“How does all this work? Through Christ alone. "Let us kneel down together and pray, rather than attack each other on blogs. This is not a godly approach," said Yohanna Katanacho, academic dean of Bethlehem Bible college. If Jesus is Lord, he added, then Palestinian Christians will love Jews in words, fellowship and action, even as they fight Islamic extremism through mercy, charity and unity.
"What we have on the ground is walls. What we need is a vision of bridges," Isaac said, adding to Katanacho's earlier words: "We are the bridge between all people trying to put up walls of injustice’.
Dean Katanacho’s words sure sound good and correct, don’t they? My question would be, if the Checkpoint sponsors think that blog ‘attacks’ are not a holy activity, why have they spoken publicly and consistently in rejectionist terms toward Israel over the past 20 years? And, I personally as a Jew, Israeli and believer in Messiah found the blogging of their last conference (2012) to be rather provocative. I have personally been at conferences where CaTC sponsors have advocated for the dismantling of Israel. Is this acceptable, while opposing their advocacy on a blogsite is not? To intimate that it is wrong to oppose the Checkpoint’s methods of ‘reconciliation’ (not the persons, but the overall philosophy and its inherent anti-Semitism) on a blogsite, yet be ‘just fine’ with their continual international complaining about Israel (i.e. the Jewish state) is the utmost in hypocrisy. The ‘mercy, charity and unity’ that Dean Katanacho would like to experience will not happen if the CaTC sponsors do not change their modus operandi. They will not garner the participation of the leaders of the Messianic Jewish community in the Land, Mr. Shoshani aside.
Mr. Katanacho complains that we have ‘walls’ on the ground. Indeed we do. But to remove them, a bottom line is to remove anti-Semitism and ‘Israeli minimization and the dismantling of Jewish Israel ’ talk from his platform (or the platforms of his associates). I have been communicating that message to the CaTC sponsors for some years. It hasn’t happened yet. I can’t talk very seriously with a movement that advocates (and will deny doing so) rejectionist politics and theology. ‘Come let’s love or you’re not following Messiah’ is a theme coming out of Checkpoint. But it comes with a subtle message of ‘Oh, and we reserve the right to talk against your people and state on international platforms as we see fit.’ That message is highly skewered to me, and has been for the past 20 years.
I found the honesty of the first Checkpoint speaker, the PA rep, to be highly honest. He opened up by telling the audience that they were ‘activists for the Palestinian national cause’. No one objected to his words. That was honesty, and is how indeed many view the Checkpoint’s function.
I encourage the reader that there are Israeli-Arab reconciliation movements that truly do practice ‘equality’, ‘love’ and accepting everyone as valuable within the Israel-Arab scene. I personally participate in two of them, formats where Arab believers do not threaten to dismantle Israel, and where Israelis express concern, love and help with outreach to Palestinians (and other Arab nations, as well).
"What we have on the ground is walls. What we need is a vision of bridges," Isaac said, adding to Katanacho's earlier words: "We are the bridge between all people trying to put up walls of injustice’.
Dean Katanacho’s words sure sound good and correct, don’t they? My question would be, if the Checkpoint sponsors think that blog ‘attacks’ are not a holy activity, why have they spoken publicly and consistently in rejectionist terms toward Israel over the past 20 years? And, I personally as a Jew, Israeli and believer in Messiah found the blogging of their last conference (2012) to be rather provocative. I have personally been at conferences where CaTC sponsors have advocated for the dismantling of Israel. Is this acceptable, while opposing their advocacy on a blogsite is not? To intimate that it is wrong to oppose the Checkpoint’s methods of ‘reconciliation’ (not the persons, but the overall philosophy and its inherent anti-Semitism) on a blogsite, yet be ‘just fine’ with their continual international complaining about Israel (i.e. the Jewish state) is the utmost in hypocrisy. The ‘mercy, charity and unity’ that Dean Katanacho would like to experience will not happen if the CaTC sponsors do not change their modus operandi. They will not garner the participation of the leaders of the Messianic Jewish community in the Land, Mr. Shoshani aside.
Mr. Katanacho complains that we have ‘walls’ on the ground. Indeed we do. But to remove them, a bottom line is to remove anti-Semitism and ‘Israeli minimization and the dismantling of Jewish Israel ’ talk from his platform (or the platforms of his associates). I have been communicating that message to the CaTC sponsors for some years. It hasn’t happened yet. I can’t talk very seriously with a movement that advocates (and will deny doing so) rejectionist politics and theology. ‘Come let’s love or you’re not following Messiah’ is a theme coming out of Checkpoint. But it comes with a subtle message of ‘Oh, and we reserve the right to talk against your people and state on international platforms as we see fit.’ That message is highly skewered to me, and has been for the past 20 years.
I found the honesty of the first Checkpoint speaker, the PA rep, to be highly honest. He opened up by telling the audience that they were ‘activists for the Palestinian national cause’. No one objected to his words. That was honesty, and is how indeed many view the Checkpoint’s function.
I encourage the reader that there are Israeli-Arab reconciliation movements that truly do practice ‘equality’, ‘love’ and accepting everyone as valuable within the Israel-Arab scene. I personally participate in two of them, formats where Arab believers do not threaten to dismantle Israel, and where Israelis express concern, love and help with outreach to Palestinians (and other Arab nations, as well).