Serving God Inside the Belly of the Empire: An Interview with Rev Dr Jack Sara

By Hadje Cresencio Sadje

Photo taken during the 72hr ceasefire between Hamas and Israel on 6th of August 2014. Destroyed ambulance in w:Shuja'iyya in the Gaza Strip. Photo by Boris Niehaus.

The latest news of Israel continued colonial violence in Sheikh Jarrah (East Jerusalem) and Gaza Strip has become one of the featuring top stories from around the world. Sadly, disinformation and misinformation have represented by various pro-Israel Western media platforms that generates confusion to mislead its readers without providing a proper framework. The end result is, readers received false information and inaccurate portrayal of Palestinian people. But this pro-Israel Western media tactic is not new. Since there are various competing views on the conflict between Israel and Palestine, many scholars, individuals, and concerned groups argue that the facts and truth about this long-running conflict were buried in the mountains of misinformation, particularly in various types of mass media (Uddin, 2021; Daoudi and Zeina M. Barakat, 2013). Many critics contend that the use of problematic media language distorted or replete the ground realities. Often, mainstream West media’s coverage misrepresents or obscures the truth about Israel and Palestine conflict. Using euphemism, gobbledygook, inflated language, and jargon, it de-emphasizes and minimises responsibility of Israel hostility against Palestinian people (Diwakar, 2021). For instance, Branko Marcetic observes that Western media depict the conflict between Israel and Palestine describes as “nebulous clashes” (2021). According to Marcetic, “Once again, the media are trying to depict the fighting between Israelis and Palestinians as a round of meaningless violence from “both sides” of an equally matched contest — the reality on the ground be damned” (2021). Likewise, many critics argue that the use of “both sides” or “clashes” obscures the nature of the violence taking place and the narrative descends into what has been colloquially referred to as “bothsideisms”. (McDonald, 2021). Aside from this term, the use of conflict, property dispute, extermist, terrorist, Islam, Zionism, Arab, and Temple Mount/Al-Aqsa are forms of discursive normalisation of Israel violence against Palestinian people, including pro-Palestinian Jews (McDonald, 2021).

Except the word Zionism, however, I agree that all these terms are whitewashing that attempt to conceal incriminating facts about the Israel brutal colonisation of Palestinian territories (Zureik, 2015). In fact, this can lead people to have misunderstanding, complexities, and refusal to acknowledge Israel’s criminal actions. In his article titled, “There’s Nothing Complicated about What’s Happening in Palestine” (2021) published in Jacobin magasine, Asia Khatun describes how pro-Israel groups tried to make things complicated or blurring the ground realities. He writes:

The normalisation of colonialism begins where it always has: in language. These language choices, be they irresponsible or just ignorant, reinforce the notion that this is a conflict in which both sides have the means to be equally violent toward each other.

But the fact of the matter is that Israel is one of the most militarised occupying nations in the world, backed with billions of dollars and weapons from the United States. The power dynamic that Western society at large believes in simply does not exist, and the lack of understanding is a consequence of decades’ worth of conflating anti-Zionism with antisemitism, which deflects the conversation away from the ethnic cleansing of Palestine (2021).

One of the unheard voices of minority group in the Middle East are Palestinian/Arab Christians, particularly in Occupied Palestine territories (Sadje, 2017). Sadly, Christian churches around the world are not aware (and misinformed) that strong Christian minority group exists in East Jerusalem, West Bank, and Gaza Strip. In fact, prior to the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Christians, Muslims and Jews peacefully co-existed. However, when such disinformation and misinformation persists, Palestinian people will continue to suffer such injustices (Sadje, 2017). As Israel’s colonial project continues, Palestinian people are suffering from hunger, poverty, conflict, and above all, the impact of the global pandemic, therefore, educating the world of what is really the truth behind the conflict between Israel and Palestine is more important today (UN report, 2021). With that, I decided to interview Reverend Dr. Jack Sara - a Palestinian Christian, ordained Alliance minister, and incumbent president of the Bethlehem Bible College, West Bank/Palestine, to get his perspective on the curent conflict in the Middle East, and what it means to live and serve as a Christian Palestinian in such a volatile environment.

Hadje Sadje

Hello Rev Sara, it’s been a long time since we met in Alliance Church Old City Jerusalem. How are you and your family?

Rev Dr Sara

Hello brother Hadje, yes it has been a while, it’s great to connect with you and share some news about our region and how Christians from around the globe could pray in behalf of the Palestinian people. My family are doing well, both my wife and I are in ministry between Jerusalem and Bethlehem, pastoring in our church and serving at the Bethlehem Bible College, West Bank.

HS

What its like to be Christian Palestinian and a pastor under de facto Israeli control?

Rev Dr Sara

The honest truth is not easy. You see! I grew up in the Old city of Jerusalem to parents who became refugees as a result of the loss of their houses and land during the first Jewish occupation to our land in 1948, that was called the Nakba (great catastrophe) for my family and the Palestinian people at that time. Over 750 thousand people became refugees and so were my family. They moved to the old city of Jerusalem and again when Israel continued to occupy the rest of the country in 1967 they became under the Israeli rule. So they became residents of Jerusalem under Israeli rule. Please note that many of the people that were part of the refugees that lost their house and lands during the wars were Christians, many left the country and many stayed and became internally displaced people (IDPs). Of course since that time two generations are already born and people are more now, there are almost 7 million Palestinians nowadays, they live all over the Holy Land now, but in different conditions. The Palestinians who live in the areas that were occupied in 1948 were able to receive Israeli citizenship and they can have Israeli passport and move around the country and abroad freely. The Palestinians who were in the areas that were occupied in 1967 are split in three categories, Jerusalem residents, West Bank and Gaza strip. Each of those groups face the Israeli occupation injustices in different levels, Gaza being the worst scenario case. In each of those areas there are Christians and churches and they face the same challenges and injustices similar to their own people the Palestinians.

From left to right, protest signs read: "From the river to the sea Palestine will be free", "End the occupation", "End apartheid." Image by Raya Sharbain.

Image 1 (Source: “Judaizing Palestine,” Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, (2021). https://icahd.org/2016/09/15/judaizing-palestine-a-campaign-against-house-demolitions-in-asingle-state/)

“So we are talking about a conflict that is less than a 100 years old, based on the occupation of people to other people’s land and creating an unjust situation for millions of people now.”

HS

Let me ask the big question: what are the roots of the “Israeli-Palestinian conflict”? How do you see the future of your people?

Rev Dr Sara

For some this might be a complex question and they might say that the conflict is old from thousands of years and relate this to biblical stories and other futuristic apocalyptic interpretation, which are all nonsense if you read the Bible right and know that in the NT (New Testament), the Holy Land is no longer the promised land nor the place where God wants to build a temple in it, there is no need a temple anyway. The conflict is only from the 20th century, after the colonisation of many parts of the middle east and `North Africa by European powers and to solve some of the problems of the Europe the question of what to do with the Jews was on the table, together with that an awaking of the Zionist movement with the aspiration to bring the Jewish people to a land which some of their ancient ancestors lived in it. Once this movement happened together with the infamous Balfour Declaration of promising the land of Palestine to the Jews, right after that and the permission for Jewish groups to settle in the Holy Land the conflict began. So we are talking about a conflict that is less than a 100 years old, based on the occupation of people to other people’s land and creating an unjust situation for millions of people now. The crux of the matter: Land grab and displacement of people and stripping them of their right to live in their land freely and in dignity.

HS

Thank you once again for accomodating me. It’s good speaking with you.

Rev Dr Sara

You are welcome brother, always honoured to communicate with you.

Reverend Dr Jack Sara was born and raised in the Old City of Jerusalem. He is an ordained minister with Evangelical Alliance Church in the Holy Land where he maintains an overseeing role with the leadership of the churches. He has worked extensively in the areas of peace & reconciliation. He also holds the office of Secretary General for the Middle East and North Africa region of the World Evangelical Alliance (MENA-WEA). He studied at Bethlehem Bible College, West Bank after committing his life to Christ and his teachings, and soon became a member and leader in the ministry of the Jerusalem Alliance Church. He earned his Master of Divinity degree at the Alliance Biblical Seminary in the Philippines, and went on to study at the Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary in the United States where he earned his Ph.D. in Missions and Cross Cultural Studies.

Hadje Cresencio Sadje is an associate member in the Centre for Palestine Studies – SOAS University of London, UK. Sadje obtained his MA in Theology and Religious Studies at the Evangelical Theological Faculty in Leuven, Belgium and has been working with various professional and faith-based organizations, including Christian Peacemaker Team, Caritas Brussels, Peace Builders Community Philippines, and the Foundation University – Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Search “council for world mission” on the above social media channels to find us!

Religious Diversity,

Political Conflict,

This article first appeared in the June 2019 issue of INSiGHT.

There is no other region in the world, where religion and politics interact, collide, and conjoin like in the Middle East. The region I come from, called the Middle East, is on the one hand the cradle of three monotheistic religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and is on the other hand a region of diverse ethnicities, religious minorities, and multiple identities. Add to that the fact that the modern history of this region has been marked for over a century by colonial history, conflicting imperial interests, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and regional instability.

In this paper I will analyse three different contemporary case studies that will show the use and misuse of religion in contexts of political conflicts. In the first case study I will look at the latest debate at the United Nations Security Council regarding Israeli Settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In a second case study I will look at the interaction between religion and state in the Arab World in relation to power, and in the third I will look at the role Christian Zionists play within the current context. While the first case study will focus on a Jewish Israeli case, the second will look at a case within the Arab-Islamic region, and the third is an intra-Christian western case. After analysing these case studies, I will try to draw three important conclusions from a liberation theology point of view.

Religion in the context of Occupation This conflict, however, has its roots not in the Middle East, but in nineteenth century Europe. It was exactly 100 years ago, on November 2nd 1917 that the British Lord Arthur James Balfour promised the land of Palestine to another British-Jewish Lord Rothschild. It wasn’t the Lord God who promised the land to the Jews of Europe, but Lord Balfour. This was not done out of religious convictions, but rather part of British Imperial expansion policy on the one hand, and of interior political necessity on the other. On the one hand the European Jews were to colonise Palestine and to settle there serving British Imperial expansion and interests. On the other, the sending of the European Jewish community to Palestine was supposed to solve an interior European issue, the integration or non-assimilation of Jews in Europe. Nonetheless, religion played indirectly a role behind this declaration. For many Zionist Christians in Great Britain the restoration of the Jewish people was a precondition for the second coming of Christ. A subtle anti-Arab and anti-Muslim theology was the other side of this coin. The Balfour declaration was issued at a time when the British army, stationed in Egypt, were ready to storm southern Palestine. The plan for a National Home for the Jewish people was thus one of the deals and outcomes of the WWI.

This plan was made possible in the aftermath of WWII. It was in this context that in 1947 (70 years ago) the United Nations adopted the partition plan to divide Palestine into two states. A year later the State of Israel was established. The new state chose a biblical name “Israel” for itself. The branding of the Israeli state as “biblical Israel” accelerated after 1967, when Israel occupied the West Bank including East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights (50 years ago). The name chosen for the war “Six days” had a biblical connotation: like God who finished creating the creation in six days, Israel was able to finish its job by occupying the rest of Palestine and before they can rest.

1967 didn't bring rest neither to the Israeli nor to the Palestinians. On the contrary. When the international community and the political leadership of both peoples failed in achieving a just peace, people started turning more and more to religion searching there for answers. The longer the conflict remained unsolved with human intervention, the more it started getting religious connotation. The outcome of the 1967 war gave a boost to Jewish religious nationalism and to “messianic” extremist Jewish groups within Israel, who started settling in the West Bank claiming it as ancient “Judea and Samaria.” Judea and Samaria was not so much a geographical description but rather a religious claim with a clear political agenda. The Iranian revolution and the petro-dollar that flooded the gulf region gave a boost to certain forms of political Islam. Christian Zionism experienced a revival and their followers started celebrating Israel victory as a direct Divine Intervention.

After Oslo and when political leaders were ready for a political compromise, the opposition utilised religion to empty that peace agreement. Rabin was killed by a religious Jewish Israeli person, and Hamas started a series of suicide attacks on Israeli targets.

and the Spirituality of Liberation

by Rev Dr Mitri Raheb, President, Dar al-Kalima University College of Arts and Culture, Palestine

Expanding Israeli settlements in the Palestinian land became a tactic of the Israeli government who have been subsidising the building of settlements through soft loans, tax exemptions, and a modern infrastructure. This is just the background for the first case study I would like to analyse.

On December 23rd 2016 the UN Security Council met to discuss the expansion of Israeli settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. A resolution 2334 (2016) was adopted by 14 countries in favour and a US abstention. The resolution reaffirmed the Security Council stand that Israeli Settlement have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of the Internal Law. The full text reads as follows:

“The Security Council, “Reaffirming its relevant resolutions … “Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,

“Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice,

“Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,

“Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines, “Recalling the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap, endorsed by its resolution 1515 (2003), for a freeze by Israel of all settlement activity, including “natural growth”, and the dismantlement of all settlement outposts erected since March 2001…”i

I was watching the debate live and listened to the 14 council members talking about the fourth Geneva Convention and International law and how important it is to abide by them. The US representative explained the decision to abstain rather than veto the resolution by saying that settlements are undermining Israel’s security and eroding the prospect for a two states solution, thus peace and stability. Once all 15 Security Council members were given the floor, it was time for Danny Dannon, the Israeli representative to the UN to address the council. This is what he said:

“Mr. President today is a bad day for this council…This council wasted valuable time and efforts condemning the democratic state of Israel for building homes in the historic homeland for the Jewish people. We have presented the truth time and again for this council and implore you not to believe the lies presented in this resolution. I ask each and every member of this council who voted for this resolution: Who gave you the right to issue such a decree denying our eternal rights in Jerusalem? …We overcame those decrees during the time of the Maccabees and we will overcome this evil decree today. We have full confidence in the justice of our cause and in the righteousness of our path. We will continue to be a democratic state based on the rule of law and full civil and human rights for all our citizens and we will continue to be a Jewish state. Proudly reclaiming the land of our forefathers, where the Maccabees fought their oppressors and King David ruled from Jerusalem.” And just before ending his speech, something interesting happened that captured my full attention. Mr. Dannon pulled a Hebrew Bible, lifted it up in his hand, and said: “This holy-book the Bible contained 3,000 years of history of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel. No one, no one can change this history.”

It wasn’t a surprise for me to hear such rhetoric from an Israel politician, but what struck me was the act of raising the Hebrew Bible at a UN Security Council with the aim of undermining International Law and the Geneva Convention articles. It is interesting to see the words and language Mr. Dannon uses in his speech. Mr. Dannon is convinced that he owns the truth: “We have presented the truth time and again.” He is convinced of the justice of his cause and the righteousness of his path.

He uses words like "historic homeland" and "eternal rights." He kept shifting between biblical Israel and the state of Israel of today as if they were one and the same: “Proud live and reclaiming the land of our forefathers, where the Maccabees fought their oppressors and King David ruled from Jerusalem.” And “This holy-book the Bible contained 3,000 years of history of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel. No one, no one can change this history.”

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a political conflict over land and rights. The UN Resolution clearly refers to international laws applicable in contexts of occupation. Mr. Dannon doesn't address this issue. He avoids it on purpose because there is no human excuse to it and there is no way that one can excuse their colonial expansionist policy. The last resort to defend the Israeli settlement policy is God.

Mr. Dannon is basically saying this: “We don't adhere to international law, we do not abide by the Geneva Convention, we don’t care about the bill of human rights, because we possess divine and eternal rights.” Religion is here used to avoid a political solution and to religiously legalise what is politically an aggression. I asked myself: How did we arrive at a situation today where divine rights trump human rights? Is it possible to violate the human rights in the name of divine rights? Is it possible to use the biblical text to white wash military occupation and the oppression of whole nations? Can religious convictions lead to a severe violation of international law? The matter here is not about religious convictions, but rather how religious convictions are instrumentalised for political ends. And how Divine rights are utilised to allow for the violation of human rights and to avoid solving a political conflict. And while Jewish Israeli are given land to occupy in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, Palestinian towns and villages are being striped of any possibilities for expansion or natural growth. This situation is a clear case of discrimination, segregation, and apartheid and can't be defended by modern international standards thus the resort to the Bible as the last resort and legitimising tool.

Graffiti in Tel Aviv, Israel - March 2009 (Photo by David Miller)

Christian Zionism as a tool of the Israel Lobby

The third case study I want to focus on is an intra-Christian debate.

During an international conference commemorating the 30th anniversary of Kairos South Africa on August 20th . 2015, a delegation from Palestine was present. One of the members of the delegation was Rev Dr Robert O. Smith, at that time he was serving as the Program Director of the Middle East and North Africa at the ELCA and co-Moderator of the Palestine-Israel Ecumenical Forum of the World Council of Churches. Dr. Smith is the author of “More desired than Our Owne Salvation: The Roots of Christian Zionism,” which is his doctoral thesis at Baylor.

During the conference, Smith and two other Palestinians were invited to speak at an evening panel organised by one of the South African Palestinian Solidarity groups. In his short input, and after describing himself as a citizen of the United States and a citizen of the displaced Chickasaw Nation, and as a current resident in Jerusalem, Robert wanted to talk about the responsibility of international Christians to the Christians of Palestine, and raised the question about why the Christian community in the world react to the suffering of the Palestinian community the way they do and why do they allow Israel to behave the way it does. He mentioned three reasons:

First, “I would say that the Christians in the United States and I assume also in South Africa often do not know that Christians are present in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and within the State of Israel. They have a false imagination of what Israel is and what Palestine is. They falsely assume that Israel is made up solely of Jews and that the West Bank is made of solely of Palestinian Muslims but this is not true and even if it were true it does not excuse the actions of the State of Israel. Secondly Christians in the United States and in many other places have negative conceptions of Islam and Muslims. They operate out of a fundamental fear of Islam and Muslims along with the false understanding that the conflict is at its foundation religiously formed; that it is a conflict between Islam and Judaism. This is so far from the truth; it is a conflict over land; it is a political conflict over resources; it is a political conflict over self-determination and decolonising principles. It is not first and foremost about religion although the continuation of the political conflict brings us closer to very dangerous religious conflicts. And finally Christians in the United States and in many other places and I’ve heard many South African friends this week tell me are influenced by the Imperial theology known as Christian Zionism. Christian Zionism is first and foremost political activity. It is not really a theology; it is not a commitment to doctrines and principles of faith; it is a political ideology that supports Jewish control over the land that now contains Israel and Palestine...It is essential that all of us understands that the Israel of the Bible, the ancient Israelites, are not linked in any substantive or material way to the contemporary modern Israel. The biblical narrative of Israel has almost nothing to do with contemporary Israel other than the intentional manipulation of sacred texts to justify a political project. We must reject the theological justification for the present acts of the State of Israel and we must instead draw from our sacred texts the Quran the Torah the Tanakh as a whole and the Christian scriptures to instead inform resistance to empire that is faithful to our traditions.”ii

This presentation was tapped as many other presentations. Suddenly on April 4th 2017 Robert Smith became a target for a social media smear campaign orchestrated by an American Christian who describes himself as a media analyst, his name is Dexter van Zile. The smearing campaign uses a quote from Robert Smith presentation in South Africa that reads: “The biblical narrative of Israel has almost nothing to do with contemporary Israel other than the intentional manipulation of sacred texts to justify a political project.”

In any debate about any Christian doctrine, theologians can speak their mind, critic almost everything. One can question the existence or non-existence of god, the divinity of Christ, the historicity of any biblical story, but dare anyone question anything regarding the State of Israel. There are watch dogs who watch every word, watch every YouTube, follow every tweet, and every post. It seems that when it comes to the issue of Israel, neither religious disagreements are allowed nor diverse political opinions are tolerated. Even worse, every credible Christian theologian or researcher who dares to question the religious Hora of the State of Israel becomes a plausible target for all kind of Israeli Watch dogs groups. The Israel lobby is very clever. They don’t want to be at the front of such attack, so they hire Christian Zionists to do the dirty job for them.

Dexter van Zile is one of those hired in 2005 by Charles Jacobs to be the director of Christian Outreach and to oversee an initiative called the Judeo-Christian Alliance at the David project. A year later, Dexter moved to another watchdog group called CAMERA “The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America.” He does the dirty work of targeting Christians. If one follow the smear campaign done over two days one would notice the following: the campaign is intended to scare Robert so that he starts censoring himself. By mentioning Notre Dame University, Robert’s employer, in the campaign, the university is dragged into the issue and will either exert pressure on Robert or even fire him. One religious or political view on Palestine can therefore cost people their job, their reputation, and comes close to a character assassination. And last but not least, there is no room for dialogue or diverse opinions or academic or political disagreement. The message is not debated here but rather the messenger is targeted. Killing as well as character assassination in the name of God becomes a religious duty. After looking at these three case studies allow me to add three theological conclusions:

Divine rights and Human Rights

In contexts of conflicts, as in the Middle East, groups often utilise divine rights to deny others equal human rights.

We find these groups within all three monotheistic religions. These are not only Islamist groups in Iraq and Syria, but also Jewish groups in Israel as well as Israeli politicians. These are also Christian Zionists, who keep attacking fellow Christians who dare to challenge the Israeli Occupation.

Two forces are currently violating the human rights in our region: so-called "security states" who don’t allow people to move, to have an opinion, to publish controversial books, to question policies, or simply to think critically; and religious movements who leave no room for people to choose their beliefs and to breathe freely. Both forces create systems based on fear. The fear of the state and the fear of God become two sides of the same coin. A society that is based on fear rather than on freedom kills the soul and spirit of its people, their innovation and their creativity. There will be no future for the Middle East until we break out from the bondage of the security state as well as of oppressive “religious laws” to a wide open space where human lives and security is protected, where freedom is free to blossom, and where human rights become sacred. For us as Christians, a spirituality of liberation is a spirituality of creation and incarnation. All people are created equally in God's image. In fact, all three monotheistic religions could agree on this. As Christians we believe also that in Christ and in Bethlehem, God became human so that all human lives are sanctified.

Such a theology of liberation is essential in our region today. But in today's world we adhere to the universal declaration of human rights that clearly states that "All Human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." It should not be acceptable by religious or political terms to violate human rights in the name of divine rights, or to play God against humanity. Groups who do that are misusing the scriptures for their own political ideologies. The scriptures and the Human Rights charter are there for one and the same reason: to defend the meek, protect the rights of the weak, put limits to those in power, and to make sure that the state adheres to the laws. Both religion and state have to ensure that the power of law and not the law of power prevails. No religion or human legislation is entitled to give the Israelis more rights than Palestinians, Muslims more privileges than Christians, or men higher wages than women. Equality is something we cannot compromise on neither religiously nor secularly.

The Cross as the ultimate critique of state and religious terroriii

For too long we have tried to spiritualise the notion of liberation in the Bible. We replaced liberation with salvation, and the cross became nothing but an atonement. We have to put the cross in its original context of political and religious violence. Jesus was one of the many who experienced on his own body the violence of both state as well as religious terror. The cross is a permanent reminder of the millions of people who are persecuted either by the state or by the religious establishment because they raise their prophetic critique to an unjust ruler or to corrupt forms of religion. The cross is a reminder of all those innocent killed in the name of God. There is an urgent need today to discover this dimension of the cross. The fact that Jesus died on the cross by a combination of state and religious terror is of utmost importance as a critique to both powers. The cross becomes the ultimate critique of state as well as religious violence.

A graffiti by the street artist Banksy on the Israeli West Bank barrier.

The cross becomes a mirror that shows God’s vulnerability and the cruelty of political and religious behaviour. For the peoples of the Middle East, who are living either in contexts of the Israeli occupation, or in the context of political despotism, or affected on daily basis by religious extremism, this dimension of the cross is of utmost importance. Both religion and the Alexander and Company had the state must be under the rule of law as ambitious plan to pour all tribes and a mean of protection from political groups into one gigantic melting pot. despotism on the one hand, and from The outcome of this forceful unification tyrannical and repressive religious was utter confusion. The empire fell extremism that bans what it dislikes apart and dissolved. The Romans tried and legitimises what suits its the same experiment and were no more ambitions, on the other. The role of successful. The Byzantine emperor, the state is to safeguard the rights of Constantine, thought that by forcing one all its citizens. On the other hand, creed at Calcedon he could unite his religion has an important role to empire behind one emperor and one inspire its followers to be faith. The Oriental identities and compassionate. Securing human expressions of faith were thus declared dignity and the well-being of the heretical and were persecuted. people is at the core of religion and the ultimate raison d’être for statehood. The Arabs tried to push their language There is a dire need for a prophetic on to the Berbers of North Africa and on and dynamic faith that does not run central Asian countries which led to the away or hide from the challenges of opposite effect-of less identification with the society but instead engages the their empire by those tribes. This issue is society for the good of all citizens. The central for a Middle East which is alternative to state and religious terror pluralistic in nature. No single empire is a society based on civil laws, has been able to force the region into freedom, compassion, and equal uniformity. There was never a single citizenship irrespective of one’s Catholic Church that monopolised the religious convictions, cultural identity, Christian faith in the Middle East but socio-economic status, or race. rather national churches: Copts, Syriac, Marinates, Greeks, etc., each A vision for a world marked by worshipping in their own native Diversityiv language and possessing, as they do today, a distinct cultural identity. The The story of Pentecost in the Book of same is true for Islam. It too has Acts (2: 1-13) is imperative to different expressions according to understanding the spirituality that is different regions: Shiite, Sunni, Alawite, needed in the Middle East because it Druze etc. All efforts to forcefully unify provides a counter narrative to the them have come to naught. The Middle logic of the oppressive regimes. The East continues to be one of the most narrative of oppressive regimes is diverse regions in the world with found in Genesis (11: 1-9) in the story multiple ethnicities, religious of the Tower of Babel, where a mighty affiliations, and plural identities. For any empire with a strong economy reaches empire this was and is both a challenge to heaven and with one language holds and an opportunity. A challenge because the empire together. This is exactly the region resisted all attempts of what Alexander the Great and the forceful inclusion. But an opportunity Greeks tried to do with imposing because the empire was forever keen to Greek and Hellenistic culture on their play one group against the other and conquered peoples. ensure that the region remained

The Gaza Strip after eight days of bombing by Israel. (Photo New York Times/HH) preoccupied with internecine fighting so that the empire’s job of control was easier. This is part and parcel of colonial history in the Middle East.

In this context, the story of Pentecost shows an alternative vision of the region by reversing the story of the Tower of Babylon. Jerusalem becomes the counter narrative of Babel. Here various nations and cultures meet. They don’t speak the language of the empire, but rather their own native languages. Their identities are respected and embraced. The Spirit provides the software for communication so that they understand each other. In this story the rich diversity of the region is embraced and celebrated. It is regarded as strength rather than a deficiency.

The multiple identities of the region are viewed not as contradictions, but as a treasure to save. In Jerusalem the people from the whole oikumene “stood” on equal footing, "Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrdne; visitors from Rome (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs". The moment Pentecost was taken out of its original context it became a nice story without any particular significance. It became a tale about speaking in tongues, and thus lost its contextual relevance. The Church born in Jerusalem was meant to counter the empire; not by creating another but by providing a new, ecumenical vision. The spirituality so urgently needed today, more than at any previous time, is one that embraces diversity and celebrates it as strength.

A Christian spirituality of liberation is a crucial contribution not only to the survival of the Christian community as such, but is crucial for the future of the Middle East at large ensuring that human rights are protected, prophetic critique is raised, and diversity is celebrated.