The Jews Who Fought For HItler

It isn’t every day that I pick up a book from a middle school library. It’s even less often that when I do I can’t put it down. That was the case recently with a book that my son brought home. In a rare case for my son, he had read the book and enjoyed it so much that he wanted to buy a copy. After looking at the book, I not only bought it for him, I read it myself and found the story riveting.

The book was “Unlikely Warrior: A Jewish Soldier in Hitler’s Army” by Georg Rauch. As a self-proclaimed, history nut, the title grabbed my attention. My first thought was, “Whoa, I didn’t know that there were any Jews who fought in the German army.”

The book is an autobiographical tale of an Austrian teenager who had a Jewish grandparent but was raised as a gentile. Even though Judaism is a religion rather than a race, the fact that Rauch was ¼ Jewish made him a “mischling,” essentially a half-breed, in the eyes of the Nazis. Nevertheless, while Rauch’s mother was hiding Jews in their home, the Wehrmacht drafted the young man. Initially selected to be an officer, he used his mischling status to avoid being assigned to a leadership position.

Rauch’s tale brings humanity to the face of Wehrmacht soldiers, many of whom were conscripts who had no love for Hitler or the Nazis. Once Rauch was enlisted and joined a Wehrmacht unit, his Jewish ancestry seems not to have made a difference. He was accepted as a brother-in-arms by his fellow soldiers who had bigger concerns than who the grandparents of their fellow soldiers were. His letters home were reminiscent of letters by American GIs.

The German soldiers were on the wrong side, but not all of them were evil. With conscripts on all sides in the war, a great many soldiers on every side just wanted the war to be over so they could go home.

Rauch’s description of fighting on the Russian front also tells a story that is largely unknown among American readers. As bloody as the American and British campaigns against the Germans were, the fighting on the vast expanses of Russia was much larger in scale. Throughout the war, Germany had many more divisions on the Eastern front than in the West. Rauch arrived in Russia shortly before German lines collapsed in 1943. His story includes a stint as a prisoner in a Soviet POW camp that bears more than a passing resemblance to a Nazi concentration camp.

His description of the SS recruiting at his school tells of young men who were lured into the elite service by promises of girls and national glory. Many probably had no idea what they were volunteering for at the time. The promises of the recruiters stand in stark contrast to the later scene at the prison camp in which Soviet guards singled out SS soldiers for execution by their blood type tattoos, a perk of SS service.

Rauch’s story was so compelling that I sought out another book that he mentioned. Bryan Mark Rigg researched the topic of Jewish German soldiers in his book, “Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers,” and it turns out that there were thousands of them. While most were mischlinge like Rauch, some were full Jews. Some were generals and some even served in the SS.

The Nazi approach to Jewish and mischling soldiers was paradoxical and confused. Some served out the war. Many were discharged, even as the Third Reich crumbled, and others were sent to forced labor groups or concentration camps.

Some Jewish soldiers who had good records, had been decorated for their bravery and looked Aryan were granted exemptions to serve. A few were granted certificates of German blood that essentially made them honorary Aryans. The decisions to grant clemency from the anti-Jewish laws were made personally by Hitler. At times, the Fuhrer would grant an exemption to one brother but deny another.

The obvious question is why? Why would Jews enlist to fight for Hitler?

There are many answers. Some were so assimilated into German society that they didn’t know about their Jewish ancestry. Some were even Nazi Party members before they learned the “embarrassing” truth about their lineage. These Jewish Germans considered themselves nationalists and patriots rather than Jews.

Many others became soldiers to protect themselves and their families. Being a soldier or a veteran sometimes – but not always – offered protection from the SS and the Gestapo. Some Jewish soldiers were able to prevent or delay the deportation of their relatives to the death camps. Some were able to get better rations for their families by serving. It is ironic that they felt safer facing the Americans, British and Russians than their own government.

Some were professional soldiers who were in the German military before Hitler’s rise to power. These men simply knew no other career or way of life.

Some, like Rauch, served because they were drafted and had no other option. Dodging the draft would result in imprisonment or execution and might also bring punishment upon their family.

Another factor was that most German Jews were unaware of the Nazi extermination of Jews in the East. In Germany, persecution of Jews was widespread and obvious, but mass murders were less apparent in the police state where information was tightly controlled. People knew about the deportations of the Jews from Germany but did not know that they were being transported to death camps.

If the firsthand account of World War II from the German perspective makes the Wehrmacht seem more human, one has only to watch a documentary about the Einsatzgruppen (available on Netflix) to again question the very humanity of German soldiers. What was hidden from those in Germany was readily apparent to those in the occupied territories of the East. The Germans and their allies marched Jews into ravines and executed them one by one, stacking thousands of bodies like cordwood. The Wehrmacht took part in these massacres and attempts were made by leaders to implicate every soldier by making them take part.

None of the Jewish German veterans admit to being involved in the massacres, but Rauch does describe being ordered to execute a Russian civilian accused of being a partisan. The passage provided an opportunity to discuss the ethics of warfare with my son, who is currently a JROTC cadet.

The story of the Jews who fought for Hitler is a little-known but fascinating part of World War II history. Almost lost amid the tragedy of the war and the Holocaust is the story of these German Jews who were caught between love for their country and persecution by their government. As with many victims of the war, they were left with no good options with which to play the hand that life dealt them.

Originally published on The Resurgent

“Harbinger” author to headline inaugural prayer breakfast

Jonathan Cahn, a controversial messianic rabbi, announced on his Facebook page today that he has been asked to be the keynote speaker at the Presidential Inaugural Prayer Breakfast on Jan. 21. Cahn is the rabbi of the Beth Israel Worship Center in Wayne, N.J. and president of the Hope of the World ministry. He is also the author of “The Harbinger,” a prophetic novel that details Cahn’s belief that the United States is receiving divine warnings as a prelude to judgment.

“The Harbinger” centers around Isaiah 9:10, a verse in which the ancient Israelites vowed to rebuild stronger than before in the aftermath of an Assyrian attack. Cahn finds many parallels between modern America and ancient Israel.

According to Cahn, the process of divine judgment begins with the removal of God’s protective “hedge” to open the nation to attack. In the case of both nations, the removal of God’s protection led to an attack by terrorists. In Israel’s case, the attack was by the Assyrians in 732 B.C. In America’s case, it was by al Qaeda on 9/11.

In both cases, the attack was followed by defiance. The Israelites made the vow found in Isaiah: “The bricks have fallen down, but we will rebuild with dressed stone; the fig trees have been felled, but we will replace them with cedars.” Put simply, they would take what was destroyed and replace it with something even better rather than repenting of their sins.

Ironically, this obscure Old Testament verse with its vow of defiance was used not once, but twice by American leaders in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. On Sept. 12, 2001, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle quoted the verse in a speech to congress where he specifically linked the verse to America. Three years later, on Sept. 11, 2004, Sen. John Edwards, then a vice presidential candidate, again invoked the verse in a speech to the Congressional Black Caucus. On February 24, 2009, President Obama echoed the defiant tone of the verse, saying in his address to Congress, “I want every American to know this: We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before.” The book cites many other striking similarities between ancient history and modern news.

Other confirmed guests at the Presidential Inaugural Prayer Breakfast include Chaplain of the U.S. House Father Patrick Conroy, Rep. Michele Bachmann, Rep. Eric Cantor, and Sen. Roy Blunt. Worship music will be provided by Jeremiah and Wendy Ginsberg and the Philadelphia Tabernacle of David. It is not known whether President Obama will attend.

Tickets to the event are available to the public. They can be purchased online at http://pipb2013.eventbrite.com/ or by calling (804) 971—0414. Limited tickets will be available at the door.

Originally published on Examiner.com:

http://www.examiner.com/article/author-of-book-on-judgment-of-u-s-will-headline-inaugural-prayer-breakfast?cid=db_articles&no_cache=1357424951

Race, slavery and the Bible

Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Georgia was at the center of America’s racial struggle, for good and bad.  From its colonial days, Georgia was a slave-owning colony and then state.  It stood in the heart of the Confederacy and, even after the abolition of slavery blacks were treated as less than equal.  A few miles from where I grew up and less than ten years before I was born, Lt. Col. Lemuel Penn, a black US Army veteran of WWII, was murdered by Klansmen in 1964.  Martin Luther King, Jr., an Atlanta native and pastor of Atlanta’s Ebenezer Baptist Church, became the face of the civil rights movement.  King represented a full circle between past attempts to use the Bible to justify racial discrimination.  King, and other Christians like him, was instrumental in banning slavery and segregation in the US.

Over the years, religion has been used to justify slavery and segregation as well as racial reconciliation.  Pastors and congregations have used Bible verses to support arguments on both sides of the racial and political spectrums.  What does the Bible really tell us?

Slavery has probably existed almost as long as human societies have.  The earliest mention of slavery in the Bible is in Genesis 9:25 in which Noah curses Canaan, the son of Ham and grandson of Noah, to live in slavery because Ham ridiculed Noah while he was drunk in the days after the Great Flood.  By the end of Genesis, the entire Hebrew clan was enslaved in Egypt.  The Bible repeatedly reminds the Jews that they were rescued from slavery by God (Exodus 2:23, 6:6, 20:2, Leviticus 26:13, Deuteronomy 5:6, 5:15, 16:12).

Slavery was not condemned by the Bible, but, beginning with Moses, God set down rules for the treatment of slaves.  An early rule regarding slaves is found in Exodus 20:21 which stipulates that a slave owner must be punished if a slave dies after being beaten.  Beating slaves was not forbidden in itself.

Slavery as we know it, based on race, was forbidden.  Slaves were typically taken as captives in wars, or in some cases sold themselves into slavery to pay their debts or provide for themselves.  The Bible did forbid the type of slavery in which slavers raided African villages and sold the inhabitants into slavery.  In Exodus 21:16, God, through Moses, forbade the kidnapping of people to sell into slavery. 

The law books of the Bible also address the treatment of slaves.  Leviticus 19:20 regulates sexual relations with slaves.  Leviticus 22:11 concerns the possession of slaves by priests.  Leviticus 25:42-44 forbids the sale of fellow Hebrews as slaves and stipulates that Jews had to buy slaves from the surrounding gentile nations.  In Deuteronomy 15:12-15, the Bible specifies that if a Jew sells himself into slavery, he must be offered freedom after six years.  If he elects to go free, the owner had to supply him with food and livestock.

The New Testament also addresses slavery.  The book of Philemon is a letter from Paul to the owner of an escaped slave, Onesimus.  Paul sent Onesimus back to Philemon, asking that he be treated not as a slave, but as a brother (v. 16).  Similarly, in Ephesians 6:9, Paul instructed slave owners not to threaten or harm their slaves, since both slave and master had the same Master in Heaven.  A similar statement in Colossians 4:1, instructs slave owners to give to their slaves what is “right and fair.” 

Paul did provide a condemnation of the slave trade, if not slavery itself.  In 1 Timothy 1:8-10, Paul listed slave traders in a list of sinners and lawbreakers, along with murders, adulterers, perverts, liars, and perjurers. 

To this point, the Bible has condemned the slave trade and instructed slave owners to treat their slaves humanely and fairly.  Paul went a step further, however.  In several passages, Paul implicitly states that slaves and owners, as well as Jews and gentiles, are equal in the eyes of God.  1 Corinthians 12:13 says that both slaves and freemen have been given the gift of the Holy Spirit.  Deuteronomy 32:36, Revelation 13:16, and Revelation 19:18 all point to the fact that God judges free and slave equally.

In case there is any doubt, Paul goes even further.  He states what for his time must have been a radical thought.  In both Galatians 3:28 and Colossians 3:11, Paul states explicitly that there is no slave or free.  Paul also points out that Jews and Greeks are equal as well, a notion that the leaders of God’s Chosen People would not have liked.  In God’s eyes, all people are equal.  None are superior and none are inferior.  In God’s eyes all people are sinners and are in need of the freedom from sin that Jesus offers (2 Peter 2:19).

These statements provide the basis for the eventual abolition of slavery.  Even though some nominal Christians taught that blacks were inferior descendents of Ham, there is no basis for this.  To the contrary, a close reading of the Bible shows just the opposite: that people should be treated as equal, regardless of race, creed, color, or nationality.

It would take hundreds of years, but Paul’s words would finally give birth to movement for the abolition of slavery.  The abolition movement began in colonial America.  The first resisters to slavery were members of the Society of Friends, a Christian sect also known as Quakers.  After the American Revolution, many free whites began to equate the plight of slaves with that of the former colonists. 

The ratification of the US Constitution in 1788 set the stage for the eventual abolition of slavery.  The constitution gave the federal government the power to ban the importation of slaves in 1808, which it did.  The 3/5 compromise, contrary to claims that it valued slaves and only 3/5 of a person, limited the political power of the slave states.  The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 also made slavery illegal in the Northwest Territory.  During this period, Northern states began to enact state laws banning slavery.

Probably no man was as instrumental in the abolition of western slavery as William Wilberforce.  Wilberforce was a Christian and a prominent member of the British parliament who, influenced by slave trader turned evangelist John Newton, began a campaign to end the slave trade in 1798.  The campaign resulted in the end of the British slave trade in 1807 and the end of all slavery in England in 1833. 

American abolitionists too, were often inspired by their religious beliefs.  Frederick Douglass, a former slave, framed his arguments against slavery in religious terms, pointing out the hypocrisy of Christians owning slaves.  Sojourner Truth, a former slave born in New York, used the Bible to effectively argue for both women’s rights and the abolition of slavery.  Many other abolitionists opposed slavery on moral grounds derived from a Christian worldview.  Many put their beliefs into practice as conductors or station keepers on the Underground Railroad.  Harriet Tubman, “the Black Moses,” was one of the Underground Railroad’s most famous conductors, as well as a spy for the Union Army.

John Brown's execution day

One of the most infamous Christian abolitionists of the nineteenth century was John Brown.  Brown worked on the Underground Railroad in Pennsylvania before moving his family to Kansas, where he became known for his savage attacks on pro-slavery settlers.  Brown eventually was captured by US Marines under the command of Robert E. Lee and sentenced to hang.  Brown was executed on December 2, 1859.  His last words, in a note given to his jailer, foretold the wrath of God that was soon to be visited upon the United States for the evil of slavery:

I, John Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with blood. I had, as I now think vainly, flattered myself that, without very much bloodshed, it might be done.

Elected on the heels of John Brown’s hanging, Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president, also framed his opposition to slavery in moralistic terms:  “Now I confess myself as belonging to that class in the country who contemplate slavery as a moral, social and political evil...” The Republican Party was created in 1854 specifically to oppose slavery. 

There is dispute over Lincoln’s religious beliefs.  Many believe that he was not a Christian because he never joined a church.  Nevertheless, he did often attend church and read the Bible regularly.  In his speeches and letters, he quoted from the Bible regularly and is said to have had large portions of it committed to memory.  He also grew up in a Baptist family.  Lincoln himself said, “That I am not a member of any Christian Church, is true; but I have never denied the truth of the Scriptures; and I have never spoken with intentional disrespect of religion in general, or any denomination of Christians in particular.”  Whatever his personal spiritual beliefs, Lincoln’s Christian background likely shaped his beliefs on the immorality of slavery.

Further, the Battle Hymn of the Republic was one of the most popular songs of the Civil War.  It became a popular marching song of the Union army.  Its lyrics, together with the tune of another popular song about John Brown, are unmistakably Biblical.  The words invoke the sacrifice of Christ as an inspiration for the Union struggle to abolish slavery.

After the abolition of slavery, the struggle started anew to gain full legal equality for all Americans regardless of race.  In the years after the Civil War, a system of “separate-but-equal” was established and black suffrage was discouraged in many areas.  Again, activists steeped in a Christian worldview led the movement for equality and civil rights.  As with slavery, however, people also used the Bible, mostly out of context, to support segregation as well.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was the symbol of the civil rights movement. King, his father and his grandfather were all Baptist preachers.  The Bible taught King that blacks were equal to whites and his faith in God gave him the strength to stand strong.  Alluding to Moses, King said, “I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over, and I've seen the Promised Land.” 

Another famous figure of the civil rights movement, Rosa Parks, was also a committed Christian.  Rosa Parks was not the first person to refuse to move to the back of the bus, but the quiet dignity that her faith instilled made her a sympathetic face for the Montgomery bus boycott and the civil rights movement as a whole.

Jackie Robinson

Jackie Robinson, the first black player in Major League Baseball, was also a Christian.  Robinson was given his chance by Brooklyn Dodgers general manager, Branch Rickey, also a Christian.  Many other rank-and-file Christians pushed for equality on the basis that no race was superior since all races were created by God and descended from Adam.

In other countries, a Christian worldview has also helped to bring about equality and freedom.  After years of apartheid, South Africa is now integrated.  In the aftermath of apartheid, many wanted to try the former leaders of the country for human rights abuses.  Instead, South Africa established a Truth and Reconciliation Committee that walks the line between mercy and justice.  Bishop Desmond Tutu was instrumental in establishing the process that is helping black and white South Africans to reconcile and face the future in peace.

It might have taken thousands of years, but we are as close to the full equality of the races, what was most likely God’s original intent, in modern America as anywhere in history.  There will always be racist fringe groups, but in modern America they are ostracized and not part of mainstream society.  We are very near to Martin Luther King’s colorblind society, but the next step is a difficult one to take.

The next step on the road to equality is to attack what President George W. Bush called “the soft bigotry of low expectations.”  Preferential treatment for any race needs to be phased out.  Programs such as these had their place in the days of integration, but our society is fully integrated now.  People of all races have equal opportunity, as evidenced by the election of President Barack Obama, and there are laws to prevent discrimination (with the exception of discriminatory government programs and laws). 

To believe that any one race needs special government help to succeed is an inherently racist notion.  It is time to remove race-based programs.  If the government feels that it is necessary to provide entitlement programs (which it increasingly cannot afford to do anyway), then they should be administered on the basis of need, rather than race.

According to Joel Kotkin in his book The Next Hundred Million:  America in 2050, the population of the United States will grow by leaps and bounds in the coming decades.  Many new Americans will be immigrants and many will be born here.  True to the tradition of the American melting pot, they will come in a variety of races, creeds, and colors.  It is in our best interest to welcome them into our society and to help them assimilate. 

http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/view_photog.php?photogid=1722

As different races assimilate into our society, there will more intermarriage.  The races will blend.  This is a good thing.  I look forward to a day when the color of someone’s skin makes no more difference than the color of their hair or eyes.  When my children grow up, I will be far more concerned with the character and culture of their spouses than the color of their skin. 

If this was God’s intent from the beginning, then why does the Bible not prohibit slavery?  Why didn’t Moses tell the Jews in the wilderness that since they had known the evils of slavery in Egypt they were now forbidden from owning slaves themselves?

I believe that the answer can be found in Matthew 19:8.  In this passage, Jesus is asked about divorce by a group of Pharisees.  Jesus answered, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.”  Similarly, I believe that if we could talk to Jesus face-to-face and ask him why God did not prohibit slavery, He would say, “Moses permitted slavery because your hearts were hard.  But it was not this way from the beginning.”

The races may coexist peacefully and equally in the modern United States, but this is not the case for all parts of the world.  Harassment, persecution, and even genocide of people who look, speak, or think differently still happens all too often.  Likewise, slavery still exists in many parts of the world.   We should use our national influence to encourage equality and reconciliation around the world, while fighting to end slavery everywhere.

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-atlanta/race-slavery-and-the-bible"> 

(This article originally published Feb. 24, 2010.  It has been one of my most popular posts.)

The Cohen gene - Key to a prophetic priesthood?

And bring thou near unto thee Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office, even Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron's sons
Ex 28:1 (ASV)

A few years ago, Dr. Karl Skorecki, a nephrologist and researcher at the University of Toronto and Israel’s Rambam-Technion Medical Center had an interesting thought. He speculated that the Kohanim, a family line that descends from Aaron, the brother of Moses, according to Jewish tradition, might be genetically distinct from other Jews and gentiles. Skorecki reasoned that if the Kohanim, the Cohens, were descended from one man, Aaron, as the Bible asserts then they would have common genetic markers. The Cohens are mentioned in the Bible as far back as 2nd Kings 17:27-28. In fact, the term “kohanim” or “cohanim” often seems used interchangeably with the word “priests” in Jewish sources.

Fathers pass Y-chromosomes to their sons. The Y-chromosome does accumulate mutations, but is otherwise the same as a man’s ancient male ancestors. These combinations of mutations are known as haplotypes.

The study showed that over 98% of Cohen Jews possessed a particular genetic marker (YAP). Non-Cohen Jews possessed the marker in significantly lower percentages. A second study confirmed the results and showed that over 91% of Cohens possess six chromosomal markers now known as the Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH) (http://www.cohen-levi.org/jewish_genes_and_genealogy/the_dna_chain_of_tradition.htm). The CMH is common in both Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews and indicates a common ancestor for both European and Mediterranean Jews. By counting the mutations in the Y-chromosome, researchers calculate that the Cohen line goes back approximately 106 generations or roughly 3,300 years. This is the approximate time of the Exodus from Egypt.

Ultimately, the research showed that over 80% of Cohens share the genetic markers (http://www.cohen-levi.org/jewish_genes_and_genealogy/the_dna_chain_of_tradition.htm). Researchers believe that the differences are accounted for by the fact that Jewishness is not determined genetically. Additional chromosomes can enter as people convert to Judaism or intermarriage with non-Jews. Jewish ethnicity is determined by the mother, but Jewish tribal membership is determined by the father.

Further, the research showed that the Levites, the tribe from which Aaron came, are not as genetically distinct as the Cohens. Jewish scholars believe that this is due to the fact that many Levites never returned to Jerusalem from the Babylonian exile. This resulted in the loss of their family line into history.

It should be noted that the CMH genetic group does appear in non-Jews as well. Matches of five of the six markers are common in the Middle East. However, possession of all six genetic markers occurs at a much higher rate in Jews than in non-Jews. Researchers point out that the genetic testing is for the extended Cohen family line rather than individuals. No one is qualified or disqualified for any office based on their status as a Cohen.

The most recent study in 2009 confirmed the findings of the earlier study. The extended Cohen Modal Haplotype was found to be virtually absent from non-Jews, while making up approximately 30 percent of Kohanim Y-chromosomes (http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/165282.php). The study traced the gene’s likely source to a common ancestor in the Near East who lived approximately 3,200 years ago.

Similar genetics are found in several other groups around the world. One is the Lemba, a tribe of Southern Africa. Interestingly enough, the Lemba have an oral tradition of Jewish ancestry and keep many traditions and rituals that are similar to those of Judaism. The Buba are considered to be the priestly clan of the Lemba and carry most of the CMH markers.

Samaritans are also relatives of the Jews. A Samaritan community survives as a minority in the Middle East and has genealogical records going back about 400 years. The Samaritan priestly class originally claimed to be descended from the son of Aaron, but this line ended around 1623. The office of high priest was then transferred to a Levite line, which as we have seen, is no longer genetically distinct.

The preservation of the Cohen line matters for a couple of reasons. First, it offers support for the Bible’s version of Jewish history. The fact that the Cohens have preserved their family line since the days of Aaron speaks to the importance placed on preserving the priestly line.

Second, it makes a feasible a fulfillment of Biblical prophecy that a new Temple will be built (Ezekiel 40-44, Daniel 9:27, Haggai 2:9, Zechariah 8). The difficulty with the fulfillment of the prophecy is that the Dome of the Rock mosque is widely believed to be built upon the site of the Jewish Temple, which was destroyed by the Romans in AD 70 (http://www.templemount.org/theories.html).

In its heyday, the Temple was the center of Jewish religious life. The role of the priests was described and set forth in Exodus and Leviticus even though the Temple was not built until the time of Solomon. The Temple contained the Altar of Sacrifice upon which the priests made sacrifices to atone for the sins of the people and the nation. It also contained a sacred room called the Holy of Holies in which resided the Ark of the Covenant, a vessel containing the original tablets of the Ten Commandments. The Ark disappeared as the first (Solomon’s) Temple was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BC and its present location is unknown. A second Temple was built seventy years later by Ezra and Jews returning from exile. This Temple, called Herod’s Temple because Herod the Great renovated and restored it, was destroyed by the Romans in AD 70.

To clarify some of the background Jewish history, I spoke with a rabbi at one of Atlanta’s largest synagogues. The rabbi, who prefers to remain anonymous, told me that the Jewish genealogies had been passed down through family tradition after the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. He told me that there is no link between the Cohens and modern rabbis, which are totally different from the Levitical-Aaronic priests. When I asked him about the possibility of a new Temple and a new priesthood, he demurred, saying that there were people who wanted to build a new Temple, but that it was far from certain and that there was no way to know the basis for the new priesthood.

Further investigation on the internet revealed that there are two Israeli groups that are dedicated to restoring the Temple in Jerusalem. The Temple Mount Faithful (http://www.templemountfaithful.org/) has crafted cornerstones for the new Temple and makes regular trips to the Temple Mount where they are always turned away by Israeli authorities. The Temple Institute (http://templeinstitute.org/) has crafted new vessels, tables, and musical instruments for use in the next Temple. Additionally the Temple Institute has also had priestly garments made for a new cadre of Temple priests (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/126721). One item that cannot be recreated is the Ark of the Covenant. The Temple Institute believes that the Ark is hidden in the catacombs beneath the Temple Mount.

The remaining obstacle, and it is a large one, is the fact that the Muslims still maintain control of the Temple Mount, even though the Israelis have controlled Jerusalem since 1967. The mount, called the Noble Sanctuary by the Muslims, is home to the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqua mosques. These mosques would have to be removed in order for the Jewish Temple to be restored. Doing so would undoubtedly trigger a war. In 2000, the mere presence of Ariel Sharon on the Temple Mount set off the Second Intifada.

One possible scenario for the removal of the mosques involves yet another prophecy, the War of Gog and Maggot. Ezekiel (ch. 38-39) foretold of a military alliance against Israel led by Russia and Iran that would be destroyed by divine intervention (http://captainkudzu.blogspot.com/2008/11/who-is-gog-of-magog.html). It may be that this war will destroy the mosques on the Temple Mount and pave the way for the reconstruction of the Temple which Ezekiel describes in chapters 40-48.

If and when the Temple is rebuilt, will the priests resume sacrifices as well? I believe so. In fact, the Temple Mount Faithful website contains photos (http://www.templemountfaithful.org/pics-1998.htm) of the sacrifice of a lamb for Pesach (Passover). Since the Jewish religion subscribes to the Torah (Old Testament) in which sacrifices are required, it is logical to assume that once the Temple is restored, sacrifices will continue. Further, Daniel 9:27 refers to a latter-day leader who will stop sacrifices. In order to one day be stopped, sacrifices first have to resume.

It appears that regardless of whether the Cohen genetic information is used to screen rabbis for the new Temple priesthood that the family line of Aaron is intact. This verifies the authenticity of Biblical claims that the Aaronic line was distinct within the Jewish nation. Additionally, it provides a means through which prophecies of a restored Temple and priesthood can one day be fulfilled.


Sources:
http://www.cohen-levi.org/jewish_genes_and_genealogy/the_dna_chain_of_tradition.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-chromosomal_Aaron
http://www.freemaninstitute.com/Gallery/lemba.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemba_people
http://www.templemount.org/theories.html
http://www.ariel-sharon-life-story.com/16-Ariel-Sharon-Biography-2000-Visit-to-the-Temple-Mount.shtml
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/165282.php
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/126721
http://captainkudzu.blogspot.com/2008/11/who-is-gog-of-magog.html
http://www.aish.com/ci/sam/48936742.html

Video Source:
http://www.templemountfaithful.org/multimedia/documentary.htm
Photo Links:
The Temple vessels: http://www.templeinstitute.org/treasures-vessels.htm
The Temple cornerstones: http://www.templemountfaithful.org/img/2006/jerusalemday/1127.jpg
The priestly garments: http://www.templeinstitute.org/treasures-garments.htm
The Temple: http://www.templeinstitute.org/treasures-models.htm
Orlando FL
September 9, 2010

Photo Credit:
luigi diamanti's portfolio is:
http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/view_photog.php?photogid=879

The Khazar conspiracy

There are very few things that extremists of the right and left can agree on. One rare topic on which they tend to see eye-to-eye is criticism of Israel. Although the right and left both tend to dislike the Middle Eastern democracy, they do so for different reasons. Over the last few months, I became aware of a theory being propagated on the right that holds that the Israelis are not really Jewish. If that statement has you scratching your head, then you know exactly how I felt when I first heard it.

The theory holds that modern Jews (and Jewish Israelis) are not descendents of the Biblical Jacob (Israel), but are of European stock, and therefore are not a party to God’s promises to His Chosen People.

According to the theory, the Khazars, a nomadic Eastern European people, converted en masse to Judaism over a thousand years ago. These new Jews supposedly became the basis of the reconstituted nation of Israel. If this is true, so the thinking goes, the new Khazar Jews are not of the direct bloodline of Jacob, and therefore are not heirs to God’s promise. Going further, many proponents of the Khazar theory believe that all Jews, since they have not accepted Jesus as Messiah, have forfeited God’s promise and that Christians, specifically America, have assumed the mantle of God’s Chosen People.

Without getting too deeply into the Biblical argument (which I addressed in an earlier blog: http://www.examiner.com/x-11781-Carroll-County-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d1-Israels-fall-and-redemption), is there any historical basis for the claims about Khazaria? As with many conspiracies, there is a grain of truth at the center of the conspiracists’ claims.

My first instinct was to assume that Khazaria was pure fantasy, but it did exist. Although the origin of the Khazars is unknown, there is ample archaeological evidence from a variety of sources that Khazaria did exist as a nation of nomadic Turks in central Asia, covering parts of the modern nations of Ukraine and Uzbekistan. The history of Khazaria runs from about AD 550 until the 11th century (http://www.khazaria.com/khazar-history.html). A lasting legacy of the Khazars is the battles they fought against Muslim invaders that ultimately prevented Eastern Europe from becoming part of an Islamic caliphate.

It is also true that the Khazars did allow Jews to settle within their borders (http://www.doingzionism.org.il/resources/view.asp?id=140). In fact, Khazaria was a center for religious tolerance at a time when religious persecution was the rule. For example, the Khazar supreme court was composed of representatives of the major religious groups of the day: Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and pagan. Given the historical persecution of the Jewish people, it is no wonder that many of them chose to immigrate to Khazaria.

There is also evidence that the royal family of Khazaria did convert to Judaism at some point after AD 740 (http://www.doingzionism.org.il/resources/view.asp?id=140). The extent of the Jewish conversions is disputed. Some believe that the Jewish community consisted primarily of the Jewish immigrants and the royal family. Others believe that the conversions were more widespread. Whatever the extent of the conversions, it is apparent that large communities of adherents to other religions remained.

The conspiracists believe that the Khazars became what are now referred to as Ashkenazi Jews. Ashkenazi Jews are simply Jews descended from the Jews of central and eastern Europe. Ashkenazi Jews make up the majority of Jews in world today, and many of the Jewish customs that we are familiar with are specifically Ashkenazi customs. “Ashkenazi” is a Hebrew term for “Germany.”

The charge that the Khazars became the Ashkenazi is more difficult to substantiate. In fact, genetic testing of Jews and other Europeans seems to indicate the opposite. Genetic testing of y-chromosomes has indicated that Jews from Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East all share common genetic markers. This indicates that they are descended from common Middle Eastern ancestors (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC18733/?tool=pmcentrez).

In a different genetic study, more groups were tested. Ashkenazi, Sephardic (literally “Spanish”), and Kurdish Jews were tested against various Arab and European samples. The genetic samples of the Arabs and Europeans clustered in separate groups. On the other hand, “neither Ashkenazi Jews nor the two Sephardic samples clustered with their former host populations (non-Jewish Eastern European, Iberian, and North African populations) (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1274378/).

In other words, two separate studies show that the Jewish populations that lived in Europe remained genetically distinct from the local Europeans. This would indicate that the local Jewish populations in Europe did not generally intermarry with the indigenous Europeans. It would also mean that the Ashkenazi Jews are descended from the Jews of Israel, not the Khazars of the Caucasus.

Additionally, from ancient times Judaism has accepted converts and assimilated them into Jewish society. Ironically, or perhaps through God’s Providence, while I was writing this article, I was delayed at airport with a Jewish woman who was also an anthropology major. While we waited, she confirmed the legend from Jewish antiquity of the Khazar king who converted to Judaism. She also confirmed that converts had historically been welcomed into the Jewish community. However, she had never heard the theory that the Khazars supplanted ethnic Jews.

On the other hand, the intermarriage between the Jewish and gentile communities has historically been limited. It has only been in the last two hundred years that Jews have begun to assimilate more into gentile culture. Limited intermarriage and conversion of a relatively small number of native Europeans to Judaism would explain the minor variances between Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews.

Furthermore, even if the conspiracy mongers had been correct and the Khazars had converted en masse to Judaism and immigrated to the Middle East, ultimately ancient bloodlines have no bearing on modern geopolitics. The truth is that the Jews never totally left the area that the Romans designated Palestine. When the British won the area from the Ottoman Empire in WWI, Jews were already there. Likewise, when the British turned Palestine over to the United Nations to implement a two-state solution, many of the people in the new nation of Israel had lived in Palestine all their lives and their families for generations (http://captainkudzu.blogspot.com/2008/06/brief-history-of-modern-state-of-israel.html).

Modern Israel was not founded on an ancient claim to the land from a displaced people. Exiled and conquered Israelites had no more of claim to the land than the American Indian has to the island of Manhattan or Mexico to the American southwest. Israel was founded on claims by Jews who lived in Palestine. The Jews who live there today have the same claim to their property that Americans have to their own homes.

The theory of Ashkenazi Jews originating from the Khazars seems to have originated with Arthur Koestler, a Hungarian Jew and author. His book, The Thirteenth Tribe, advanced the theory that the Ashkenazi were of Turkic origin in an attempt to defuse anti-Semitism. Koestler reasoned that if the Ashkenazi were not ethnically Jewish, it would remove many of the reasons that people hated them. For instance, if they were not descended from Middle Eastern Jews, the charge that the Ashkenazi were “Christ killers” would be baseless. Koestler did not foresee that his theory, now thoroughly disproven, would be used by anti-Semites to foment further hatred of Israel and the Jews.

The story of Khazaria was co-opted by anti-Semites and white supremacists as a justification for their hatred of Israel. Exercise caution and prudence if you see or hear someone espousing the Khazar conspiracy. As with all conspiracies, know your source and consider whether other things that they say are truthful. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but they are not entitled to their own facts.” The facts of the genetic tests are incontrovertible evidence that the Khazar conspiracy is a lie.

Sources:
http://www.khazaria.com/
http://www.khazaria.com/khazar-history.html
http://www.doingzionism.org.il/resources/view.asp?id=140
http://www.sullivan-county.com/identity/khazars.htm
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/judaism/FAQ/07-Jews-As-Nation/section-5.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC18733/?tool=pmcentrez
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1274378/
http://www.jewishpress.com/pageroute.do/21499/
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0002_0_01522.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Koestler
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thirteenth_Tribe


Newark NJ
June 24, 2010


Photo Credit
http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/view_photog.php?photogid=879
Luigi Diamanti

Race, slavery, and the Bible

Over the years, religion has been used to justify slavery and segregation as well as racial reconciliation. Pastors and congregations have used Bible verses to support arguments on both sides of the racial and political spectrums. What does the Bible really tell us?

Slavery has probably existed almost as long as human societies have. The earliest mention of slavery in the Bible is in Genesis 9:25 in which Noah curses Canaan, the son of Ham and grandson of Noah, to live in slavery because Ham ridiculed Noah while he was drunk in the days after the Great Flood. By the end of Genesis, the entire Hebrew clan was enslaved in Egypt. The Bible repeatedly reminds the Jews that they were rescued from slavery by God (Exodus 2:23, 6:6, 20:2, Leviticus 26:13, Deuteronomy 5:6, 5:15, 16:12).

Slavery was not condemned by the Bible, but, beginning with Moses, God set down rules for the treatment of slaves. An early rule regarding slaves is found in Exodus 20:21 which stipulates that a slave owner must be punished if a slave dies after being beaten. Beating slaves was not forbidden in itself.

Slavery as we know it, based on race, was forbidden [1]. Slaves were typically taken as captives in wars, or in some cases sold themselves into slavery to pay their debts or provide for themselves. The Bible did forbid the type of slavery in which slavers raided African villages and sold the inhabitants into slavery. In Exodus 21:16, God, through Moses, forbade the kidnapping of people to sell into slavery.

The law books of the Bible also address the treatment of slaves. Leviticus 19:20 regulates sexual relations with slaves. Leviticus 22:11 concerns the possession of slaves by priests. Leviticus 25:42-44 forbids the sale of fellow Hebrews as slaves and stipulates that Jews had to buy slaves from the surrounding gentile nations. In Deuteronomy 15:12-15, the Bible specifies that if a Jew sells himself into slavery, he must be offered freedom after six years. If he elects to go free, the owner had to supply him with food and livestock.

The New Testament also addresses slavery. The book of Philemon is a letter from Paul to the owner of an escaped slave, Onesimus. Paul sent Onesimus back to Philemon, asking that he be treated not as a slave, but as a brother (v. 16). Similarly, in Ephesians 6:9, Paul instructed slave owners not to threaten or harm their slaves, since both slave and master had the same Master in Heaven. A similar statement in Colossians 4:1, instructs slave owners to give to their slaves what is “right and fair.”

Paul did provide a condemnation of the slave trade, if not slavery itself. In 1 Timothy 1:8-10, Paul listed slave traders in a list of sinners and lawbreakers, along with murders, adulterers, perverts, liars, and perjurers.

To this point, the Bible has condemned the slave trade and instructed slave owners to treat their slaves humanely and fairly. Paul went a step further, however. In several passages, Paul implicitly states that slaves and owners, as well as Jews and gentiles, are equal in the eyes of God. 1 Corinthians 12:13 says that both slaves and freemen have been given the gift of the Holy Spirit. Deuteronomy 32:36, Revelation 13:16, and Revelation 19:18 all point to the fact that God judges free and slave equally.

In case there is any doubt, Paul goes even further. He states what for his time must have been a radical thought. In both Galatians 3:28 and Colossians 3:11, Paul states explicitly that there is no slave or free. Paul also points out that Jews and Greeks are equal as well, a notion that the leaders of God’s Chosen People would not have liked. In God’s eyes, all people are equal. None are superior and none are inferior. In God’s eyes all people are sinners and are in need of the freedom from sin that Jesus offers (2 Peter 2:19).

These statements provide the basis for the eventual abolition of slavery. Even though some nominal Christians taught that blacks were inferior descendents of Ham, there is no basis for this. To the contrary, a close reading of the Bible shows just the opposite: that people should be treated as equal, regardless of race, creed, color, or nationality.

It would take hundreds of years, but Paul’s words would finally give birth to movement for the abolition of slavery. The abolition movement began in colonial America [2]. The first resisters to slavery were members of the Society of Friends, a Christian sect also known as Quakers. After the American Revolution, many free whites began to equate the plight of slaves with that of the former colonists.

The ratification of the US Constitution in 1788 set the stage for the eventual abolition of slavery. The constitution gave the federal government the power to ban the importation of slaves in 1808, which it did. The 3/5 compromise, contrary to claims that it valued slaves and only 3/5 of a person, limited the political power of the slave states. The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 also made slavery illegal in the Northwest Territory [3]. During this period, Northern states began to enact state laws banning slavery.

Probably no man was as instrumental in the abolition of western slavery as William Wilberforce. Wilberforce was a Christian and a prominent member of the British parliament who, influenced by slave trader turned evangelist John Newton, began a campaign to end the slave trade in 1798. The campaign resulted in the end of the British slave trade in 1807 and the end of all slavery in England in 1833 [4].

American abolitionists too, were often inspired by their religious beliefs. Frederick Douglass, a former slave, framed his arguments against slavery in religious terms, pointing out the hypocrisy of Christians owning slaves [5]. Sojourner Truth, a former slave born in New York, used the Bible to effectively argue for both women’s rights and the abolition of slavery [6]. Many other abolitionists opposed slavery on moral grounds derived from a Christian worldview. Many put their beliefs into practice as conductors or station keepers on the Underground Railroad.

One of the most infamous Christian abolitionists of the nineteenth century was John Brown. Brown worked on the Underground Railroad in Pennsylvania before moving his family to Kansas, where he became known for his savage attacks on pro-slavery settlers [7]. Brown eventually was captured by US Marines under the command of Robert E. Lee and sentenced to hang. Brown was executed on December 2, 1859. His last words, in a note given to his jailer, foretold the wrath of God that was soon to be visited upon the United States for the evil of slavery:

I, John Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with blood. I had, as I now think vainly, flattered myself that, without very much bloodshed, it might be done [8].

Elected on the heels of John Brown’s hanging, Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president, also framed his opposition to slavery in moralistic terms: “Now I confess myself as belonging to that class in the country who contemplate slavery as a moral, social and political evil... [9]” The Republican Party was created in 1854 specifically to oppose slavery [10].

There is dispute over Lincoln’s religious beliefs. Many believe that he was not a Christian because he never joined a church. Nevertheless, he did often attend church and read the Bible regularly. In his speeches and letters, he quotes from the Bible regularly and is said to have large portions of it committed to memory. He also grew up in a Baptist family [11]. Lincoln himself said, “That I am not a member of any Christian Church, is true; but I have never denied the truth of the Scriptures; and I have never spoken with intentional disrespect of religion in general, or any denomination of Christians in particular [9].” Whatever his personal spiritual beliefs, Lincoln’s Christian background likely shaped his beliefs on the immorality of slavery.

After the abolition of slavery, the struggle started anew to gain full legal equality for all Americans regardless of race. In the years after the Civil War, a system of “separate-but-equal” was established and black suffrage was discouraged in many areas. Again, activists steeped in a Christian worldview led the movement for equality and civil rights. As with slavery, however, people also used the Bible, mostly out of context, to support segregation as well.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was the symbol of the civil rights movement. King, his father and his grandfather were all Baptist preachers [12]. The Bible taught King that blacks were equal to whites and his faith in God gave him the strength to stand strong. Alluding to Moses, King said, “I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over, and I've seen the Promised Land [13].”

Another famous figure of the civil rights movement, Rosa Parks, was also a committed Christian. Rosa Parks was not the first person to refuse to move to the back of the bus, but the quiet dignity that her faith instilled made her a sympathetic face for the Montgomery bus boycott and the civil rights movement as a whole [14].

Jackie Robinson, the first black player in Major League Baseball, was also a Christian. Robinson was given his chance by Brooklyn Dodgers general manager, Branch Rickey, also a Christian [14]. Many other rank-and-file Christians pushed for equality on the basis that no race was superior since all races were created by God and descended from Adam [15].

In other countries, a Christian worldview has also helped to bring about equality and freedom. After years of apartheid, South Africa is now integrated. In the aftermath of apartheid, many wanted to try the former leaders of the country for human rights abuses. Instead, South Africa established a Truth and Reconciliation Committee that walks the line between mercy and justice [18]. Bishop Desmond Tutu was instrumental in establishing the process that is helping black and white South Africans to reconcile and face the future in peace.

It might have taken thousands of years, but we are as close to the full equality of the races, what was most likely God’s original intent, in modern America as anywhere in history. There will always be racist fringe groups, but in modern America they are ostracized and not part of mainstream society. We are very near to Martin Luther King’s colorblind society, but the next step is a difficult one to take.

The next step on the road to equality is to attack what George W. Bush called “the soft bigotry of low expectations [16].” Preferential treatment for any race needs to be phased out. Programs such as these had their place in the days of integration, but our society is fully integrated now. People of all races have equal opportunity, as evidenced by the election of President Barack Obama, and there are laws to prevent discrimination (with the exception of discriminatory government programs and laws).

To believe that any one race needs special government help to succeed is an inherently racist notion. It is time to remove race-based programs. If the government feels that it is necessary to provide entitlement programs (which it increasingly cannot afford to do anyway), then they should be administered on the basis of need, rather than race.

According to Joel Kotkin in his book The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050, the population of the United States will grow by leaps and bounds in the coming decades. Many new Americans will be immigrants and many will be born here. True to the tradition of the American melting pot, they will come in a variety of races, creeds, and colors. It is in our best interest to welcome them into our society and to help them assimilate.

As different races assimilate into our society, there will more intermarriage. The races will blend. This is a good thing. I look forward to a day when the color of someone’s skin makes no more difference than the color of their hair or eyes. When my children grow up, I will be far more concerned with the character and culture of their spouses than the color of their skin.

If this was God’s intent from the beginning, then why does the Bible not prohibit slavery? Why didn’t Moses tell the Jews in the wilderness that since they had known the evils of slavery in Egypt they were now forbidden from owning slaves themselves?

I believe that the answer can be found in Matthew 19:8. In this passage, Jesus is asked about divorce by a group of Pharisees. Jesus answered, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.” Similarly, I believe that if we could talk to Jesus face-to-face and ask him why God did not prohibit slavery, He would say, “Moses permitted slavery because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.”

The races may coexist peacefully and equally in the modern United States, but this is not the case for all parts of the world. Harassment, persecution, and even genocide of people who look, speak, or think differently still happens all too often. Likewise, slavery still exists in many parts of the world. We should use our national influence to encourage equality and reconciliation around the world, while fighting to end slavery everywhere.

Sources:
1. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html
2. http://americanabolitionist.liberalarts.iupui.edu/brief.htm
3. http://www.infoplease.com/timelines/slavery.html
4. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/wilberforce_william.shtml
5. http://www.lib.rochester.edu/index.cfm?PAGE=4071
6. http://nisto.com/wct/who/sojourn.html
7. http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/people/A0809136.html
8. http://www.famousquotessite.com/famous-quotes-13161-john-brown-last-words-in-a-written-note-given-to-his-jailer-dec-2-1859.html
9. http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/quotes.htm
10. http://www.lipolitics.com/_history.htm
11. http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/abraham_lincolns_religious_beliefs
12. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAkingML.htm

13. http://thinkexist.com/quotes/martin_luther_king,_jr./
14. http://www.leaderu.com/critical/colson-parks.html
15. http://www.christianpost.com/article/20100120/why-king-s-dream-overcame-christian-white-supremacy/print.html
16. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57466-2004Sep2.html
17. http://joelkotkin.com/content/0091-next-hundred-million-america-2050
18. http://www.philosophytalk.org/pastShows/Reconciliation.htm
19. http://www.freetheslaves.net/Page.aspx?pid=375
February 23, 2010
Charleston SC

A Brief History of the Modern State of Israel

The nation of Israel was founded by Joshua over three thousand years ago. Yet in 2008, the modern nation of Israel celebrated its sixtieth anniversary. In 586 BC, Israel ceased to exist for over twenty-five centuries until a remarkable series of events led to its reformation in 1948.

The story of modern Israel begins in the late 19th century. During this period, Palestine, the name of the Roman province that incorporated ancient Israel, was ruled by the Ottoman Turks. Jews had been scattered throughout the world for thousands of years. As pogroms and persecution increased in Europe in the 1800s, some Jews began to immigrate into Turkish Palestine. These movements of Jews were referred to as “aliyahs.”

Jewish settlers initially purchased uncultivated and swamp land in Palestine. They worked the land and drained the swamps to create arable land. In these early days, Jews and Arabs peacefully coexisted in most cases, although the Jews were still persecuted by the Ottoman Turks.

Theodore Herzl was an early proponent of Zionism, the belief that a new Jewish state should be created. After covering the Dreyfus trial in France, Herzl was shocked at the rampant anti-Semitism in his country and promoted the aliyahs. In the midst of Jewish immigration to Palestine, Tel Aviv was founded as a Jewish city in 1909.

Chaim Weizmann was a Zionist contemporary of Herzl. Weizmann was also a chemist. During WWI, Weizmann worked with the British against the Central Powers. First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill, charged Weizmann with developing a process for producing acetone, which was needed to manufacture naval artillery shells. Weizmann’s scientific success brought him, and Zionism, to the attention of the British government.

The Ottoman Empire, which ruled Palestine, was allied with Germany during WWI. Weizmann’s influence eventually helped convince the British that establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine would help convince Jews to join the fight against Germany and the Turks. The Allies also planned to dismember the losing empires to ensure that they would not be able to wage war in the future.

In 1917, the British formally issued the Balfour Declaration, which supported the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. The declaration stated that British government "view with favour" the establishment in Palestine of "a national home for the Jewish people" on the conditions that "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine" or "the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

While several thousand Jews in Palestine were inducted into the Ottoman army, many others assisted the British. A group called the Gideonites spied for the British. In 1915, the Zion Mule Corps was founded to serve with the British army in Gallipoli. Two years later, a Jewish Legion, the 38th King’s Fusiliers, was formed from Zion Mule Corps veterans and other Palestinian Jewish volunteers. The Jewish Legion served with General Allenby in Egypt and Jordan. Later, the 39th and 40th King’s Fusiliers were formed with Jewish volunteers from other countries.

After the defeat of Germany and the Ottomans, Weizmann signed an agreement with future Saudi king, Faisal ibn Hussein. The Faisal-Weizmann agreements set the stage for a Jewish state in Palestine and a separate Arab state. The borders would be determined by the Paris Peace Conference and both sides agreed to allow the British to arbitrate disputes.

In 1920, the Allies signed a peace treaty with Turkey. The British were assigned a mandate to administer Palestine and Transjordan, including the responsibility for implementing the Balfour Declaration. The Turks had kept thousands of troops in Palestine, but British forces numbered only in the hundreds. These few troops and police would not be enough to keep the peace in the years that followed.

Soon relations between the Jews and the Arabs began to break down. Haj Amin al-Husseini, nephew of Jerusalem’s mayor, organized Arabs into groups of fedayeen “one who sacrifices himself” to attack Jews, beginning in 1919. Haj Amin helped to incite Arab mobs to riot in Jerusalem in April 1920. Six Jews were killed and 200 injured during the riots. The death toll would have been higher if Vladimir Jabotinsky had not already begun organizing a Jewish defense organization, the Haganah (self-defense).

After the riots, the British arrested both Arabs and Jews, including Jabotinsky. Haj Amin escaped to Jordan and was convicted in absentia by a British court. Jabotinsky was sentenced to fifteen years at hard labor followed by deportation for illegal possession of weapons.

A year later, Haj Amin was pardoned and appointed Mufti of Jerusalem for life by the British High Commissioner. This meant that Haj Amin was the pre-eminent Muslim scholar in Jerusalem. He used this position to consolidate power. No Muslim who did not support the Mufti could attain a position of influence. The Mufti killed Arab dissidents as well as Jews.

The Mufti also pressed the British for an end to Jewish immigration. In the wake of the riots, Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill issued a White Paper in 1922, which placed strict limits on Jewish immigration.

More riots occurred in 1925 and 1926 after Haj Amin spread rumors that the Jews were seeking to rebuild the Jewish temple on the site of the al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock. British troops intervened after the fighting spread as far as Hebron and the Gaza Strip.

Again in 1929, Arabs were incited to riot by rumors that Jews had killed two Arabs as well as false rumors that Jews were attempting to defame Muslim holy places. 133 Jews were killed, primarily in the Old City of Jerusalem and Hebron.

In 1936, Haj Amin and six prominent Arab leaders formed the Arab Higher Committee. The Committee protested British rule and Jewish settlement by launching a full-scale revolt. The Arabs waged a war of terror against the British and Jews for three years, while Haj Amin continued to consolidate power through murder and intimidation of Jews and Arab resisters. In 1937, the Mufti went so far as to express solidarity with Hitler’s Germany and appealed for Germany to arm the Arabs and help stop Jewish immigration.

Haj Amin’s role in the Arab revolts, together with an assassination attempt on the Inspector General of the Palestine Police Force led the British to exile him again, this time to Syria. The Arab Higher Committee was disbanded and the British brought in massive reinforcements to crush the revolt, which lasted until 1939.

The Arab revolt led to the establishment of the Peel Commission to study the relationship of the Jews and Arabs with respect to the establishment of a Jewish homeland. The 1937 report recommended a limit of 12,000 Jewish immigrants per year for five years and the development of a plan for partition of Palestine. The report also recommended a population transfer due to the desire of Arabs for independence and their hatred and fear of Jewish state.

In response to war clouds in Europe and a desire to pacify the Arabs, the British issued the McDonald White Paper in 1939. The White Paper reversed the Balfour Declaration and stated that it was not British policy to form a Jewish state in Palestine. It also restricted Jewish immigration to 75,000 over five years, restricted land transfers from Arabs to Jews, and called for the establishment of a joint Arab-Jewish state.

During World War II, Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe were almost exterminated. Free Jews often joined Allied armies in the fight against fascism. The Jewish Brigade of the British Army, formed in 1944, was composed entirely of Jews. All the while, restrictive British and US immigration policies cost many Jews their lives. Unable to emigrate from Nazi areas, millions were shot and gassed as part of the Final Solution.

In contrast, Mufti Haj Amin spent the war in Germany. The Mufti met with Hitler several times and played a role in the Holocaust. He sought to keep Germany from allowing Hungarian Jews from emigrating and personally intervened when Adolf Eichman tried to orchestrate and exchange of German POWs for Jewish children with British government. The children were sent to death camps instead. Haj Amin personally visited these death camps, including Auschwitz. He also made numerous propaganda broadcasts throughout the war and encouraged Muslims, including those of German occupied Bosnia and Kosovo, to join Nazi units such as the Hanjar 13th Waffen SS division.

Pro-German sympathies were found in Arab nations throughout the Middle East as well. Even after the war was over, Arab nations became havens for Nazi war criminals on the run. These included the SS general in charge of the murder of Ukrainian Jews, who became Gamal Abdul Nasser’s bodyguard and Alois Brunner, who became a senior advisor to the Syrian senior military staff.

After the war, surviving Jews flocked to Palestine regardless of limits on immigration. The postwar illegal immigration to Palestine was referred to as the Aliyah Bet. Several pogroms, including one in Kielce, Poland in 1946 in which 46 Holocaust survivors were murdered, increased the movement from Europe. Many of the Aliyah Bet ships were intercepted by the British, who detained the Jewish immigrants on Cyprus.

As detentions of Holocaust survivors became known around the world, public opinion turned against the British. US President Harry Truman was instrumental in changing British policy. He pressured the British to allow the immigration of 100,000 European Jews. Truman also pressured the British to turn over the Palestine problem to the UN.

As Jewish immigrants flooded into Palestine, the Jews formed a United Resistance Movement from the Haganah, the Irgun, and the Lehi in 1945. The URM resisted Arab violence as well British rule. Public reaction to the kidnapping of British soldiers and the bombing of the King David Hotel, British military headquarters, eventually caused the URM to disband at the request of Chaim Weizmann. The Haganah complied with Weizmann’s request to suspend operations, but not the Irgun or the Lehi.

As violence increased, the British decided to ask the newly formed United Nations to help solve the problem. On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly voted to partition Palestine into two separate nations, one predominantly Jewish and one predominantly Arab. President Truman again played a prominent role in gaining passage of the partition by influencing Latin American countries to vote in favor of the resolution.

The partition was accepted by the Jews, but immediately rejected by the Arabs. Jewish forces were vastly smaller, but better organized, than the Arab forces. By the spring of 1948, the Jewish forces had secured most of the territory that made up the Jewish partition.

On May 15, 1948, the British evacuated Palestine and Jewish leaders announced the formation of the nation of Israel. Shortly after, Israel was invaded by the combined armies of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Iraq. Both the United States and the Soviet Union immediately recognized Israel. Fighting was initially heavy, but as the Israel Defense Force (IDF) began to receive shipments of supplies from Czechoslovakia, the Arab armies were beaten back. Eventually, the IDF was able to secure much larger borders for Israel than the UN had originally allotted.

A controversial moment in the war occurred during the Battle of Deir Yassin. Irgun and Lehi forces attacked Arab troops at Deir Yassin on April 9, 1948. What happened is shrouded in controversy, but both sides agree that between 100 and 250 Arab civilians were killed. It is unclear whether they were killed accidentally in heavy fighting or if they were murdered by the Jewish soldiers. The incident has been frequently used as Arab propaganda ever since.

The Israeli War of Independence or War of Liberation ended with armistice agreements signed in early 1949 with Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan. Israel was established as a Jewish homeland, while, ironically, the remaining areas of the Arab partition were annexed by Jordan and Egypt. Palestinians refer to the war as al Nakba, “the Catastrophe.”

Sources:
http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/palestine.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel
http://www.jewishmag.com/60mag/weizmann/weizmann.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917
http://www.answers.com/topic/faisal-weizmann-agreement
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/riots29.html
http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_mandate_grand_mufti.php
http://www.answers.com/topic/palestine-arab-revolt
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6W4dsvz5P-8&feature=related
http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_mandate_peel.php
http://palestinefacts.org/pf_mandate_whitepaper_1939.php
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005459http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007255
http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/MFA/Facts+About+Israel/Israel+in+Maps/1947+UN+Partition+Plan.htm
http://www.merip.org/palestine-israel_primer/un-partition-plan-pal-isr.html
http://www.peacefaq.com/deiryassin.html
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/deir_yassin.html
http://www.historyguy.com/arab_israeli_wars.html
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf2.html