ISRAEL, CHURCHES, AND CONGRESSIONAL AID: MORE HIGH OCTANE SPECULATIONNovember 30, 2012
First, consider this:
I'm one of those that is genuinely grateful to be living in a country that is secular, for like it or not, secularism affords an unprecedented degree of freedom and tolerance, though as we all know, liberty (and I do not confuse freedom and liberty) is under assault in it. It allows religious expression, but doesn't sanction any particular version of it, though, in recent years, it has made of secularism something of a religion in an of itself, with ludicrous strictures against menorahs or creche scenes on public property.
And there's no denying that one political party in this country has become the party of "religion" and "family values" and, as the article avers, "Judeo-Christianity" with its underpinning of dispensationalist "theology" and an almost unquestioning support for Israel, no matter what the latter does. (That party being the Grand Old Plop, in case you didn't know). The other party in this country, conversely, like the first one, both pimps God when convenient to it (usually during elections), but otherwise seems hell-bent to deny any acknowledgement of the vast influence of religion in our history and culture and seems to go out of its way to offend people of faith (any faith), at every opportunity. (That would be the Dummycrooks).
In that context, I've never understood U.S. foreign policy, for it seems oddly schizophrenic for a "secular" culture, witness our long-standing support for Israel, a clearly Zionist state, and our current policy of backing extremist regime changes in the Middle East. While Zionism, in my opinion, is itself more a secular doctrine than a religious one, such a foreign policy seems contradictory. If Congress is not empowered to make any law respecting the establishment of a religion or the prohibition thereof at home, isn't it something of a contradiction to pass budgets for the effective establishment of them abroad?
But as I read this, a disturbing though crossed my mind, one which co-author Scott DeHart and I talked about and briefly suggested inYahweh, the Two-Faced God, namely, if one's long term goal would be to establish a kind of global secularist culture, then what would stand in the way of that? Answer: the three great Yahwisms, two of which - Judaism and Islam - in their "founding documents" remain unreconstructed barbarisms. What better way, then, to achieve your goal, than to allow both to slip into more extreme expressions of fundamentalism, conflict, and war, the better to demonstrate their growing irrelevancy in the modern world?
If that's the game, then they're good at it, and don't expect the churches questioning support of Israel to go along with that. To do so, is to misread them.
See you on the flip side.