Protocols of the Elders of Zion

[brendan]

A quick scan of material about MacDonald's books reveals a great deal of controversy over his methods. If you want to be a crank you can dismiss this as part of the conspiracy, but as a gentile I think that's hogwash. Amazon reviews in particular show people picking apart some of his specific claims.

Fortunately for Prof. MacDonald's antagonists, we know nothing of their qualifications to make criticisms. And the last time I browsed the comments, a large proprtion seemed like they were probably Jewish and naturally very hostile.

But in any case, MacDonald's books don't exist in a vacuum. There are many books by Jewish authors which support his theories.

Instead of judging MacDonald's books by what other's say, I would suggest that perhaps you might withold judgement until YOU, yourself, have read them. I have read the last two books. It was an eye-opening experience to say the least.

If you don't like MacDonald, maybe you could read Israel Shahak's books which expose the extreme anti-Christian animus in the Jewish religion and the things they yearn to do if and when they feel confident enough to get away with it. For example, like obliterating every church and vestage of Christianity in the Holy Land. But one could also look at what they presently do. Like Israeli soldiers urinating and defecating on the alters of churches - some of which are doubtless Orthodox, just to mention one particularly evil and outrageous practice.

Its good thing for the Jews that few people read Hebrew or they would know what gets reported in the Israeli press.

[CGW]

Even if I believed that you had read these books, your claims that MacDonald is "a recognized expert in the study of ethnic groups" are strained at best. And if if you're going to insist on some sort of recognized expertise in order to criticize, certainly it then follows that the same expertise is required in order to recommend! As it happens, I don't agree that the situation is so technical as to defy lay analysis-- and since I am trained in statistics, I certainly am qualified to criticize any statistical claims (e.g. the haplotype material).

As far as Israel is concerned: first, Israel is neither Judaism nor the Jewish people. In fact, the Orthodox Jew at the other end of my office is emphatically anti-Zionist. Second, it doesn't take much historical knowledge to see that the Palestinian conflict is well-staffed with villains and victims on both sides. A partisan attack upon Jews as a whole based on the suffering of Middle Eastern Christians is immoral and unjust.

The question you should be asking yourself is what you are really getting out of all this tripe. Are you going to prefer a dishonest "Christian" candidate over any Jewish candidate in an election? Are you going to boycott Jewish-run businesses? Are you going to turn a blind eye to acts of terrorism upon Jews? Are you going to cheer the Jordanian army on should they decide to invade Israel?

I'm far more concerned about the character of individual, real people. If I didn't think you were powerless to do anything effective about your wrongheaded beliefs, I'd be more worried about you than about any random Jew. Fortunately, your voice seems to be merely one more in the loud chorus of on-line nonsense. For the sake of your soul, put this bigotry aside; work out your own salvation instead of cheering on the damnation of others.

[TomS]

Radio Stations Ask Jews for Jesus to Alter Controversial Commercial

By David Cho
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 26, 2004; Page C05

A radio commercial for the evangelical group Jews for Jesus has been dropped by classical music station WGMS, while the general manager of all-news WTOP and modern-rock Z104 said he would continue to air the ad only if it is altered. All three stations said they received numerous letters and complaints from Jewish listeners.

Jews for Jesus leaders said WASH and classic-rock WARW also informed them late yesterday that the commercial would be pulled unless the group comes up with another one. WJFK and WMAL are running the spot unchanged, according to the group.

The 60-second spot features two men debating whether Jesus is the Messiah and inviting listeners to "come, it's time to take a look, and think for yourself." They speak with "Yiddish accents" while klezmer music plays in the background, said Stephen Katz, Washington director of the San Francisco-based Jews for Jesus.

Joel Oxley, general manager of WGMS, dropped the commercial after a week, saying the station's "mission is not to offend." He added, "When people come to us, they want to be soothed and they want to hear the great classical music. It was not the case when they heard the advertising."

Oxley, who also manages WTOP and WWZZ (Z104), said he made a different decision for those stations because their news and talk programs aim to be open to all points of view.

Still, he asked Jews for Jesus to alter the commercial. "We started to get a lot of complaints about the characterization of Jewish people, the accents of the people in the advertisement and the music, so while we decided we would keep the script, we would not keep the accents and the music," he said.

Jews for Jesus officials said they are considering redoing the entire ad, but complained that Jewish leaders tried to counter it with a letter-writing campaign.

"I just find it rather disconcerting if you have a contract and you've worked out an arrangement and the ad is honest and clear, that you could have a letter-writing campaign pressure stations to drop ads," said Susan Perlman, spokeswoman for the San Francisco-based Jews for Jesus.

The commercials are part of the group's $200,000 campaign to evangelize the Washington region and especially the region's 220,000 Jews. Hundreds of its volunteers are handing out religious tracts at Metro stops and area parks until Sept. 18. The blitz of evangelism also includes weekly ads on seven of the most popular radio stations in the area and in several newspapers, including The Washington Post. The content of the print ads is similar to that of the radio ads.

But the campaign is an anathema to Jewish groups. Scott Hillman, for one, who founded the counter-missionary group Jews for Judaism in Baltimore, has said: "Jews cannot believe in Jesus and remain Jewish."

Hillman said he has been training teams to fan out at Metro stops and parks to hand out literature that seeks to discredit Jews for Jesus.

"If you offend your audience, you are going to lose listeners," Hillman said. "Radio stations have the right to take or not take ads from certain people and they listened to their audience who said, 'We don't want to hear about this product, it's offensive.' "

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

[brendan]

Even if I believed that you had read these books, your claims that MacDonald is "a recognized expert in the study of ethnic groups" are strained at best. And if if you're going to insist on some sort of recognized expertise in order to criticize, certainly it then follows that the same expertise is required in order to recommend! As it happens, I don't agree that the situation is so technical as to defy lay analysis-- and since I am trained in statistics, I certainly am qualified to criticize any statistical claims (e.g. the haplotype material).

With all due respect, your statistical qualifications are pretty meaningless if you haven't even read what MacDonald has said in his three books. Three whole books - that requires a lot of refuting.

As far as Israel is concerned: first, Israel is neither Judaism nor the Jewish people. In fact, the Orthodox Jew at the other end of my office is emphatically anti-Zionist. Second, it doesn't take much historical knowledge to see that the Palestinian conflict is well-staffed with villains and victims on both sides. A partisan attack upon Jews as a whole based on the suffering of Middle Eastern Christians is immoral and unjust.

I'm aware that a small minority of Jews are anti-Zionist, but they are just that - a minority. But even setting Israel aside, the anti-Christian hostility exists in Judaism regardless of any individual Jew's position on Zionism.

The question you should be asking yourself is what you are really getting out of all this tripe. Are you going to prefer a dishonest "Christian" candidate over any Jewish candidate in an election? Are you going to boycott Jewish-run businesses? Are you going to turn a blind eye to acts of terrorism upon Jews? Are you going to cheer the Jordanian army on should they decide to invade Israel?

The state of Israel was built on terrorism. That's a historical fact. First against the British, who actually helped the Jews get the land via the Balflour Declaration, and now the Arabs. Most people aren't aware that Palestine was under British control after WW1. But with regard to your point on terrorism, many of the leaders of Israel, like Menachim Begin, (who had a price put on his head for terrorism by the British), engaged in murder and terrorism when he was a member of Jewish terror groups such as the Stern Gang that operated in Palestine in the late 1940s. As I recall, Begin was directly involved in the bombing of the King David hotel which killed dozens of people, mostly women and children.

I'm far more concerned about the character of individual, real people. If I didn't think you were powerless to do anything effective about your wrongheaded beliefs, I'd be more worried about you than about any random Jew. Fortunately, your voice seems to be merely one more in the loud chorus of on-line nonsense. For the sake of your soul, put this bigotry aside; work out your own salvation instead of cheering on the damnation of others.

As I said previously, I judge individuals, including Jewish indivduals, by their individual actions, but I also judge groups by their group actions. Based on that, I'm not engaging in bigotry. But my question is why you are so emphatic in your defense of the traditional enemies of Christianity?

How many of the most highly regarded Fathers and leaders in the Orthodox Church condemned these people? But its very odd that we have been trained to ignore the Fathers on the subject of Jews. Isn't it strange that the great men of the Church were wise in all things, EXCEPT when it comes to Jews, about whom we are expected to believe they were just ignorant bigots and fools. Well, I happen to think the Fathers were as correct about Jews as they were on any other issue.

Its conspicuous that most Orthodox booksellers carry a number of books on the danger of Islam and various Christian heretic sects, but one never, ever sees books critical of the Jews even though they are the ones most often found leading practically every anti-Christian effort in the US. That's striking.

I, for one, am not going to defend the enemies of Christ against reasonable criticism. For example, I don't believe the Protocols of Zion because I think they are not what they are claimed to be, but there is much other evidence that I do think is valid - much of it, BTW, comes from the mouths of the Jews themselves. What credibility does a Christian have who defends Jews against charges to which Jews themselves admit?

[TomS]

How many of the most highly regarded Fathers and leaders in the Orthodox Church condemned these people? But its very odd that we have been trained to ignore the Fathers on the subject of Jews. Isn't it strange that the great men of the Church were wise in all things, EXCEPT when it comes to Jews, about whom we are expected to believe they were just ignorant bigots and fools. Well, I happen to think the Fathers were as correct about Jews as they were on any other issue.

Interesting point.

[CGW]

With all due respect, your statistical qualifications are pretty meaningless if you haven't even read what MacDonald has said in his three books. Three whole books - that requires a lot of refuting.

It is crank scholarship to insist that I have to read everything that someone says/writes in order to pass any judgement on their work. One does not protect one's conclusions by writing more than can be reasonably read.

In the case of MacDonald, even a fairly cursory survey of what he says on line and what others say on line about his writings results in a negative assessment by me. I base that assessment, in part, on the supporting assessment that actually reading the books themselves is likely to lead to the same conclusion;that is, there seems to be enough evidence about what the books say to draw a conclusion about the merit of their arguments, in the large. As far as the remark about Jewish reviewers is concerned, honest evaluation discounts the writer, just as honest evaluation of your words does not discard them because of your "I'm not bigoted/they really ARE out to get us" perspective.

I'm aware that a small minority of Jews are anti-Zionist, but they are just that - a minority.

So what? A fairly small minority of Jews are Orthodox, too (at least in the USA) and it wouldn't surprise me that secular Jews might even be a majority in this country. The point is, you're slip-sliding all over the place now over what exactly this group is. When you look at the great moral debates of American society, Jews fall all over the map on them; they simply don't act as a coherent group.

And besides that, why does it matter what the affiliation of the supposed enemies of your religion is? I mean, reading this discussion, it wouldn't be all that unreasonable to suspect any Orthodox Christian of being an anti-Semitic conspiracy-monger.

The state of Israel was built on terrorism.

And that justifies what? This turns into an argument for completely depopulating the Middle East and giving it over to, say, the Swedes; for if "their blood be upon us and upon our children" were laid upon everyone in the Middle East, there would be blood indeed to condemn every man, woman, and child.

Instead, you are supposed forgive the dead and not lay their sins upon the living-- that's what Jesus says, after all. You totally missed my real point: that nothing that was done in the past lends justification to current sins.

As I said previously, I judge individuals, including Jewish indivduals, by their individual actions, but I also judge groups by their group actions.

But what group? You talked of "Judaism", but there is no organized Judaism-- certainly not one that covers secularized Jews! I might as well condemn you on the basis of what was done in Bosnia-- after all, I assume you're Orthodox.

But my question is why you are so emphatic in your defense of the traditional enemies of Christianity?

I don't care about traditional enemies-- forgiveness, remember?

How many of the most highly regarded Fathers and leaders in the Orthodox Church condemned these people? But its very odd that we have been trained to ignore the Fathers on the subject of Jews.

Well, um, they aren't the same Jews. The Jews of patristic times are not the Jews of today, for the latter still live, but the former are all dead, every one.

What credibility does a Christian have who defends Jews against charges to which Jews themselves admit?

If I don't agree that Jews form a coherent organization, then I certainly disregard the claims of those who claim to speak for this nonexistent body.

[gphadraig]

I still baulk at the raw antagonistic feelings sometime displayed to whole groups, sometimes it is one group and at other times another; Jews today and gypsies tomorrow for example.

In this thread Jews are sometimes strongly associated with persistently seeking to undermine Christianity, and a variety of evidence has been cited and argued over. However I strongly feel this lets off a mass of folks who are persistently undermining the Christian message. These include a wide range of people who are Gnostics, pursue the occult, promote so-called liberation theologies and comparative religion, or seek to mingle Christianity with various Eastern practices such as Hinduism, Zen and the like. Christianity, as another poster has said, is not a religion among religions but revealed TRUTH. Sadly caught up in this sometimes are well-meaning and honest folk who are lead astray by the example of those who appear to represent the church.

As St Irenaeus of Lyons writes:

"For no false teaching desires to offer itself to our view openingly, lest such exposure should lead to conviction; but, craftily putting on a plausible dress, makes itself by its outward form appear to the simpler sort to be truer than Truth itself"

'Against Heresies' or "'A Refutation and Overthrow of Knowledge Falsely So Called', Introduction §2.