Comments on: World Council of Churches ignores Christians in danger

By: Ed Hausman

Ed Hausman — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 05:45:30 +0000

I read something recently that these anti-Israel churches aren’t necessarily liberal as much as Replacement Theology — they believe the Christian message supersedes Judaism.

The evangelicals, on the other hand, while they also believe Israel will turn to their messiah eventually, believe that Am Yisrael has an earlier relation to God which stands in parallel to Christian revelation.

By: Meryl Yourish

Meryl Yourish — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 04:50:43 +0000

Yeah, but that’s not the point. The point is that Hamas is lying about their tolerance of other religions, and the attack on Gaza Christians proves it.

Not that I thought any differently.

But the world still manages to ignore Muslim atrocities, or to blame Israel, the U.S., or colonialism for them.

By: Michael Lonie

Michael Lonie — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 04:07:48 +0000

Soccer dad,
Good catch. He and his pals are pieces of work aren’t they?

The irony is that the Christians of the Middle East have almost all been good little dhimmis and supported the Arab Muslims in their attempts at destruction of Israel and genocide of the Jews. Soon, if not already, the only state in the ME where Christians can live without fear of persecution will be the Jewish one.

Musalem called Christians in the West filthy because they did not support the Palestinians, moaning about an absence of love. His view of that Christian “love” consisted of supporting the genocidal Arab war on Israel. I don’t think Jesus said anywhere “Kill the Jews.” Maybe Musalem has been reading Gnostic Apocrypha to conclude that such a message constitutes Christian love.

By: Derick S.

Derick S. — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 23:56:33 +0000

I’ve read more than once that Israel is the only country in the Middle East with a growing Christian population, which certainly seems plausible to me.

By: Ryan Frank

Ryan Frank — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 21:23:51 +0000

Eric J,

Its a little different (for Catholics at least) since it does have a central church authority who is supposed to speak for the Church. Not that they’ve exactly covered themselves in glory in this matter, but there is less leeway for a group like WCC to claim to speak for all Christians.

It helps that Christians also don’t have to deal with the fact that when asked questions like ‘is it okay to kill infidels?’ 50% don’t say yes.

By: Eric J

Eric J — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:04:21 +0000

John M. – isn’t that what “Moderate Muslims” keep saying about terrorists and firebreathing Imams?

Perversions of a belief must be spoken out against directly and specifically, lest they begin to claim a seat at the table.

By: soccer dad

soccer dad — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 15:14:37 +0000

This guy Musalam isn't exactly a prize though.

By: John M.

John M. — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 15:03:11 +0000

Guys, the WCC is widely recognized among serious Christians as a liberal mouthpiece with no authority. They don’t represent Christianity in any meaningfuly way. Just ignore them.

By: Alex Bensky

Alex Bensky — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 14:13:19 +0000

Millions of Copts suffer persection in Egypt and the WCC says nothing. Bethlehem Christians flee, and not because of the IDF–the population has gone from eighty percent Christian to less than fifteen percent Christian. The WCC says nothing. Churches are destroyed in Gaza and Christians beaten or killed. The WCC says nothing.

They organize a protest against Israel’s occupation.

I’m sure there’s some reason for this other than sheer antisemitism. Any ideas what it might be?