Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories should be declared a «sin against God».
This is a statement of the out going general secretary of the World Council of Churches Samuel Kobia, a Methodist priests from Kenya.
The Church leader is reportedly saying:
«Occupation along with the concomitant humiliation of a whole people for over six decades constitutes not just economic and political crimes but, like anti-Semitism, it is a sin against God»
On 26th of August he gave a report to a meeting of the church grouping’s main governing body, its central committee.
Koiba also noted that at its founding assembly in Amsterdam in 1948, the WCC has declared that anti-Semitism is a «sin against God». Speaking to a revised version of his original text, Kobia further stated:
«Are we ready to say that occupation is also a sin against God?».
Source: Ecumenical News International (ENI)
The Arab Palestinians claim that even East Jerusalem is occupied by Israel.
Before claiming that the city of Jerusalem is «occupied», Samuel Kobia first need to explain to us when the city was liberated. A city that is occupied has obviously been taken from its previous owner. Not its possible future owner.
There are several complications following a claim that Jerusalem is occupied:
If the city of Jerusalem was liberated and free in 1947, why was there a need for United Kingdom to give up the city? If Israel has occupied Jerusalem, the control over the city should be given back to London.
If the city of Jerusalem was occupied by United Kingdom in 1947: Did the city return to its rightful owners in 1948?
Was the Kingdom of Jordan the rightful owner? If so, the Eastern part of the city have only been free and liberated from 1948 to 1967. And if the Eastern part of Jerusalem was free during these 19 years, why has the Kingdom of Jordan given up her demands of getting their city back?
If East Jerusalem has only been free from occupation between 1948 and 1967, when will West Jerusalem ever be liberated?
Well, the correct answer must lay further back in history. The United Kingdom should have given the occupied city back to the power she evicted from the city in 1917.
The city of Jerusalem was controlled by the Ottoman Empire in 1917, when Union Jack replaced the Turks as the ruler of Jerusalem. Since the city was under the control of Istanbul, i guess United Kingdom should have returned the city to the Turkish authorities?
An unsolvable problem has forever complicated a return of Jerusalem to the Ottoman Empire. This imperialistic empire ceased to exist at the end of World War I.
The International community agreed that even the Ottoman Empire had occupied Jerusalem in the years from 1517 to 1917, and that even the Turkish people would not be the rightful owners of Jerusalem. Thats why the International community in the years 1922 to 1947 proposed that the city of Jerusalem should remain under the Control of an International authority. The problem was that there was not such a body available or interested in claiming the ownership to Jerusalem.
Since the Bible says that it was the Jewish King David who was the founder of the city of Jerusalem, it would be legally correct to give the city back to the Jewish people. They can rightfully claim 3000 years of connections to the city of Jerusalem. The Bible even says that the Jews will return to the city when we approach the end of the present age.
Samuel Kobia seems to be of a different opinion than God of the Bible. And this will not help him on the day of Judgment. The Messiah Jesus of Nazareth will come back to the same Jewish people, to the the same Jewish city, He left 2000 years ago. Regardless of what Kobia might say and do.
If not repented for, claimed to be «Christian» priests like Kobia, will receive eternal punishment by the Messiah for their insult, lies and false accusations against the Jewish people and the state of Israel.