Comments on Calvin L. Smith: "We are all Seismic now"

I think it comes down, as you said, to tracing anc...

2010-02-04T10:19:50.683Z

I think it comes down, as you said, to tracing ancient origins of the group.

It's possible that today's Arabs are the self-same people. But it's also possible that the term 'Arab' is being used differently in Jubilees from how we use it today. That is, to refer to another group.

Without knowing the exact facts, I can't do much more than set out the alternatives though. I'd be interested to see what you come up with, though!

It is something I do want to explore further but a...

2010-01-31T15:01:59.600Z

It is something I do want to explore further but as your comment indicates, it is very difficult tracing and discussing the ancient origins of an ethnic migratory group.

The intertestament Book of Jubilees states the following:

20: 11 And he [Abraham] gave to Ishmael and to his sons, and to the sons of Keturah, gifts, and sent them away (12) from Isaac his son, and he gave everything to Isaac his son. And Ishmael and his sons, and the sons of Keturah and their sons, went together and dwelt from Paran to the entering in of Babylon in (13) all the land which is towards the East facing the desert. And these mingled with each other, and their name was called Arabs, and Ishmaelites.

Now I know Jubilees is not canonical. But this does help to push back a discussion of Arab origins some centuries before the migration you refer to. (Jubilees was written around 150-100 BC). What do you think?

Calvin, thanks for your careful response. I think ...

2010-01-31T13:52:04.051Z

Calvin, thanks for your careful response. I think I more or less agree with all you said, and was interested to learn something of your experience with MJs, which I'm somewhat ignorant of, I have to say.

One final (and tangential) question: do you really think that Arabs are benificiaries of the Hagaric covenant? The reason I ask is that Arabs only entered Palestine and the Levant during the conquests after the rise of Islam. As such, I don't see that they can be the beneficiaries. What do you think?

Amen Brother!

2010-01-29T21:03:44.575Z

Amen Brother!

Lee, thank you for your gracious comment. While it...

2010-01-29T10:05:59.108Z

Lee, thank you for your gracious comment. While it helps to know who I’m talking to, please don’t leave over the anonymity issue. As long as debate remains respectful and objective here I will do my best to ensure no one feels harassed.

Again, my blogroll is not an endorsement of anyone. But let me say this. Over time I’ve come to know of the acute crises of identity and theology young Messianic Jews (MJs) experience. Many orthodox Jews no longer view them as Jewish, secular Jews sometimes view them with curiosity, even suspicion, while as believers in Jesus they’re confronted with juggling their Christian and Jewish identities. This is complicated by one group of Gentile Christians who smother and raise them on a pedestal (when, in fact, in Christ there is no qualitative difference between Jew and Gentile), while another so criticizes Israel and sides slavishly with Palestinian nationalism, it evokes painful memories of the Church’s shameful historical dealings with the Jewish people. Thus, many MJs face considerable criticism from their Jewish countrymen for continuing to identify themselves with Jesus. So when Stephen Sizer sets about a campaign of criticizing Israel, seeking disinvestment, speaking at Palestinian events, and criticisng Christian Zionists, all in the name of Christianity, some young MJs become frustrated, even angry. Concerning their methods, they are not infallible (nor are any of us, least of all me), and they must give an account of their own actions if they have done wrong. But just as people have raised the issue of context concerning why this story first erupted, context is important here too.

So I agree this hasn’t been our finest hour. Yet the public manner in which a lot of this was kicked off in the first place could have been avoided, while the language of polarization also ought to have been eschewed. It is unfortunate, because a respectful and biblically-based debate over the Church’s response to Israel is much needed, leading both sides to modify their theology. I sincerely believe God retains a place in his heart for the Jewish people. But through the Hagaric covenant the Arab people are also special to God(I speak merely as an adopted Gentile). But sadly much of this is lost in the deliberately polarizing language and unwise methods employed by some, and Sizer must accept his share of responsibility for this.

Though it is unpleasant in some quarters, I shouldn’t worry too much about the current row, as it will pass in time. Besides, the apostle Paul very publicly rebuked on several occasions, and we must take care not allow that British Christian disease of wanting to avoid conflict cloud our judgment. Views expressed robustly must be prepared to have those views equally robustly challenged. I do think something good will come out of all this. MJs are already being viewed and engaged with differently by their fellow Jews. I also think many Christians (on all sides) will think a little more carefully over how they express future views. Some have acted and said things – whether inflammatory language, intimidatory email campaigns, sticking up for one side right or wrong – which upon reflection they will concede was wrong and they will, in time, become better Christians. Finally, I am hopeful some fellow believers will eschew the language of polarization and shallow rhetoric instead of thoughtful, in-depth theology. After all, good hermeneutics would seem to suggest extreme positions are rarely biblically supported.

Calvin, on reflection, I think perhaps that I shou...

2010-01-28T22:05:29.280Z

Calvin, on reflection, I think perhaps that I should not have got involved in this. You are right that it's not fair for me to be anonymous, whatever my reasons, and to make criticisms.

For clarity, I have not meant to accuse you of bad faith. I admit that I am frustrated by Seismic Shock, and you know my views by now.

I have not wanted to 'silence' him, really. Mind you, his behaviour towards the youth group at Virginia Water seems more than just fair criticism.

I'm aware that I may have come across as somewhat holier-than-thou, and I'm sorry about that, too. It wasn't my intention.

I'm going to try to forget about this whole thing and concentrate on doing some work instead!

I didn't mean to suggest the Vee herself engag...

2010-01-28T21:18:35.798Z

I didn't mean to suggest the Vee herself engaged in antics, rather that some of the comments on some of her posts, not made by her, were unedifying. Apologies for the misunderstanding.

In answer to your direct questions, I have never met, nor do I know, Stephen Sizer. Nor have I been to his church or listened to him speak. Second, the reason I won't reveal my identity is because last time I did it I was on the end of nasty comments from a number of blogs from a number of people involved in this debacle. Yes, perhaps I have an interest, and perhaps it's affecting my judgment but I hope not.

I think the key issue you raised was of how Christians seek to engage in public debate. We have not presented a pretty spectacle this time. We have not honoured God. We should all of us examine ourselves (me, Sizer, and everyone else) and repent where we have gone wrong. We should encourage each other to do good deeds and rebuke with gentleness where appropriate. In this spirit, I would encourage you to continue to engage those you disagree with in the gentle manner that you usually do. Though, and you may continue to disagree with me, I think you should not lend support to Mr Weissman. It's not about silencing him, rather about encouraging him as a Christian to be more Christlike. (I haven't read much of Sizer - same goes for him if he's done wrong, but I'm afraid I have to use ifs because I don't know myself.

Lee, you surprise me! Alluding to Matthew 18:15 (“...

2010-01-28T20:40:13.425Z

Lee, you surprise me! Alluding to Matthew 18:15 (“If your brother sins against you, tell him his fault in private…) you suggest I rebuke Sizer privately. But I respectfully suggest your exegesis is quite flawed. From day one Sizer chose to criticize his fellow Christians quite publicly (rather than win them over in private), his writings and activities are out in the public domain, and indeed he actively and publicly promotes his views, which inevitably means public scrutiny. Besides, I’m not rebuking him (for sinning against me personally or otherwise). I’m simply commenting on a very public issue.

Your efforts to deflect the story from Sizer to me, implying I encourage abusive, non-edifying behaviour by Seismic and Living Journey, is a tad weak (BTW, out of curiosity what are her “antics”?). My blogroll has a disclaimer. Did you notice I also link to The Independent, which includes the rather angry Israel critic Robert Fisk? Perhaps I’m encouraging him too? While naturally I’m flattered, you do rather seem to have overestimated a trifle the influence you think I have over people, which (somewhat wistfully) I feel I should correct.

You do seem to be quite single-minded in your attempts to deflect any criticism from Sizer, failing to concede any error of judgment (“while it might be right to rebuke Sizer if he is wrong”, or “if Sizer does something sinful”). So I have two questions for you. First, do you know Sizer, and if so in what capacity And secondly, given how you strongly disagree with Seismic’s methods (and thus presumably his past anonymity), please will you let us know who you are exactly? After all, you know who I am and what I do, so why not reciprocate?

In the meantime (and do please forgive me for seeking rather irritatingly to get back to the main issue), this post was about silencing criticism. Yet here you are a third time trying to do just that. Therefore, may I suggest if you have issues with Seismic and Living Journey, why not post your comments on their sites? As far as I know they’re not censorious, so I’m sure they’d welcome them, which is somewhat ironic given your efforts to have them silenced here.

Firstly, I haven't seen any of this. But secon...

2010-01-28T14:34:57.197Z

Firstly, I haven't seen any of this. But secondly, you pre-judge and suggest that, even if true, it is all antisemitic, knowing that the charge of antisemitism against a Christian minister is a serious one and the same as racism.

You don't realise that what you are doing is creating a climate of fear and intimidation where honest debate is impossible. When honest debate is silenced in this way then you create the conditions for fear and intimidation to spread with arguments forced underground.

You say you are are a Messianic Jew - perhaps you would do well to study the writing of Rabbi Paul in the New Testament about being loving and respectful to elders etc and working for peace and love between Jews and Gentiles as I have tried to do in my own books.
Andrew Sibley

Andrew, I've also read his books and articles ...

2010-01-28T11:47:23.997Z

Andrew,
I've also read his books and articles and have found the antisemitic insinuation of Israeli complicity in 9/11, allusions to antisemitic writers such as Norman Finkelstein, Lenni Brenner & Uri Davis, the antisemitic trope of a powerful Jewish lobby influencing US foreign policy, the antisemitic claim that European Zionists collaborated with the Nazis, and comparisons of Israeli policy with that of the Nazis. If you think me pointing this out is "slander and gossip" please tell me why.

James - I have read Sizer's books, and listene...

2010-01-28T09:45:36.522Z

James - I have read Sizer's books, and listened to some of his video messages on his blog and I simply don't see any evidence of what you say.

There seems to be instead a concerted effort of mud raking against him based on various alleged 21st century 'thought crimes'. The New Testament warns against spreading slander and gossip and those involved in Christian ministry have a duty to honour one another, even if there is disagreement over theology.

It seems that the claims against Sizer are made to restrict free speech - a bit like Orwell's 1984 where 'Newspeak' and 'doublethink' mean words are banned until people cannot even protest against their slavery. Orwell was apparently concnered about the rise of fascism in Britain, but Jews themselves are in danger from fascism.

In light of 'Newspeak' I do not feel at liberty to discuss the existence or otherwise of a Jewish lobby.
Andrew Sibley

Calvin, please feel absolutely free not to publish...

2010-01-28T09:32:59.768Z

Calvin, please feel absolutely free not to publish any of the posts I make. It's your blog and your call. What I'm saying is that you should exercise that discretion more often. And so should both Joseph Weissman and living journey. In my opinion, that is. Don't you think that on purportedly Christian websites (both of them are meant to be) that I should expect to find material that is edifying rather than abusive?

You may not be a pastor, and you may not know Mr Weissman, but as an older Christian surely your duty is not to encourage such antics? Don't you see how giving implicit backing only encourages those antics?

At the same time, if Stephen Sizer does something sinful he should be rebuked. There are many ways of doing this, in private (if you know him) and then if he doesn't repent perhaps more publicly too. I don't know him, but judging from his affiliations, I'm sure he would agree with that.

>Lee >Seismic Shock ran a campaign of cyber-...

2010-01-27T22:46:41.539Z

>Lee
>Seismic Shock ran a campaign of cyber-stalking against Sizer.

Can you back that up, Lee?

If you can, I'll cover it - but as I see it the main issue here is harrassment law being used to respond to critical articles, and the police to entertain the complaint.

I've seen nothing of "stalking" by Seismic, whether it be phone calls, poison pen letters or anything else.

Once again, if you have evidence, I'll cover it at my site (link on the name) and at the Online Journalism Blog at www.onlinejournalismblog.com.

Rgds

I'm sorry Andrew but did you avtually read my ...

2010-01-27T22:18:52.693Z

I'm sorry Andrew but did you avtually read my piece? I didn't accuse Sizer of Holocaust denial, I did point out that he circulated material written by deniers. Do you think it is acceptable for a Christian minister to do that? What do you make of all the other points I raised? Like his allusions to a supposed "Jewish lobby" which cows American presidents?

If people really want to broaden this, I am ver...

2010-01-27T19:28:00.301Z
If people really want to broaden this, I am very happy to prepare a detailed, impeccably sourced paper exploring Sizer’s theology and the manner in which (and where) it has been expressed

Oh yes please....

That would be fantastic....

I rather think, Lee, you’ve overestimated my eccle...

2010-01-27T19:10:29.336Z
I rather think, Lee, you’ve overestimated my ecclesial authority. I’m not a pastor and have no spiritual oversight over Joseph Weissman (who I’ve never met) or anyone else.

Also, don’t you think it’s a tiny bit rich opining who I may link to on my blog, then fully expecting your own comments to be published? With respect, you appear to have missed what this story is all about – an attempt to silence critics – and thus here you are suggesting the same.

Concerning your comment about what is “sinful”, why limit this to Seismic? After all, some might argue Sizer's sharing a platform with Azzam Tamimi (who condones suicide bombings) next month is not in keeping with “Blessed are the peacemakers”.

Which brings me to the main point. I do think we are getting off track here. If people really want to broaden this, I am very happy to prepare a detailed, impeccably sourced paper exploring Sizer’s theology and the manner in which (and where) it has been expressed. Otherwise, we need to stay focused on why this story erupted and was propelled throughout the blogosphere by both Christians and non-Christians, left and right, and pro- and anti- Zionists alike. It concerns a churchman’s right to express views however he chooses, and the right of his critics to do likewise. Yet instead the police were called in and another blogger threatened.

Either we believe in free speech, or only when it is convenient to our views. Which is it?

Not associated with any UK Anglican evangelical gr...

2010-01-27T18:12:48.198Z
Not associated with any UK Anglican evangelical groups by any chance are you Andrew?

James - the logic of your argument against Stephen...

2010-01-27T17:41:54.279Z
James - the logic of your argument against Stephen Sizer seems to be as follows.

Person A quoted statement X made by person B

Person B believes X Y and Z

Therefore person A also believes Y and Z

I would suggest such logic is deeply flawed.

There is no reason to question the holocaust, but as you know holocaust denial is a criminal offence in some countries, even honest research is forbidden. It seems to me the desire to implicate Stephen Sizer in holocaust denial is an attempt to silence him.

Speaking of abusive comments, would anyone like to...

2010-01-27T17:09:20.819Z
Speaking of abusive comments, would anyone like to see some of the abusive comments Mordechai haCohen left me - such as "Son of Penises" - while he was working for and being paid by Sizer to harass me:

http://seismicshock.wordpress.com/2010/01/27/stephen-sizer-hired-ex-israel-soldier-to-harass-me/

Gabi, if Sizer has misbehaved then we should rebuk...

2010-01-27T15:36:36.317Z
Gabi, if Sizer has misbehaved then we should rebuke him too.

But have you looked into some of the things that Seismic Shock has been doind and saying? They are really quite poisonous. An even take on this case surely has to include a condemnation of that?

On the issue of closing the comments on his blog, many people do this when the volume of abusive comments becomes too much to bear. For example, on the BBC's post relating to this incident, they have also closed the comments, presumably because some of the vitriol that you can see on other sites was making its way here.

I think that Dr. Calvin's review of the situat...

2010-01-27T15:04:36.984Z
I think that Dr. Calvin's review of the situation that is happening is a very fair and just one.
I do not know every single detail on this whole issue but i do know that the more i look into it and read about Sizer’s views and, more importantly, his way of expressing them I believe that it is only fair that he should get this response which, as Calvin says is 'breaking across the blogosphere'.
If someone wishes to state their views publicly, they must understand that they will be challenged by people with opposing views. The fact that Sizer closed his comments section on his blogs and now threatens, and alerts the authorities about anyone who references him with disagreements and facts on his public activities proves that he cannot handle being opposed.
I am all for peacemaking and doing anything to stop divisions within Christianity, but the fact that someone expresses their views on the internet and gets 'cautioned' as Sizer seems to believe, proves that free speech has gone out the window even though he may say whatever he wants about the State of Israel and Zionists.
I just pray that he sees his wrong doing in this whole matter.

Sorry Freddie - the link certainly used to work! ...

2010-01-27T15:00:50.924Z
Sorry Freddie - the link certainly used to work!

Try http://www.comw.org/warreport/fulltext/0604dershowitz.pdf for Dersh's paper, or more resources on Mearsheimer & Walt at

http://www.engageonline.org.uk/archives/index.php?id=17

James, the link in your article to the Dershowitz ...

2010-01-27T13:49:41.114Z
James, the link in your article to the Dershowitz paper is broken. Is it somewhere else now? Did it make it through the peer review process?

Excellent article James! Thanks for the link:- <...

2010-01-27T12:51:47.525Z
Excellent article James!

Thanks for the link:-

If I was Stephen Sizer, Christian Antizionist – James Mendelsohn

Andrew, "The many accusations against him a...

2010-01-27T12:36:24.158Z
Andrew,

"The many accusations against him are simply baseless as far as I can see."

Are you seriously saying that the accusations of Sizer circulating material written by antisemites, and of using antisemitic sources and motifs, are baseless, in spite of all the evidence? In that case can you please refute my case against Stephen Sizer at http://engageonline.wordpress.com/2009/03/21/if-i-was-stephen-sizer-christian-antizionist-james-mendelsohn/ ? Have you actually looked at what I have written and the evidence I have linked to?

Rev Sizer couldn't refute any of my charges except one (and a minor one at that). I'm just thankful he didn't set the police on me.