Salaam (Peace) to all.
In light of the recent controversy surrounding the Hon. Louis Farrakhan's expression of admiration for Sen. Barack Obama, which involves the age-old accusation that Minister Farrakhan has made "anti-Semitic" remarks in the past, I would like to offer the following for consideration:
In order to rightly understand the term "anti-Semite", one must first rightly understand what a "Semite" is.
Semite:
1) 1847, "Jew, Arab, Assyrian, Aramæan," from Mod.L. Semita, from L.L. Sem "Shem," one of the three sons of Noah (Gen. x:21-30), regarded as the ancestor of the Semites (in the days when anthropology was still bound by the Bible), from Heb. Shem. Semitic (1813 of languages, 1826 of persons) is probably from Ger. semitisch (first used by Ger. historian August Schlözer, 1781), denoting the language group that includes Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Assyrian, etc. In recent use often with the specific sense "Jewish," but not historically so limited.2) A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.
What has the Hon. Louis Farrakhan said that was against the "Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians"?
How many of the above named peoples have accused Minister Farrakhan of being "anti-Semitic"?
Notice that "Europeans" are not included in this definition, and that the ones who are crying out "anti-Semite" with regard to Minister Farrakhan are EUROPEAN "Jews", who are not "Semitic" at all, but are European CONVERTS to the faith of Judaism.
Many have based their entire charge against the Hon. Louis Farrakhan of "anti-Semitism" on what they HEARD from some other source of the Minister's alleged reference to the religion of Judaism as a "gutter religion" or "dirty religion". However, when pressed to cite exactly what the Minister said on the issue, they begin fumbling over their thoughts and words, unable to prove the claim they have made.
Here is a citation of the Hon. Louis Farrakhan's actual words regarding the above:
"That nation called Israel has not had any peace in 40 years, and she will never have any peace; for there can be no peace structured on injustice, thievery, lying, murder, and deceipt, and using the name of God to shield your dirty religion under His Holy and Righteous Name."
Nowhere did the Hon. Louis Farrakhan express that "Judaism" is a "gutter" or "dirty" religion. What he expressed was, that which the Israelis were doing "under the shield" of "Judaism" was a "dirty" practice; and, in fact, they were "dirtying" their own religion by their unjust and wicked practices.
With all this considered, the question then should not be "is Louis Farrakhan anti-semtic"; but the question should be "Is Louis Farrakhan CORRECT in his estimation of the problem in that region of the world?"
If the Hon. Louis Farrakhan is to be classified as "anti-semitic" for condemning those who call themselves Jews, who are guilty of wicked behavior; then JESUS should be labeled likewise an "Anti-Semite", for he plainly referred to the Jews as "devils", or the children of the Devil, and the "Synagogue of Satan".
Was Jesus of Nazareth "anti-semitic"?
Is the New Testament "anti-semitic"?
Absolutely Not! Neither is the Hon. Louis Farrakhan!
If I condemn a Semite for the evil that he has committed, don't call me "anti-semitic", call me "anti evil".
The Hon. Louis Farrakhan condemns "evil", no matter who is the perpetrator of it.
He condemns the evils committed by Black people. Is he "Anti-Black"?
He condemns the evils committed by Arabs. Is he "Anti-Arab"?
He condemns the evils committed by Muslims. Is he "Anti-Muslim"?
He condemns evil, from the basis of Truth -- as we ALL should -- no matter who is guilty of it. Why should the Israelis and Zionists be exempt from criticism?
There are many Jews who oppose and criticize the State of Israel. Are THEY "Anti-Semitic"?
Come, now, let us Reason together.
RM
No matter how many times this truth about a Semite is broken down, people still want to say what they think they know.
ReplyDeleteThe enemy is unable to make any other claim, so he goes to the claim that everybody can sympathize with them with. The next thing that comes out of there mouth is the tragedy that happen during world war two.
It's really rather outdated. It's a surprise that this subject can be so relevant today.
HAALL