Leftist tyrants always lie to the people, the easily duped masses. It’s how they obtain and maintain control of the population. A hallmark of such a regime is the sheer magnitude of the lie. The tactic of using the “Big Lie” has been attributed to Hitler, or his propaganda chief, Joseph Goebbels, but whoever coined the term understood its implications.
And so it is that when a huge lie – a real whopper – is told loudly enough, often enough … people believe it.
Yasser Arafat, perhaps modern history’s most visible serial killer and mass murderer, learned from the Soviets that by transforming himself from a terrorist to a “freedom fighter,” he would win great gains in the West.
They were right.
I became aware in the ’90s that Arafat was targeting the American Christian community with a series of whoppers so outrageous, it was hard at the time to believe anyone would believe them.
Yet he was successful. One of the biggest lies is the historical falsehood that Jesus was a Palestinian.
Here’s how this works: Relying on the knowledge that many Americans are biblically illiterate (literally having never read the Bible; perhaps parts of it, but not close to both testaments), Arafat could float the trial balloon that Jesus of Nazareth – thoroughly presented as Jewish in Scripture – was in reality a “Palestinian.”
It is an historical fact that in modern times, at least since the 1967 Six Day War, the Palestinians as a distinct, sovereign entity, are a creation of Arab and Soviet propaganda. No one denies that Arabs have lived in the Holy Land for some time. Yet a formerly sovereign “state of Palestine” has never existed.
It is truly astonishing, then, that the big lie that Jesus had “Palestinian” roots has found its way into the very heart of mainstream evangelicalism in the United States.
In the recently published February/March issue of Relevant magazine, publisher Cameron Strang penned a piece called, “Blessed Are the Peacemakers,” in which he presented the Palestinian narrative regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Strang, whose father, Steve, is founder and president of Charisma Media, could be described as progressive in worldview. Steve Strang has a long reputation as a leader in the pro-Israel Christian community. The son, however, is something else altogether. Someone has described Relevant as Rolling Stone for evangelicals.
In the new issue cover story, Cameron Strang quoted a variety of people involved in framing the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. The problem is they are all left-wing. Sami Awad, Hanan Ashrawi, Lynne Hybels and Todd Deatherage, among others, are not impartial, unbiased observers. The article itself is steeply slanted toward the Palestinian view of the conflict which is, in short-form, all Israel’s fault.
Witness the bizarre historical lie in a quote from Ashrawi: “‘Palestinians are the descendants of the early Christians,’ says Palestinian legislator Dr. Hanan Ashrawi. ‘We are probably the straightest line to original Christianity. The Christian presence in Palestine is important. Christianity is part and parcel of the Palestinian identity.'”
It’s hard to understand why a publisher, self-identifying as a believing Christian, would allow a falsehood of this magnitude in his publication.
Unless he has an agenda.
Again, the rest of the piece is heavily tilted in favor of the Palestinian narrative, and therein we find Cameron Strang’s agenda: Palestine must increase, so Israel can decrease.
I emailed Cameron Strang after the issue hit the streets, telling him I had questions about his cover story. I requested an interview, which I’ve done before. He said no. This is the same answer I’ve gotten from his fellow “Christian Palestinianists,” like Lynne Hybels (co-founder with her husband, Bill, of Willow Creek Community Church), Wheaton Professor Gary Burge and Strang’s close friend, Donald Miller.
None of them want to talk about their extreme views of Israel and the way they present those views.
Why would they refuse to answer questions? If they were sure of their view, why wouldn’t they be willing – even eager – to discuss it?
Some of them, like Cameron Strang, like to say that I am biased in my view. They fail to mention of course that they are equally biased in their view.
My position is that this group of Evangelical leaders is spreading a distorted and in some cases false reality with regard to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
If they are willing to present a sharply biased view of this issue, in order to advance an anti-Israel agenda, how are the masses going to know the truth? How will the readers of Relevant know that Hanan Ashrawi’s presentation of early Christian history is false?
And the real question, the foundational issue here is … why does the Christian Palestinian leadership in the Evangelical community hide from scrutiny?