Yesterday was quite a day here in the micro Methodist blogsphere especially at the semi-official Connexions.
Richard Hall, the blog's owner is very proud of the number of comments he gets. Richard seems to spend a lot of time responding to them. He somehow thinks this signifies support for his views A typical Connexion discussion normally goes something like this:
![]()
Richard posts
12 comments:
Kim: Absolutely brilliant Richard.
Richard: I know Kim. I owe it all to you.
Kim: Oh Richard.
Richard: Oh Kim.
Dave W: Brilliant. Conference will approve
Kim: Thank you Dave
Richard: I am with you there Kim
Bene D: Stunning analysis Kim. He is only it in for the money.
PamBG: Fantastic Richard. I'm insulted.
Richard: Absolutely Pam
Kim: Descartes came to the same conclusion.
Rachel: Despite being a white male.
For some reason yesterday the script changed for two of Richard's posts: One accused British Jews of seeking support from the English Defence League and a second tried to outline the Methodist case for its position on Israel. He went a little over the top.
Several Jewish people joined the conversation. First off was a very clear exposition that Jewish people in Britain had no truck with the EDL. This was anti-Jewish defamation at its worst and that lie was well and truly nailed. Richard should have undertaken a little more research before making that accusation.
Several people commented on his second post. It was interesting to read what Jewish people think of our report and resolution. Several times I have urged Richard and others to meet with Britain's Jewish community. Yesterday, they came to him.
We Methodists now seem curiously afraid of dialogue with Jews. We would not allow a Jew to address our conference, preferring to discriminate in favour of a Christian who denounced the Holocaust as a "Zionist tool". Many of those commenting said that they believed the Methodist Church position was anti Semitic. That saddens me because I don't believe Methodist people are anti-Semitic, though I believe our behaviour to be discriminatory.
Last time I looked there were about 70 comments many putting a very different view to that normally expressed on Connexions. Some from the Methodist side were fairly rude about the denomination's newly appointed bogeyman but I think I will manage. That aside take a read.
There was one comment that caught my eye:
“”Criticism of the state of Israel is not anti-semitism” (sic)
I am a Jew who has suffered for 2,000 years from Christian anti-semitism. Without the Church (generically) pathing the way for the Nazi Holocaust, Hitler would have been laughed out of his first beer-hall for attacking Jews.. But the Church had prepared Europe for the Holocaust over 2,000 years.
The only difference between the Nazis and the Church was technological - in Spain the Church burned Jews alive. Had the Spanish Inquisition knowledge of 6,000,000 Jews refusing to lose their faith, they also would have created a similar Holocaust. CAn anyone refute that?
Your theological problem now is contention with the problem of the ‘Wandering Jew’, so condemned to eternity for killing Christ. The fact that I sit here in my home in Jerusalem, Israel, typing this post, protected by a Jewish State that has a superb army, intense satellite
communications independance, and according to rumours - nuclear capability - all this is a supreme contradiction to the Christian theory of the ‘Wandering Jew’. Your theology is wonky!
So let’s not play games and deny charges of anti-semitism.
Am Yisrael Chai - the People of Israel Live!
You may comment during the course of the day but I am on half term duty.![]()
Richard Hall, the blog's owner is very proud of the number of comments he gets. Richard seems to spend a lot of time responding to them. He somehow thinks this signifies support for his views A typical Connexion discussion normally goes something like this:
Richard posts12 comments:
Kim: Absolutely brilliant Richard.
Richard: I know Kim. I owe it all to you.
Kim: Oh Richard.
Richard: Oh Kim.
Dave W: Brilliant. Conference will approve
Kim: Thank you Dave
Richard: I am with you there Kim
Bene D: Stunning analysis Kim. He is only it in for the money.
PamBG: Fantastic Richard. I'm insulted.
Richard: Absolutely Pam
Kim: Descartes came to the same conclusion.
Rachel: Despite being a white male.
For some reason yesterday the script changed for two of Richard's posts: One accused British Jews of seeking support from the English Defence League and a second tried to outline the Methodist case for its position on Israel. He went a little over the top.
Several Jewish people joined the conversation. First off was a very clear exposition that Jewish people in Britain had no truck with the EDL. This was anti-Jewish defamation at its worst and that lie was well and truly nailed. Richard should have undertaken a little more research before making that accusation.
Several people commented on his second post. It was interesting to read what Jewish people think of our report and resolution. Several times I have urged Richard and others to meet with Britain's Jewish community. Yesterday, they came to him.
We Methodists now seem curiously afraid of dialogue with Jews. We would not allow a Jew to address our conference, preferring to discriminate in favour of a Christian who denounced the Holocaust as a "Zionist tool". Many of those commenting said that they believed the Methodist Church position was anti Semitic. That saddens me because I don't believe Methodist people are anti-Semitic, though I believe our behaviour to be discriminatory.
Last time I looked there were about 70 comments many putting a very different view to that normally expressed on Connexions. Some from the Methodist side were fairly rude about the denomination's newly appointed bogeyman but I think I will manage. That aside take a read.
There was one comment that caught my eye:
“”Criticism of the state of Israel is not anti-semitism” (sic)
I am a Jew who has suffered for 2,000 years from Christian anti-semitism. Without the Church (generically) pathing the way for the Nazi Holocaust, Hitler would have been laughed out of his first beer-hall for attacking Jews.. But the Church had prepared Europe for the Holocaust over 2,000 years.
The only difference between the Nazis and the Church was technological - in Spain the Church burned Jews alive. Had the Spanish Inquisition knowledge of 6,000,000 Jews refusing to lose their faith, they also would have created a similar Holocaust. CAn anyone refute that?
Your theological problem now is contention with the problem of the ‘Wandering Jew’, so condemned to eternity for killing Christ. The fact that I sit here in my home in Jerusalem, Israel, typing this post, protected by a Jewish State that has a superb army, intense satellite
communications independance, and according to rumours - nuclear capability - all this is a supreme contradiction to the Christian theory of the ‘Wandering Jew’. Your theology is wonky!
So let’s not play games and deny charges of anti-semitism.
Am Yisrael Chai - the People of Israel Live!
You may comment during the course of the day but I am on half term duty.
