Would you like to see how a Sabeel follower responds to truth and logic after being exposed to toxic quantities of the opposite?

Just try these questions suggested by Snapshots.

They were originally designed to be used at a Sabeel 'peacemaking' conference at the Prairie Village Presbyterian Church, Kansas this coming weekend. They are so good, however, that they can be used again - and again - and again.

A sample:

1. Is it appropriate for the leader of a so-called peacemaking group to use language reminiscent of the deicide charge in reference to Israel, the Jewish state?

Background: Sabeel’s founder, Rev. Naim Ateek has used hostile imagery that is clearly reminiscent of the deicide charge – the notion that the Jews are collectively responsible for the death of Jesus – to demonize Israel. Rev. Ateek’s defenders have attempted to downplay this problem. Nevertheless, the European Union Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia has written a working definition of antisemitism that mentions the use of “symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.”

Or how about:

7. Isn’t Sabeel’s support for a one-state solution just a code-word for the elimination of Israel as Jewish state?

Background: In “The Jerusalem Sabeel Document, Principles for Just Peace,” published in 2004, the organization states its “vision for the future” is “One state for two nations and three religions.”

8. If this single state were created, would the Jews be safe?

Background: Edward Said, who spoke at an international conference hosted by Sabeel in 1998, admitted in 2000 that he worried what would happen to a Jewish minority in a single state. “It worries me a great deal,” he said. “The question of what is going to be the fate of the Jews is very difficult for me. I really don’t know. It worries me.”

Go and read them all!