accordance to an entirely different concept for "branding" purposes.
The different development in accordance to a a different concept produces the American Evangelical Christians and the Middle East Christians. [Erasmus explained this part in the article].
All counted, now we have more brands in Christianity than brands of breakfast cereals.
Q: Which one represents the "real" Jesus?? Do you know?
As an aside, I personally think Jesus left some great teachings. He was cool. I am wondering if he is crying where he is?
Again, you don’t have to answer my Q if the answer is too easy or too difficult. At any rate, it can only be one of the two.
"The Almighty" -- please define your terms. Is that Trump or Yaweh?
The deaths of thousands? The displacement of millions?
There have been a few ginned-up "spontaneous demonstrations" such as the "Three Days of Rage." Soon, perhaps, we will be treated to the "Five Minutes of Eternal Anger."
For the most part, the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital has been greeted by yawns in the Arab world.
Some things are true or they are not true. Is Jerusalem the capital of Israel or is some other city (Des Moines?) the capital of Israel?
If what Trump said was true, then where is his "faux pas?"
Good morning, Andros!
Thanks for your reply.
I trust in the Triune God. I understand many trust in Yahweh while still others prefer Allah. In any case, the idea seems to be that the sole God is Almighty. Thus, the picture of Him making His way into the future, leaning on the arm of the gracious, ever-helpful, benevolent, humble, charitable President Trump, is more than a little oxymoronic.
I hold a very pessimistic view of the future of the Middle East and of its present as well. In any other location, between any other two peoples or tribes or what-have-you, were A seizing the territory of B, ignoring their right to exist and their sovereignty, and killing (according to "The Atlantic" magazine) the population of B at a rate of 160 times any losses of their own, folks might well begin to talk in terms of ethnic cleansing.
I am very willing to allow you or anyone else to deny that this is the case in the West Bank. However, I continue to get the impression that, whatever else you wish to call it, the result for the Palestinians is just the same. If we were to think in terms of maintaining peace and human rights, then it would seem that the pronouncement of the soft-spoken, kind, affectionate President Trump has not furthered those aims.
Of course, the capital of Israel is whatever the Israelis say it is. The unfortunate thing is that in creating Israel, the UN designated Jerusalem as the capital, not only of Israel, but also of the West Bank. My impression is that most Jews throughout the world find that idea repugnant, especially the current Zionist government in Israel.
Israelis seem surprised and very angry that Palestinians resist having their farms destroyed to make way for Israeli-only condos. I chalk their surprise up to their inability to concede the possibility that Palestinians might be human. In any case, they have no qualms about taking their land and killing any who resist.
I often wonder if the Israelis would not be far more humane if they simply told the rest of us: "In 12 months we will resume our God-given sovereignty over Greater Israel. Any foreigners found in the West Bank (and in the portions of whatever other countries they have determined lie within Greater Israel) will be removed and buried. If there are any people there you wish to escape this, please remove them prior to 12 months from this time and date." First, this would remove all uncertainty. Second, the rest of the world would have to put their money behind what they have said for years, and get those Palestinians (and whoever else) want to leave out of the way. Third the realization of Eretz Israel would be easier for Israel. Fourth, anyone Israelis found within Eretz Israel when the deadline arrived would be a resisting trespasser who had been warned of the cost of such arrogant misbehaviour.
I doubt this solution will be ever put in place. It would produce far too many unemployed and unemployable diplomats. So I suppose the byword is: COME WEAL OR COME WOE, THE STATUS IS QUO. Plus, of course, you have the insightful, wise, and far-seeing guidance of the beloved President Trump.
I hope this clarifies things a little. Have a great week!
And, a great week to you!
I, too, like to think that I trust in God -- but I have fooled myself in the past and would not be a bit surprised to learn that I lied to myself about this as well.
I don't know much about the Israeli's seizing Palestinian farms in the West Bank -- although I believe you. Nearly all states insist on the right of eminent domain. That power can be misused but it is an aspect of sovereignty.
Your anger at Trump is not unique and neither is your contempt for him. I don't think, though, that his acknowledgment of a fact is one of his failings. As I mentioned, if what he said regarding Jerusalem is true then he is in the right. "Truth" is an absolute defense.
Perhaps both of us believe that God has His ways that we know not of and it is, therefore, only our arrogance and spite that leads us to believe we know His intent. The Almighty is absolutely mysterious, utterly beyond my knowing, That is why I believe it is pernicious folly to justify anything we humans do as "God's will."
Great wrongs exist. Israel may well be guilty of many. That - and I know we agree on this - can never justify the forcible extinction of the Israelis. And, that extinction is what, I fear, so many "anti-Zionists" seek.
The dead must bury the dead. The living must go on with it all.
Wishing you a mild winter!
Good morning, ashbird!
A ruddy good question with thousands of answers. Here's mine to add to the pile.
The Biblical book of Acts gives us a hint to how this fissiparousness began. (Wow! Love the questions that let me use big words! TY!) First, early on, there were differences among the disciples themselves. Hence the need for a sit-down together in Jerusalem to make sure all were on the same page. These were rather easily sorted out. Next, differences emerged in some of the congregations Paul started. Like Topsey, it just grew.
Why? If today and my experience are any measure, it's because folks try to make Christianity logical or reasonable. We do that with lots of other things like philosophy and motorcycle repair. Why not Christianity?
God, being God, does not obey the rules of Aristotle, Kant, or Quine. I would agree that those folks have made our world and how we act in it easier and more understandable. But I think God is not a figment or fabrication of this world. Sure, He works here, but He transcends it.
The Bible relates a lot of information that is counter-intuitive. Counter-intuitive is hard to digest. To make it more palatable, our favourite move is to trim it and rearrange it logically. If one does that with revelation, it simply does not work. It's even worse than mixing 25 year old Scotch (or Irish if you prefer) with cola.
Who's right? Who represents Jesus accurately? I try to. That's why I learned Greek, so I could read the New Testament in its original. I think the New Testament is clear. It's my brain that's foggy. I'm still learning.
Lousy answer. Perhaps you asked the wrong guy. There's a quick read that's helpful. Try the Gospel of John. John was a close friend of Jesus, if we are to believe the documents in the New Testament. (If we do not rely upon them, we do not have much to work with. We have avoided the best evidence for hear-say.) See what he says. No, I have not completely understood him yet, but I'm working on it.
Thanks for your comment. Have a great week!
Thanks a bunch for your reply, John Eh. It is a substantive one. I am immensely grateful.
Re answer to my Q, I am very satisfied (by “satisfied” I mean I absolutely can’t find anything that doesn’t sit right in my gut) by your answer. The Almighty is by definition a “Court of last resort”, if you will, and no manly or unmanly personage sits in that Court.
Many Americans make that error. They think they are that Court and they speak for that Court. They believe in their heart of heart they are in fact the God who presides over that Court. That’s how, curiously, they’ve come to represent the most ghastly bunch of racists and misoynists in the country. One such even says the Swastika sign seen carved into the glass windows in Asian churches in the month after Trump was elected, “get the h—- out of our country” scrawled on the side, is not Swastika but a peace sign (THIS ACTUALLY HAPPENED on TE community forum - a Trumpista whose MO is feign he can’t read any time at his convenience, wrote that!!)
These are the lot of “Ugly Americans”, a bunch no less loathsome than the constituents in Daesh, except these guys wear white, the cloak of “Christians”, not black, the cloak of Daesh. Not all Americans are like that. From my personal knowledge, experience and impression, very few are.
Every bit as hateful, divisive, destructive, nonsensical as Daesh. This lot specialize in, whenever they are totally lacking in any informed and fact-based argument on issues that concern the real lives of real people in the real world, malingering imbecility (“malingering” means “pretend, feign”, as in a serial killer malinger legal insanity) to gain an unfair advantage in public discourse. Some example of feigned imbecility are: a black man’s constitutional right is secondary to a white man’s, a woman’s constitutional right is subservient to a man’s, it is totally fine to grope a woman’s p—— , and brag about it on tape, and then deny you did , and blamed the woman who suffered the groping by saying her breasts hanged out of her blouse..… etc.
I think the Almighty, in a fit of SNL humor, allowed folks like that to be created as a constant reminder for the human race on what it looks like to be less than human. These guys (for they are invariably guys) like to come at you with ad hominem attacks, with no rhyme or reason whatsoever, just to spill on you the hate that fills their their chest, choking on it sometimes as they spill, if you are not white and male, simultaneously churning the music of “God’s words”, quoting this that and the other from the Book, at all times forgetting - nay obliterating - the words spoken in the Sermon of the Mount. I personally find this bunch of “so-called Christians” in America despicable to the nth degree. And, BTW, such folks are, it seems, also, without exception, Pro-Gun and “Pro-life” in the same breath, a circle and a square only they know how to fit. But of course they are all on Almighty’s Court. So anything is possible.
Part 2 of 2 to John Eh -
Happy to learn you learned Greek just to understand the original version of the words in the Bible, as “pristine” as possible. Pristine”, of course, refers to “No value-added stuff” as in the interpretation by the Evangelical Christians in America - after-thoughts and more after-thoughts and more after-thoughts and more after-thoughts…..all in the framework of what works to their benefit and advantage, no one else’s. This in the nitty-gritty laws in a society operated by a political machinery bought and sold through an intermediary called “Lobbies”. Even thought a Constitution exists.
Will pay attention to St. John. I was not familiar with St. John. Thank you very much for that. I have 3 Bibles on my bookshelves. One with red leather jacket given to me by a Presbyterian minister (King James Version, the only one I know), one in black leather jacket given to me by the Dean of Women when I was an undergrad; she was Methodist, one in Chinese translation given by a Baptist minister. All these people were my friends and remain my friends. I did not, do not, see any trace of the “X is bad and wrong but good and right when I do it” stuff in these people. These are also real people, not slips from fortune cookies.
Re the political situation on the ground before our eyes in ISRAEL - one I didn’t raise in my Q to you - my view is wholly the same as yours. I could not have put it better than you did. That’s the reason I wrote with a Q ancillary to that view.
A similar view is succinctly summarized by the words written by another astute TE commenter (his initials are S.R.), a person in possession of sense, plus a curious, informed, and learned mind, a polymath and polyglot. A fair-minded commenter [fair-minded means one that does not subscribe to “X is bad and wrong but good and right when I do it” format of “reasoning”]. I quote this commenter below because I can’t write it any better and more succinctly -
“The move makes peace even more difficult and is therefore against the interest of Israelis, Palestinians and Americans. But it is in the interest of Mr. Netanyahu, Hamas and Mr. Trump; and the latter's self-interest trumps all else.” I am 100% in agreement with this view.
Again, thank you for your kind and learned reply. I am very happy you stayed on track for a reply to me and did not get off track. Reflection of a clear mind.
Good evening to you. :)
"First, early on, there were differences among the disciples themselves. Hence the need for a sit-down together in Jerusalem to make sure all were on the same page."
When Kundera received the Jerusalem Prize his acceptance speech was based round the old Jewish proverb "Man thinks, God Laughs". Why does God laugh when men think? Because man thinks and the truth escapes him. And the more he thinks, the more one man's thought differs from another man's thought. And because we can never be quite sure what it is we think, or we traduce our thought, or we forget it or we think again - with the same results.
Nothing is more natural - nothing more in the state of things for hapless humanity - than that Christianity should have broken up into so many different strands.
John Eh again, I owe you an apology. I got all fogged up in my own head, busy venting my grievances to you, treating you as if you were my "confessor" or something. That was not appropriate.
I read your reply @Dec 10th, 17:34 again and realized a couple more things. Indeed, God, if s/he were God, would not follow Aristotle, Kant, or Quine. If s/he did, he wouldn't be "God", would s/he?! "God" is not in the market for that kind of competition. I never had a problem with that. Also "God" is not subject to proof or disproof. If s/he were, s/she would outprove the best prover, wouldn't s/he?! By definition, "God" transcends the corporeal, in the strictest sense of the word. How else could "God" be "God"?!
I didn't ask my Q to "test" you, I asked the Q b/c I wanted to find out how you think about "God". I too believe there is an Almighty. And this Almighty knows more than anybody else and works in ways we cannot begin to fathom. Nor do we need to try to fathom it. God's business is not our business. Our business is to be good to our fellow human beings. That's all. Not at all complicated. Do our best and try to get over this "either I die or you die so you had better be the one to die" mentality before we close the books on our own selves is the most fundamental human responsibility before we prognosticate who goes where afterward.
I really really, if I may I say so, like what you wrote here: "Who's right? Who represents Jesus accurately? I try to". I think that answer is so right.
Good morning to you and have a great week!
Forgot one more thing -
The best way to get rid of Hearsay by the Best Evidence Rule are acts and deeds that conform to the words mouthed, whatever the words are chosen to be mouthed. Again, not complicated. I don't understand why so many folks make it so complicated.
I have enjoyed the interchange between you and John Eh.... if you will permit me one point the Eastern Orthodox split away from what we now call Roman Catholic church around 1000 AD (see Great Schism) prior to the Protestant Reformation.
In my experience almost any group has tendency to split over interpretations over the shared beliefs that brought them together, human nature.
Evangelicals are going to do what they deem needed to ensure Armegeddon.
That motivation makes me nauseous.
But Greek or any written form cannot capture what was for almost all an oral tradition.
Texts were written by many and often as a capture of stories at that moment in time.
What became scripture was a matter of selection, given the clues the Dead Sea scrolls render.
Same can be said of Islam even if that would cause rage.
Likewise, I'm sure.
".... if you will permit me....". Of course, of course. We are all sharing thoughts, ideas and opinions here, in total good faith.... Nobody needs to win anything, and certainly nobody needs to step on anyone just so they can feel taller, more bigly. John Eh is one of my most "loved" (if I may use the word, since I can't find another one that fits better!) commenters on TE. He is a gentleman. Funny, brilliant, studied. A Christian, he doesn't come on line to say: "Hey, my name is Christian. Let me tell you something. I am going to Heaven and you are going to Hell. So convert, or else..." John brings both IQ and heart to a discussion. Note even though he is a Christian (the real kind from my vantage point, not the crook kind) and I am what some of his co-religionists (from my vantage point the crook kind) call a hell-bound Nonbeliever, a person who has horns sticking out of her forehead, and advocate, in law and in psychiatry, of all sins in the alphabet (start with "a"..... end with "z"), the worst of the worst, so "bloated with" (verbatim quote from a fortune-cookie hater - the man is awesome) horrible things I can "propel dead pigs down the river" (another verbatim quote from a most devout Christian, one said (by himself) to be on a conveyer belt to Heaven.) I tell you, those KKK type are truly awesome folks. Ain't seen nothing till you see some!
THANK YOU so much for bringing my attention to the timing of the split of the Eastern Orthodox Church from what we now call the Roman Catholic Church. I really really appreciate that fact item. I will bear in mind - around 1000 AD, prior to the Protestant Reformation. Now I have lots to catch up and know what to catch up with - "The Great Schism". The only thing I know about the split is they seemed to have very different sense of "fashion" for robes, hats and such. :)
The Orthodox Church was quite known quite a while before the protestant Reformation. The split was mostly about 'filioque'.
Thank you for the pointer. Appreciate it.
The rapture's cumming!
Unfortunately although the religious claim to be spiritual their political decisions are always based on ....... politics!
The Catholics have many groups scattered throughout the Arab world and if they clearly supported Israel then we know what will happen to them don't we?
On the other hand groups such as the Evangelicals are not in the Arab world so they can support Israel as only through a united Jewish state will the messiah reappear .
In fact appeasing the Muslims is the main concern of the Catholic hierarchy as was appeasing the Nazis in World War II was its main concern and never publicly condemned the genocide of Jews although it was well known to them even in 1940 what was happening in Poland.
This is total humiliation for all Muslims. Anyway Muslims have done their worst to the Yankees. There is nothing more they can do or say. A billion Hindus are laughing.
They done stepped in a hornets nest again.
"At the same time the “Gentiles” or non-Jewish Christians are merely new branches that have been grafted onto the tree. Ultimately, as Paul teaches, all segments of the tree will thrive and “all Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:26)."
Islam is also a branch of that tree.
I think the best description of the trump presidency is: "look mom, no brains". One of the strange phenomenon of Homo sapiens is that the least bright tend to think they are actually brighter than the smart ones. And it leads to lots of self defeating behavior. For instance, here is a group that was told repeatedly not to steal and what is their main behavior toward the Palestinians, stealing their land. The result is, God can't accept putting any zionists, Jewish or otherwise, along side those that follow the rules and effectively all zionists go to hell. But you can be sure the evangelical Christians will be dancing all the way to the gates.
Donald, Donald, Donald.... go back to "grab 'em by the pussy" before you prematurely blow your stack in the ME.
The problem with your analysis is that you (and people like you) conveniently leave off the last clause of the agreement. That being: "for as long as you keep the covenant." Jesus was sent to tell the Jews that they had failed to keep the covenant for the third and final time and would be exiled yet again. You see, God did keep his agreement but God was smart enough to make it conditional of the Jew's behavior. I mean who is dumb enough to make an agreement with someone and then allow them to break it over and over, this time, which isn't sanctioned by God, including murder, torture of children and stealing. Read Zachariah When the Jews were allowed back after the second golden cow incident they were told they could not steal and yet here they are doing just that to create their pseudo Israel.
1) The gift of the land to the descendants of Abraham is NOT conditional. Much ink is spilt in the Hebrew bible about whether God has divorced Israel, but the view seems to be that in fact He didn't - as most elegantly demonstrated by the writings of Hosea. Paul's promise in Romans that 'All Israel will be saved' indicates their status has survived their killing of Jesus intact, as does Jesus' words in Luke 'until the times of the Gentiles are completed'.
2) To the extent that the Jews are removing squatting Arabs from their land in Judea and Samaria, the designation 'stealing' is inappropriate.
ROTFL, so how do you take the other two exiles from the land? Clearly God is willing to tell the Jews to take a hike. Has done so multiple times and hasn't given them permission to return after Jesus told them they had screwed themselves. This "return" is unauthorized and they are clearly squatting and breaking God's commandments to do so. The reality is that all modern zionists go to hell. Sorry about that but there is no other interpretation unless you are willing to cherry pick the Torah. Read the first 5 chapters of Zacharia, after the second golden cow incident God let the Jews return but at the end of the dream God warned the Jews that they could not steal. So even it this return were authorized, which it isn't, they would have to peacefully buy the land and not take it by force.
Should we afford much weight to the hebrew bible or paul's promise in romans? is anyone on earth able to assess god's outlook, despite elegant writings? what about a modern-day pro-and-con assessment of the situation?
God speaks to me.
Prepare for the end of days shadow. Make your peace with my God.
Dear "Charles Jacks",
Since you seem to know what God thinks and does, maybe you can tell us, faithful readers of The Economist,
what did God say when Christians created the notorious Inquisition? Did He say "I fully endorse torturing and killing, by burning alive, those that don't follow what the Pope mandates? Please clarify this doubt that nags me every day.
As far as Israel is concerned, Jerusalem and all, we all know that as long as a single so-called "Palestinian" is left in the Holy Land there will not be peace. Sorry to be so blunt and honest but reality does not allow for much dreams in that geographical and religious area.
Together, radical christian evangelists,integrist muslims, and religious sionists work very hard to a continuation of war and tension in the middle east. All the other people have a strong interest in diminishing their nefarious influence over world affairs.
Jewish religious Zionists take serious the promise of God that the Land is theirs, and believe they have a right to it as a result. Some Christian EVANGELICALS (sic) but by no means all accept this argument.
Islam teaches, I believe, that once land has been captured by the people of Allah, it is their in perpetuity and should fight to restore their ownership. The Madrid train bombings were based on this belief; Spain was once ruled by Islam so it's for Muslims to recapture it.
Secularists have no truck with these views, basing their beliefs on other a priori belief that may or may not have a religious origin (love your neighbour as yourself - especially defining 'neighbour' as to include a most hated group - is definitely religious in origin). Therefore their beliefs are, ultimately, as well founded as the beliefs of the fundamentalists: they are all chosen because they are what you think is right. It is one of the most challenging insights of post-modernism that noone has a secure basis for their meta-narrative or ethics (unless they invoke a deity as those who believe in deities would argue). This, of course, gives classic liberals a headache, especially when combined with a bad case of white guilt!
Thanks for "evangelical". I do not understand why non religious jews citizens of israel let religious sionists dictate their policy ,and doing so, take the risk to endanger the very existence of their state.I guess that deep in their heart, evengelicals do not care,their problem is just about scriptures. They live so far away.
Judgement day is coming!
The non-religious right wing Zionists of Israel are often the descendants of the Jews ethnically cleansed from the Arab lands after the creation of Israel. As a result they have a clear understanding of how the Arabs regard the Jews, and are not inclined to risk being ethnically cleansed again.
And it's always worth remembering the worked example of what happens when you withdraw from territory; as Gaza demonstrates, the result is chaos, continuing confrontation with Israel, the destruction of the infrastructure of agriculture and Jewish religion left behind and ecological catastrophe, as the watertable is over exploited and polluted...
A negociated peace and land sharing agreement with secure borders for all is the best way to avoid the risk of ethnic cleansing on both side. To negate Palestine arabs the right to their own country is reproducing the history of the jews all over again, this time with palestine arabs.
The experiment of inviting the Arabs to live in their own areas with their own armies has been tried twice. Between 1948 and 1967 it resulted in a steady flow of terrorist incidents and a total refusal of the Arabs to accept the existence of Israel. Since 2005 Gaza has proved that the Arabs are still not willing to respect the agreements they made, but rather continue to use terror to attack Israel as often as they can get away with it. The fact is that there is no realistic negotiating partner for Israel, not least because Islamic theology denies the possibility of making a long term agreement with non-believers, whilst the theology of the Islamists has no compunction at using any technique to attack Israel.
I am not very knowledgable on all the negociations wich took place and their lack of results. I suppose a two state solution can only exist if both state recognize the complete right to exist of the other one, in sure and internationally recognized border. A precondition for such an agreement is the trust that both governemnt will be able and totally willing to control extremists on his side. It is obvious there can be no peace and "two states solution" if,for example Hamas still exist as it is today. Conversely, there can be no peace if colons in Cisjordania do not recognize the palestinian state, like arabs living in israel accept the Istaeli state.
I like your comment about the Madrid train bombing. When that happened I was the sponsor for a Saudi Arabian military officer in the US attending training. His response was "why would they bomb Spain? Spain is an Islamic country....". I wonder what the people in Spain would think about that.
Their entire world view is different that that of the West. This is something that people in Europe and the US always seem to forget.
The article fails to fully understand 'replacement theology', which argues that the promises of God to Israel under the Mosaic Covenant, including giving the Land to the descendants of Abraham (via Isaac, NOT Ishmael) have been torn up because the Jewish people rejected their Messiah when Jesus was crucified. This logic is odd: if God can decide to ignore his promises, then they have no value. This is not the God presented in the Hebrew bible.
The only coherent alternative is to argue that the Jews have and have always had the primary ownership of the Land, regardless of what anyone else thinks. This has been given to them by God. Consequently the Arabs who are living there are merely squatters - who arrived at the time of the Islamic conquest and have no lasting rights whatsoever. Specifically the Mosaic law commands that land ownership reverts to the descendants of Israel at the time of Jubilee every fifty years.
Presenting the issue as ow to manage the removal of the squatters, and whether to allow them to stay, is of course a matter of humanitarian concern. THEOLOGICALLY however, the choice is binary: we can trust God's promises, or we can have no trust in them...
You might be theologically correct, I have no way to tell. But does it make sense to govern the world theologically ?
God is on our side Lars.
"[D]oes it make sense to govern the world theologically ?"
The alternative is to govern the world according to liberal Western secularist principles. Believers and non-believers both come with their basic creed and make decisions on the basis of that credit. There is no 'neutral' place, merely the one you happen to hold given your own beliefs. The Western secular elite's arrogant tendency to assume otherwise is why they fail to understand vast swathes of world events, and so make idiots of themselves on a regular basis.
The world is always governed theologically. Just choose one that you like. That of Christ, that of Allah, of Marx, of Volter.
You mean Voltaire, I suppose. His most famous quotes is: "Superstition sets the whole world in flames; philosophy quenches them." He was a deist, not interested in theology.
"Volter"? Is that the one who invented AA batteries?
You're ignoring the blessed Bentham and Mill...
we now await for Osama Bin Laden to rise again.
And just as before 86% of all Muslims will fall in love with him.
A holly man with a porn collection... go figure?
As Erasmus has told us, 99.99% of Muslims are so peaceful and tolerant that the Buddha himself would seem like a crazed neonazi in comparison. Thus, we can be sure that Muslims will respond with peaceful protests, perhaps a sit-in, to President Trump's announcement. They certainly would never do anything violent.
If they could find their butt-cheeks with a road-map they might.
Well, sorry to inform you but you were wrong: just read today's newspapers and see what the peaceful (sic) Palestinians did following Trump's decision. Not that anyone expected a different reaction.