Christians United for Israel

I wrote a post about Islamic terrorism yesterday, so I might as well follow with one about Christian terrorism. Max Blumenthal has made a brilliant video about the organisation called Christians United for Israel. I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry. With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Here are some choice quotes from the video:

Woman: Are you Jewish?
Max: Yes
Woman: So do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ?
Max: No, I’m Jewish.

Max: Are you looking forward to Armageddon?
Man: Yes, I definitely am.

Pastor John Haggee: “…therefore it is time for American to embrace the words of Senator Joseph Lieberman and consider a military pre-emptive strike against Iran to prevent a nuclear holocaust in Israel”.

Lieberman: “Haggee is a man of God”.

It might be tempting to dismiss all this as the fantasies of a deluded minority. But Senator Joe Lieberman is right at the centre of it all. Only reason, science, rationality, and logic will thwart these people. Or not. Probably not. Damn.

I know! Let’s try ridicule and satire instead!



  1. Godefroi said,

    August 14, 2007 at 10:48 pm

    Just out of curiosity, where is the terrorism you mentioned? Is it the pre-emptive strike suggestion?

  2. Tony D said,

    August 15, 2007 at 1:42 am

    Yeah there was an article about this in the Irish times today, as bad as this is, these guys are containable ISLAM AND its poison are not

  3. shazgood said,

    August 15, 2007 at 10:49 am

    From wikipedia:
    “Terrorism is a controversial and subjective term with multiple definitions. One definition means a violent action targetting civilians exclusively. Another definition is the use or threatened use of violence for the purpose of creating fear in order to achieve a political, economic, religious, or ideological goal. …”

    It is the second sense that I refer to. The use of “pre-emptive” strikes on Iran to support their political/religious objectives is terror.

  4. Godefroi said,

    August 15, 2007 at 12:27 pm

    Then…wouldn’t any kind of threat of violence presented by anyone in order to promote their ideology be terrorism? Like, “if you don’t stop reading that Bible, we’ll beat you”?

  5. shazgood said,

    August 15, 2007 at 12:48 pm

    No. But threatening someone for reading a bible is stupid and wrong.
    I’ve looked at your site. A lot of what you report is scary: I agree that religious tolerance seems to work only one way – Islam is extremely intolerant of other religious beliefs. At least America has huge tolerance for all races and creeds, probaly not perfect, but probably also the best in the world.
    But that won’t change my view that Christian fundamentalists are both dangerous and irrational. Wanting to bomb Iran is wrong. It should not be part of any spiritual person’s wish to see others bombed, killed, maimed, or otherwise hurt.

  6. Godefroi said,

    August 15, 2007 at 2:28 pm

    “threatening someone for reading a bible is stupid and wrong”

    Agreed – it would be so for reading just about anything.

    “Wanting to bomb Iran is wrong. It should not be part of any spiritual person’s wish to see others bombed, killed, maimed, or otherwise hurt.”


    “But that won’t change my view that Christian fundamentalists are both dangerous and irrational”

    What would? As a “fundamentalist” Christian, I’m curious. I can’t think of anything from Christianity’s foundations that is dangerous.

    I don’t intend to debate with you (unless you invite me to!) – I’d just like to understand the viewpoint.


  7. shazgood said,

    August 15, 2007 at 3:53 pm

    Maybe you can tell me if I have a good idea of “fundamentalism” or not, since you are a self-professed Christian fundamentalist. No need for an elaborate debate – that would take too much time!

    Christians live all around me. My parents are Catholics, as are my friends, neighbours, I was educated as a Catholic. (But I am now atheist.) None of them are or were fundamentalists though. They live and let live. They have doubts, they respect others, try to lead good lives. So I am 100% fine with Christians!

    To my mind, a Christian fundamentalist is someone who places great store in the Bible as God’s word. Some of them are literalists, and others accept that the Bible can be interpreted more metaphorically. But all accept it as their basic doctrine. What disturbs me is their adherence to interpretations that are either plainly wrong (e.g. creationism) or disturbing (e.g. the rapture/second coming). It is this rigid viewpoint which marks out the fundamentalist from ordinary christians.

    I think “fundamentalism” of almost any sort is wrong – whether than be Islam, Hinduism, Christianity, or indeed, science. A scientific fundamentalist sees no other valid point of view than science: which is narrow-minded and immature.

    “Christianity’s foundations”? – never mentioned the foundation of christianity!
    It is fundamentalism I am opposed to!

  8. Godefroi said,

    August 15, 2007 at 5:46 pm

    I was considering a more strict definition of fundamental, to wit: “of, pertaining to, or affecting the foundation or basis; being an original or primary source.” When one looks at the foundation, the fundamentals, of Christianity, one must see Christ, his actions and teachings, and (secondarily) those of his disciples. Anything else is not Christianity, but man-made and man-promoted religion.

    I am one of those who believe the Bible is true, and that there is also much allegory included. Was the world and all in it created in 6 literal days? I doubt it. It doesn’t change my belief (or what I think is the point of the creation account) that it was created…it didn’t accidentally appear from nothing. As Oliver Wendell Jones once said, “Does it really make more sense that it’s all just a big accident?”

    I also believe that Christ will return to redeem his own after a time of intense persecution against Christians.

    Why are such beliefs disturbing? Would I like everyone to believe as I do? Of course – everyone who holds an opinion believes that he or she is right, and that those who disagree are not. I’m no different. If I’m right, those who disbelieve are doomed. If I’m wrong, then I’m doomed to a life of waste and delusion. What does that cost anyone?

    This is OT, and I won’t continue the discussion here, but the possibility of all things being created has never been disproved…therefore one can’t state in all honesty that my position on the matter is “plainly wrong”.

    So, this ended up longer than I had intended…sorry.


  9. shazgood said,

    August 15, 2007 at 6:07 pm

    Good, sensible comment. You have my respect.
    It reminded me of Pascal’s Wager (I presume you know it, so bear with me please for repeating it here)
    Blaise Pascal wagered that it was better to believe than not believe because if God did exist, he would be saved, and if he did not exist, what the heck? If he did not believe however, and God existed, oh boy, look out below!
    I guess I am prepared to take the risk…:-)

  10. Tony D said,

    August 16, 2007 at 5:51 pm

    Pascals wager is just childish and silly.

    It is also easily refuted

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: