Thursday, May 14, 2015

// // 3 comments

Highly Offensive

​   by Reb Gutman Locks   
   

Highly Offensive

 

Regarding my article "Stolen Property", a reader complained:

     "Why are you always insulting those who don't share your beliefs? If you're not gonna respect christians beliefs, then at least respect them as human beings. And calling them Thieves is highly offensive."

 

Gutman's response:

     No one ever gave the x-ians permission to take our holy Torah and attach it to their books of idolatry. But that is not our strongest complaint.

     As I write this article a large x-ian group is having a convention in Jerusalem, the theme of which is how to convert Jews to their idolatry! Not only did they steal our Torah, they also want to steal our people! There are centers in Israel that teach, to bless Israel you should accept their idol! G-d forbid!

     The same week that Muslims in the Mideast murdered 82 x-ian children the U.N. announced that Israel was the only country in the Mideast where x-ians were not being persecuted. That week the presbyterian church in America voted to ban and boycott Israel!

     For the past 2,000 years more Jews have been murdered in the name of that idol than any other name. Jews were exiled from x-ian countries and forced to abandon their property only because they were Jews, and the x-ians could not tolerate Jews living in their countries!

     The nazi soldiers (Y"S) were referring to that idol when they wrote, "god is with us" on their belt buckles.

     And you say that calling x-ians thieves is offensive? Sorry, but your complaint does not even dent your history.

 

3 comments:

Sharbano said...

I think we need to change semantics. Everyone speaks about Xtians "converting Jews". There are those from VOI who bluntly ask this question and those Xtians will reply this isn't so. In Their semantics this is true. As with Jewish texts they have changed the meaning and intent of words and so with the word "Conversion". No longer does it have the meaning of "believer". Now it has the connotation of force, such as in times past with forced conversions. They will admit they cannot "convert anyone". Instead the person has to come to it themselves. They are still aggressive in their pursuit for Jews to "accept Jsus as their savior", but Not by conversion. They would consider Conversion as something that is abandoned, and Now Xtianity is "supposed" to be 'Judaism enhanced'.

Therefore, the terminology needs to conform to bring honesty in Xtian dialog. When a host asks a Xtian leader if his aim is to "convert Jews" he is allowing the Xtian to be devious in his answer. All one has to do is look at the comments By Xtians and they will say "we don't want to [convert] Jews".

I'm unsure what the best method of asking would be but using the word "conversion" should be eliminated from the vocabulary. This should include Not only in direct conversations but also in the written word, articles or whatever. Maybe a question such as "Are you lending support or making efforts to [lead] Jews to Xhrist". Since they DO use the words "to lead" it may have some impact. In other words WE NEED to FORCE them to be honest.

Binyomin said...

I think Sharbano has hit the nail on the head. The professional missionaries have entire courses on what they call "contextualization." In a nutshell, it is dressing up their theology to make it more palatable to their audience. This is precisely what they are doing when they avoid the word conversion.

CDG, Yerushalayim said...

Better yet, maybe we need to corner them into admitting that they worship an idol.

Last I heard, they say that JC is 100% gxd & 100% man. I don't care if the % man is .0000000002%...as long as there is ANY percent man, it ain't The Real Deal.

Mashiach will be 100% man...and 0% gxd.

Related Posts with Thumbnails