The Second Coming
A positive view of fundamentalism
By Israel Shamir
They walk in big and jolly crowds on Jerusalem streets,
waving blue-and-white flags and smiling at passers-by;
the Christian friends of Israel often arrive in the
autumn, during the Tabernacles Feast. This year, too,
they came by thousands; cheered up the despondent
shopkeepers of Ben Yehuda Street, promised to stand by
us, in weather fair or foul; met with the
representatives of the settlers and with Sharon's
ministers. Their leader, Pat Robinson, proclaimed: "I
see the rise of Islam to destroy Israel and take the
land from the Jews and give East Jerusalem to Yasser
Arafat. I see that as Satan's plan to prevent the return
of Jesus Christ the Lord,"- and the crowds applauded
him, even ram horns blew.
The Israeli Jews are less than happy with them.
Religious Jews hate their crosses and visibly restrain
themselves from spitting in their direction as is their
wont. Ministers of the Jewish Nationalist Right hoodwink
their supporters promising them to use and manipulate
the silly visitors. In the educated and liberal circles
of Jerusalem (as well as in Boston, Washington and
Paris) it is usual to pour scorn on the fundamentalist
Evangelical Christians, to despise these 'country
hicks', 'homophobes' and 'warmongers'. But I like these
simple and sincere men and women; though their love of
Christ was misused by their cynical leaders as the first
love of a young country girl is misused by a cynical
urbanite.
What is, indeed, the proper Christian attitude to the
Jewish state? Nowadays it varies from "warm support" to
"indifferent", i.e. from support of Israel on the
grounds of an apocalyptic belief to the view that the
Jews and the state of Israel have no more meaning for
Christians than Inuit. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan
Williams offered a compromise affirming the need for a
Jewish state and the state's duty to be good to its
neighbours. A Palestinian Christian, Jonathan Kuttab of
Sabeel wrote him an open letter bitterly complaining
that he "ignored the Palestinian people on whose land
the Jewish state was created" but "was satisfied that
the Archbishop did not support eschatological or
prophecy-driven interpretations". However this discourse
is missing the fourth leg: the rejection of the Jewish
state on the ground of an apocalyptic tradition; and so
we shall supply this leg.
Indeed, the "eschatological or prophecy-driven
interpretations" are unavoidable; millions of Americans
express them openly and millions of Europeans feel them
acutely. No amount of empathy with the Palestinians has
been able to change the widespread feeling that was well
expressed by Lord Balfour: "The fate of the world, the
millennia-old plan of Redemption and the Second Coming,
is more important than the immediate concerns of local
inhabitants". Balfour, probably the Archbishop of
Canterbury, other shepherds of the Catholic and
Protestant Churches, and many, many ordinary folks feel
about the fate of Palestine as [Egyptian President Gamal
Abdel] Nasser felt about the fate of Nubian villages
when he built the Aswan Dam: 'tis pity but they'll have
to suffer for the greater good of the land and its
people.
Let us follow this simile a bit farther. If the Aswan
Dam were to flood the Nubian villages, Pharaonic temples
and Coptic monasteries, but will provide Egypt with
water and food -- fine and good; we shall just
compensate the poor Nubians and relocate the monks. If
the Dam were to create zillions of mosquitoes and
bilharzia man-eating worm, arrest the inflow of
fertilising Nile ooze and disrupt harvests, we shall
regret the folly of building the Dam but stick with it
hoping for the better. But were we to recognise the Dam
as a new Damocles sword hanging over Egypt, allowing its
neighbours to blackmail the country by the treat of
nuclear targeting the Dam and turning the Lake of Nasser
into the Sea of Doom for this ancient country - we would
change our view about the setup rather radically and
begin gradually dismantling the project.
In other words, we (as opposed to many friends and
enemies of Palestine) may agree that prophecies are
coming true, but which prophecies? There are two
competing mutually exclusive versions of Apocalypse, a
Judaic and a Christian. According to the Jews, after
Jewish sufferings, God's rage will be awaken and he will
avenge the shed Jewish blood and restore their good
fortunes: the outcasts will become the leaders. Theirs
will be the only spiritual centre of the world in
Jerusalem, they will outlaw or kill believers in Christ
and other idolaters, demolish churches, de-spiritualise
and disarm the nations, will get seven gentile slaves to
a person, collect all material and spiritual riches, and
will live happily ever after shepherding the happy
gentile flock.
In the Christian narrative of forthcoming events, before
the new spiritual awakening of Christendom (described as
the Second Coming), the Christian world is to sink
slowly into the abyss of de-spiritualisation and Mammon
worship; its nadir is described as "the Antichrist
rule", the end of Kali Yuga, as they say in India. The
prophets connected this dramatic development with the
return of the Jews and with re-establishment of Judaic
cult in Jerusalem. This was supposed to be the lowest
point of spiritual descent, the darkest hour before the
sunrise, for Judaism is based on rejection of Christ.
This mass apostasy will cause a horrible war; in its
aftermath, the survivors will return to Christ.
The prophets and fathers of the Church did not determine
whether the Antichrist was to be a Jew (or even a
person), but the intricate connection between the Jews,
restoration of their cult and the Doom of Christendom
was a universally accepted dogma, East or West. In the
West, as long ago as the seventh century, Isidor, the
bishop of Seville, knew of the "Antichrist who will take
Jerusalem and re-establish the Jewish temple and the
Jewish kingdom" before taking over the Church and the
world. In the East, St John the Damascene prophesied
that the Antichrist will come to Jews and for Jews,
against Christ and Christians. The Church Fathers
considered the Rise of the Antichrist as the rise and
temporary triumph of Judaism. In the Tenth Century, St
Andrew prophesied that the kingdom of Israel will be
restored, and that it will be the launching-pad of the
Antichrist.
The secret of this confluence of two narratives is
hidden in the idea of de-spiritualisation: the Church
fathers were aware that the Jews seek to remain the only
sacral unity within profane mankind, while they wished
the world to overflow with sacrality like a jar with
good wine.
When a Christian observes the US Army and its
auxiliaries being sent to subdue the Middle East and
establish a Judaic ruler on the throne of Solomon; when
the Jewish state declares its supreme sovereignty upon
earth by assuming right to judge and doom anyone,
anywhere; when prime ministers and presidents gather to
deliberate whether they are doing everything they can
for the Jews; when the superpower rates its allies by
their attitude to the Jews; when princes of the church
are begging forgiveness of the Jews, and when practical
steps are being taken to renew the sacrifices in
Jerusalem - one can't but recognise that prophecies are
being fulfilled. One also can't but recognise that
whoever supports this prophesied "rise of Jews" sides
with the Antichrist. One may also find comfort in
knowing that the dark night of the Antichrist will
eventually bring the great spiritual awakening, or 'the
Second Coming', but may one then hasten the darkness of
the night while wishing for sunrise?
In the Bolshevik tradition, this is called "the worse,
the better"; i.e. the worse is the situation, the better
are chances to bring forward the desired revolution. It
is a legitimate view; many good people feel that Bush
the Worse is also Bush the Better, as he is so obviously
evil that he antagonises even groups liable to support
an equally bad but cunning politician. In Israel, a
Jewish Ultra-Orthodox authoress wittily explained her
antizionist community's support for Benjamin Netanyahu
the Zionist: The Ultra-Orthodox realize that Netanyahu
will surely destroy the Zionist state.
This attitude ceases to be legitimate when it is
transformed into a positive action of supporting evil.
One may passively find comfort in knowing that a nasty
situation will be soon over, but one may not actively
provoke the nasty situation "to have it done with", by,
say, campaigning for Bush or Netanyahu. Such a
Machiavellian action is perilous for the soul.
The rise of the Antichrist as the last stage before the
Second Coming may be compared with the betrayal and the
Crucifixion before the Resurrection. Thus actively
aiding and abetting the Antichrist, in order to speed up
the Second Coming, is tantamount to playing the role of
Judas betraying Christ - if he betrayed Christ in order
to quicken the Redemption. A mad theologian Nils
Runeberg, a character in a Jorge Luis Borges story,
admired Judas for his deed, as without him, the divine
plan would not be fulfilled. Such an approach is called
"antinomian", and Christ foresaw it when he said: "the
Son of Man will go as it has been decreed, but woe to
that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed" (Mat
26:24). Indeed, for Christians, Judas is the symbol of
the worst in human nature; Dante planted him in the
Ninth Circle of his Inferno, while a Jewish author made
him a national hero in the Toledoth Yeshu.
Lurian Cabbala is decidedly antinomian; Sabbatai Tsevi,
a post-Lurian Cabbalist messiah of 17th century,
believed that sins lead to redemption. His adversaries
claimed he would sodomise a boy while wearing
phylacteries and singing hymns. The spiritual leader of
the Israeli Cabbalist school, Rabbi Kook, also believed
that mass murder, rivers of blood and a sinful life are
the harbingers of salvation, though he never called for
direct antinomian action - this was a later addition by
his disciples.
So-called Christian Zionists are antinomians as they
side with the Antichrist in order to quicken the Second
Coming, but woe to that man who helps Antichrist to
destroy the world. Whether they believe in the Second
Coming of Christ or not, people who knowingly implement
antichristian plans are better called "the Antichrist
Zionists". Rise of the Antichrist Zionists is a part of
the prophesied Apostasy of the Church. But our feeling
towards them are like that towards misled brothers. They
were ensnared by their spiritual longing for Christ. We
do not mind that they are fundamentalists - we regret
that they are not sufficiently fundamentalist.
II
A fundamentalist is one who follows the traditional
teaching of the Church. There are no stricter
fundamentalists than the monastic community of Mt Athos
in Northern Greece, where I write these words. Athos is
a great reservoir of spirit, and many people come to
partake of its waters. (Charles, the Prince of Wales
stays here in an abbey, too.) The monks keep the fire of
Christian faith as it was kindled by Christ and his
apostles. They do not expect their salvation will come
from Jews, as it already came in the person of Christ.
They feel no need to seek Rapture for they were given a
plan of their own: to try and achieve the Second Coming
by means of prayer and spiritual enlightenment. For
them, the Second Coming is the individual mystic
experience of seeing Christ in his glory, and it is
attainable by divine grace. Thus, the Second Coming
happened many times, and will happen again and again.
The roots of the Greek Church go beyond the first
mission of St Paul to Athens, for he recognised the
religious zeal of the Hellenes. They did not have to be
converted, but enlightened. Even today, Greeks are
devoted to Christ, to His Mother Our Lady Mary and to
her earthly manifestation, their own Mother Church
established by SS John and Paul.
Their church stays out of politics, but exercises moral
influence. Guided by her church, Greece does not
participate in the Iraqi war, her sons do not die on the
streets of Baghdad; and this most religious, most
Christian nation shares the view of good Muslims and
ours, that the world including Greece is threatened not
by Islamic terrorism, but by the US fight against
terrorism. Their Archbishop Christodoulos correctly
stated that terrorism is caused by the "injustice and
inequality that pervades the world."
In The Wall Street Journal, a Zionist Greek Takis
Michas, in a piece called Is Greece a Western Nation?
writes with horror: "Such views seem to have more in
common with public opinion in Cairo or Damascus than in
Berlin or Rome." Indeed, such views are common among
Christians of Jerusalem and Damascus, Madrid and
Montevideo, in short, in all lands where Christians are
united in Apostolic Churches. So much for the silly
concept of conflict between Christendom and Islam
promoted by these guardians of the Christian faith, the
Wall Street Journal and the New York Times!
As opposed to the West, the Greeks knew neither hatred
nor fear of Jews. As they had their own national church,
they did not transfer their spiritual values to Jews for
safekeeping; and thus had no reason to bewail the loss
of them. Where there is no guilt, there is no fear,
either. Where there is no fear of Jews, there is no
automatic support for the US, either, and Theodorakis'
view that "the root of evil today is the policy of
President Bush" rather than the Muslim world is shared
by many Greeks.
Greeks know Muslims not from books - they lived in close
quarters with them for a millennium. They are aware that
their long and troubled relationship with their Turk
neighbours reached its nadir under the anti-Islamic rule
of Kemal Ataturk, while Islamic Sultan Selim the Grim
spent a fortune restoring the monasteries of Athos.
Now, both the Greek Left and the Greek Right are united
in their rejection of the American drive to conquer the
East, to enforce multiculturalism and to separate Church
and State. They support the Palestinians and wish the
Jews to come to their senses. They are a good example
for US fundamentalists. Indeed, Greece is the proof that
fundamentalist Christianity is not that of George Bush,
and that the alternative to him is not monopolised by
the First Lesbian Synagogue of New York.
Mt Athos, this green wooded island stretching into
Aegean Sea, an independent Christian nation under Greek
protectorate and home to twenty massive abbeys, a place
where hundreds of monks and thousands of lay pilgrims
pray to Lord, work the land, grow heavy olives and red
apples, is a good place to recognise an unacknowledged
victim of the Iraqi war: Christianity. Its reputation
has been besmirched by people who take the name of
Christ - and of fundamentalism - in vain. From the New
York Times to FrontPage magazine, various Judaic
publications provide an outlet for anti-Muslim rant, for
calls to war in the name of Conflict of Civilisations.
As a result, some Muslims began to answer by
counter-attacking Christianity; and European and
American youth learn to think of their faith as a danger
to mankind. However, this victim is innocent: true
Orthodox Christendom, as fundamentalist as it can be,
firmly rejects the creed of Mammon and the US war on
Islam.
Why were the Greeks better than the Western
intellectuals at recognising these media lies for what
they were? The reason, in my view, is the national
character of the Greek Apostolic Orthodox Church.
Separation of Church and State, this much vaunted
accomplishment of the French revolution and even more of
the US founding fathers, cut off the anchors of the
Western society and it drifted straight towards the
rocks. While in France the national Catholic church
still occupies an important and exclusive place, the US,
the country without a state church, became a victim and
a servant of Mammon. The small, independent churches of
the US had no ability to form the mind of the nation;
they competed for an outlet in the Jewish-owned media;
they were forever threatened by tax authorities; they
broke with tradition and became prey for the wolves.
This absence of one church further undermines the
underlying concept of unity-in-God, elaborated by T S
Elliot in The Christian Idea of Society (1939). People
live together united by an idea; this idea may (or
indeed should) be their common worship and uniting
communion, thus the need for one national church that
unites its people by a single communion.
The US was a first experiment on a large scale of what
will happen to a society that is built on the quicksand
of profit, instead of the rock of faith. Given this
background, one can understand the US churches'
vulnerability to the Judaic influence and their
readiness to support the Judaic Doomsday script. But
this should be called heresy - not fundamentalism!
(Full version of Part Two: An Island of Faith can be
read on
http://www.israelshamir.net/shamirImages/Shamir/Greece.htm)
III
Fundamentally, the church always believed that the Jews
will be eventually saved by coming to Christ. This
important event will accompany the defeat of the
Antichrist, as part of the Great Reawakening
(metaphorically called the Second Coming). Then the
sheep will be separated from goats, and those who accept
Christ will continue into future life. As the Rise of
Antichrist occurs in our days, we witness the first
fruits of this sifting.
Our brother Mordechai Vanunu is one of the first
swallows. This holy man, a scion of a learned Sephardi
Jewish family, was horrified by the Jewish persecution
of the native Palestinians and came to Christ. As a
Christian, he denounced the Armageddon weapons of
Antichrist, manufactured in Dimona, in the South of the
Holy Land, within sight of Sodom. He was severely
punished by the Antichrist and suffered 18 years in
jail; but by God's will he survived it like Daniel
survived the Lions' Pit.
There are many others: Neil and Gilad, Daniel and
Menachem, Jews by birth who denounced the Judaic cult of
Death and accepted the Living Christ. In every case,
relationship to the Palestinian suffering was the sieve:
whoever disregarded it followed Antichrist; whoever
denounced it, began his way to Christ.
Though modesty precludes me from referring to myself, I
have a duty to witness. A vain and suffering man, I was
granted the grace of Christ and was reborn in his glory.
Though the ways of God are mysterious, I believe that it
was my compassion and love for the native people of the
Holy Land that made me worthy of His Theophany. A poem
by the Greek Alexandrian poet Cavafy helped me to
recognise my way:
For some people the day comes
When they must say the great Yes
Or the great No. He who has the Yes
Ready within him, says it
And goes by the path of honour, strong in his
conviction.
He who refuses does not repent. Asked again,
He'd still say no. Yet that No - the right No -
Drags him down all his life.
I do not regret my Yes, and the attacks of enemies do
not break my spirit. I am daily grateful to Christ who
saved me from the Judaic paranoia of hating and being
hated, and brought me into the world of loving and being
loved. And every Jew who has come to Christ by the way
of rejecting the Judaic ideas, by upholding love for the
nations, is a portent of Salvation.
Now I have received good news, great news from a great
man, Alfred Lilienthal, an American Jewish author of
many books including famous What Price Israel? published
in 1953 and republished last year. Alfred Lilienthal was
one of the first Jews who renounced Zionist separation
and mistreatment of Palestinians.
Now Suzanne Nicole, his webmaster, secretary and
assistant wrote to me:
"At age 90, Alfred is quite frail and too blind to read,
his short-term memory is severely impaired, so he has to
be asked short questions (in a loud voice since he is
also growing deaf), or he forgets what he is being
asked. His long-term memory is still quite good, so he
is also able to discuss concepts such as the difference
between Judaism and Zionism. He understands current
events when he first hears about them but quickly
forgets the details. I did paraphrase one of your
statements from The Pardes to him:
"Thus, this discourse should help an individual to
decide whether he wants to be a Jew, or not, in the same
way one may choose whether one wants to be a communist
or a Quaker, for it is my deep conviction that to be or
not to be a Jew is an act of free will."
He replied, "And that is what I have finally done." He
was baptised sometime shortly before last Thanksgiving.
Even in What Price Israel? in 1953, he had referred to
Jesus as a prophet of Israel. One day a couple of
ministers had come by to see him at the urging of a
Christian friend, and he made the decision in what
seemed to some perhaps as a senile moment. But Friday
afternoon, he said, "What is today? Is Ned coming to
take me to church today?" So, it has stuck. He may not
remember what day it is, but he does remember each day
that he has chosen to become a follower of Christ like
you."
This conversion of Alfred Lilienthal is an important
event, for it tells us that Christ's grace is available
to Jews and not only in the physical Holy Land: It is
enough to renounce the separation of a Jew and a
Gentile, to give up hate and to accept the love that is
Christ.
Christian faith is not compatible with Jewish
exclusivity. The mission among Jews can be successful
only if the whole complex of Jewish separatism is
removed, when their hearts are circumcised and they are
brought into full communion with the people they live
amongst. I have met in Israel with some 'messianic
Jews', who were full of hate to the native people of the
Holy Land. Not surprisingly, they thought Jesus Christ
came just for Jews, and the Holy Land was theirs, too;
they worshipped the Israeli Army and the flag of Israel.
For them, the pivotal moment of history was not the
Resurrection, but the Destruction of the Jewish Temple.
In other words, they only pretended to be Christians, or
not even that, as they preferred to be called 'messianic
Jews'.
Indeed, the plans of Almighty include the Jews; like the
plans of the Ring included the hobbits; but some will
play the role of Frodo, while others will take the part
of Gollum, some will support Antichrist, and some will
stay with Christ.
The 'Antichrist Christians' may revert to true
fundamentalism, reject Antichrist and his drive to
destroy the last enclaves of spirit still hidden in the
high mountains of Asia. Then they will be called
'Christ's Christians'. They may campaign for
strengthening and uniting the American churches and
eventually bringing them into full communion with the
Apostolic Churches of the East and the West. They may
campaign and undo the extreme separation of church and
state in their country; for sacred and profane must be
reunited. They may reintroduce worship of Our Lady, as
the way to connect to nature. She performed a miracle in
the neighbouring Mexico, and healed the wounds of the
native people; she can repeat it in the US. Then you
will be blessed by all those who damn you today; and the
Americans will be met as friends by friends wherever
they go. The plans of the Antichrist will be ruined, as
happened before; and mankind will resume its noble path
of striving to discover its divine qualities. For the
main message of the Orthodox Christianity is that God
became Man so Man can become God; this is the true
meaning of the Second Coming.
Responses of
Readers:
From Ahmed, Bahrain
Greek people are such wonderful people, so easy to be
with and so light and refreshing in their being. I
always felt at home amongst them. They were always glad
to share their bread, fetta and olives with a stranger
like me. If this hospitality was ingrained in them then
they truly are blessed by God. If they inherited it from
Christ then they are truly showing grace to Christ for
following his ways. As a Muslim, I have always
considered myself to be a Christian too for I believe in
the immaculate birth of Christ, the Spirit of God, and
his Mother being The Jewel of the women of Paradise.
Bless them both and God bless Greece.
Shamir replies: I also consider Muslims being
Christians; the third branch of the tree of faith, next
to Orthodox, Catholic and Lutheran branches.
From Antoine The prophecies, as events supposed to
happen in a "future", in a "tomorrow", have been already
accomplished to my humble Christian opinion. On the
Cross, Jesus said "everything have been accomplished".
This precisely means that prophecies have no more
accuracy as futuristic events in a time "to come".
At Easter Sunday, we do say "today is the day of
Resurrection". This "today" has no "time" dimension. It
is now, yesterday, tomorrow, it is not a "chronologic"
sequence but rather a "kairotic" event. This "kairotic"
perspective is indeed the same that allows us to say at
the end of the "anaphora": "We make the anamnesis (
remembrance ) of your incarnation, your death, your
resurrection and your second coming". In the western
rites, this same liturgical moment is said: "We remember
your death etc... and we EXPECT your second coming". In
the East, and since "everything had been accomplished"
we can very easily "remember the future". Remembering
the future, dear Shamir, is at the very heart of
"Iconopeia", or "image craft", i.e. thinking through
images.
I know this may sound a little strange. But what I want
to say is that all the prophecies of the Old Testament
have no more accuracy as "chronologic events to happen
in a future to come". They are definitely "kairotic
moments" that has been fully accomplished already.
Therefore, to recognize to the Zionist state a
theological value, in matter of salvation, is a very
strange attitude for a Christian.
As for your article, I like it very much. I admire your
courage and I acknowledge your Christian faith.
Shamir replies: though it is certainly true, still the
apocalyptic ideas were known to the Eastern Fathers of
the Church.
From Michael:
…It seems to me that the essence of both Judaism and
Christianity is spiritual rather than material. In
Judaism, this spirituality is worldly, but only up to a
point. It may well be part of Jewish spirituality to
form communities that live according to a certain law.
It may sometimes be part of Jewish spirituality to form
communities, even empires, against the will of other
men. But it is certainly not part of Jewish spirituality
to do this against God's will. The Bible on the contrary
makes it crystal clear that Jews continually find it
difficult to keep God's law, and that they must accept
the consequence of diaspora.
It was long the consensus of the Jews that, with the
destruction of the Temple, the time for empire-building
had past, and the time for humility, submission and
contemplation was upon us. A true Jewish fundamentalism
would have to take account of this consensus. This does
not mean that there might never come a time when Jews
were once again sovereign in the holy land. But it does
mean that anyone who claimed to establish sovereignty in
accord with the dictates of the Jewish religion would
have to receive a clear indication of God's command that
the time of contemplation was past. To suppose that
modern Zionism, an intensely secular enterprise, was
founded on such an indication would be ludicrous. Nor
can even the most fanatical settlers show a sign or a
prophet credible to the spiritual leaders generally. So
the true Jews are either those who remain contemplative,
or those whose actions testify, not to prideful
ambition, but to a respect for God's laws and His
punishments. Anti-zionists are far more likely to embody
such respect than Zionists. And the same may be said for
the worshippers of Mammon. It is not forbidden, even in
the diaspora, for a Jew to become wealthy. But it is
forbidden to use this wealth to reverse God's verdict,
to amass a human power divergent from His will. This is
what happens when wealth is put in the service of
Zionism.
As for Christianity, its spirituality is clearly much
less worldly. Here too one must not exaggerate.
Seclusion from the world and its concerns is considered
admirable but far from mandatory: one may fight
injustice; one may help others; one may live an active,
engaged yet Christian life. But - and this I think is
crucial to the issues you raise - genuine Christian
fundamentalism, like genuine Jewish fundamentalism, must
never seek to manipulate history on a grand scale. True
Judaism and Christianity have in common the abhorrence
of pride, and Christian Zionism, like Jewish Zionism, is
pride in its most sinful form. It is not just that using
American or British power to accelerate eschatology in
Palestine would require a sign as unambiguous as the
coming of Christ Himself. It is also that the spiritual
Sorelianism of encouraging the ascent of Antichrist is
literally the worst insolence conceivable, the
arrogation of a literally Godlike power to visit
calamity on the earth in His name. True fundamentalism
practices the fundamentals of the faith. Nothing could
be further from Christian fundamentalism than the lack
of humility and love inherent in this geopolitical
tinkering with evil.
From Hans, Norway
The message from Alfred Lilienthal is fantastic. His
life work is finished. He will be remembered for ages -
as a messenger of the truth of the Gospel.
Still: The very strange thing is that even Judaism's
apocalyptic system comes very close. The message of
Talmud is very clear:
http://www.come-and-hear.com/kethuboth/kethuboth_111.html#PARTb
"One, that Israel shall not go up [all together as if
surrounded] by a wall;8 the second, that whereby the
Holy One, blessed be He, adjured Israel that they shall
not rebel against the nations of the world; and the
third is that whereby the Holy One, blessed be He,
adjured the idolaters that they shall not oppress Israel
too much'. And Rab Judah? - It is written in Scripture,
That ye awaken not, nor stir up.1"
Even the words - "Israel shall not go up all together as
if surrounded by a wall". And if they "go up as if
surrounded by a wall":
R. Eleazar explained: The Holy One, blessed be He, said
to Israel, 'If you will keep the adjuration, well and
good; but if not, I will permit your flesh [to be a
prey] like [that of] the gazelles and the hinds of the
field'.
I think the few orthodox Jews left that still follow the
terms of the Talmud here are "the remnant of Israel",
the ones that shall see salvation. But this is
complicated dialectics - I don't know if it can be
incorporated.
From Geoff, Oxford
What sort of writing is this? Is it writing about
something? To some extent. Mainly, it is writing to
someone. It is a letter, addressed to Jews and
Christians.
To Jews it says, grosso modo: "A Jewish identity always
will be problematic, for you and for everyone you have
to do with, individually and collectively; here is the
solution; become Christian." To Christians it says: "The
story of the second coming is hard to take, yes; but
there is great meaning in it; the meaning is that,
simultaneously, Jesus' message of compassion is to be
renewed and Talmudic exclusivism is to be overcome."
This is good stuff. It is not all there is to the piece.
There is another level to it. This fits together with
the first level, as above, but is not necessarily
implied by it. It says something different about the
story of the second coming. The story is true, you
suggest here, not just in the sense that it offers a
valid means to transform experience positively but also
in the sense that it correctly describes external,
objective reality. It is true not only for Christians
and Jews now but for all people for all time.
Well, if you like. I don't say that's false. I ask how
useful it is.
Suppose you address an audience of 100 Jewish people and
say that the way forward for them, determined by God and
History, is for them to become Christian. And then
suppose you address another audience of 100 Jewish
people and say that a way forward for them, consonant
with an understanding, of God and of History, that
works, is for them to become Christian. In each case,
how many are likely to become (a) less inclined to
Zionism and (b) more inclined to Christianity? More in
the first case than in the second, or vice versa?
And is this message only designed for Zionist Jews and
fervent Christians? How about the non-Zionist Jews and
the tepid Christians in whom it would be useful to
stimulate a more activist stance? Is over-statement or
under-statement more likely to achieve the desired
effect?
And then, (as we were saying in London a couple of
months back), it is perhaps worth remembering that most
of the world
¨ is neither Christian nor Jewish nor Muslim; and indeed
¨ tends to think of the Abrahamic religions as a bit
weird; and moreover
¨ is reinforced in that opinion by the situation in
Palestine - and as a result
¨ is less likely than would otherwise be the case to
translate revulsion at the patent injustice of what is
happening into effective action.
Is it not important to mobilise these people too? How to
do that? The first level of your message can contribute
to this cause; perhaps not the second level.
Love
Geoff
Shamir replies: this is indeed a letter to 'fervent
Christians'; it was not meant for Jews or Buddhists.
They will be mobilised by another letter J
From Hans, Sweden
I find your essay very touching and well written,
although I myself is not a religious person. This does
not mean that I am not a christian. I was raised in a
country where christendom was still a living entity and
all my underlying moral values obviously have their
origin from within the Bible. So the connection is there
although I later in life adopted the marxian world view.
But remember what Marx himself said, that he preferred a
wise idealist to a stupid materialist. I regard yourself
as being predominantly a wise idealist and I definitely
share your opinion that love instead of hate should be
"le genre humain".
As to my existential beliefs, I regard myself as being
an insignificantly small part of nature. This wonderful
and harsh entity, surrounding us all. Coming out of
nature and returning back to nature after life sounds a
lot like the christian burial ritual so in that respect
I feel like a part of something much greater, which I
prefer to name Nature. Apart from that I am still a
dialectical and historical materialist as described by
Marx.
And I definitely find your essay very appealing and
worth publishing.
From Ian, England
…One of your themes - that of despiritualisation - is of
great importance.
Here is what a despiritualised society looks like :
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1283478,00.html
"Sitting in the heart of the lowlands that once produced
much of Britain's coal, the centre of the city is now
almost entirely ringed by run down, sprawling, low-rise
estates which were originally conceived as high-density
housing for the local workforce. With little or no
recreational facilities and declining employment, many
areas of the city are spiralling into decline. Huge
numbers of properties, many of them close to the city
centre, are boarded up, burned out or simply falling
down. The collapse of the mining industry in the north
of the county has forced many workers back into the city
and it is their increasingly disaffected children who
are being drawn into Nottingham's drugs and guns
culture. "
Not exactly pretty, is it?
When observing those - like Blair or TV newsreaders -
who mouth words they do not believe about 'prosperity'
or 'success', I sometimes have the feeling of watching
an animated carcass, or perhaps an android of science
fiction.
Total despiritualisation has taken place: they have
(visibly) sold their souls..
From Augustin:
People are born different, some have more princely blood
and behaviour than
others. Before as well as after Christ there were
Christians. I have been
reading and seeking my whole life, but I cannot say that
I have become something
really distinct from what I was meant to become, still
at variance with the
answers I got; they were chance meetings with friends,-
like-hearted
individuals, or part friends - and with enemies, whom I
turned my back to
although keeping listening to them out of an
unprincipled curiosity about how
far people can go to or a kind of Schadenfreude, both
disgraceful but commonly
shared attitudes, I fear.
I follow with intellectual and spiritual pleasure your
discussions and share
most of your ideas and struggles; I suppose that you
must have been a Christian
your whole life without knowing it. I must have been
born a Christian too,
before ever having heard of Christ, and you may say that
I am one because I was
born into this judeo-christian society. I have great
sympathy for the Christian
teachings, but the mysteries remain and the reading in
between the lines can
turn it into anything we have met so far on the
christian front. Paul is such an
interpreter, acute, maybe a little intransigent, and he
is not the most harmful.
I would say that I can accept and recognise the
christian part of my cultural
basis, but that theologically there should never have
been a judean trait to it,
since the Old Testament should never have been added to
the christian corpus. My
cultural basis is certainly more Greek or Latin,
Germanic or Slavic than Jewish,
even if we use a lot of jewish christian names.
European-christian would be a
better definition, as there must be a sino-christian, a
judeo-christian (if you
insist, and if there is any), a indo-christian and so
forth. There are good
jews, since they are human beings, there are many mafias
(and the jewish one is
not the least powerful), there seems to be a majority
voting for Bush, for God's
sake: these are people who want to kill and get killed.
That is what you get
when you are frustrated of self-knowledge. Personally I
am too civilised to want
either, and I can only hope that some day a majority
will be like that. I think
that being civilised is being a christian, with or
without Christ. Didn't Christ
want peace and justice, and are not that very reasonable
(induced by reason)
proposals? The second coming is a cry of hope.
Reasonable and full of hope are
Plato, Zeno and Seneca, Epictetus and Aurelius,
humanism, enlightenment and
science. I sometimes have the impression that human
biological evolution is
stirring strongly these days, considering the amount of
precocious and
self-confident children I know of, about whom adults
keep saying that they seem
like extra-terrestrials. The new ones would be felt as
strangers.
For instance: what is the proper christian attitude
towards the Jewish state? As
a civilised human being I am against colonialism,
exploitation, accumulation of
riches and power. There is an International Law, a
Declaration of Human Rights,
better than the precepts of any religion. Prophecies and
apocalyptic teachings,
which attract broad interest and following, must be
psychological compensations.
The Old Testament should not stop with the return from
babylonian exile: the
history of jewish fanaticism, hopes and bloodbaths went
on in their promised
land until the Romans put an end to it. Now that they
are back they will go on
revering their unjust god, new gods, other facets of the
Mammon you talk about
(but the same old devil), and at the same time rejecting
them since the seed of
civilisation is planted in every soul. That is an
insurmountable contradiction
and must lead to despair and annihilation.
I don't give a shit about whether you are a
fundamentalist or not. My knowledge
of the pros and contras is and will be forever lacking
in width and depth. I
keep swimming in a river, upstream mostly, since I keep
unsatisfied with life
most of the times, except when I experience beauty and
love. Otherwise I feel
hatred, envy, fear and such things, certainly not
indifference. I have to accept
the facts of life, and through learning that, I am aware
that I follow the
precepts of intelligent and wise men, or simply wise
men, whom I suspect of
knowing or feeling more than I do, but who are assailed,
I suspect often
unbeknownst to themselves, by the same contradictions
and doubts, since not a
single one returned saying I am who I am.
Mount Athos must be an inspiring experience, a sort of
learned Hobbittown. Its
inhabitants no doubt will provide you with the
commentary on your views I am
incapable of giving. Forgive me my incoherence.
