Customer Reviews
Reptile Tongue - By: Pieter, 09 Mar 2008 
When reading this book, one ought to be aware of the theological framework of the author - the traditionin which he writes that has contributed to shaping his personal beliefs & opinions. In Chapman's case, it is Replacement Theology, also called Supercessionism. This doctrine comes from the so-called "saint" Augustine who rejected the biblical concept of a thousand year Messianic reign of peace. He was thus an amillennialist as opposed to a post- or premillennialist. He also claimed that the church had superceded or replaced the Hebrew nation & that all the scriptural promises to Israelin the Old Testament thus belonged to the church. Augustine's ideas became Catholic orthodoxy & at the Reformation they were more or less accepted unchanged, entering the Lutheran & Calvinist traditions.
The tragic history of Christian Antisemitism is well documentedin books like The Crucifixion of the Jews by Franklin Littell & Christian Antisemitism by William Nicholls. It is often called Anti-Judaismin the literature but it led to the same thing: oppression, expulsion & murder. In this regard, see The Popes Against the Jews: The Vatican's Rolein the Rise of Modern Anti-Semitism by David Kertzer. There is no doubt that the destructive effects of Replacement Theology have substantially contributed to these crimes & ultimately to the Holocaust.
Although it is not immediately apparent, Chapman's book falls squarelyin this Antisemitic tradition. There is much hand-wringing about historical & Christian Antisemitism. The latter comes across as insincere, because one cannot criticize the attitudes of Augustine, Chrysostom & Martin Luther without mentioning Replacement Theology.
What marks the Christian Antisemite? In the first place, a twisting of Old Testament prophecies concerning Israel, usurping every promise to make it applicable to "the church" or to "Christ." In the second place, the refusal to make a distinction between the Abrahamic covenant regarding ownership of the land & the Mosaic covenant of laws. Thirdly, a fuzzy, ethereal view of mankind's ultimate destiny wherein no distinctive cultures survive, all become "onein Christ". Geddit? There is no multiculturalismin heaven! Finally, a cursory or dismissive treatment of the facts that led to the rebirth of Israel & of the subsequent wars against the Jewish State. All of these are evidentin Whose Promised Land? to a greater or lesser degree.
There is a strong undercurrent of a denial of Israel's right to life although the author never explicitly states it. He quotes left, right & centre (though mainly Left) & presents a distorted view of the Middle East conflict. For example he implies that Israel is responsible for the formation of Hamas while includingin an appendix the covenant of this terror group that includes statements like "Hamas aims for every inch of Palestine" & accuses the Jewish people of having been behind communism, capitalism, freemasonry, the Rotarians, etc. Oddly there is no mention of global warming, yet.
Chapman's interpretations serve only to support his preconceived opinion. For example he claims that the prophecies of Ezekiel 36 & 37 have no validity today. He plays word-games, denyingin one passage that the church replaced Israel & then going on to assert that early Christians did not consider it "important for Jews to express their distinctive identity through ... a Jewish state." Oh & he replaces the concept of "replacement" with the idea of "fulfillment." Furthermore, he draws a false analogy between Joshua's conquest of Canaan & the history of the Jewish State by throwing around words like "ethnic cleansing". At present, approximately 20% of Israeli citizens are Arabs & 16% of its citizens are Muslim. At last count its Arab citizens were represented by 10 membersin the Israeli parliament belonging to three political parties: Balad, Hadash & the United Arab List - Ta'al.
When considering the options for peace, Chapman looks at the various scenarios like the possible defeat of Israel or its opponents, options like the One-State (Rwanda) & the Two-State solution, concluding that the last is the best. In discussing the history of the conflict, he does not have much to say about the Arab attempt to strangle Israel at its birthin 1948, the open calls for genocide by Arab leaders then & now or the co-operation of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem with Nazi Germany which is well documentin the book The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism: Adolf Hitler & Haj Amin Al-Husseini by Chuck Morse.
The antagonism towards Israel is more insidiousin this book, less overt thanin the work of Chapman's associates like Stephen Sizer & Naim Ateek. Christians must put the Discern-ometer on max when exposed to these Leftist theologians, as well as of course to those Rightwing Christian Antisemites like Pat Buchanan. For more information on replacement theology & its contemporary manifestations, I recommend Future Israel: Why Christian Anti-Judaism Must Be Challenged by Barry Horner. Paul Charles Merkley's illuminating Christian Attitudes Towards the State of Israel provides the facts on where various denominations stand today on the issue of the Jewish State.
Appears balanced, in reality is highly partisan - By: Charles Soper, 30 Dec 2006 Colin Chapman's book is sprinkled with quotes from both 'sides', warns of the danger of older forms of anti-Semitism & focuses on some of the hardships Jews have suffered. It urges cautionin forming judgement & maintains an appearance of objectivity & balance, including an interesting, if ironic, quote from Edward Said on the need for intellectual honesty.
However the foundation of his section examining the justice of the dispute is a favourable citation of Naeem Ateek, who himself part justifies suicide terrorism. In the quote Ateek claims biblical Naboth's murder & the theft of his property by the vile Ahab, 'has been re-enacted thousands of times since the creation of the State of Israel'. This fabricated accusation lies at the heart of the book's case.
Chapman almost completely ignores the defensive character of the 1948 & 1967 wars (almost as though the Poles & Czechs were responsible for Dresden or Hitler's 'murder'in 1945), the repeated calls for Israel's annihilation by Arab leaders & their media, the sharp differencein Arab & Jewish murder rates before 1948, & extremely oppressive British policiesin handling refugees from the Holocaust. Not surprisingly he also neglects to mention the Palestinian Grand Mufti's close association with the Nazis, meeting with Hitler & shared genocidal intentions.
His quotes are highly selective & I suspect many are sourced from the partisan Middle East Council of Churches, as well as some rather one-sided historians (Gentile & Jewish).
Let the reader beware of a carefully concealed but highly virulent bias against Israel!
