March 26, 2024

About the author of Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments









Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments: Critical Thinking about the Israel-Hamas War

Note to readers: See previous APOLOGIA post for Suggested Resources. (Also, Table of Contents with links is listed below. Or download pdf of the whole book here.)

Note to critics: Please read the whole of my little book (including notes) before offering criticism. Thanks.

 

About the author

Hendrik van der Breggen received a BA in Philosophy from University of Calgary, an MA in Philosophy from University Windsor, and a PhD in Philosophy from University of Waterloo. His study and writing interests include logic, ethics, philosophy of religion, and philosophy of science—done with the goal of getting closer to the true, the good, and the beautiful. Hendrik has had articles published in various newspapers, magazines, and academic journals. Hendrik writes the blog APOLOGIA and has published four books (which contain many of his blog articles). Hendrik was Associate Professor of Philosophy at Providence University College (Manitoba) and retired in June 2019. Hendrik and his wife Carla have two sons, two daughters-in-law, and two grandchildren. Hendrik and Carla live in Steinbach, Manitoba, Canada, with their cat Rupert.

 


 

Table of Contents (links)

Introduction

Chapter 1. Israel is engaging in colonial retaliation?

Chapter 2. Israel is a powerful state and thus the oppressor?

Chapter 3. Israel is not a legitimate state?

Chapter 4. Israel occupies Gaza?

Chapter 5. Gaza is like a Jewish ghetto?

Chapter 6. What about Gabor Maté?

Chapter 7. What about Gabor Maté, again?

Chapter 8. Israel targets a hospital?

Chapter 9. Israel’s attack on Gaza is as bad (or worse) as Gaza’s attack on Israel?

Chapter 10. Israel is wrong to cause Gaza to suffer?

Chapter 11. Israel is guilty of genocide?

Chapter 12. Israel’s response to Hamas is not proportional?

Chapter 13. Israel should agree to a permanent ceasefire?

Chapter 14. Israel should embrace a two-state solution?

Chapter 15. Conclusion and prayer

Appendix 1: Criticizing Islam is Islamophobic? (Part 1 of 2)

Appendix 2: Criticizing Islam is Islamophobic? (Part 2 of 2)

Appendix 3: War and Bible

Suggested resources

About the author

 

 

Suggested Resources for Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments









Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments: Critical Thinking about the Israel-Hamas War

Note to readers: See previous APOLOGIA post for Appendix 3. (Also, Table of Contents with links is listed below. Or download pdf of the whole book here.)

Note to critics: Please read the whole of my little book (including notes) before offering criticism. Thanks. (You might take a look at some of relevant resources below, too.)

 

Suggested Resources


Books

Of the books listed below, I recommend most highly Noa Tishby’s book. Tishby’s book should be in everyone’s personal library. The other books are excellent as reference works and should be required in all high school, college, and university libraries—and put Tishby’s book in those libraries, too!

Dershowitz, Alan. War Against the Jews: How to End Hamas Barbarism. New York: Skyhorse Publishing/ Hot Books, 2023. See chapter 1.

Herf, Jeffrey. Three Faces of Antisemitism: Right, Left and Islamist. New York: Routledge, 2024. See especially chapters 3, 4, 5 and 12.

Schwartz, Adi and Einat Wilf. The War of Return: How Western Indulgence of the Palestinian Dream has Obstructed the Path to Peace. Translated by Eylon Levy. New York: St. Martin’s Publishing Group/ All Points Books, 2020.

Tishby, Noa. Israel: A Simple Guide to the Most Misunderstood Country on Earth. New York: Free Press, 2021.


Articles

Hirsch, Maurice. Frequently Asked Questions about the 2023 War with Hamas. Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, October 12, 2023.

Lobel, Oved. Blatant Misuse of International Law: ‘Proportionality,’ ‘Collective Punishment’ and ‘Genocide’. Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council, October 25, 2023.


Videos

Of the videos listed below, I recommend most highly Marissa Streit’s interview with Richard Kemp. Streit is CEO of PragerU and a former member of the Israeli Intelligence Corps. Kemp is a retired British Army Officer. If you have time only for one short video (15 minutes), see Oren Cahanovitc’s “Israelis must listen to the Palestinians!”  Cahanovitc is an Israeli travel guide with a master’s degree in Israeli history.

Brog, David. Why Isn’t There a Palestinian State? YouTube video, 5 minutes. PragerU, March 27, 2017.

Cahanovitc, Oren. 10 Things you didn’t know about the Arab-Israeli conflict. YouTube video, 15 minutes. Travelling Israel, May 25, 2020. This video helps open-minded truth-seekers navigate through the dense intellectual fog that arises from the many confusing and misleading objections levelled against Israel.

Cahanovitc, Oren. The Palestinian Refugee Problem Explained (Nakba and the false Arab narrative). YouTube video, 25 minutes. Travelling Israel, November 3, 2023.

Cahanovitc, Oren. Israelis must listen to the Palestinians! YouTube video, 15 minutes.  Travelling Israel, March 9, 2024. This is a very unpleasant video, but hugely important.

Israel—Birth of a state. DW DocFilm, 52 minutes. May 13, 2023. This documentary is somewhat biased toward Palestine but is very good. Also view the 700 Club videos below.

Kemp, Richard. Israel: The World's Most Moral Army. YouTube video, 5 minutes. PragerU, December 7, 2015.

Kemp, Richard, and Marissa Streit. UK's Col. Kemp Blames Hamas for Palestinian Deaths. YouTube video, 38 minutes. PragerU, February 21, 2024.

Morris, Benny and Jonathan Kay. Why did Hamas attack Israel? YouTube video, 25 minutes. Quillette Podcast, Episode 227: Benny Morris, November 23, 2023.

Stern, Sol. Debunking the Palestine Lie. YouTube video, 12 minutes. Encounter Books, September 19, 2011.

Tishby, Noa. Israel: Who Are the Indigenous People? YouTube video, 6 minutes. PragerU, July 10, 2023. This is the same Noa Tishby whose book I recommend most highly in my book list above.

Whose Land Is It? Jewish Claims Explained. YouTube video, 14 minutes. The 700 Club, October 19, 2023.

Whose Land Is it? Palestinian Claims. YouTube video, 15 minutes. The 700 Club, August 17, 2017.

Wilf, Einat and Dan Senor. Exploring Israel's Statehood and the Palestinian Refugee Issue: A Conversation with Dr. Einat Wilf. YouTube video, 77 minutes. StartUp Nation Central, February 28, 2024.


Website

Bard, Mitchell G. Myths & Facts: Online Exclusives (2021–present). Jewish Virtual Library.


News agencies

CBN Jerusalem Dateline

ILTV Israel News


Spokespersons/reporters

Levy, Eylon. Israeli government spokesman [presently suspended].

Murray, Douglas. British author, political commentator.

 


Table of Contents (links)

Introduction

Chapter 1. Israel is engaging in colonial retaliation?

Chapter 2. Israel is a powerful state and thus the oppressor?

Chapter 3. Israel is not a legitimate state?

Chapter 4. Israel occupies Gaza?

Chapter 5. Gaza is like a Jewish ghetto?

Chapter 6. What about Gabor Maté?

Chapter 7. What about Gabor Maté, again?

Chapter 8. Israel targets a hospital?

Chapter 9. Israel’s attack on Gaza is as bad (or worse) as Gaza’s attack on Israel?

Chapter 10. Israel is wrong to cause Gaza to suffer?

Chapter 11. Israel is guilty of genocide?

Chapter 12. Israel’s response to Hamas is not proportional?

Chapter 13. Israel should agree to a permanent ceasefire?

Chapter 14. Israel should embrace a two-state solution?

Chapter 15. Conclusion and prayer

Appendix 1: Criticizing Islam is Islamophobic? (Part 1 of 2)

Appendix 2: Criticizing Islam is Islamophobic? (Part 2 of 2)

Appendix 3: War and Bible

Suggested resources

About the author



Appendix 3 of Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments


 








Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments: Critical Thinking about the Israel-Hamas War

Note to readers: See previous APOLOGIA post for Appendix 2. (Also, Table of Contents with links is listed below. Or download pdf of the whole book here.)

Note to critics: Please read the whole of my little book (including notes) before offering criticism. Thanks.


Appendix 3: War and Bible

 

I am neither a pacifist nor a war-monger. I believe that sometimes (as a last resort) war is just, or at least more just than the alternatives. I believe, too, that my view is consistent with the Bible. Here are some relevant clarifications.

1. Genesis 9:6

“Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God has God made man.” This biblical principle seems odd or even contradictory until we account for the biblical notions of guilt and shedding blood with/ without God’s approval.

Consider Genesis 9:6 plus my clarifications in brackets: “Whoever sheds the blood of man [whoever kills an innocent person, i.e., kills a human being without God’s permission], by man shall his blood be shed [the guilty person will be killed by others with God’s permission, i.e., God prescribes that other human agents kill the guilty person].”

So in the case of killing an innocent person (a capital crime), it’s possible to forfeit one’s life (via capital punishment). Innocent life is so important—because made in the image of God—that whoever destroys it unjustly is justly destroyed.1

2. God’s vengeance

Yes, Scripture tells us that God says “vengeance is mine.” Significantly, however, Scripture ALSO tells us that (just) government is “God’s servant”—God’s “agent of wrath.”

Romans 13:4: “[The government] is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.”

The sword is an instrument of death. The sword-bearer is God’s appointed agent.

Vengeance is God’s, yes, but God delegates.

3. The Bible commands “Do not kill”

No, the Bible commands “Do not murder.” Killing and murder are different morally. All murder is killing, but not all killing is murder.

Think of a police officer who must kill someone engaged in a deadly shooting spree in a school. The police officer doesn't murder; the killer of the students murders. The police officer kills the murderer to protect innocents; the murderer kills innocents. The police officer kills justly; the murderer kills unjustly.2

4. Turn the cheek

Jesus said: “Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”

Yes, Jesus said this, but this has to do with personal relationships, not matters of government. It has to do with a backhand slap to the face, which in Jesus' culture is an insult. It means that if someone insults you, suck it up.

Context is important. Jesus is talking to individuals about how to relate to one another within a society ruled by a foreign power. Jesus is not talking about the affairs of state. (About the affairs of state, Paul in Romans 13 says the state legitimately bears the sword and is God’s agent of wrath.)

C. S. Lewis, in his essay “Why I am not a Pacifist,” points out that Jesus’ audience consists of a “private people in a disarmed nation” and “war was not what they would have been thinking of.”

Also, Lewis asks:  “Does anyone suppose that our Lord’s hearers understood him to mean that if a homicidal maniac, attempting to murder a third party, tried to knock me out of the way, I must stand aside and let him get his victim?” For Lewis, context renders such an understanding impossible.

The turn-the-other-cheek passage, then, doesn't mean we shouldn't use force to protect others.

5. Love your neighbour

Aren't we supposed to love our neighbours? Doesn't love preclude war?

Yes, we should love our neighbours. No, love doesn't preclude war.

Here I side with Augustine (354–430 AD). According to Augustine, love of neighbour sometimes requires that we use violence to protect our neighbour, as when our neighbour is threatened by an assailant.

In the name of love, according to Augustine, we may have to use military force—a lethal force—to stop an army from murdering innocent neighbours.

Reminder: Not all killing is murder. Think again of the good police officer who justly kills a rampaging killer of innocents. Soldiers—just soldiers—are like that good police officer.3

6. Jesus and the sword

Doesn't Jesus tell his followers to reject the sword, as when Peter cuts off the ear of the man arresting Jesus?

It seems to me that Jesus tells Peter (who was carrying a sword even after following Jesus for a few years!) to put his sword away so that Jesus would complete His special mission, i.e., so that Jesus—an innocent man who is also God—would die on our behalf for our sins to satisfy the requirements of God’s justice.

The above sword passage is a special case, in other words.

Significantly, as I have pointed out, elsewhere Jesus tells his disciples to buy swords. Elsewhere, too, Jesus commends without reservation the faith of a Roman Centurion, a commanding officer of 100 soldiers, i.e., 100 professional warriors—who use swords! (Jesus’ having such high regard for a soldier strongly suggests that there is such a thing as morally good soldiering and thus the moral appropriateness of sometimes, under appropriate circumstances, taking human life.)

Also, John the Baptist, whom Jesus holds in high regard, advises soldiers—professional warriors/ killers/ sword-bearers—not to quit their jobs but be content with their pay.

Also, David—a man after God’s (Jesus’) heart—uses violent force to kill Goliath plus chops off Goliath’s head with a sword.

Moreover, God in the Old Testament often uses lethal force (e.g., the sword of war) to deal with evil aggressors.

Furthermore, Ecclesiastes tells us, apparently prescriptively, that there is “a time to kill” and “a time for war” (which often involved swords).

In addition (and again), the apostle Paul, writing under the influence of the Holy Spirit (who is one with Jesus), says the state bears the sword—a lethal instrument—as an agent of God’s wrath (1 Peter 2:14 confirms the government’s role in punishing wrongdoers).

Therefore, when it comes to the question of whether the Bible tells us to use lethal police/ military force justly, it seems there are good biblical grounds for thinking so—especially to protect innocents from evil aggressors.

Love of neighbour sometimes requires just force to protect one’s neighbour.4,5

 

NOTES

1. To destroy an innocent life unjustly presumes the intent to do so. In war wherein innocent lives are not targeted (such as the Israeli war against Hamas), there is no intent to destroy innocent life.

2. If the police officer accidentally kills a bystander or an innocent person being held as a human shield by the person doing the deadly shooting spree, then that killing is tragic but not murder.

3. See note 2.

4. Some recommended resources on war and Bible:

5. The above appendix is a combination of two of my articles published previously in my blog APOLOGIA and in my local newspaper The Carillon on August 21 and October 30, 2014.

 

Table of Contents (links)

Introduction

Chapter 1. Israel is engaging in colonial retaliation?

Chapter 2. Israel is a powerful state and thus the oppressor?

Chapter 3. Israel is not a legitimate state?

Chapter 4. Israel occupies Gaza?

Chapter 5. Gaza is like a Jewish ghetto?

Chapter 6. What about Gabor Maté?

Chapter 7. What about Gabor Maté, again?

Chapter 8. Israel targets a hospital?

Chapter 9. Israel’s attack on Gaza is as bad (or worse) as Gaza’s attack on Israel?

Chapter 10. Israel is wrong to cause Gaza to suffer?

Chapter 11. Israel is guilty of genocide?

Chapter 12. Israel’s response to Hamas is not proportional?

Chapter 13. Israel should agree to a permanent ceasefire?

Chapter 14. Israel should embrace a two-state solution?

Chapter 15. Conclusion and prayer

Appendix 1: Criticizing Islam is Islamophobic? (Part 1 of 2)

Appendix 2: Criticizing Islam is Islamophobic? (Part 2 of 2)

Appendix 3: War and Bible

Suggested resources

About the author


Appendix 2 of Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments









Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments: Critical Thinking about the Israel-Hamas War

Note to readers: See previous APOLOGIA post for Appendix 1. (Also, Table of Contents with links is listed below. Or download pdf of the whole book here.)

Note to critics: Please read the whole of my little book (including notes) before offering criticism. Thanks.

 

Appendix 2: Criticizing Islam is Islamophobic? (Part 2 of 2)

 

Objection: Pointing to the Islamic beliefs of Hamas terrorists is Islamophobic.

Reply: No, my drawing attention to Islam’s negative view of Jews (and women and non-Muslims) and my encouraging careful thinking about Islam (especially its founder whom radical Islamists take very seriously) are not instances of Islamophobia. Rather, these are reason-able, evidence-based concerns.

To make this clear, what follows are some of my thoughts about Islam and Christianity.

Before I begin, please know this: Vandalizing Mosques or otherwise treating Muslims with hatred and disrespect is wrong, period.

But know this, too: Thinking carefully about Islam is NOT Islamophobia. One can have non-phobic, reason-able concerns.

Let's proceed.

The focus of Islam is the Qur'an and Muhammad. Muhammad, according to the Qur'an, is the “seal of the prophets,” i.e., Muhammad is God’s latest and greatest prophet. He calls us to submit to God and His Messenger (Muhammad).

According to the Qur’an, Jesus is to be respected. But, although born of a virgin and doer of miracles, Jesus is merely a prophet. Jesus is not God in human flesh, contrary to the New Testament.

According to the Qur’an, and contrary to the New Testament, Jesus didn’t die on the cross (somebody else did) and Jesus didn’t resurrect bodily after death.

About the Qur'an: Its revelation about Jesus comes to Muhammad via an (alleged) angel, 600 years after Jesus’ life, 1000 kilometers away, in a cave.

About the New Testament: It contains historical testimony for Jesus’ life that is close to the events temporally and geographically (i.e., it contains accounts of eyewitnesses and close associates of eyewitnesses).

The Qur’an’s chapters are ordered from longest to shortest, not chronologically. Chronologically, the Qur’an’s peaceful verses occur before Muhammad gains power, whereas its calls to jihad (war on unbelievers/ “infidels”) occur after Muhammad gains power. According to the Qur’an, the later verses abrogate (cancel) the earlier verses.

According to the Qur’an’s last revelation, Muhammad orders his followers to kill infidels, i.e., those who don’t agree with his views about God.

According to Islamic tradition (hadith) and biographies of Muhammad (sirah), Muhammad is a warlord, responsible for hundreds of murders plus the enslavement of men, women, and children.

Also, according to Islamic tradition and the Qur'an, Muhammad has a low view of women (their testimony is worth half that of a man, more women than men will be in hell, they can be beaten) and Muhammad married a girl when she was six, consummating the marriage three years later.

Yes, the Bible has calls to war in the Old Testament. But the Bible’s calls to war are specific and limited to particular times and places, whereas the Qur’an’s call for jihad is Muhammad’s latest revelation and is open-ended—and continues.

According to the New Testament, Jesus promotes his message by allowing his blood to be shed on a cross. But Muhammad, according to the Qur’an and tradition, promotes his message by shedding the blood of others.

Yes, most Muslims don’t follow the violent Muhammad, which is good. They elevate his peaceful traits above the violent.

But why do this, if Muhammad’s call to violent jihad is his latest revelation and this latest revelation abrogates the earlier peaceful revelation?

If Islamic “reform” means (at least in part) getting back to basics, what are those basics?

We live in an open society. Surely we should encourage investigation of the evidence of competing religious truth claims, while showing respect to those who hold them.

Such investigation isn’t a sign of disrespect, nor is it, in the case of investigating Islam, a case of Islamophobia (just as investigating Christianity isn’t a case of disrespect to Christians or Christophobia).

Let’s welcome Muslims to Canada, especially if they are fleeing persecution. Let’s also encourage careful thinking.

Love and truth-seeking can co-exist.1,2,3

 

NOTES

1. A version of this article appeared in my column/blog APOLOGIA in The Carillon, March 16, 2017. I have edited it to include Hamas (the original version only mentioned ISIS). I include this and the previous appendix in this book because it seems to me (as I noted in the previous appendix but add here for emphasis) that atheist philosopher Sam Harris is for the most part correct when he states the following: 

There are many things to be said in criticism of Israel, in particular its expansion of settlements on contested land. But Israel’s behaviour is not what explains the suicidal and genocidal inclinations of a group like Hamas. The Islamic doctrines of martyrdom and jihad do. These are religious beliefs, sincerely held. They are beliefs about the moral structure of the universe and they explain how normal people, even good ones, can commit horrific acts of violence against innocent civilians on purpose, not as collateral damage, and still consider themselves good. When you believe life in this world has no value apart from deciding who goes to hell and who goes to paradise, it becomes possible to feel perfectly at ease killing non-combatants or even using your own women and children as human shields. Because you know that any Muslims that get killed will go straight to paradise, for eternity. If you don’t understand that jihadists sincerely believe these things, you don’t understand the problem that Israel faces. The problem isn’t merely Palestinian nationalism or resource competition or any other normal terrestrial grievance. In fact, the problem isn’t even hatred, but there’s enough of that to go around. The problem is religious certainty. (Sam Harris, The Bright Line Between Good and Evil [Episode #340], Making Sense podcast, November 7, 2023.)

 I would add (again) that the problem is not merely religious certainty but a religious certainty in a particular religion that is dubious in terms of historical evidence, philosophical reasoning, and morality—a religion that is a death cult. Hence, there is a need to engage in careful, truth-seeking investigation concerning religion, especially Islam.

2. Concerning Islamic Jihadism (as manifested via Hamas, ISIS, etc.) and the just defensive war(s) against such aggression, it is sometimes said that we cannot destroy an idea but we can remove it from power. With this I agree. But I would add some nuance. Definitely we should remove Islamic Jihadism from political power. This takes military force. But we should also weaken Islamic Jihadism by exposing it to the light of truth, reason, and evidence. This takes intellectual force—i.e., sustained careful thinking.

For some recommended resources relevant to careful thinking about Islam, see my list at the end of the previous appendix.

On why there is such an intellectually odd alliance between radical leftist academics (many students and professors in the West) and hard-right Muslims (e.g., Hamas), see Winston Marshall’s important interview with James Lindsay: Uncovering The Rise of Woke Islamism with James Lindsay, The Winston Marshall Show #005, February 14, 2024. In this 52-minute interview Marshall and Lindsay explore the influence of poor thinking—as found in Critical Theory, Postmodernism, and Marxism—on those in the West (especially university professors and students) who support Islamic Jihad. It turns out that the common goal of radical leftists and hard-right Muslims is to destroy the West’s hegemony, i.e., destroy Western liberal democracy and freedom. (James Lindsay is co-author with Helen Pluckrose of the fine book Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody [Durham, North Carolina: Pitchstone Publishing, 2020].).

3. Please excuse this shameless plug: For an easy-to-read and important look at why Christianity (instead of Islam or Atheism or other competing worldviews) is the way to go intellectually (in terms of truth and careful reasoning), see my book APOLOGIA: The Columns: A Defence of Mere Christianity (Amazon KDP, 2023).

 

Table of Contents (links)

Introduction

Chapter 1. Israel is engaging in colonial retaliation?

Chapter 2. Israel is a powerful state and thus the oppressor?

Chapter 3. Israel is not a legitimate state?

Chapter 4. Israel occupies Gaza?

Chapter 5. Gaza is like a Jewish ghetto?

Chapter 6. What about Gabor Maté?

Chapter 7. What about Gabor Maté, again?

Chapter 8. Israel targets a hospital?

Chapter 9. Israel’s attack on Gaza is as bad (or worse) as Gaza’s attack on Israel?

Chapter 10. Israel is wrong to cause Gaza to suffer?

Chapter 11. Israel is guilty of genocide?

Chapter 12. Israel’s response to Hamas is not proportional?

Chapter 13. Israel should agree to a permanent ceasefire?

Chapter 14. Israel should embrace a two-state solution?

Chapter 15. Conclusion and prayer

Appendix 1: Criticizing Islam is Islamophobic? (Part 1 of 2)

Appendix 2: Criticizing Islam is Islamophobic? (Part 2 of 2)

Appendix 3: War and Bible

Suggested resources

About the author