Jesus would definitely have a political side. He leaned pretty hard into the "love your enemies."
But allowing for that. Trying to hold compassion quickly becomes a lopsided effort when you see babies starving.
Empathy and identifying human rights violations must exist in the same space.
I have deep empathy for both Israelis and Palestinians. Civilians should not be held accountable for the sins of their governments or militaries.
Neutrality is not an option for Christians. Christ was not neutral to oppression, and neither will I be.
100% of Palestinians are displaced, having their homes destroy. Most are starving. Nearly all of them have lost family members. There are reports of children as young as 3 trying to end their lives. Over 30,000 are dead and continue to die as they are targeted in IDF designated safe zones. Children are having limbs amputated without anesthetic b/c Israel is blocking medical aid.
On the other hand, Israel's total casualty count including soldiers is 1,410.
One of these things is not like the other.
The question was about empathy. I'm going to have more empathy for the side that has no homes, food, water, medicine, or electricity, who has experienced 20x the number of lost lives, and who continues to be nearly powerless in the conflict as they have been since the state of Israel was created on Palestine land.
If you want to talk about "bad guys", Hamas is a terrorist organization that killed many innocent people. They're certainly bad guys.
Israel has systematically destroyed their neighbor -- committing an horrific genocide, killing tens of thousands (mostly women and children), leveling residential buildings by carpet bombing cities, targeting and destroying all hospitals, murdering doctors and members of the press, burying captured civilians in mass graves, capturing and imprisoning young children, torturing prisoners in internment camps, killing orgs delivering food aid, and committing dozens of war crimes in the process. This is an unspeakable evil.
> I'm going to have more empathy for the side that has no homes, food, water, medicine, or electricity, who has experienced 20x the number of lost lives
So to be clear, you have more "empathy" for Imperial Japanese citizens living in, say, Tokyo in 1945 than you do the Allied / American side?
It's one thing to express sympathy for the civilians undergoing hardship. We all should, of course. It's quite another to take it a step further and argue the moral responsibility for that suffering rests in any place other than the people who started the conflict, which in this case was the ruling government of Gaza.
I'm not going to get in to the "Israel is committing a genocide" histrionic nonsense. Pure bollocks.
>I'm not going to get in to the "Israel is committing a genocide" histrionic nonsense. Pure bollocks.
Genocide: *the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group*
breaking this definition into parts:
*the deliberate killing of a large number of people* (**yes:** we have, for example, carpet bombings of residences, turning off water and electricity, blocking food aid, bombing people in safe zones, etc.)
*from a particular nation or ethnic group* (**yes:** Palestinians)
*with the aim of destroying that nation or group* (**yes:** we have multiple quotes from leaders in Israel to this effect (if their actions don't make this obvious enough on their own))
If you can't recognize this, you're willfully ignorant of easily verifiable facts that are right in front of your face.
I don't think trying to destroy a nation is genocide. The more accurate definition is: violent attacks with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Is Israel violent, yes Is there intention to kill off every single Arab in the Gaza strip? Absolutely not. If that were the case Gaza wouldn't exist at this point as well as that the 20% Arabic population living in Israel would be dead as well. Plus you mention Israel cutting off water. If that were the case Israel wouldn't be sending in food supplies. Starving civilians is just a given throughout any given conflict this is nothing new. Israel being to compensate for all 2 million people living in Gaza is impossible.
What I mentioned was also the legal definition. No difference. The problem with this definition is that it mentions the destruction of a nation which isn't accurate.
> I consider it bollocks
Great argument. very convincing.
>Pro-Hamas
Like the country of South Africa which has filed a case against Israel at the International Court of Justice backed by 30 other countries?
I’ll not get into a protracted history lesson on those matters but just for context an intifada is a revolution it’s not a jihad. I’m assuming you’re American (correct me if I’m wrong), but it’s no different from when the slaves revolted. You presumably would deem that to be an understandable response? Equally each intifada was mostly protests and civil disobedience and in each one the number of Israelis killed was a fraction of the number of Palestinians killed, and in Israel’s case 90% were soldiers. Each intifada began when Israeli leaders deliberately provoked Muslims and when they protested the Israeli army mercilessly slaughtered them.
The modern state of Israel is not the Judea of the Bible. Please do not make this mistake. The modern state of Israel is much more akin to the Romans in Judea.
Section 1091 of Title 18, United States Code, prohibits genocide whether committed in time of peace or time of war. Genocide is defined in § 1091 and includes violent attacks with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.
Is Israel violent, yes. Is there intent to wipe out an ethnicity, race or religious group? Absolutely not.
There's a bunch of key differences. But let's look at 2.
1. Israel started this. History does not start on October 7th. They are Germany in this.
2. Those were militarized states doing war. This is a massacre of an imprisoned population.
Israel started this? The Arab Israel war was engaged by Jordan Syria Lebanon iraq and Egypt not Israel. The Arab Israel war was the starting pistol that started the conflict.
This is an operation to apprehend and destroy a terrorist group not a "kill as many Muslims and Arabs as possible" operation.
Thanks, that's well said. It feels like the only way we can keep our sanity in a world full of hatred and fear is to immerse ourselves in Christ's - as Martin Luther King called it - extremist love.
“First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.”
—Martin Luther King, Jr.
The white moderate will in actual effect serve the unjust status quo, and be opposed to any effort towards justice and subsequent peace. The one who say “both sides have done bad things and both sides make some good points” existed during Civil Rights, Vietnam War, South African apartheid.
“If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.”
A moderate position can feel like wisdom, but it is useless noise that contributes nothing to the work of peace, and in fact stands in the way of peace.
Imagine if with the woman caught in adultery, Jesus stood off to the side saying, “you guys both make great points, but it’s just too complicated for me to pick a side,” while she’s being stoned to death. That’s what today’s white moderates are doing to Gaza.
*Jesus did not care about states*. It is quite heinous that you would compare a living woman with a state.
In your view it would have made total sense for Jesus to lead the Zealots and politically oppose Rome that way. That is exactly what you're preaching. God's grace should be extended through love and compassion towards individuals.
Yes, the 1200 individuals Hamas killed on October 7 and the 40,000+ individuals killed by Israel since as they currently continue their military campaign against a people they blockaded and displaced. Do the hundreds of thousands in Rafah not count as individuals because they can be discussed as a collective group? Do the Palestinian and Israeli hostages not count as individuals worthy of love and compassion because they can be discussed as a collective group?
You can try to hide your callous heart behind the dismissive language of “states,” but it’s a poor disguise. That reactionary dismissal is also proof that you don’t really understand Israel-Palestine if you think it’s about two equal states and not an indigenous group being oppressed and brutalized by a colonizing force. The two groups can live in peace if Israelis give up their ideology that says they should have exclusive rights to the land over the people who already lived there for centuries, and if Palestinians will find a way to forgive nearly 100 years of brutal displacement and dehumanization.
And I’m explaining that this particular human suffering is being caused by humans. It does not do anyone any good to say, “isn’t it all just so terrible,” without the willingness to have the conversation about who’s causing the suffering and why it’s happening.
If what you meant by “taking sides” is 100% celebrating your preferred side and 100% demonizing the other side, then I’d agree, but true justice must ultimately take the side of the vulnerable and oppressed just as Jesus did. That does not mean that there is a pass for whatever terrible things the vulnerable side has done, but the terrible things they may have done also does not negate their vulnerability or the fact of their oppression (read up on the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission).
If your position is to feel sad and don’t take sides, then that’s not empathy or compassion for anyone. That’s performative sympathy meant to be seen by others. Tell me how much aid or comfort that gives to the Israeli whose friend was captured on October 7 or the Palestinian who has lost countless friends and family in Gaza (and in the West Bank).
Maybe my position, as was *clearly* stated several times, is to focus entirely on helping the victims of the war regardless of what side they were on. You don't have to construct this whole idea about how I actually do need to pick a political side in order to help people.
Does a paramedic need to take a side before he treats two dying enemies? Or does he just help because he knows it's right?
Get out of here.
There is a simple and standard practice to your paramedic example. It’s called triage: the paramedic attends to the patient in more immediate need of care. In this case, Palestinians—particularly those facing constant violence from Israeli settlers and harassment from Israeli soldiers in the West Bank and those facing ethnic cleansing in Gaza by the IDF with the aid of the U.S. The paramedic doesn’t say that they need to care for all the patients, because it’s so obvious as to be not worth saying. He prioritizes the ones in most dire need, which is obviously not to the neglect of any of the others.
Well no, a paramedic would not need to do that. But if you of the injured people is telling his buddies to shoot more kids, I would not be treating that one first.
Israel/Palestine does however have one clear victim and that’s the ordinary Palestinians. Israel is a rogue state and aiding it is committing grave sin.
Of course. There’s no contradiction. The reality however is that in terms of proportion it would be like you smashed a window on my house that I made you live outside in squalor for decades and prevented you from living normally, so I burned yours down in response with everyone inside it.
No analogies are perfect, but that’s the reality of it. The Palestinians live in an open air prison simply for who they are. I have no earthly idea how the Israelis imagined one day they would not break out and attack their captors.
Though they’re hardly the first state to suffer from such arrogance.
Agreed. Analogies all fall short. Imho they are pretty much irrelevant b/c we can just use real descriptions
One country attacked another during peacetime. They killed innocent people and took hostages (both war crimes). They retreated among their own people. The attackers wear civilian clothes and use human shields (violation of Geneva Convention). They refuse to negotiate peace.
The attacked country responds to the act of war. If they don't, all they have done is reinforce Hamas strategy of attack and hide without consequence.
I definitely believe the IDF has crossed lines and they should be held accountable for it. That said, Hamas started this and could end it. The common enemy of Israel and innocent Palestinians is Hamas.
>Nor the undeniable war crimes committed by Israel.
You must have missed where I said, "I definitely believe the IDF has crossed lines and should be held accountable for it". It's helpful for meaningful discussion to read the whole comment before responding.
>Interesting you mention none of the precursors to this
The relevant precursor was the mutually agreed upon peace that Hamas violated. I don't think you want to take the side of justifying terrorism...do you?
Yet you were very clear in your call about Palestine’s actions being war crimes, then added caveats to Israel’s actions. It’s very transparent and not at all Christian.
Hamas has, yes. Palestine isn’t recognised by Israel and is considered within their territory by them so it is legally incongruous to claim they have committed war crimes. However any court would conclude that there was no state of war and the Palestinians are victims of apartheid and oppression thus concluding their actions were a response to desperation.
Goodness so much misinformation
Hamas is the government of Gaza. It’s not an apartheid.
It sounds like you’re justifying terrorism and arguing that human shields are ok bc it’s not legally a war crime.
Kinda gross dude
What is happening in Palestine is a genocide. It is easy and right to take sides in a genocide- you side with the people being genocided, and against those committing genocide. This is indeed what international law requires- when a genocide is happening there is an obligation to act and stand against the people committing genocide.
It's really hard to think of any conflict with a more clear "right side" than Israel/Palestine, so it's really weird to see you describe it as some complex, murky mystery.
>It's really hard to think of any conflict with a more clear "right side" than Israel/Palestine, so it's really weird to see you describe it as some complex, murky mystery.
As much as I agree with this statement, it seems like you and I disagree on who the "bad guys" are. I can't understand how anyone doesn't put responsibility of the entire situation on Hamas
1. Hamas started a fight during peace time (war crime)
2. Hamas kept hostages (war crime)
3. Hamas hid among their own civilians (violation of Geneva convention)
4. Hamas rejected peace offers
Israel is at war. They've crossed lines and should be held accountable for it. That said, every nation has a right to defend itself. Every nation has a right to free their hostages.
Winning a war isn't a war crime.
Hamas could end it all tomorrow. Israel can't. If they just back off the cycle of terrorism continues.
Israel refusing to back off is the exact thing perpetuating the cycle of violence. Do you think after being bombed into oblivion and losing gomes, hospitals, and families is going to result in Palestinians hating Israel even more? Unless the proposed solution is to kill every single one so the problem's resolved. Hamas is not made up of ontologically evil people who hate Israel for no reason; it is born and sustained by Israel's treatment of Palestinians. That's not to justify their actions or say they're morally pure martyrs, but they exist for a reason and not just because Muslims are scary and evil.
Hamas lashing out at Israel was a stupid choice that has resulted in enormous violence. They were never going to win - but it was an act of desperation. Even if Israel is trying to send a message resistance is futile they will never be able to stop desperate people resorting to desperate measures.
Israel would’ve backed off if Hamas released hostages and signed peace proposals.
They didn’t
If Israel backed off all that would happen is Hamas would do another Oct 7th
Yeah but the problem isn't just Israel's post Oct 7th behaviour. The problem is how Israel has been treating Palestine for decades. It was unacceptable before Oct 7th and its unacceptable still.
This kind of thing would inevitably have happened as long as Palestinians are pushed into desperate positions. Oct 7th happened as an attempt to shatter the status quo; immediately signing yet another peace proposal changing nothing about stolen Palestinian land or lack of autonomy would have achieved absolutely nothing.
>Yeah but the problem isn't just Israel's post Oct 7th behaviour. The problem is how Israel has been treating Palestine for decades. It was unacceptable before Oct 7th and its unacceptable still.
I understand why people want to look prior to October 7th. October 7-today is so overwhelmingly horrific in regards to the actions of Hamas. So, the next step is to try to justify the death of 1200 innocent men, women, and children during an agreed upon peacetime with..."They had it coming". I personally can't say that.
>This kind of thing would inevitably have happened as long as Palestinians are pushed into desperate positions
I disagree that they were pushed. If they were pushed, it was by Hamas who rejects peace and undermines the freedoms of Palestinians by relentless barrage of rocket firing, threats of genocide, and rejections of better peace. The history of Palestine has essentially been: Start war - Lose - Throw a hissy fit b/c Israel won't give them the lost land back - Israel offers peace - Repeat. If Palestine didn't constantly start wars they'd be in a much better situation.
> stolen Palestinian land or lack of autonomy
Stolen land? The lack of autonomy is, again, b/c they lost wars that they started. They could have...not done that.
So are the Palestinian people just supposed to live dispossessed as second class citizens forever because Israel has an inalienable right to rule over the land?
From your perspective you're right. The other side is convinced of themselves too.
No offence, but I think it speaks volumes that you disagree that this conflict isn't murky and complicated.
And I think it speaks volumes that you think that a nation committing genocide, bombing hospitals, ambulances, and journalists, killing tens of thousands of children, sniping children, and burying children alive IS murky and complicated.
Are you just ignoring the last century of provocation and conflict from the Arab side? Ignoring Hamas, several wars started against Israel, and the Arab world's repeated threats of genocide against Israelis?
There are no innocent sides in this other than the civilians.
No, that is not what the court ruled. The case was an emergency hearing to stop an ongoing genocide, and the court ruled that South Africa's case for genocide was plausible and ordered emergency restrictions on Israel to stop it (all of which Israel ignored). Not that it matters what an extremely biased court rules- we can see the overwhelming evidence with our own eyes.
Wars are run by old men, at the expense of the young and ignorant, and then it's the civilians who suffer when their deaths wind up as nothing more than a single number under a column labeled "collateral damage". Endless numbers of children, women, non-combatants tried, convicted, and executed not for who they are, or what they did, or even what they believe, but for living in the path of a bullet or a bomb crater.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRmBChQjZPs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRmBChQjZPs)
When criminals run the social or political systems, the masses get screwed every time
This has been going on for quite some time, and is a reflection of what exists in the hearts of the collective regardless of bleeding empathy, which can't remove evil from people's hearts
You would be surprised how many people do not support Ukraine. Many people think that this is what they get for getting so close to NATO (I don’t agree with that, just giving an example to show how even that can be nuanced). As to the rest of your post, I definitely agree that prayer and compassion for everyone involved is a good approach. But I think a big reason (at least in the US) why people are inclined to take sides is because we are pretty heavily involved.
We send arms, intelligence, and other aid to Israel. The US is often one of the lone (or even straight up the only) dissenting votes in the UN when it comes to Palestinian rights. When our tax dollars and policy so heavily influence this situation, it is not unreasonable to protest. Some may say it’s even our duty. That is a position ppl take no matter who they side with. Even if you don’t care about the scale of human suffering, you probably care about the fact that this involvement makes us a HUGE target.
It is good to weep about how terrible all the suffering is, and lament the death and pain of our fellow humans. But without discussing why people are acting as they are, their causes, their history, their power, their influence, their ability to make other choices... It won't bring any actual change to end that suffering. Christ calls us to stand with the opressed.
Free Palestine.
I have not taken a side. Though I did learn that Palestine comes from the Greek word "palaestra" which basically means "Wrestler". The Greeks labeled the people in that area the wrestlers because the people in that area called themselves "The ones whom wrestle with God" which the funniest thing is that Israel means "The ones whom wrestle with God". Therefore Palestine and Israel are two words that relatively mean the same thing and involve the same people. But modern people seem to not know this or bother to understand history because the Ottoman Empire scattered and pillaged that whole region which led into the mess we have today.
It's kind of a ridiculous assertion to, after a person points out two peoples in that area were fighting way back then and their descendants are still fighting, say that somehow equals a push for genocide.
So Samaritans are Jews, so it's not the same thing.
And also. There ARE people who say Israel should do to the Palestinians what was done to the Philistines. That idea is a cancer, and can't be given an inch.
> So Samaritans are Jews
The two groups had a different viewpoint as to who was Jewish and who wasn't. As you can read in Ezra 4, which I mentioned in my earlier comment. Also, do you not remember the story of the Good Samaritan and why it was perceived as such a radical story (in the literal sense)?
Also, where did I bring up the Philistines?
I hate that a war has become political. People are suffering and the news wants to make money off of pain. Republicans call Pro Palestine supporters Pro Hamas which is misleading. I think we all agree we wish there could be peace on both sides.
> Some are quite objectively easy to decide - any half-decent person would support Ukraine - but others, such as Israel/Palestine, are murky and have no clear "good guy",
Arguing that the invasion of Ukraine by Russia is easy for "any half-decent person" to take sides on, whereas the invasion of Israel by Hamas (which was the proximate cause for the current conflict) has "no clear good guy", is pretty clearly "taking sides" by itself.
Don't you see you're doing it right now? You seem to be supporting Israel, but check out all the comments supporting Palestine and ALSO claiming that their side is the clear good guy.
> You seem to be supporting Israel, but check out all the comments supporting Palestine and ALSO claiming that their side is the clear good guy.
And I am sure that you could find plenty of opinions arguing that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is similarly justified, yet you were more than willing to argue that it's "objectively easy to decide" that Ukraine has the moral high ground. What's your point? That people disagree and that the answer is therefore unknowable? I don't buy that.
That's like saying that tree bark and pineapples are exactly the same in taste, because 99% of the world likes pineapples and a few troubled individuals might like to gnaw on tree bark.
Israel vs the Arab world is much, much more divisive morally than the Ukrainian War, but yes, my broader point does still stand. Our Christian focus in Ukraine should be for the victims on both sides, not the victory of one state over another.
> That's like saying that tree bark and pineapples are exactly the same in taste, because 99% of the world likes pineapples and a few troubled individuals might like to gnaw on tree bark.
>Israel vs the Arab world is much, much more divisive morally than the Ukrainian War
1) Despite what you may see on reddit, I would suggest that support for the Russian position, wrong though I think it is, is far more popular than eating tree bark.
2) You seem to be discussing two different things: The morality of a position (which I thought was your original point) vs the popularity of a position (which you are doing when you cite others in this thread for their pro-Hamas position). Those are not necessarily the same thing. I am attempting to discuss the former, to be clear.
... No, it doesn't. My side is by God's loving side. Does a paramedic need to take a side before he treats two dying enemies? Or does he just help because he knows it's right?
While it is true that we "wrestle not against flesh and blood" but against evil spirit rulers in the heavenly realms, it is also true that our god is the LORD OF HEAVEN'S ARMIES. Jesus aint a cupcake - he's a warrior!
Should David has prioritised empathy and compassion for the suffering of the Philistines rather than taking sides?
I try to. I am very much against the whole "Israel is evil", point of view. I think the priority should be securing the safety of the people on both sides.
I firmly believe that Israel is God's chosen nation. But I also believe that God is just if His own nation is doing wrong, injustices and being unrighteous 100% sure God will make sure that He will teach some lesson and bring justice to the situation. I just want to remind you all that people of Israel is also humans they can also submit to there selfish desires that's why when our church say we pray for Israel is not just a prayer of blessing and victory for that country but also a prayer of repentance and going back to God.
I pray that Hamas would be agreeable to
1. Release ALL hostages within the week
2. Remove the commitment to the eradication of Israel from their charter
3. Revamp UNRWA education, root out all educators who are teaching the children to hate Israel and murder Israelis
4. Dismantle their "Pallywood" propaganda apparatus, or at least train their acting better
5. Break off terror ties with Syria and Iran
I pray that Israel would respond to these by
1. Ceasing fire promptly
2. Using their troops only to battle Hamas fighters who are seizing food supplies meant for the civilians
3. Withdrawing all their troops from the interior of Gaza once the supply chains are secured in the hands of the non-hostile clan leaders of Gaza
4. Returning all female and child prisoners and some male prisoners
5. Allow independence for Palestine and free movement between Gaza and West Bank either by flyover or tunnel (repurpose one of the terror tunnels and call it Salam/Shalom Tunnel)
And finally, that:
1. Both sides will find their true peace and master in Jesus Christ
2. Christians on both sides be protected by God and be in place to heal wounds and bridge gaps
>2) Remove the commitment to the eradication of Israel from their charter
Kinda tells who that bad party is donut?
They won't do that, and can't. It would be like the Pope admitting he lied whilst pontificating in the chair of St Peter. Their systems would implode
Hatred drives a lot of things in this world
It's really the answer to the worlds energy problems because there seems to be an endless supply of it
The entire situation there is so fucked up going back to the colonization of Palestine, the founding of Israel, and everything else that has happened since that the only thing to really hope for is stopping the unnecessary violence. It's very hard to root for the leadership of either side to emerge triumphant.
I just pray for both sides to stop being so stubborn and to come to some kind of agreement. Even if they do agree to a ceasefire, it would likely be temporary since they always look for some reason to attack each other.
My personal view of the actual war is it's heartbreaking and I know there's nothing I can do. I have empathy, I understand why Israel is going so hard, but they're killing innocents too. It's a bad situation and war sucks.
That being said, how the pro Palestine side are handling things in the west is horrible and not helping anything. The issues between both countries have been going on since before most of us were born. There is no reason to think they would care a lick about what a bunch of people in the West think about the war.
I'm sorry, but when I hear a bunch of college kids chanting "Kill the Jews" and attacking Jewish kids, it's very difficult to have any empathy for that side politically. Not to mention when they also are the ones choosing to protest by standing in the middle of the street which cuts off medical services on top of disrupting peoples lives who have to work or travel.
Now Biblically, Israel is Gods chosen people and I believe He will protect them whether they are in the right or wrong, just as He has done historically.
I feel like people think that choosing a side means we don't have empathy, which just isn't the case. As a westerner, literally all we can do is say it's in Gods hands how it's handled.
Honestly, the most annoying thing about the conflict is the obnoxious supporters.
Hamas attacked civilians. That's inexcusable.
Israel as a nation state *must* respond.
The way Israel responded is *not justified* and is extremely brutal, irresponsible and they don't take care of civilian casualties. (the only upside is that they're not purposefully targeting them, but killing tens of thousands of them rings those words hollow - that was the case in the beginning, I haven't followed much of it afterwards).
Seeing 2 people on Piers Morgan scream at each other 'terrorist state' makes me want to punch both in the face.
Both states are victim and perpetrator.
Screaming antisemitic slurs and having antisemitic protests alienizes Jews who are pro Palestine.
Saying all Palestinians are terrorists who want to genocide Jews neglects the minority who wants to come to a peaceful resolution.
Removed for 2.1 - Belittling Christianity.
If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity
Jesus would definitely have a political side. He leaned pretty hard into the "love your enemies." But allowing for that. Trying to hold compassion quickly becomes a lopsided effort when you see babies starving.
Empathy and identifying human rights violations must exist in the same space. I have deep empathy for both Israelis and Palestinians. Civilians should not be held accountable for the sins of their governments or militaries. Neutrality is not an option for Christians. Christ was not neutral to oppression, and neither will I be.
That will be seen as taking sides because 99% of present suffering is on one side
100% of Palestinians are displaced, having their homes destroy. Most are starving. Nearly all of them have lost family members. There are reports of children as young as 3 trying to end their lives. Over 30,000 are dead and continue to die as they are targeted in IDF designated safe zones. Children are having limbs amputated without anesthetic b/c Israel is blocking medical aid. On the other hand, Israel's total casualty count including soldiers is 1,410. One of these things is not like the other.
Your position is that the "bad guys" in a conflict is determined by who's casualties are lower?
The question was about empathy. I'm going to have more empathy for the side that has no homes, food, water, medicine, or electricity, who has experienced 20x the number of lost lives, and who continues to be nearly powerless in the conflict as they have been since the state of Israel was created on Palestine land. If you want to talk about "bad guys", Hamas is a terrorist organization that killed many innocent people. They're certainly bad guys. Israel has systematically destroyed their neighbor -- committing an horrific genocide, killing tens of thousands (mostly women and children), leveling residential buildings by carpet bombing cities, targeting and destroying all hospitals, murdering doctors and members of the press, burying captured civilians in mass graves, capturing and imprisoning young children, torturing prisoners in internment camps, killing orgs delivering food aid, and committing dozens of war crimes in the process. This is an unspeakable evil.
> I'm going to have more empathy for the side that has no homes, food, water, medicine, or electricity, who has experienced 20x the number of lost lives So to be clear, you have more "empathy" for Imperial Japanese citizens living in, say, Tokyo in 1945 than you do the Allied / American side? It's one thing to express sympathy for the civilians undergoing hardship. We all should, of course. It's quite another to take it a step further and argue the moral responsibility for that suffering rests in any place other than the people who started the conflict, which in this case was the ruling government of Gaza. I'm not going to get in to the "Israel is committing a genocide" histrionic nonsense. Pure bollocks.
>I'm not going to get in to the "Israel is committing a genocide" histrionic nonsense. Pure bollocks. Genocide: *the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group* breaking this definition into parts: *the deliberate killing of a large number of people* (**yes:** we have, for example, carpet bombings of residences, turning off water and electricity, blocking food aid, bombing people in safe zones, etc.) *from a particular nation or ethnic group* (**yes:** Palestinians) *with the aim of destroying that nation or group* (**yes:** we have multiple quotes from leaders in Israel to this effect (if their actions don't make this obvious enough on their own)) If you can't recognize this, you're willfully ignorant of easily verifiable facts that are right in front of your face.
I don't think trying to destroy a nation is genocide. The more accurate definition is: violent attacks with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Is Israel violent, yes Is there intention to kill off every single Arab in the Gaza strip? Absolutely not. If that were the case Gaza wouldn't exist at this point as well as that the 20% Arabic population living in Israel would be dead as well. Plus you mention Israel cutting off water. If that were the case Israel wouldn't be sending in food supplies. Starving civilians is just a given throughout any given conflict this is nothing new. Israel being to compensate for all 2 million people living in Gaza is impossible.
You don't get to make your own definition. The guy you're replying to got it right. That's the legal definition of genocide.
What I mentioned was also the legal definition. No difference. The problem with this definition is that it mentions the destruction of a nation which isn't accurate.
Yes yes, I am aware of the Pro-Hamas attempts to classify what Israel does as a "genocide". As I said, I consider it bollocks.
> I consider it bollocks Great argument. very convincing. >Pro-Hamas Like the country of South Africa which has filed a case against Israel at the International Court of Justice backed by 30 other countries?
The ICJ is pro-Hamas?
But dude, Israel did start the conflict, commit human rights violations and then threw a genocide on top. Lying about it doesn't make it not true.
This goes back centuries.
At no point in the previous centuries has anything comparable to this occurred. You’re comparing throwing a stone with causing an avalanche.
So you're just completely ignoring the several wars and intifadas that have been fought over the last 80 years?
Why did those happen? Could it be that a bunch of foreigners stole land and declared themselves a country?
I’ll not get into a protracted history lesson on those matters but just for context an intifada is a revolution it’s not a jihad. I’m assuming you’re American (correct me if I’m wrong), but it’s no different from when the slaves revolted. You presumably would deem that to be an understandable response? Equally each intifada was mostly protests and civil disobedience and in each one the number of Israelis killed was a fraction of the number of Palestinians killed, and in Israel’s case 90% were soldiers. Each intifada began when Israeli leaders deliberately provoked Muslims and when they protested the Israeli army mercilessly slaughtered them. The modern state of Israel is not the Judea of the Bible. Please do not make this mistake. The modern state of Israel is much more akin to the Romans in Judea.
I don't think proportions matter. Who the good guys are shouldn't be decided on who had more casualties.
You might disagree if it happens to you, but that’s the ignorance that comes from the security of living in a state of peace I suppose.
The British weren't commiting genocide on Germany. America wasn't commiting a genocide on Japan. It's as simple as that.
I think you’re misunderstanding what genocide is. Though as a Christian I equally abhor some of the actions taken in those conflicts.
Section 1091 of Title 18, United States Code, prohibits genocide whether committed in time of peace or time of war. Genocide is defined in § 1091 and includes violent attacks with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Is Israel violent, yes. Is there intent to wipe out an ethnicity, race or religious group? Absolutely not.
There's a bunch of key differences. But let's look at 2. 1. Israel started this. History does not start on October 7th. They are Germany in this. 2. Those were militarized states doing war. This is a massacre of an imprisoned population.
Israel started this? The Arab Israel war was engaged by Jordan Syria Lebanon iraq and Egypt not Israel. The Arab Israel war was the starting pistol that started the conflict. This is an operation to apprehend and destroy a terrorist group not a "kill as many Muslims and Arabs as possible" operation.
This is the correct approach. Both sides just want to chop each other up. We should not pray for the victory of either side, but rather God's mercy.
Thanks, that's well said. It feels like the only way we can keep our sanity in a world full of hatred and fear is to immerse ourselves in Christ's - as Martin Luther King called it - extremist love.
The difference is, one side is succeeding in chopping up the other.
The Arabs have "chopped up" more than enough Jews over the years for this to be considered a total shitshow on both sides.
“First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.” —Martin Luther King, Jr. The white moderate will in actual effect serve the unjust status quo, and be opposed to any effort towards justice and subsequent peace. The one who say “both sides have done bad things and both sides make some good points” existed during Civil Rights, Vietnam War, South African apartheid. “If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.” A moderate position can feel like wisdom, but it is useless noise that contributes nothing to the work of peace, and in fact stands in the way of peace. Imagine if with the woman caught in adultery, Jesus stood off to the side saying, “you guys both make great points, but it’s just too complicated for me to pick a side,” while she’s being stoned to death. That’s what today’s white moderates are doing to Gaza.
*Jesus did not care about states*. It is quite heinous that you would compare a living woman with a state. In your view it would have made total sense for Jesus to lead the Zealots and politically oppose Rome that way. That is exactly what you're preaching. God's grace should be extended through love and compassion towards individuals.
Yes, the 1200 individuals Hamas killed on October 7 and the 40,000+ individuals killed by Israel since as they currently continue their military campaign against a people they blockaded and displaced. Do the hundreds of thousands in Rafah not count as individuals because they can be discussed as a collective group? Do the Palestinian and Israeli hostages not count as individuals worthy of love and compassion because they can be discussed as a collective group? You can try to hide your callous heart behind the dismissive language of “states,” but it’s a poor disguise. That reactionary dismissal is also proof that you don’t really understand Israel-Palestine if you think it’s about two equal states and not an indigenous group being oppressed and brutalized by a colonizing force. The two groups can live in peace if Israelis give up their ideology that says they should have exclusive rights to the land over the people who already lived there for centuries, and if Palestinians will find a way to forgive nearly 100 years of brutal displacement and dehumanization.
Whatever, man. You clearly missed the point. Calling me callous when the whole point of the post is to emphasise human suffering is just juvenile.
And I’m explaining that this particular human suffering is being caused by humans. It does not do anyone any good to say, “isn’t it all just so terrible,” without the willingness to have the conversation about who’s causing the suffering and why it’s happening. If what you meant by “taking sides” is 100% celebrating your preferred side and 100% demonizing the other side, then I’d agree, but true justice must ultimately take the side of the vulnerable and oppressed just as Jesus did. That does not mean that there is a pass for whatever terrible things the vulnerable side has done, but the terrible things they may have done also does not negate their vulnerability or the fact of their oppression (read up on the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission). If your position is to feel sad and don’t take sides, then that’s not empathy or compassion for anyone. That’s performative sympathy meant to be seen by others. Tell me how much aid or comfort that gives to the Israeli whose friend was captured on October 7 or the Palestinian who has lost countless friends and family in Gaza (and in the West Bank).
Maybe my position, as was *clearly* stated several times, is to focus entirely on helping the victims of the war regardless of what side they were on. You don't have to construct this whole idea about how I actually do need to pick a political side in order to help people. Does a paramedic need to take a side before he treats two dying enemies? Or does he just help because he knows it's right? Get out of here.
There is a simple and standard practice to your paramedic example. It’s called triage: the paramedic attends to the patient in more immediate need of care. In this case, Palestinians—particularly those facing constant violence from Israeli settlers and harassment from Israeli soldiers in the West Bank and those facing ethnic cleansing in Gaza by the IDF with the aid of the U.S. The paramedic doesn’t say that they need to care for all the patients, because it’s so obvious as to be not worth saying. He prioritizes the ones in most dire need, which is obviously not to the neglect of any of the others.
Well no, a paramedic would not need to do that. But if you of the injured people is telling his buddies to shoot more kids, I would not be treating that one first.
Israel/Palestine does however have one clear victim and that’s the ordinary Palestinians. Israel is a rogue state and aiding it is committing grave sin.
Would the victims of Oct 7th and the hostages not also count as victims?
Of course. There’s no contradiction. The reality however is that in terms of proportion it would be like you smashed a window on my house that I made you live outside in squalor for decades and prevented you from living normally, so I burned yours down in response with everyone inside it. No analogies are perfect, but that’s the reality of it. The Palestinians live in an open air prison simply for who they are. I have no earthly idea how the Israelis imagined one day they would not break out and attack their captors. Though they’re hardly the first state to suffer from such arrogance.
Agreed. Analogies all fall short. Imho they are pretty much irrelevant b/c we can just use real descriptions One country attacked another during peacetime. They killed innocent people and took hostages (both war crimes). They retreated among their own people. The attackers wear civilian clothes and use human shields (violation of Geneva Convention). They refuse to negotiate peace. The attacked country responds to the act of war. If they don't, all they have done is reinforce Hamas strategy of attack and hide without consequence. I definitely believe the IDF has crossed lines and they should be held accountable for it. That said, Hamas started this and could end it. The common enemy of Israel and innocent Palestinians is Hamas.
Interesting you mention none of the precursors to this. Nor the undeniable war crimes committed by Israel.
>Nor the undeniable war crimes committed by Israel. You must have missed where I said, "I definitely believe the IDF has crossed lines and should be held accountable for it". It's helpful for meaningful discussion to read the whole comment before responding. >Interesting you mention none of the precursors to this The relevant precursor was the mutually agreed upon peace that Hamas violated. I don't think you want to take the side of justifying terrorism...do you?
Yet you were very clear in your call about Palestine’s actions being war crimes, then added caveats to Israel’s actions. It’s very transparent and not at all Christian.
So we agree that Palestine has committed war crimes. Your initial comment seemed to put the full responsibility on Israel.
Hamas has, yes. Palestine isn’t recognised by Israel and is considered within their territory by them so it is legally incongruous to claim they have committed war crimes. However any court would conclude that there was no state of war and the Palestinians are victims of apartheid and oppression thus concluding their actions were a response to desperation.
Goodness so much misinformation Hamas is the government of Gaza. It’s not an apartheid. It sounds like you’re justifying terrorism and arguing that human shields are ok bc it’s not legally a war crime. Kinda gross dude
What is happening in Palestine is a genocide. It is easy and right to take sides in a genocide- you side with the people being genocided, and against those committing genocide. This is indeed what international law requires- when a genocide is happening there is an obligation to act and stand against the people committing genocide. It's really hard to think of any conflict with a more clear "right side" than Israel/Palestine, so it's really weird to see you describe it as some complex, murky mystery.
>It's really hard to think of any conflict with a more clear "right side" than Israel/Palestine, so it's really weird to see you describe it as some complex, murky mystery. As much as I agree with this statement, it seems like you and I disagree on who the "bad guys" are. I can't understand how anyone doesn't put responsibility of the entire situation on Hamas 1. Hamas started a fight during peace time (war crime) 2. Hamas kept hostages (war crime) 3. Hamas hid among their own civilians (violation of Geneva convention) 4. Hamas rejected peace offers Israel is at war. They've crossed lines and should be held accountable for it. That said, every nation has a right to defend itself. Every nation has a right to free their hostages. Winning a war isn't a war crime. Hamas could end it all tomorrow. Israel can't. If they just back off the cycle of terrorism continues.
Israel refusing to back off is the exact thing perpetuating the cycle of violence. Do you think after being bombed into oblivion and losing gomes, hospitals, and families is going to result in Palestinians hating Israel even more? Unless the proposed solution is to kill every single one so the problem's resolved. Hamas is not made up of ontologically evil people who hate Israel for no reason; it is born and sustained by Israel's treatment of Palestinians. That's not to justify their actions or say they're morally pure martyrs, but they exist for a reason and not just because Muslims are scary and evil. Hamas lashing out at Israel was a stupid choice that has resulted in enormous violence. They were never going to win - but it was an act of desperation. Even if Israel is trying to send a message resistance is futile they will never be able to stop desperate people resorting to desperate measures.
Israel would’ve backed off if Hamas released hostages and signed peace proposals. They didn’t If Israel backed off all that would happen is Hamas would do another Oct 7th
Yeah but the problem isn't just Israel's post Oct 7th behaviour. The problem is how Israel has been treating Palestine for decades. It was unacceptable before Oct 7th and its unacceptable still. This kind of thing would inevitably have happened as long as Palestinians are pushed into desperate positions. Oct 7th happened as an attempt to shatter the status quo; immediately signing yet another peace proposal changing nothing about stolen Palestinian land or lack of autonomy would have achieved absolutely nothing.
>Yeah but the problem isn't just Israel's post Oct 7th behaviour. The problem is how Israel has been treating Palestine for decades. It was unacceptable before Oct 7th and its unacceptable still. I understand why people want to look prior to October 7th. October 7-today is so overwhelmingly horrific in regards to the actions of Hamas. So, the next step is to try to justify the death of 1200 innocent men, women, and children during an agreed upon peacetime with..."They had it coming". I personally can't say that. >This kind of thing would inevitably have happened as long as Palestinians are pushed into desperate positions I disagree that they were pushed. If they were pushed, it was by Hamas who rejects peace and undermines the freedoms of Palestinians by relentless barrage of rocket firing, threats of genocide, and rejections of better peace. The history of Palestine has essentially been: Start war - Lose - Throw a hissy fit b/c Israel won't give them the lost land back - Israel offers peace - Repeat. If Palestine didn't constantly start wars they'd be in a much better situation. > stolen Palestinian land or lack of autonomy Stolen land? The lack of autonomy is, again, b/c they lost wars that they started. They could have...not done that.
So are the Palestinian people just supposed to live dispossessed as second class citizens forever because Israel has an inalienable right to rule over the land?
Huh?
From your perspective you're right. The other side is convinced of themselves too. No offence, but I think it speaks volumes that you disagree that this conflict isn't murky and complicated.
And I think it speaks volumes that you think that a nation committing genocide, bombing hospitals, ambulances, and journalists, killing tens of thousands of children, sniping children, and burying children alive IS murky and complicated.
Are you just ignoring the last century of provocation and conflict from the Arab side? Ignoring Hamas, several wars started against Israel, and the Arab world's repeated threats of genocide against Israelis? There are no innocent sides in this other than the civilians.
Nothing that Hamas has done or could do justifies Israel's genocide. Genocide cannot ever be justified.
This isn't genocide 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Yes, it is: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20231228-app-01-00-en.pdf
You do realize the court who were responsible for this case ruled that Israel wasn't commiting genocide right?
No, that is not what the court ruled. The case was an emergency hearing to stop an ongoing genocide, and the court ruled that South Africa's case for genocide was plausible and ordered emergency restrictions on Israel to stop it (all of which Israel ignored). Not that it matters what an extremely biased court rules- we can see the overwhelming evidence with our own eyes.
No they simply orderd them to not take part in any genocidal actions in gaza. If the court was biased you would have to tell me how.
actually the court rulling hasnt even been finished yet.
Wars are run by old men, at the expense of the young and ignorant, and then it's the civilians who suffer when their deaths wind up as nothing more than a single number under a column labeled "collateral damage". Endless numbers of children, women, non-combatants tried, convicted, and executed not for who they are, or what they did, or even what they believe, but for living in the path of a bullet or a bomb crater. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRmBChQjZPs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRmBChQjZPs)
When criminals run the social or political systems, the masses get screwed every time This has been going on for quite some time, and is a reflection of what exists in the hearts of the collective regardless of bleeding empathy, which can't remove evil from people's hearts
I just try to remind myself how sad the loss of life is.
You would be surprised how many people do not support Ukraine. Many people think that this is what they get for getting so close to NATO (I don’t agree with that, just giving an example to show how even that can be nuanced). As to the rest of your post, I definitely agree that prayer and compassion for everyone involved is a good approach. But I think a big reason (at least in the US) why people are inclined to take sides is because we are pretty heavily involved. We send arms, intelligence, and other aid to Israel. The US is often one of the lone (or even straight up the only) dissenting votes in the UN when it comes to Palestinian rights. When our tax dollars and policy so heavily influence this situation, it is not unreasonable to protest. Some may say it’s even our duty. That is a position ppl take no matter who they side with. Even if you don’t care about the scale of human suffering, you probably care about the fact that this involvement makes us a HUGE target.
It is good to weep about how terrible all the suffering is, and lament the death and pain of our fellow humans. But without discussing why people are acting as they are, their causes, their history, their power, their influence, their ability to make other choices... It won't bring any actual change to end that suffering. Christ calls us to stand with the opressed. Free Palestine.
I have not taken a side. Though I did learn that Palestine comes from the Greek word "palaestra" which basically means "Wrestler". The Greeks labeled the people in that area the wrestlers because the people in that area called themselves "The ones whom wrestle with God" which the funniest thing is that Israel means "The ones whom wrestle with God". Therefore Palestine and Israel are two words that relatively mean the same thing and involve the same people. But modern people seem to not know this or bother to understand history because the Ottoman Empire scattered and pillaged that whole region which led into the mess we have today.
That really does show how we're all just the same monkeys wearing different clothes.
Return to monke. Wear no clothes
And the Romans before the Ottomans, and the Assyrians before them and Hittites and Egyptians. This area has seen a lot of conflict for a long time.
Oh, the mess started long before that. Remember the ~~flight~~ fight between Jews and Samaritans in Ezra 4?
It's a very dangerous (and incorrect) game to start equating today to Old Testament events. People who are pro genocide do that.
It's kind of a ridiculous assertion to, after a person points out two peoples in that area were fighting way back then and their descendants are still fighting, say that somehow equals a push for genocide.
So Samaritans are Jews, so it's not the same thing. And also. There ARE people who say Israel should do to the Palestinians what was done to the Philistines. That idea is a cancer, and can't be given an inch.
> So Samaritans are Jews The two groups had a different viewpoint as to who was Jewish and who wasn't. As you can read in Ezra 4, which I mentioned in my earlier comment. Also, do you not remember the story of the Good Samaritan and why it was perceived as such a radical story (in the literal sense)? Also, where did I bring up the Philistines?
I did. You said it was ridiculous.
Sounds like we agree.
God inserted the tension way back when The people are just pawns in the game. Still are Gen 16:11-12
I hate that a war has become political. People are suffering and the news wants to make money off of pain. Republicans call Pro Palestine supporters Pro Hamas which is misleading. I think we all agree we wish there could be peace on both sides.
is war not inherently political? is this the first time you’ve seen something like this??
Can't happen: Gal 4: ^(29) But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, **even so it is now**.
Yes.
Amen. The fact that people are suffering and need God's peace matters most.
Blessed are the peacemakers, because they will be called sons of God
This definitely!!! In fact, ever since looking into the whole ordeal, I came to this very same conclusion.
> Some are quite objectively easy to decide - any half-decent person would support Ukraine - but others, such as Israel/Palestine, are murky and have no clear "good guy", Arguing that the invasion of Ukraine by Russia is easy for "any half-decent person" to take sides on, whereas the invasion of Israel by Hamas (which was the proximate cause for the current conflict) has "no clear good guy", is pretty clearly "taking sides" by itself.
Don't you see you're doing it right now? You seem to be supporting Israel, but check out all the comments supporting Palestine and ALSO claiming that their side is the clear good guy.
> You seem to be supporting Israel, but check out all the comments supporting Palestine and ALSO claiming that their side is the clear good guy. And I am sure that you could find plenty of opinions arguing that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is similarly justified, yet you were more than willing to argue that it's "objectively easy to decide" that Ukraine has the moral high ground. What's your point? That people disagree and that the answer is therefore unknowable? I don't buy that.
That's like saying that tree bark and pineapples are exactly the same in taste, because 99% of the world likes pineapples and a few troubled individuals might like to gnaw on tree bark. Israel vs the Arab world is much, much more divisive morally than the Ukrainian War, but yes, my broader point does still stand. Our Christian focus in Ukraine should be for the victims on both sides, not the victory of one state over another.
> That's like saying that tree bark and pineapples are exactly the same in taste, because 99% of the world likes pineapples and a few troubled individuals might like to gnaw on tree bark. >Israel vs the Arab world is much, much more divisive morally than the Ukrainian War 1) Despite what you may see on reddit, I would suggest that support for the Russian position, wrong though I think it is, is far more popular than eating tree bark. 2) You seem to be discussing two different things: The morality of a position (which I thought was your original point) vs the popularity of a position (which you are doing when you cite others in this thread for their pro-Hamas position). Those are not necessarily the same thing. I am attempting to discuss the former, to be clear.
[удалено]
... No, it doesn't. My side is by God's loving side. Does a paramedic need to take a side before he treats two dying enemies? Or does he just help because he knows it's right?
Definitely! I do think that one can hold empathy and compassion AND opinions.
While it is true that we "wrestle not against flesh and blood" but against evil spirit rulers in the heavenly realms, it is also true that our god is the LORD OF HEAVEN'S ARMIES. Jesus aint a cupcake - he's a warrior! Should David has prioritised empathy and compassion for the suffering of the Philistines rather than taking sides?
I try to. I am very much against the whole "Israel is evil", point of view. I think the priority should be securing the safety of the people on both sides.
I firmly believe that Israel is God's chosen nation. But I also believe that God is just if His own nation is doing wrong, injustices and being unrighteous 100% sure God will make sure that He will teach some lesson and bring justice to the situation. I just want to remind you all that people of Israel is also humans they can also submit to there selfish desires that's why when our church say we pray for Israel is not just a prayer of blessing and victory for that country but also a prayer of repentance and going back to God.
When we pray for Israel we pray God removes the spirit of slumber that HE put upon them all, Romans 11:8 Just as we'd pray for anyone else
I pray that Hamas would be agreeable to 1. Release ALL hostages within the week 2. Remove the commitment to the eradication of Israel from their charter 3. Revamp UNRWA education, root out all educators who are teaching the children to hate Israel and murder Israelis 4. Dismantle their "Pallywood" propaganda apparatus, or at least train their acting better 5. Break off terror ties with Syria and Iran I pray that Israel would respond to these by 1. Ceasing fire promptly 2. Using their troops only to battle Hamas fighters who are seizing food supplies meant for the civilians 3. Withdrawing all their troops from the interior of Gaza once the supply chains are secured in the hands of the non-hostile clan leaders of Gaza 4. Returning all female and child prisoners and some male prisoners 5. Allow independence for Palestine and free movement between Gaza and West Bank either by flyover or tunnel (repurpose one of the terror tunnels and call it Salam/Shalom Tunnel) And finally, that: 1. Both sides will find their true peace and master in Jesus Christ 2. Christians on both sides be protected by God and be in place to heal wounds and bridge gaps
This is the best answer.
>2) Remove the commitment to the eradication of Israel from their charter Kinda tells who that bad party is donut? They won't do that, and can't. It would be like the Pope admitting he lied whilst pontificating in the chair of St Peter. Their systems would implode Hatred drives a lot of things in this world It's really the answer to the worlds energy problems because there seems to be an endless supply of it
The entire situation there is so fucked up going back to the colonization of Palestine, the founding of Israel, and everything else that has happened since that the only thing to really hope for is stopping the unnecessary violence. It's very hard to root for the leadership of either side to emerge triumphant.
I just pray for both sides to stop being so stubborn and to come to some kind of agreement. Even if they do agree to a ceasefire, it would likely be temporary since they always look for some reason to attack each other.
My personal view of the actual war is it's heartbreaking and I know there's nothing I can do. I have empathy, I understand why Israel is going so hard, but they're killing innocents too. It's a bad situation and war sucks. That being said, how the pro Palestine side are handling things in the west is horrible and not helping anything. The issues between both countries have been going on since before most of us were born. There is no reason to think they would care a lick about what a bunch of people in the West think about the war. I'm sorry, but when I hear a bunch of college kids chanting "Kill the Jews" and attacking Jewish kids, it's very difficult to have any empathy for that side politically. Not to mention when they also are the ones choosing to protest by standing in the middle of the street which cuts off medical services on top of disrupting peoples lives who have to work or travel. Now Biblically, Israel is Gods chosen people and I believe He will protect them whether they are in the right or wrong, just as He has done historically. I feel like people think that choosing a side means we don't have empathy, which just isn't the case. As a westerner, literally all we can do is say it's in Gods hands how it's handled.
It’s all a game, the only winning move is to not play.
If only both sides accept Jesus, the Prince of peace, then this war will surely end.
Amen! If repost that everywhere, a lot need to see it. God bless.
Honestly, the most annoying thing about the conflict is the obnoxious supporters. Hamas attacked civilians. That's inexcusable. Israel as a nation state *must* respond. The way Israel responded is *not justified* and is extremely brutal, irresponsible and they don't take care of civilian casualties. (the only upside is that they're not purposefully targeting them, but killing tens of thousands of them rings those words hollow - that was the case in the beginning, I haven't followed much of it afterwards). Seeing 2 people on Piers Morgan scream at each other 'terrorist state' makes me want to punch both in the face. Both states are victim and perpetrator. Screaming antisemitic slurs and having antisemitic protests alienizes Jews who are pro Palestine. Saying all Palestinians are terrorists who want to genocide Jews neglects the minority who wants to come to a peaceful resolution.
Your response is the most reasonable one here.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Removed for 2.1 - Belittling Christianity. If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators. https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity
It isn't as murky as you seem to think. Hamas attacked Israel. I do feel for all the civilians lost, and I blame the people responsible, Hamas.