From the BBC:

Israel criticises Church of Scotland over report

The Israeli government has criticised the Church of Scotland over a report which questions the divine right of Jews to the land of Israel.

The report will be debated and voted on at the church’s general assembly later this month.

Israel’s ambassador to the UK said it was “truly hurtful” and could “mark a significant step backwards for the forces of tolerance and peace”.

The church said it was not denying Israel’s right to exist.

The 10-page discussion paper, entitled The Inheritance of Abraham? A report on the Promised Land, was compiled by the Kirk’s church and society council.

It stated there has been a widespread assumption by many Christians, as well as many Jewish people, that the Bible “supports an essentially Jewish state of Israel”.

“Would the Jewish people today have a fairer claim to the land if they dealt justly with the Palestinians?”

But its authors said an “increasing number of difficulties and current Israeli policies regarding the Palestinians” had led to this viewpoint being questioned.

They wrote: “Possession of any land is clearly conditional. The question that arises is this: Would the Jewish people today have a fairer claim to the land if they dealt justly with the Palestinians?”

Biblical promises about the land of Israel were never intended to be taken literally, or as applying to a defined geographical territory, the report argued.

Instead, it said: “They are a way of speaking about how to live under God so that justice and peace reign, the weak and poor are protected, the stranger is included, and all have a share in the community and a contribution to make to it.

“The ‘promised land’ in the Bible is not a place, so much as a metaphor of how things ought to be among the people of God. This ‘promised land’ can be found – or built – anywhere.

“The desire of many in the state of Israel to acquire the land of Palestine for the Jewish people is wrong. The fact that the land is currently being taken by settlement expansion, the separation barrier, house clearance, theft and force makes it doubly wrong to seek biblical sanction for this.”

The report said that the enormity of the Holocaust “has often reinforced the belief that Israel is entitled to the land unconditionally.”

“There is guilt among Western Christianity about centuries of anti-Semitism that led to discrimination against the Jews, culminating in the total evil of the Holocaust,” it suggested.

Political boycotts
“There is also a belief among some Jewish people that they have a right to the land of Israel as compensation for the suffering of the Holocaust.”

While stopping short of calling for economic and political boycotts and sanctions against the state of Israel, as church leaders from South Africa did last year, the report said the issue “raises particular questions for the Church of Scotland as we seek to respond to the question: “What does the Lord require of you…?”

The paper will be voted on by delegates at the church’s general assembly in Edinburgh, which is due to begin on 18 May.

The Israeli ambassador to the UK, Daniel Taub, said: “This report not only plays into extremist political positions, but negates and belittles the deeply held Jewish attachment to the land of Israel in a way which is truly hurtful.

“If a document of this nature is adopted by the Church of Scotland it would mark a significant step backwards for the forces of tolerance and peace in our region.”

Ephraim Borowski, director of the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities, described the report as an “outrage to everything that interfaith dialogue stands for” and called on the Church of Scotland to withdraw it ahead of the general assembly.

“If the church cannot build bridges, can it at least refrain from burning them?”

Ephraim Borowski Scottish Council of Jewish Communities – He added: “It reads like an Inquisition-era polemic against Jews and Judaism. It is biased, weak on sources, and contradictory. The picture it paints of both Judaism and Israel is barely even a caricature. The arrogance of telling the Jewish people how to interpret Jewish texts and Jewish theology is breathtaking.

“If the church cannot build bridges, can it at least refrain from burning them?”

Abraham H Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League in New York, described the paper as “stunningly offensive”.

He said: “The paper’s blatant one-sided perspective falsely conflates the political state of Israel and the religious significance of the Land of Israel for both Jews and Christians. The selective citation of Biblical scripture in order to question Israel’s legitimacy is an affront to Jews around the world and to the State of Israel.”

And an editorial, the Jerusalem Post newspaper said the report would “shame the Church of Scotland”.

It claimed: “The church owes the Jewish people an apology for this incendiary text that is more fitting to the 13th Century than to this one”.

A spokesman for the Church of Scotland said it “has never and is not now denying Israel’s right to exist; on the contrary, it is questioning the policies that continue to keep peace a dream in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

He added: “This report is against the injustices levelled against the Palestinian people and how land is shared. It is also a reflection of the use or misuse of scripture to claim divine right to land by any group.

“The Church of Scotland is called to speak out against injustice. Whether people are being exploited by pay-day loan companies or through low wages and poor conditions, or because of benefit changes and actions of the powerful across the world, the Church of Scotland seeks to support just and peaceful solutions.

“With this in mind, the Church of Scotland will continue to work for freedom and justice for all who live in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

I’ve been here for nearly ten years.

At first, I hated your posts.
Then, like hairy ears or a preference for a nice quiet night in, I just grew to accept them.
Now, I quite enjoy them.

I’m not going to bother with reading the content or replying, I’d just like to thank you for the title.

Enjoy your evening.

Didn’t the Church of Scotland just have their very own schism over woman bishops ? I think the Church of Scotland are trying to distract attention from the problems in their own manse.

I like the burning bridges line, although it would have been more amusing to talk about “planting bushes, not burning them”.

(or maybe it was gay bishops – I can’t remember rightly)

Bored already can’t you all just go away.

I struggle with long sentences. Can someone give me a one liner in what the god botherers are up to this time?

EDIT: Really? That gets modded? Well I never…

Rusty, can I just leave this here for you?

mark a significant step backwards for the forces of tolerance and peace”.

When one religion says this to another and the one saying it is an Israeli I can only assume they are trolling each other

Summary: unless you agree that the Jews are God’s chosen people and they have a divine right to Israel you’re a massive racist.

So, one group of people who believe in make belief are suggesting that some of another group of peoples make belief, may in fact be make belief?

At first I thought it was 2 sky fairies having a fight, then I realised it was actually just one sky fairy beating himself up. I don’t really understand.

So, one group of people who believe in make belief are suggesting that some of another group of peoples make belief, may in fact be make belief?

I thought calling someone’s make believe make believe was called heresy, so maybe they’re each accusing the other of heresy….

Not quite relevant to Israel, but Hels, the next Moderator of the blah! blah! Church of Scotland is a woman.
I think the schism about bishops was in the Anglican Church!

This is not so much a Christian-Jewish bicker as a Christian-Christian one. The theological side of the report is a rebuke to evanglical Christians who endorse religious Zionism because it feeds into their loopy messianic beliefs (that they can precipitate rapture by getting Jews gathered in Israel).

It’s also worth noting that the Church of Scotland has had an on the ground presence in Israel and Palestine for a long time, and have been hard workers for interfaith dialogue. Palestinian Christians are having a rough time: smashed between the hammer of Israeli occupation and the anvil of Islamic loopyists within Palestinian society.

Didn’t the Church of Scotland just have their very own schism over woman bishops ? I think the Church of Scotland are trying to distract attention from the problems in their own manse.

The appointment of a woman bishop in the Church of Scotland would be very contentious…they haven’t had bishops for hundreds of years. That’s not the church’s style.

Which troubles are you referring to?

So… I think the jist of this thread becomes clear if we have hairy ears.

Palestinian Christians are having a rough time: smashed between the hammer of Israeli occupation and the anvil of Islamic loopyists within Palestinian society.

Since the formation of Israel in reparation for crimes committed by Germans and other Europeans to Jews, the majority of Palestinian Christians have fled the region. Economic hardship and violence caused by a brutal and belligerent Zionist State is what has caused them to flee, not persecution by Muslims. Better education and contacts with people living in wealthy Christian countries have given Palestinian Christians an advantage over Muslim Palestinians in terms of immigration.

I thought it was quite an interesting post actually. On top of that incidentally, having met him a few year’s ago, Mr Lupton’s a pleasant and intelligent chap who is generally worth listening to if you have the time.