Adventist Leader Speaks Out Against Religious Violence in Iraq
by Monte Sahlin
By AT News Team, August 8, 2014
The top leader of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination released a statement late Friday, August 8, condemning the violence against Christians and other minority religions in areas where Muslim extremists have recently taken control. Pastor Ted Wilson, president of the denomination's General Conference, expressed "great sadness and deep concern [about] the tragic situation where tens of thousands … have been subjected to persecution, coercion, killings, intimidation and lack of religious liberty in certain areas of Iraq and Syria."
Wilson "urgently" called church members around the world to "pray for the victims of this … religious intolerance," particularly "religious minorities." He stated that "it is important that the international community act unitedly to stop the persecution of … believers … who have lived in relative peace with their Muslim neighbors in the Middle East for hundreds of years." He also pledged that the Adventist denomination "will do its best to assist victims of this new tragedy" and "pray for a positive resolution to this appalling situation."
The denomination's East Mediterranean Field includes Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan. Throughout this large area with very different political and religious conditions in the different nations, there are only ten Adventist churches with fewer than 700 members among a population of 67 million. The main office of the organization is in Metn, Lebanon. There are also offices in Baghdad, Iraq, and Amman, Jordan.
There was a recent article by President Wilson affirming the traditional Adventist stance on non-combatancy and conscientious objectors. However, I wonder if President Wilson then supports the actions of the US Government in usuing military force to bomb ISIS, to help prevent the wholesale genocide of Christians, the Yazedi and other groups in Iraq?
There are Christians in Syria and also in the norther border of Iraq in Kurdish territory. They are being driven out for their religion. Do Adventists only concern themselves with Adventists and not other Christians who are far older than Adventism?
Not sure if that is a fair criticism Elaine. Especially since the SDA Church is actually a world leader in defending other religion's right to liberty.
Rather, my concern is this notion that we'll all pray about it at the same time as the AR is publishing articles condemning Adventists who join the military (especially the US military) – which is the only arm actually doing something about it!
You make a very good point about hypocrisy, Steve. The Good Samaritan, btw, came to help the wounded after the damage was done. But perhaps we could dare to ask, what would Jesus do? (Well, we know what He did, nothing. He lay down His life.) Or at least say? Are we willing to be guided by the words of our Lord? They are not easy sayings. Should we ask the Yazedi to practise these words now?
Matt 10.28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Or this:
Matt 5:39 but I say unto you, resist not him that is evil: but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Before you ask if I would have the courage to follow these words to the letter, as I believe we should, I have already rationalised it this way: if it is true that the best way for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing (Edmund Burke?), then we should resist the evil ones. I take militant Islam and their attitude that all infidels (of Islam) should be killed to represent a form of evil, (I cannot tolerate their intolerance of other faiths) and so therefore it seems reasonable to resist them. But that, as it turns out, is directly contrary to the words of Christ. What would be the point of non-resistance, and certain death? Only God can know.
The same Christ who struck people with a whip and instructed His disciples to carry swords?
I can't imagine Jesus would just sit by and watch whilst children were butchered and their mothers raped in front of his very eyes. I doubt He'd have just said a prayer and then do nothing.
To be honest, Jesus (like Ghandi) both lived in 'benevolent' regimes. Colonising powers to be sure, but quite restrained and civilised. Romans did control Israel but it did give Jews special rights and protections. The British likewise with the Indian Raj.
In both cases, non-violent passive resistence seems to be what both leaders advocated. And it worked in both, with Christianity eventually conquoring the might of Rome from within, and the British being shamed to leave India.
But Hitler and ISIS are both regimes to which non-violent passive resistence won't work. To both, the genocide is not to be hidden, it is to be celebrated proudly. Non-violent passive resistence is not the strategy when you, your wife, your small children, your elderly parents, your cousins, your friends, your neighbours – everyone – is facing mass extermination.
Hitler was only stopped by the force of arms by soldiers who fought and indeed died to stop him. Christians who stood by and did nothing, including Adventists, were allowing evil to go unchecked. I know many will disagree, and that is not the 'traditional' Adventist view, but that is how I feel.
Let's not forget that God commanded the Children of Israel to utterly destroy the peoples living in Canaan because of their great evil.
Steve, hypocrasy starts much earlier…. produce and sell weapons to make a huge profit. When these weapons are getting used – shout in dismay: oh, you are killing the wrong people, we now need to do something against you (increasing the profit of the weapons industry once again)….
Obviously you raise extremely painful questions – and as a post war German your stance certainly resonates with me. Bonhoeffer – a Lutheran theologian in Nazi Germany who joined the active resistance against Hitler (and died for it!) once said:"Schlimmer als die böse Tat ist das böse Sein" (worse than the evil deed is being evil)… And yet, there is a NT ideal of non-violence, and Jesus himself rather died than chose the path of violence.
In very practical terms: there are good reasons, why Adventists reasoned to stay out of "politics": not in order to avoid issues of humanity and justice, but in order to proclaim a biblical ideal.
In the last few weeks we have witnessed Israel bomb parts of Gaza into smithereens. They discovered about 40 tunnels reaching deep into Israel, some originating in Gazan hospitals and others exiting under Israeli kindergarten schools. The plan of Hamas was to strike in September with hundreds of Hamas fighters to enter Israeli territory, take hundreds of children hostage back through the tunnels, run amok among the Israelis and shoot as many as they could, then blow up the tunnels in order to destroy as much Israeli property as possible. If you were the parents of any of those children about to be taken hostage would you wait for Hamas to come so that you could turn the other cheek?
Bonhoeffer's view was that the Christian, when faced with a similar position, should act positively in the face of evil men in order to stop the spread of further evil. It could only be done if one had the where-with-all to do it. In other words, Bonhoeffer was prepared to do it because he believed he and his team could pull it off. And by so doing would save many lives, both German and non-German, both soldier and civilian.
We bring war criminals to justice AFTER their crimes. Bonhoeffer thought it made more sense to stop them in their tracks before they did too much damage. His logic appeals to me.
When Jesus advocated turning the other cheek it was an entirely different set of circumstances. The Romans, as Stephen has suggested here, were not that evil at the time. There were many benefits under their rule. Yes, there was a terrorist element alive in Israel at the time. And whenever they rose up in rebellion against the Romans, especially a bit later, they attracted the full fury of the Roman army on themselves, deservedly so. In their position of comparitive weakness they would have been wiser to carry Roman cloaks an extra mile or turn the other cheek, as Jesus recommended.
Didn't someone say,"There is a time for war and a time for peace." Wise man, I think!!
An astounding apology, Milton. Did you ever stop to ask, how did it come to this? How did it come about that Israel has turned Gaza into the world's largest, harshest prison over the past ten plus years? What is one to expect when a whole population is radicalised to such an extent by generations of the most severe repressions? Yes, they have the 'where-with-all to do it,' gratis the US taxpayer, and they do not hesitate to just 'do it!' Blow Gaza to smithereens, yep, that will teach 'em.
But do you really think the deaths of hundreds and hundreds of men, women, children is an appropriate response to a very unlikely, far-fetched, desperate, plan to do as you say? Just curious….. where did your information re Hamas' plans come from? Only the best sources, to be sure?
Someone recently sent me this. Here are a few snippets. From this source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/crimes-against-humanity-israels-own-words-we-must-expel-arabs-we-struck-civilians-they-deserved-it/5394936
With an outbreak of hostilities, the IDF will need to act immediately, decisively, and with force that is
disproportionate to the enemy’s actions and the threat it poses. Such a response aims at inflicting damage and meting out punishment to an extent that will demand long and expensive reconstruction processes.
The strike must be carried out as quickly as possible, and must prioritize damaging assets over seeking out each and every launcher. Punishment must be aimed at decision makers and the power elite… attacks should both aim at Hezbollah’s military capabilities and should target economic interests and the centers of civilian power that support the organization.
This approach is applicable to the Gaza Strip as well.(10)
I’m telling them to stop it. We are stronger; there will be more blood there. We have power, enormous power; we can do things that are devastating.(11)
Our response will be disproportionate. We won’t go back to the rules that the terrorist organisations tried
to dictate.(12)
10.) Quotation of Dr. Gabriel Siboni, Colonel in the IDF reserves, in 2008 – INSS Insight No. 74, Disproportionate Force: Israels Concept of Response in Light of the Second Lebanon War, Gabriel Siboni,
October 2, 2008:
http://www.inss.org.il/publications.php?cat=21&incat=&read=2222
(Originally sourced from PCATIs report here.)
11.) Quotation of then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in 2008 – Israel Channel 10 News, The Central
Edition, December 25, 2008:http://news.nana10.co.il/Section/?SectionID=2174&pagenum=99, accessed on September 28, 2009. (Originally sourced from PCATIs report here.)
12.) Again, quotation from then PM Ehud Olmert, this time in 2009 – Israel Channel 2 news, February 1, 2009. Available at:http://www.mako.co.il/news-military/security/Article-34a141791e03f11004.htm
I don't recall President Wilson condeming the violence against gays in Africa. Where is the "great sadness and deep concern" about gays being subjected to "persecution, coercion, killings, intimidation".
It may be true that many other issues that have gone unattended, but here is _something_, one thing Ted Wilson has done, that I can cheer for. Atta boy Ted 🙂
Serge,
The report was made recently in "The Australian" and other media outlets. Simply Google for more info at "Stories from the Battlefield: Hamas Tunnels Used to Target Israel's Kindergartens." Written by an Israeli, granted, but credible. The Israelis are now going to spend millions employing tunnel detection technology to avoid having to go to war. They have already spent millions building a concrete defensive fence in order to avoid war.
I would add that Israel's actions are not always lily white. World political leaders argue that the situation is "complicated." Agreed. Always has been. Always will be. There are radically different ideologies involved. Factors that need to be considered are: Hamas has been declared a terrorist organization. Hamas has declared Israel has no right to exist. Hamas is dedicated to inflicting a 9/11 attack on Israel. Hamas has high-jacked the Gazan population for their own ends, unlike the predominately Christian West Bank under Abbas. The creation of Gaza as the "world's largest, harshest prison" is a containment policy to mitigate bloodshed and genocide. There are laws with the same intent here in Australia. Any terrorists found here, or those who incite to terrorism, are locked up to contain the danger to the vast majority of the population. I would not, under any circumstances, go in to bat for Hamas or any other terrorist organization.
It is my opinion that evil unchecked will eventually cross a red line and, like an ulcer, needs to be excised. In effect the UN agrees. So does NATO and many other bodies including the International Court. I also think that's what Solomon had in mind.
The pacifist approach is to hold the coats of those who stone 'infidels.' To my mind that's being a party to the evil but I respect a person's right to hold that view.
So, Milton, its 'an eye for an eye, a kindergarten for a kindergarten,' now is it? Or better, a pre-emptive kindergarten for a possible kindergarten? Israel's current actions in Gaza are as abominable as 9/11 by any measure. Dig a little deeper, and one might find that holding the coats of Israel while it massacres Palestinians is an equal, or possible greater evil.
Milton, you may not have heard of a movement known as Jews against Zionism. I was shocked ot hear such a thing exists. I thought Judaism and Israel to be identical concepts. Turns out, whole swathes of Judaism utterly reject Zionism and its creation Israel. They deplore Israel's actions far more deeply than you or I could ever imagine. One example of such a voice is Gilad Atzmon. His web page is http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/
(Doubtless, Atzmon is a designated 'self-hating Jew.' Labelling is important in this big propaganda game. Beware the labels.)
Here are some snippets:
According to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, theLondon Times refused to run an ad featuring Elie Wiesel speaking out against Hamas’ use of children as human shields.
The ad’s headline reads: “Jews rejected child sacrifice 3,500 years ago. Now it’s Hamas’ turn.” Wiesel’s statement is a blatant lie and the London Times knew it.
The growing number of genocides and massacres committed by Jews in the last hundred years suggest that at least some Jews are pretty careless with other people’s children. Wiesel should examine the Holodomor and the role of ‘Stalin’s willing executioners’ as Jewish American historian Yuri Slezkine elucidates in his invaluable book The Jewish Century.
ON ISRAELI GENOCIDAL INCLINATIONS AND THE JEWISH PROBLEM
* Do you have any comments on the bloodshed in the Gaza Strip?
Gilad Atzmon: It is agonizing to watch the brutality of the Israelis, but it was predictable. Israeli genocidal inclinations are entirely consistent with Jewish supremacist culture and Old Testament barbarism. The fact that 91% of the Israeli population supports the IDF massacre confirms that we are confronting a murderous collective that is a grave threat to world peace.
* What is Israel trying to achieve in the region? Is it possible it is acting to insure its control of energy resources that may exist off the Gaza Strip?
Gilad Atzmon: It is possible that the massacre in Gaza has been lightly influenced by geopolitical considerations. However, the Israeli lust for violence and its broad support from Jewish institutions around the world suggests that the motivation to kill and destroy other people is embedded in Zionist culture. Its homicidal impulses may relate to the manner in which modern Jews interpret their sense of ‘choseness.’
ON IDF'S FAILURE AND JEWISH ETHICS
Alimuddin Usmani: Israeli intelligence apparently underestimated the extent of the tunnels built by Hamas. Emerging from the tunnels, Palestinian fighters made some daring attacks that killed a number of Israeli soldiers inside Israel. Does this represent a major failure of the Israeli army?
Gilad Atzmon: The failure of the Israeli military is far greater than just the tunnels. The tunnels are not, in themselves, resistance but are, instead, a means of resistance. The tunnels did not lead Israel into this war they were a secondary military objective. The Israeli cabinet and the IDF made the tunnels an issue as soon as they realized that they were not able to articulate any other attainable objectives. In a desperate move, they made a secondary objective into a primary one so that they could depict an image of victory.
….This means that Israel’s days are numbered. Living on someone else’s land demands a willingness to sacrifice. But the Israelis are not willing to pay the ultimate price anymore. Israel is a spoiled western hedonist society. Yet Israelis are engaged in a fierce battle with Gazans – people who have been living for decades in an open air prison, are fighting for their dignity and have nothing to lose.
….
Why is it so important for the Hasbara to use terminology such as "The IDF is the most moral army in the world?”
Gilad Atzmon: Very simple, because it isn’t. Judaism and Jewish culture are neither ethical nor universal. They are legalistic and tribal. The great Israeli philosopher Yeshayahu Leibowitz made this point in the 1970s. He argued that Judaic legalism serves as a replacement for ethical thinking. Instead of an authentic ethical judgment, the Jew is asked to follow orders. Judaism provides protocols for correct behaviour. Accordingly, the Ten Commandments are an affirmation of the paucity of Jewish ethical thinking; ethical people don’t need ‘commandments’ to know that murder or theft are wrong.
THE DESTRUCTION OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE IN GAZA
b) there is no appropriate moral framework to support our soldiers.
Meant to add this link also, to an Orthodox response to Israel's plan to end the exemption for Yeshiva students from the military. It gives background to why there are so many orthodox Jews so utterly opposed to Zionism.
A JEW I TRUST AND RESPECT
If link doesn't work, it is on the 'writings' page.
Its not only a single British Jew in isolation who is appalled by and opposed to Israel's actions. This Media Release to Australian press just came to me.
MEDIA RELEASE
AN APPEAL FROM AUSTRALIAN JEWS
TO THE AUSTRALIAN JEWISH COMMUNITY
164 Australians of Jewish identity and background have signed an Open Letter (attached) calling on their fellow Jews to break their silence on the onslaught on Gaza by Israel. Among the signatories are actress Miriam Margolyes, union leader Kim Sattler and writers Sara Dowse, Antony Loewenstein and Susan Varga.
Vivienne Porzsolt of Jews against the Occupation, which organised the Open Letter, said ‘Silence is consent and as Jews, we must oppose atrocities taken in our name. Our public stand demonstrates that many Jews reject the brutal occupation of the Palestinians by Israel.
The outrage that all people of humanity feel at the conduct of the State of Israel against the Palestinians can too easily be directed to Jews in general. As we have seen with the ugly cartoon by Le Lievre and the antisemitic attack on the Jewish children on a Bondi bus, old antisemitic tropes re-emerge, fuelled by the atrocities committed by Israel.
No racism, including antisemitism, is ever excusable. However, the Jewish community leadership promotes the identification of Jews with Israel and all its actions. They label Jewish critics of Israel as ‘self-hating’ and ‘not real Jews’. They debase the charge of antisemitism by applying it to all criticism of Israel. It is not surprising then that some may hold Jews in general responsible for Israel's actions.'
The Open Letter (attached) calls for ‘an end to the under-lying conditions of siege and occupation which defy elementary morality, decency and humanity, as well as international and humanitarian law’.
Contact: Vivienne Porzsolt 0411 366 295
AN APPEAL FROM AUSTRALIAN JEWS TO THE AUSTRALIAN JEWISH COMMUNITY
As Australians of Jewish identity and background, we are appalled at the current mass killing in Gaza by Israel. We reject the official mythology that Israel is under existential threat and acting in self-defence.
Since 12 July, the Israeli army has killed more than 1900 people in Gaza. Hospitals, schools, beaches, playgrounds – even UN shelters have been attacked. The whole world has reacted with horror and outrage.
In the face of the destruction of so many lives, we cannot remain silent while the official Jewish leadership gives such active support to Israel's attack on Gaza. Their decision to stand with the oppressor rather than the oppressed is a betrayal of our history and values, when authentic moral leadership is more important than ever. Siege, occupation, the slaughter of innocents and collective punishment of an entire people are deeply wrong and unlawful. Yet the Jewish leadership uncritically promulgates the propaganda of the Israeli government that this is self-defence. They are failing to represent and serve the Jewish community.
Silence is consent and evil triumphs when good people do nothing. We call on our fellow Jews to break their silence, to take a public stand, not just for an immediate cease-fire, but for an end to the underlying conditions of siege and occupation which defy elementary morality, decency and humanity, as well as international and humanitarian law.
This Gilad Atzmon chap has ammassed a lot of material which demythologises the common Israeli line. In the section of videos under
A Jew I trust and respect' there is to be found one entitled 'An Honest Israeli Jew tells the Reat Truth about Israel.' Everyone should watch it. He is Miko Peled, the son of an Israeli general who turned into an activist for peace. his son continues the work. His talk will force all who hear it to rethink the whole Palestinian question. Some will not like a lot of what he says. Such as, the Israeli army is a terrorist organisation. Wow. Just found the Youtube link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etXAm-OylQQ
His book is entitled
The General's Son: Journey of an Israeli in Palestine
This is the Big Picture. It is not directed to the current Israeli offensive in Gaza. But he does talk about how the last attack on Gaza, commencing with the dropping of 100tons of bombs dropped 'carpet' style on Gaza, was timed to coincide with the hour that teh streets would be full of Palestinian children. Neverhteless, his main thrust looks at teh whole history of modern Israel and the non-stop conflict since 1927.
This is an article that managed ot make it into teh Australian press. http://www.smh.com.au/comment/neither-antisemitic-nor-antipalestinian-just-a-mother-pleading-for-peace-20140816-103ctx.html
Andreas,
There was some discussion earlier about World War II and Nazi Germany and you mentioned “In very practical terms: there are good reasons, why Adventists reasoned to stay out of "politics": not in order to avoid issues of humanity and justice, but in order to proclaim a biblical ideal.”
I am not sure if you are aware of how the Seventh Day Adventists in Nazi Germany caved to the pressure of self-preservation rather than proclaiming the biblical ideal. This is a link to a short article regarding Adventist complicity in Nazi Germany and cites a number of Adventist sources:
http://www.history.ucsb.edu/projects/holocaust/Research/Proseminar/corrieschroder.htm
Any meanwhile, consider how Dietrich Bonhoeffer upheld the biblical ideal, by forming the 'Confessing Church.'
And then consider how Bonhoeffer, an otherwise pacifist with immense regard for Ghandi, came to be the spiritual leader of the German Resistance, becoming involved in the plot to assassinate Hitler. Bonheoffer didn't stay out of 'politics' in order to proclaim a 'biblical ideal' (what does that even mean?), but instead upheld that biblical ideal.
If you want an example of a Christ-like figure, battling these difficult issues of pacifism vs just use of force, of secularism vs political involvement, of turning the other cheek vs using the whip and the sword – then Bonhoffer is a very good example.
The voice of outrage at the acitons of Israel in Gaza is undiminshed.
How Israel Undermines International Law Through "Lawfare"
Globalizing Gaza
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/08/18/globalizing-gaza/print
by JEFF HALPER
A taste of his article:
Operation Protective Edge was not merely a military assault on a primarily civilian population. As in its previous “operations” (Cast Lead in 2008-9 and Pillar of Defense in 2012), it was also part of an ongoing assault on international humanitarian law (IHL) by a highly coordinated team of Israeli lawyers, military officers, PR people and politicians, led by (no less) a philosopher of ethics. It is an effort not only to get Israel off the hook for massive violations of human rights and international law, but to help other governments overcome similar constraints when they embark as well on “asymmetrical warfare,” “counterinsurgency” and “counter-terrorism” against peoples resisting domination. It is a campaign that Israel calls “lawfare” and had better be taken seriously by us all.
………..
The Dahiya Doctrine violates two cardinal principles of IHL: The Principle of Distinction and the Principle of Disproportionality. The Principle of Distinction, embodied in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their two Additional Protocols of 1977, lays down a hard-and-fast rule: civilians cannot be targeted by armies. On the contrary, they must be protected; violence to life and person is strictly prohibited, as are “outrages upon personal dignity.” The Principle of Proportionality, also embodied in the 1977 Protocols to the Fourth Geneva Conventions considers it a war crime to intentionally attack a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage. “The presence within the civilian population of individuals who do not come within the definition of civilians,” says Protocol I, Article 50 (3), “does not deprive the population of its civilian character.”
I think Gaza is a situation where they would be better of pursuing the Jesus-Ghandi method of non-violence. Otherwise, Hamas' own attacks simply water-down the moral case of the Palestinians, who rightly have a grievance on account of living in the world's biggest and longest-running refugee camp for the last 60 years.
The situation of the Yazedi against ISIS is really quite different. That is a situation where every able bodied man needs to fight for their literal survival. There is no moral non-violent means of opposition that will work against ISIS – they are pure evil.
The problem with Israel is that it essentially arose out of the latter situation, with the collective memory of the Shoah and fights to the death like the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. The lack of strategic space also makes Israelis extremely paranoid, rightly so, because they can't trade space for time if attacked.
Thus, we now have a perverse situation where the Palestinians are effectively living under apartheid, in the some sort of occupation the Jews of Jesus' own day experienced, all because the occupying power itself was so nearly exterminated itself. So violence has now begotten violence, and no one knows how to make the cycle stop.
The only solution in my view is a one-state solution, which is now openly supported by the new Israeli President. Jews fear this because they will be outvoted. I wonder then if Israel could learn from the US, with its federated system.
One can't there be 1 country with two legislative houses. One house has Jews, the other the Palestinians (including non-Jewish Israeli citizens). That would preserve Israel as a 'Jewish State' as well as give Palestinians full rights as citizens.
Something along those lines is the only thing that will end this conflict.