Thursday, August 30, 2012

Liberal Jews Owe Evangelicals an Apology

Mike L.

Israel has no better friend on the entire planet than the Christian Evangelical community in the United States and, yet, "progressive Zionists," i.e., liberal, pro-Israel Jews, treat those people like dirt.

It's a disgrace.

The tendency on the progressive-left, very much including the Jewish left, is to assume the very worst about these people. In a recent piece in the Jerusalem Post the daughter of an Evangelical pastor tries to clear a few things up:

Skeptics of the Jewish- Christian alliance question this seemingly tenuous relationship.

They assume the worst motives from both parties to explain away the alliance. Christian Zionists support Israel to speed Armageddon and the return of Christ. Jews use Christian Zionists to further their pro- Israel aims.

For so many years I listened to progressives and Democrats tell me that Evangelicals actually despise us and that the only reason they favor Israel is because they are looking forward to the Second Coming, when Jesus will teach both Hitler and the Catholic Church how dealing with the Jews should properly be done.

Here are the real motives of Christian Zionism: Repentance, thankfulness and obedience.

Repentance for Christianity’s long history of persecuting Jews.

Thankfulness to the Jewish people for Christianity’s spiritual inheritance.

Obedience to the biblical commands to bless Israel.

These three tenets best expose what I call the “Jewish heart” of Christian Zionists.

I intend to expand on this later, and perhaps elsewhere, but this just pisses me off.

One of my themes has been that progressive-left Jews do not know who their friends are and this is a case in point.

We do not have to agree with Christian Zionists about gay marriage, but we can disagree with them as friends, not enemies.

36 comments:

  1. Get as pissed off as you like... How about when you ask Evangelical Christians the simple question of whether they think "The Jews Killed Christ?". Just ask 'em. See what kind of answers you get.

    We don't owe them shit after 2,000 years of their attempted destruction of the Jewish people culminating in the Holocaust.

    You want a pat on the head from those that participated (in a historical sense) in the destruction of millions of Jews? By all means be a good boy. Because that is what you are.

    Oh and before you start spitting out about the "War on Jews by Islam"... THAT is not what we are discussing here. Not on that, but I am not asking for their approval about anything we do, nor do I say that they are our good buddies, because they are not.

    One PR piece from some Ministers daughter means shit in comparison for all the years and craziness wrought on our people in the name of Christ. So, it's nice that this girl/woman can intellectualize her support - but I am in contact with evangelicals every damn day and believe me - the stuff she is peddling in the letter sure as shit is NOT mainstream evangelical motivations.

    They like Israel over the Arabs for two reasons:

    1. They see this as "end-times" and we are just part of rapture politics

    and

    2. They hate the Muslims a lot more than they hate us. (EDL and those folks).

    Period.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh and as for this:

      Israel has no better friend on the entire planet than the Christian Evangelical community in the United States and, yet, "progressive Zionists," i.e., liberal, pro-Israel Jews, treat those people like dirt.

      Bullshit.

      American Jews, and Americans in general of all political stripes (liberal, moderate, and conservative) with the exception of crazy JVP'ers, non-Zionist Hasidim, the occasional other extremist nuts are ALL better friends to Israel than Christian Evangelicals.

      You think those pushing for Eretz Yisrael Ha'Shlema are our good buddies? Do they have to man the check points? Do they have to figure out how Israel incorporates millions of Palestinians into the structure of a vibrant Democracy? Do they go out on Patrol in the territories and have to deal with a hostile populace? Do they care about what all that means? Of course not. They don't give a shit about the end result of the the policies for which they advocate.

      So how are they our good buddies? Because they love the Netanyahu neo con agenda? Because they they think the YESHA is just the "cat's meow"? HOW????

      Delete
    2. Would you be so kind as to reveal specifics about your daily contact with evangelicals that shows the mainstream motivations?

      Is there anyone you differ with that you do not have harsh words about?

      Delete
    3. Sure... specifics.... I work with a bunch of them. I see a few at Martial Arts. I am "friends" with some on facebook. I grew up with many. Just because they all say the same things.... I guess that doesn't mean so much, eh?

      As far as your second point, how is that relevant in any way shape or form? Discuss the topic. This is not about what I like or don't like. This is about Jews owing Evangelical Christians apologies for anything. This is not about me and whether I am civil enough for you or not.

      Do you think Liberal Jews owe Evangelical Christians an apology? Yes or no. If yes, why? If no, why?

      Delete
    4. But is IS about you being civil enough. People are entitled to be treated with respect and dignity. From what I observe your comments are disrespectful and demeaning. It's unfortunate that you have yet to figure it out.

      I also don't like your style of trying to dominate the conversation. You are not the district attorney. You can ask what I think rather than command an answer.

      I don't think you are interested beyond boilerplate, which is evident from the substance. As you concede, all of us interact with evangelicals on a regular basis. The specifics provided are mere anecdotes and do not fairly support a claim to be "in contact with evangelicals every damn day" such that you can speak for the mainstream.

      Liberal Jews who are bigoted against evangelicals by assuming or proclaiming all evangelicals don't care about Israel or want to destroy it should apologize.

      It's not that difficult an issue. Evangelicals have not acted to harm Israel, which has only existed since 1948. The history of Christian oppression and persecution of Jews is a different story than addressed here, and a diversion. Some say, however, that the Christians learned to hate Jews violently only after parts of Europe were conquered by the Arab Muslims who spread their hatred of Jews and brutal practices.

      I disagree, but respect the evangelical belief that Israel will be destroyed. It does not seem to affect how they behave positively toward Jews or Israel. The argument used against them, to me, is identity politics in the negative sense, and influenced by partisans pursuing a domestic agenda. Better they consider the liberal Christians that hate Israel with a passion and actively work for its downfall.

      Also interestingly is how you and others like to repudiate as haters those who examine Muslim conduct, but are quick to demonize these Christians.

      Delete
    5. A number of things about this.... (Part 1)

      I also don't like your style of trying to dominate the conversation. You are not the district attorney.

      First of all, whether or not you "like" my style is irrelevant. Honestly, it is.

      I originally engaged Mike's post. For some reason, you responded with a screed about my personal posting habits which was NOT the subject of my comment. I rightfully asked for you to simply address the comment. Not too much to ask now, is it?

      You can ask what I think rather than command an answer.

      Ummm... I did ask. Here is my comment:

      Do you think Liberal Jews owe Evangelical Christians an apology? Yes or no. If yes, why? If no, why?

      It's a pretty straight forward question.

      Now your silly insults aside:

      As you concede, all of us interact with evangelicals on a regular basis. The specifics provided are mere anecdotes and do not fairly support a claim to be "in contact with evangelicals every damn day" such that you can speak for the mainstream.

      No, on a few levels. First off, saying that I work with evangelicals is not "concession" of any kind. It is a statement. Many of us do interact with evangelicals on a day to day basis. I would think that would be fairly obvious given the nature of the United States.

      Sure my experiences are anecdotal but they more than fairly assert my claim that I am in contact with evangelicals every day. Further, many of the evangelicals I am in contact with DO support Israel but, when I dig down deep asking questions, their answers more than support my principle assertions that either - 1. Their feelings are either part of "Rapture Politics" or 2. They simply dislike Muslims more than they dislike Jews.

      Delete
    6. (Part 2).....

      You say.:

      Liberal Jews who are bigoted against evangelicals by assuming or proclaiming all evangelicals don't care about Israel or want to destroy it should apologize.

      I disagree. Given the history of evangelicals and Christians in general wrt the Jewish community... I don't think we owe them a darn thing.

      Evangelicals have not acted to harm Israel, which has only existed since 1948. The history of Christian oppression and persecution of Jews is a different story than addressed here, and a diversion.

      Nonsense. Plain and simple but this response requires two parts. The first is that NO.. the history of Christian Oppression of the Jews DOES play a critical part in the two religion's interactions and in particular plays a huge part in relation to the State of Israel, which is the National Homeland and State of the Jewish people. Christian history is hardly a diversion when it comes to Israel.

      Second... As I said in my first comment

      You think those pushing for Eretz Yisrael Ha'Shlema are our good buddies? Do they have to man the check points? Do they have to figure out how Israel incorporates millions of Palestinians into the structure of a vibrant Democracy? Do they go out on Patrol in the territories and have to deal with a hostile populace? Do they care about what all that means? Of course not. They don't give a shit about the end result of the the policies for which they advocate.

      Apparently you missed that.

      Some say, however, that the Christians learned to hate Jews violently only after parts of Europe were conquered by the Arab Muslims who spread their hatred of Jews and brutal practices.

      I disagree, but respect the evangelical belief that Israel will be destroyed.


      Some say that the Moon is made of Swiss Cheese and that the Earth is flat. I see no reason to repeat nonsense like that just to say I disagree. That theory regarding the Christians in Europe is absolute nonsense. You know that.

      As for respecting their end times belief... Hey be my guest. I acknowledge their belief but I sure as heck don't respect it. Screw that.

      The argument used against them, to me, is identity politics in the negative sense, and influenced by partisans pursuing a domestic agenda. Better they consider the liberal Christians that hate Israel with a passion and actively work for its downfall.

      No... the argument used against them is that eventually they want to see a result that would be the destruction of the Jewish People. I get that you "respect" that but, don't expect most of us to feel the same way. Our dislike for them not only has to do with the actual policies that they pursue (which are antithetical to Jewish principles) but also with their beliefs.

      And no.. we are "better" off dealing with EVERYONE who want to harm Jewish people NOT just liberal Christians who are anti-Zionist. Indeed one of us is trying to use this as method to pursue their partisan agenda but it certainly isn't me.

      Also interestingly is how you and others like to repudiate as haters those who examine Muslim conduct, but are quick to demonize these Christians.

      No, we repudiate people as "haters" when they focus ONLY on one group of people and continually present that information to the exclusion of holding anyone else responsible. Further, we repudiate as "haters" those that use other "haters" as legitimate sources and give credence to their vile beliefs (Geller, Spencer, Glickman and Co.).


      Delete
    7. Of course it is not relevant, TO YOU. Of course you do not agree. As I said: It's unfortunate that you have yet to figure it out. This being the case, it's better to say one's piece and leave it at that, rather than engage in an exchange that serves no purpose.

      I got way better things to do than argue with you, largely for the reasons I stated at the beginning of my comment. Your disrespectful way of discussing issues, based on ridicule and demonization, does not rate a reply. You can believe what you like and so will I, but if you think you have not shown the same type of bigotry you condemn in others, I think you are sorely mistaken.

      Delete
    8. So in other words you have no substantive comment and merely want to make this personal. Since that seems to be the case, why did you engage in the first place particularly when you state:

      Your disrespectful way of discussing issues, based on ridicule and demonization, does not rate a reply.

      Perhaps you should have taken your own advice.

      Delete
    9. Not at all. I choose the manner and substance of my engagement.

      I said what I think. You said what you think. There is no duty to respond, even if that does not satisfy you.

      I have NEVER ridiculed you. That is not my way of communicating, but yours. You will not find me demonizing others either, which seems to me part of your standard fare of action. As such, there is no reason to take my own advice.

      Delete
    10. LOL... pull the other one... It has bells on it.

      Delete
    11. Your response shows exactly what was described.

      Delete
    12. Exactly, School!

      Right on schedule, the volleyboy1 train wreck pulls into the station. Good on you for knowing better than to engage with him in it.

      Yes volley, it IS about how you act. Here and everywhere else. You should be grateful 'school took you seriously for even a couple of replies. You really don't even deserve that.

      Delete
    13. school.. so basically yet again, you have absolutely nothing regarding the substance of my comment.

      Good to know.

      Delete
    14. Do you even know how, or when, to stop acting like a bully, volleyboy1?

      This is precisely why you deserve no recognition.

      Delete
    15. Yep, I got absolutely nothing to add when it comes to this matter. Why is it so difficult to accept?

      All I needed to confirm the attitude I mentioned was the "Good to know" retort. These kinds of gratuitous asides litter your comments to others. It's a poor way to persuade them that you are really interested in discourse.

      Delete
    16. Minor point of disagreement - those gratuitous asides don't 'litter' his comments to others. Rather, they make up the bulk of them.

      He doesn't seem to be interested in discourse with others, because he simply isn't. He's only interested in "gotcha" games, so he can go and chortle to his friends about how he "destroyed" his 'enemy' on any given day.

      A variation of the "don't argue with fools" principle applies here. Refusing to engage with a character assassin whose principle tactics are to insult and to dodge is really the only way to go.

      Delete
    17. @ school - since you admit:

      Yep, I got absolutely nothing to add when it comes to this matter. Why is it so difficult to accept?

      So you just engaged my comment to insult the manner in which I commented to Mike's post? Don't you have better things to do with your time?

      @ Jay - Do you see anyone here even talking to you? Who the fuck cares what you think (I mean outside of the lunatic fringe) about this? Seriously, why would you possibly think I or any other sane person on this planet could care less about your opinion on this conversation? Is it because the "ladies just love Jay", or is it because you are so "superior" to me on every level (your words... not mine)?

      Have fun ranting at me for the next few hours. This should be entertaining.

      Delete
    18. You clearly care, since you addressed me. And while so doing, once again proved the point school and I are both making.

      If you didn't catch my tongue-in-cheek riff on LL Cool J, look it up. Once again, I can joke about myself because I am confident in who I am. You, on the other hand, just are a joke. Period.

      And back to who cares what I think? Well, you. When you invited me to frontpage on your site, when you invited me to join all of your Daily Kos 'groups,' when you rec'ed numerous of my comments and diaries there, when we went out to dinner back in Portland, etc etc...

      All until very recently, when you forced me into making a choice between you and Mike, and I chose Mike. Mainly, because he never would have forced such a choice onto me. I don't like, or kowtow to, bullies.

      This spurned ex-lover act of yours is really embarrassing, volley.

      Delete
    19. No. I addressed your behavior and THEN stated my view, as follows:

      I don't think you are interested beyond boilerplate, which is evident from the substance. As you concede, all of us interact with evangelicals on a regular basis. The specifics provided are mere anecdotes and do not fairly support a claim to be "in contact with evangelicals every damn day" such that you can speak for the mainstream.

      Liberal Jews who are bigoted against evangelicals by assuming or proclaiming all evangelicals don't care about Israel or want to destroy it should apologize.

      It's not that difficult an issue. Evangelicals have not acted to harm Israel, which has only existed since 1948. The history of Christian oppression and persecution of Jews is a different story than addressed here, and a diversion. Some say, however, that the Christians learned to hate Jews violently only after parts of Europe were conquered by the Arab Muslims who spread their hatred of Jews and brutal practices.

      I disagree, but respect the evangelical belief that Israel will be destroyed. It does not seem to affect how they behave positively toward Jews or Israel. The argument used against them, to me, is identity politics in the negative sense, and influenced by partisans pursuing a domestic agenda. Better they consider the liberal Christians that hate Israel with a passion and actively work for its downfall.


      That is my view and you obviously do not accept it. However, your assertion:

      So you just engaged my comment to insult the manner in which I commented to Mike's post?

      is wrong and the type of exxageration and misrepresentation that makes it so fruitless.

      Delete
    20. I would also take note of the fact that despite his nonstop odious behavior, volleyboy1 is still not 'banned' here, and is indeed allowed to spew his vile as much as he pleases. Even if Mike and others quite rightly ignore him.

      Whereas on his site, when even two of his friends disagree on something, even in the very slightest manner, the entire post mysteriously goes... poof! Or we might even say it gets... cut.

      Yet he'll continue to insist that 'tolerance' is a value of his, even while he descends into 'they all say this, they all say that' territory. As above.

      Delete
    21. @ Jay... can you please pass the butter?

      BTW, Jay are you arguing this with a chair next to you?

      Just wondering.

      Delete
    22. And just to be crystal clear.

      "'they all say this, they all say that' territory. As above."

      Otherwise known as... bigotry.

      Delete
    23. My butter comes from manicured cows in Millville, NJ whose names I know and whose high school report cards I possess, and who holiday in Cape May, etc etc... and costs $5 a chunk at the Sunday Headhouse Farmers' Market. No way I'm passing it to you!

      See, now there is a prime example of me poking fun at myself. The ultimate point is that it's true. Well, except for me knowing cow's names and all. But if you watch Portlandia, you'd understand. ;)

      Anyway, back on point. Thanks for once again proving the point I've been making about you all along. As oldschool said, that you don't realize how juvenile and foolish you look at all times is your problem. Don't blame me for poking you.

      Btw, I thought you didn't "fucking care" what I thought, and that nobody was talking to me?

      Oops.

      If any of your friends are encouraging this behavior (because you've surely emailed it out by now), shame on them. Seriously, one of them needs to eventually step up and tell you to seek the help you need.

      Delete
    24. @ school... Heh.. I did read and engage your comment close to line for line. Perhaps you missed the comments that started with A number of things about this, Part One and then Part 2 since I quoted you extensively it is hard to see how you missed that.

      Rather than continue and back your comment up to the obvious objections I laid out, YOU choose to offer your pithy commentary on my posting style rather than addressing Parts 1 & 2 of the comment directed towards you and your comments.

      Since you chose to duck those points and instead continue along the path of your first post (moaning about my posting style), what else can one believe?

      Delete
    25. Good point, Jay. That site practices censorship in a capricious, arbitrary fashion. There is scant tolerance there, but large doses of smug ridicule toward others can be found among some members.

      It has been evidenced here, over and over, with snide remarks like:

      can you please pass the butter?

      BTW, [...] are you arguing this with a chair next to you?

      Just wondering.


      The sad part is that many of these folks cannot even see.

      Delete
    26. Once again, for the record, here is the entire substance of volley's last two replies to me -

      "@ Jay... can you please pass the butter?

      BTW, Jay are you arguing this with a chair next to you?

      Just wondering."

      And -

      "@ Jay.. heh...."

      Yeah, I think I'm gonna stick with my comment above, which notes that volley's only tactic is attack and dodge.

      The same guy who only a few minutes ago was cursing up a storm against me, insisting he wasn't talking to me and didn't care what I think.

      Thank you for proving my case once again, volleyboy. I don't even have to ask you to keep it up, because we both know you simply can't help yourself.

      Delete
    27. Smug ridicule can be found there amongst all except for two, actually.

      I hope they'll excuse me for saying so, but Fizziks and Wiscmass are the only two there who have anything of value to say.

      Perhaps volley should take note of the fact that even the one person who wasn't a part of his clique, The Makabit, hasn't even stopped by his site in months.

      And since he went and accused me of 'talking to chairs' (hello, psychological projection, once again!), I'll also note here that the Ian guy he often talks to at his site, has never showed up there to acknowledge him, either.

      The reason his site is not considered a part of the larger pro-Israel blogging community, and has no contacts with same, is because of him, and him alone.

      But in response to this, I'm sure he'll "destroy" me, by calling me a juvenile name, and by going back to his buddies for private reinforcement.

      It's truly sad.

      Delete
    28. You've been gone and away for years, volley. It's just a shame that none of your friends has the nerve to tell you so.

      Delete
    29. You said above:

      So you just engaged my comment to insult the manner in which I commented to Mike's post?

      But I engaged your comment on substance, which you failed to acknowledge. You created a false impression.

      There is no more on the substance I or you can say that would not be a virtual repeat of the original points made. Which is why it is useless to do the dance, as I explained at the start.

      I am under no obligation to "engage" further, just because you demand. I explained my reason for not doing so, whether or not you approve.

      Contrary to your new misrepresentation, I am not "ducking your points." Another false impression. It reflects nothing more than my choice. That is what most anyone reading the thread would believe.

      You seem to believe that because you say something it requires a reply according to your dictates, limited to the scope that you command. You are mistaken.

      Delete
    30. And once again, oldschool neatly sums it all up.

      Volley will flail away in response, of course, but nothing will change the situation as is,

      Have you ever noticed that your buddies don't jump in on your behalf here, volley? And have you ever wondered why that is?

      It's because they're content in leaving you to play the fool.

      Which role you, of course, can't help but fulfill, by your very nature...

      Delete
  2. OK First -- I agree entirely with you Mike about Evangelical Christians .

    We have a real serious problem with Christians who have found a religious reason to see Israel pass into the the dust of history and are in alliance with Jihadists on this.

    Do you doubt this?

    I have saved you a cross post of this on my blog because something I have said about an Anglican priest is probably actionable under Australian law and therefore I need to spare you any possible complications.

    Who cares about what they believe? I don't care about your religious beliefs let alone theirs. That's the point isn't it?

    Their are many Christians who find in their religion and traditions reason to admire or at least stand by Israel and the Jews. They are welcome in my home any time. There are even more Buddhists, agnostics and atheists in my experience. More it seems than even Jews.

    Next volleyboy1.

    Ahh the hell with it ...

    Either you get it or you don't. There are a thousand ways why people end up doing the right thing and standing by the human rights of the Israelis and the Jews and every body else in the world is most assuredly the right thing. Isn't it?

    Isn't that what "liberalism", however you define it on either side of the ocean, is all about?

    They are our friends, aren't they?

    In a world full of enemies you treat friends with courtesy. At the very least you do not question their motives. Could it be that they just believe the Jews should be left alone? If not for the Jews sake at least for their own?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Geoffff,

      It seems to me that non-American anglo-Jewry is more in touch with the problem of the "liberal" churches than are American Jews.

      I believe we have the same problem here, but it doesn't seem quite so pronounced. In any case, no, I do not doubt you for a moment.

      As for your potentially actionable statements under Australian law... ARE YOU CAUSING TROUBLE AGAIN, MISTER?!

      :o)

      I mean, there you are, on the other side of the planet, causing people misery. It seems to me that you are unjustly annoying perfectly innocent, perfectly fine, good-hearted people who want nothing more than a world in peace... without Israel.

      And there you are giving them a hard time.

      Shame!

      Shame on you!

      Just because those fine folk are working toward what would ultimately be the genocide of the Jews of the Middle East, it does not give you reason to say mean things about them.

      Everyone is entitled to their opinion and if their opinion happens to be that as a matter of social justice and civil rights the Jews must stop defending themselves against Arab aggression, then they are entitled to that opinion and just who the heck are you to claim that they are wrong???

      LOL.

      Sorry, I'm feeling a tad daffy this morning.

      It's a chronic problem!

      Delete
  3. Geoff
    What you have said about an Anglican priest is not at this point in time actionable under Australian law. It is however being 'worked on'

    ReplyDelete