Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Who Writes History?

I have been disturbed by a thought that is not new to me, but one that has hit me afresh. I have been reading the book The Cleansing of Palestine by Ilan Pappe -- and I have simply been astounded by the documented events that happened in the formation of the nation of Israel in 1948 that I simply was not told. Ilan Pappe is actually an Israeli historian who simply could not stand to have the truth not be told about the atrocities that have happened to the Palestinian people during these years of "destiny." By all measures, Ilan Pappe documents through transcripts of meetings, military orders, diaries, and other resources the atrocities committed by the Israeli people toward the Palestinian people who owned 94% of the land that was taken away from them, by force, and given to the nation of Israel (England played a major role in all of this happening until 1936 when they decided to let the UN make the decision about Palestine -- which after 9 months of looking at the issues ignored the pleads of the Palestinians [the natives of the land] and the other Arab nations ruling in favor of the Jewish people because of the recent Holocaust).

The methods planned out by the Israeli people in what is known as "Operation Dalet" (the fourth letter of the Hebrew alphabet) include: village raids, key individual executions in front of entire villages held at gun point, burning down of houses, planting of land mines in rubble to keep people away, rapes, and other atrocities (I am starting to understand more and more why the Middle Eastern countries do not favor the Western nations supporting Israel). By the end, over 800,000 Palestinians were forcefully displaced from their homes. While I was totally sickened by these truths that do not surface in any of my history books -- it struck me like lightening once again -- history is often written by those that are victorious in battle.

While it sometimes does occur, we often ignore, if not silence, the victims of empires expanding their spoils of war. For example, do we hear of the modern histories of the American Indians that lost their land in the war? Or more close to home, if we did not have the Bible, where would we hear in the annals of Roman history about the atrocities done to Christians? Very little information (outside of the antics of Nero) are found about the way in which Christians were constantly persecuted as atheistic, incestuous, treasonous, anarchists that were probably even cannibals -- at least that's the rumor.

I do not think, however, that this means that we should be suspicious of all history, but I do think this should make us think more critically about "the way things are." For example, I know the history books will write about the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime and the "War on Terrorism," but who is going to write about the perspective of the impoverished Iraqi who is trying to stay away from the crosshairs of each side? Who is writing about the women in Afghanistan who are caught in the middle of a political tug-of-war of the east trying to keep them hidden in traditional Islam and the west trying to "free" them by exposing them to shameful situations from their culture's perspective? Who will write the history of the generation of children experiencing genocide on the losing side of the chaos in Darfur?

All in all, I hope we are careful in our devotion to an idea of innocence toward a nation as written by history, because terrorism is simply a matter of perspective -- I pray we are constantly keeping God's call to a pure and faultless religion in the forefront of our minds. I pray we are caring after the one's lost in the cracks of our history books: the orphans and the widows.

5 comments:

Sara said...

this is SO eye-opening!... it is good for us to be reminded of what God has called us to--taking care of people, loving them and sharing the Gospel with them!... our duty as Christians is not to protect ourselves or wage war in an earthly manner!... we wage war on our knees! praying to the God of the universe who is more than capable of protecting us and who is more than capable of protecting our brothers and sisters in Christ all over the world!! how often do we pray for our brothers and sisters around the world??... on that note....

i also think that often, since we are so far removed (physically speaking) from these countries that are experiencing war, genocide, etc. it is easy for us to forget that there are PEOPLE living in these countries! i know this sounds juvenile or something, but i believe it's TRUE!! if we really saw them as PEOPLE, would we be so quick to think their lives are worth so little or that violence is the answer or that they can't think for themselves.... i also think we need to be so careful about what we think God is leading us to do--did Jesus not die for ALL of mankind? how can we favor some over others?!... for instance, the terrorism on palestine or the genocide in darfur--how are these things getting overlooked by us?? by the world?!!... i also feel that sometimes we can say things are of God, but we MUST allow our motives to be pure--we must allow God to sift through what our own desires are and what His desires are for us! and beware of what we tack his name onto!... His Spirit will not fail us in bringing truth to the forefront and helping us make truly wise decisions!...

i'm so thankful to be serving the God of the universe who is more forgiving than i can imagine and who has a greater love and devotion to mankind than i do!!... i pray his compassion and love will fill all of our hearts!!!

Jordan D. Wood said...

Great post. I want to highlight your last point by inverting it. You ended by saying that we, as followers of God (who by the way, according to Jesus "causes the sun to rise on the wicked and the good," Matt. 5.45) must be cautious about labeling any nation or group of people "innocent."

I think the inverse is also true. We must be careful about labeling any nation or group of people "evil," or "guilty," simply because they do not seem to want to be like us. It is easy, once wholes are labeled, to dismiss them categorically. The Romans called all the northern tribes "barbarians," the colonists called the Africans "not-as-evolved," the British colonists called the Native Americans "savages," and the Third Reich called the Jews "rodents." Once a State can convince its citizens that a group/nation is not human, treating them that way becomes less obviously immoral and heinous. Further, we have less motivation to actual hear them on their own terms, listening and considering their grievances and unjust sufferings, since their rationality is likened to that of beasts. They can't really think clearly, like us REAL humans, so they must not have any real complaints.

This, I fear, is what has happened in America (it wouldn't be the first, I'm afraid). The Arabs and Palestinians in the West Bank or in Gaza are "terrorists," and hate us, as Bush has reassured us, "because of our freedoms." Thus, it is not that they have any REAL reasons for their rampages and suicide bombings (although, to be sure, these are indeed terrible); rather, they just can't stand the fact that we are having such a good time over here (as Dr. Cavanaugh has pointed out).

The point is, whether we label a nation "innocent" or "guilty," we still never get around to really dealing with people on their own terms (i.e. confronting both their justices and injustices). We still never get around to being able to advocate the politics of Jesus, the politics of stopping the cycle of violence, which is fueled by such simplistic labels.

Brent McCrory said...

I think this reply goes along more with the 'Straw man' post...but it fits here too. It also kind of doesn't fit anywhere...

On the eve of a national election it is sad to hear so many Christians being so concerned about what might happen to America (note, I'm not anti-American; I'm pro-God). I'm preaching through 1 Peter right now and yesterday I was in 2:11-25. I spent some time talking about the election, our need to submit to the government (regardless of who's elected), honor those above us, etc.

I suppose what bothers me so much is the association of "Christianity" with a particular party (i.e., the Republicans). When you look at both parties and their 'strong points' as well as the 'weak points' it's clear to see that neither is "God's party".

For a long time I couldn't convince myself to vote Democratic due to (straw man) socialist tendencies they may have, as well as the abortion issue. I'm not saying I've switched or anything (and that's all I'll say about for whom I may or may not be voting), but in preparing for my sermon this week I really struggled with a variety of things. A couple follow...

God is in fact sovereign, so if He desires America to 'crumble' then it will. OK...

God also gives people the right to choose...and this is what hit me for the first time. It seems a shame that so many Christians will dismiss a Democratic candidate just because that party is "labeled" (back to the labeling comment by Jordan) as "Pro-Choice". Yet God gives us the right to choose does He not? Ultimately you could say that God gives everyone what they really want (i.e., eternity with or without Him - therefore He'll give America what 'we' really want as well...). So why should we disallow a party just because we think we can legislate morality (my goodness the prisons and all the laws on the books ought to indicate that we cannot)!?!?!

Now, to complicate this is the fact that there is something to be said about defending the helpless...but what if Christians put their faith into action by adopting, loving these single mothers going for abortions, basically being Jesus and "splachnezomai-ing" (i.e., having compassion - but being compelled to action b/c of that compassion) people!?

Would it then not matter what laws were on the books? God's love is the most powerful agent in the Universe but we get it so messed up when we think we have to FORCE people to comply and when others wrong us we have to FORCE them to realize it. What if God treated us that way? Does God not basically love us into change? I agree He does discipline us, but my goodness if He disciplined us like we think of doing to others...that's scary. If He withheld His approval and affection for us like we are prone to do when we're "wronged" - Yikes!

Well, I've rambled and I hope it's somewhat coherent. There's so much more to type (by the way I didn't go into the abortion/choice/God allows us to choose bit in my sermon) but this is all for now. Perhaps I won't really revisit this here.

(Shane (side note) I love you man - and miss you. Blessings on you, your family, and service to the Kingdom...)

I just want us to truly be the church. I want that so badly it brings tears to my eyes. Yet I'm also ashamed to admit that I enjoy many aspects of my 'comfort' as well. Father, may Your will be done in my life and the lives of Your followers; Jesus, thank You for Your example that You set in Your perfect obedience to the Father; Holy Spirit, please continue to conform and mold me more into the likeness of Jesus - for God's glory.

blessings - Brent

Brent McCrory said...

Oh, sorry man...I didn't see the note at the top of the page the first time.

I guess here would've been the spot for my 'parenthesis/brackets' paragraph...feel free to remove that one - the one directed toward you.

blessings - Brent

Shane J. Wood said...

The following comment was posted by Andrew Ramey:

Gary Burge has a book titled Whose Land? Whose Promise? which also tells the untold story. His millennial stance created for him a personal dilemma of faith. Also an eye-opening read. It is an interesting read as it demonstrates how our theology will impact our views on politics (as other areas). Many in the evangelical world turn a blind eye to the persecuted of Israel/Palestine due to their eschatology. Burge makes a good point when he states that if Israel wishes to base a claim to the land upon the covenant Yahweh made with Abraham then they must abide by covenantal standards of righteousness. I highly recommend this book.

In Christ,
andrew