Posted on 08/07/2005 9:24:34 PM PDT by SmithL
On July 27 the General Assembly of the Disciples of Christ, a mainline Protestant denomination, called upon Israel "to tear down the barrier fence." The resolution, originally entitled "Tear Down the Wall," was renamed, more ambiguously, "Breaking Down the Dividing Wall," though it remained rife with factual errors and retained the original intent.
The resolution does not deny that Israel built the fence "to shield itself against terrorist attacks," or that the fence has succeeded in saving a great number of lives (including some would-be bombers?). Yet it still demands the security barrier's removal.
Why? Because, according to the resolution, the existence of a physical barrier is creating a psychological barrier to true peace, more "visually and spiritually... devastating than abstract facts can convey."
As the amended resolution states, "By breaking down walls that separate, we actively seek peace and reconciliation in the world in an attempt to follow Jesus' example." Or as one member argued, "Every day the wall grows, the prospect for a genuine peace... diminishes."
Translation? Israelis cannot be counted on to make peace without a knife at their throats.
After reading this document it's hard not to conclude that these members have, while remaining fully in touch with their emotions, completely lost touch with "the abstract facts" of real life.
Look again at the date: 15 days after the Netanya suicide bombing. Four days after a would-be bomber was intercepted climbing the fence. If these facts do not demonstrate that completing the fence is necessary to save lives, then what would?
But this still doesn't answer the question of why two-thirds of these presumably life-loving Christians voted yes on this resolution, asking the State of Israel to put its citizens' lives in even greater peril.
It appears that many, perhaps even most, of those who voted did not actually get around to reading the document. This was not entirely the fault of most delegates since the resolution was introduced just days before the conference as an "emergency resolution" and rewritten again about 36 hours before the vote. Most other resolutions had been submitted by a January deadline, five months ahead.
In this way, the authors of the resolution succeeded not only in preventing any real study or discussion before the vote, and in delaying it until the last day of an exhausting conference, but also in framing the debate, so that to vote against it was tantamount to standing up and declaring oneself a person who no longer believes in peace.
But why did the assembly not listen to those members and their guests who opposed the resolution? The sad answer is that, for the most part, they were not given the opportunity.
Tzippi Cohen, a survivor of the Cafe Hillel suicide bombing, was not allowed to speak, ostensibly because she was not a voting member, even though she had flown in from New York hoping for the chance to address the assembly for one to three minutes.
However, Palestinian guest Rula Shubeita, of Jerusalem's Sabeel Center, was permitted to speak in favor of the resolution. Her center calls itself the "Palestinian Liberation Theology Center" and features a paean to the late Yasser Arafat on its homepage entitled, "A Word of Respect and Esteem for a Great Leader."
Shubeita told the delegates, "Because of the wall, I cannot see my brother, who lives three miles away on the other side of the fence. I now must drive 14 miles to see him." She also claimed that she can no longer visit her church in Bethlehem at all.
Actually, Shubeita, can see her brother, though she has to drive 11 miles out of her way. She omitted to say that since the arrival of PA rule and its unleashing of criminal and Islamic terror gangs, most of Bethlehem's Christians have fled to Israel and elsewhere. Bethlehem, once 80% Christian, is now less than 20%. So while she can still likely visit the church most days, it's also likely that when she gets there, most pews are empty.
Yet two-thirds of the Disciples of Christ delegates declared themselves more concerned with a Palestinian's right to drive directly to her destination than with an Israeli's right to retain her arms and legs intact; and they were clearly more interested in blaming all miseries on Israel than in helping Palestinians replace a corrupt and dysfunctional PA with something more democratic.
This was after a vigorous but limited discussion by those few who, at the last moment, somehow managed to speak.
Most eloquently, dissenting member Ken Britton of Cloverdale, Indiana, said: "For decades Israel offered land for peace - and peace hasn?t happened. If we vote for this, we are telling Israel that we don?t care about you and we don't care about terrorism, and that you have no right to exist."
The writer lives in Portland, Oregon. The vigil outside the conference was sponsored by Stand With Us, in partnership with the National Christian Leadership Conference for Israel and the Judeo-Christian Alliance.
I can't imagine a Church of Christ (Non-instrumental) that is Not part of this historical lineage. There are, on the other hand, totally different groups that call themselves "Church of Christ".
You continue to show your ingnorance regarding the current teachings of the Church of Christ. Campbell, Stone and others did indeed advocate the return to simple New Testament Christianity but the others that you group with the Church of Christ deviated from this course a number of years back and now have no affiliation with the current Churches of Christ.
Odds are a survey of DoC, independent Christian, and Church of Christ (non-instrumental) congregations will find a surprising commonality of beliefs across a quite predictable spectrum.
I can't say for those other Church of Christ operations that are not "non-instrumental". I've always thought of most of them as pretty much the same as independent Methodist operations ~ we have one in the area with infant baptism, and that's definitely outside what the Christian church does.
That are a number of differences between the Church of Christ and the group that you continue to want to associate them with. You need to learn these differences is you are going to expound on the subject.
The independent Christian Church congregations that were formerly part of the DoC may have their own conference, but there were always independent Christian Church congregations that regularly swapped members with the DoC (for any variety of reasons).
It is true that the Church of Christ does not use instrumental music in the worship service but that is not the only distinguishing characteristic. Thenchurch of Christ does not practice infant baptism. Again, you need to learn more about the Church of Christ if you are going to claim a knowledge of it and its beliefs.
"Mr. President, tear down that wall."
If only Reagan could be here.
One wall goes down, another one goes up.
This apartheid wall, too, won't last long. Mark my words.
You guys do not have a monopoly on the title.
BTW, the independent Christian Church I belonged to as a child always had a pot-luck dinner EACH AND EVERY FRIDAY EVENING. Their theological standard was that this was required because Christ fed the multitude. Your branch probably thinks buildings are prohibited because they are not specifically mentioned, which would require, of course, that the potluck supper beheld lakeside. Right?
More recently I've attended a DoC that came about as a result of a Church of Christ (non-instrumental) congregation merging with a Southern Baptist church whose members were first relocated to New England (on defense work) and then to this area (again on defense work). The church is laid out like a typical Church of Christ.
Sure be confusing to someone who "didn't know".
Odds are that ANY congregation EVER affiliated in any way with Stone or Campbell is going to give you answers pretty typical of the others.
Still, unlike many other affiliations, denominations and groups, odds are none would say the other guys are "going to Hell". If anything, that's a unifying belief that fairly well defines all the movement churches.
The Campbell, stone movement took place in the mid 1800's. The Church of Christ predates that by about 1800 years. Check it out in Romans 16:16. I don't know what movements you may be familiar with, but they are evidently not the Church of Christ that I am affiliated with. Please do not attempt to assign us to a particular denominational theology.
You know there are folks in the independent Christian Church as well as the Disciples of Christ who also hold to the position that they do not constitute a denomination ~ 's a fact!
I've got an old pre-Civil War Baptist church history for a congregation in Southern Indiana (which was filled to the brim with Abolitionists) and they refered to your brand, my brand, and the other Christian church brands all as "an alleged Christian church".
The Baptists knew who they were dealing with, Fur Shur.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.