Difference between revisions 1256650 and 1278755 on enwiki

The controversial claim that "'''[[Zionism]] is [[racism]]'''" has recurred many times in the context of [[United Nations]] debates and resolutions, especially since the [[1967 occupation of the West Bank and Gaza]] by the State of [[Israel]]. It has become in some circles an [[idiom]] or [[stock phrase]] to signal rejection of this occupation and demands for [[Israel]] to withdraw to the UN-mandated "Green Line".

On [[November 10]], [[1975]] the [[United Nations General Assembly]] adopted, by a vote of 72 to 35 (with 32 abstentions), its [[UN Resolution 3379]], which states as its conclusion:

:'''Zionism is''' a form of '''racism''' and racial discrimination.

The resolution also endorsed an August [[1975]] statement by the [[Conference of Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned Countries]] (Lima, Peru), that:

:...severely condemned Zionism as a threat to world peace and security and called upon all countries to oppose this [[racism|racist]] and [[imperialism|imperalist]] ideology.

The resolution was actively debated and had a turbulent history until [[1991]].

The resolution was explosively controversial at the time, and remains so;  To see all Zionism as racism is considered by some to be [[anti-Semitic]] and thus itself racist.  Furthermore, it was seen as a threat to the existence of the state of [[Israel]], which rendered resolution of regional conflict difficult.

Under pressure from the [[George W. Bush]] administration of the [[United States]], the phrase was omitted from the agenda of the [[United Nations Conference on Racism]] in [[Durban, South Africa]], and its final communiqué.  Subsequently, under further pressure from this administration, [[Palestinian Authority]] and rival groups have backed away from the claim's original form.

*[http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1967to1991_un_zionism_racism.php background on original resolution]{{cleanup}}
According to a tradition preserved by Suidas (s.v.), Lucian was born c. 240 at Samosata, Commagene, Syria [now Samsat, Turkey], of pious parents, and was educated in the neighbouring city of Edessa at the school of a certain Macarius. Not much faith can be attached to these statements, which are not corroborated by any other author; Suidas very probably confounded the history of Lucian with that of his famous namesake, the pagan satirist of a century earlier. The confusion is easily pardoned, however, as both exhibited the same intellectual traits and the same love for cold literalism.

Early in life Lucian took up his residence at Antioch, where he was ordained presbyter, and where he soon attained a commanding position as head of the theological school in that city. Though he cannot be accused of having shared the theological views of Paul of Samosata, he fell under suspicion at the time of Paul's condemnation, and was compelled to sever his communion with the Church. This breach with the orthodox party lasted during the episcopates of three bishops, Domnus, Timaeus, and Cyril, whose administration extended from 268 to 303. It seems more likely that Lucian was reconciled with the Church early in the episcopate of Cyril (perhaps about 285) than in that of his successor; otherwise it is hard to understand how bishops in the Orient could have received his pupils. Very little is known about the life of Lucian, though few men have left such a deep print on the history of Christianity. The opposition to the allegorizing tendencies of the Alexandrines centred in him. He rejected this system entirely and propounded a system of literal interpretation which dominated the Eastern Church for a long period. In the field of theology, in the minds of practically all writers (the most notable modern exception being Gwatkin, in his "Studies of Arianism", London, 1900), he has the unenviable reputation of being the real author of the opinions which afterwards found expression in the heresy of Arius. In his Christological system ? a compromise between Modalism and Subordinationism ? the Word, though Himself the Creator of all subsequent beings was a creature, though superior to all other created things by the wide gulf between Creator and creature. The great leaders in the Arian movement (Arius himself, Eusebius, the court bishop of Nicomedia, Maris, and Theognis) received their training under him and always venerated him as their master and the founder of their system.

Despite his heterodoxy, Lucian was a man of the most unexceptionable virtue (Eusebius, H. E., VIII, xiii, 2); at the height of the Arian controversy his fame for sanctity was not less than his reputation as a scholar. During the persecution of Maximinus Daza he was arrested at Antioch and sent to Nicomedia, where he endured many tortures and, after delivering a long oration in defence of his faith, was finally put to death on January 7, 312, in Nicomedia, Bithynia, Asia Minor [now Izmit, Turkey]. The most enduring memorial of the life of Lucian, next to the Christological controversy which his teachings aroused was his influence on Biblical study. Receiving the literal sense alone he laid stress on the need of textual accuracy and himself undertook to revise the Septuagint on the original Hebrew. His edition was widely used in the fourth century (Jerome, De Vir. III. Ixxvii Praef. ad Paralip.; Adv. Rufium xxvi, Epis., 106). He also published a recession of the New Testament. St. Jerome (De Vir. Ill, 77), in addition to the recension of the Bible, speaks of "Lebelli de Fide", none of which are extant. He is also credited with the composition of a Creed, presented to the Council of Antioch in 341 (Athan., "Ep. de Synod. Arim. et Seleuc". xxiii), but his authorship is doubtful; in fact it is certain he did not compose it in its present form. Rufinus (H. E., IX, vi) has preserved a translation of his apologetic oration. There are epistles mentioned by Suidas; a fragment of one announces the death of Anthimus, a bishop ("Chronicon Paschale in P.G. XCII, 689).

''ROUTH, Reliquiae Sacrae, IV, i, 17; Acta SS. Jan. I, 357, 365; BARDENHEWER, Geschichte der altkirchlichen Literatur, II, 235, 241; HARNACK, Die Chronologie der alchristlichen Litteratur, II, 138-146; BATIFOL, Etude d'hagiographie arienne ;La Passion Saint Lucien d'Antioche, compte-rendu au congris scientifique international des Catholiques (Paris, 1891), sect. 11, 181, 186; WESTCOTT, History of the New Testament Canon, 392 sq.; NEWMAN, Arians of the Fourth Century; BARDENHEWER, Patrology, tr. SHAHAN, (St. Louis, 1908).''