|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The Story of the Jews
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Some scholars I think believe that Judaism was a far more missionary faith before Christianity came along. Once Christianity arrived, it was offering all the advantages of Judaism plus eating pork. And no circumcision. It is at that stage, allegedly, that Rabbinic Judaism discovered that God had made a covenant with Noah that applied to Gentiles and therefore there was no need to evangelise.
Do you have any evidence for either the Judaic missionary outreach or a Rabbinical recognition of a covenant with Noah for the gentiles?
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by beatmenace:
Facts are just the data of history
Contra New Agey and pomo dogma, facts are the basic building blocks of history, but it is also true that:-
Data (facts) is not information.
Information is not knowledge.
Knowledge is not understanding.
Understanding is not wisdom.
I have not seen the series yet, but it sounds as if it would have been interesting to have included Marx's, as well as Freud's, ideas about Jewishness.
[ 04. September 2013, 01:11: Message edited by: Kaplan Corday ]
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bostonman
Shipmate
# 17108
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Some scholars I think believe that Judaism was a far more missionary faith before Christianity came along. Once Christianity arrived, it was offering all the advantages of Judaism plus eating pork. And no circumcision. It is at that stage, allegedly, that Rabbinic Judaism discovered that God had made a covenant with Noah that applied to Gentiles and therefore there was no need to evangelise.
Do you have any evidence for either the Judaic missionary outreach or a Rabbinical recognition of a covenant with Noah for the gentiles?
A small piece of evidence would be the presence of Gentile "godfearers" and "proselytes" in the Jewish communities of the New Testament period.
Posts: 424 | From: USA | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Net Spinster
Shipmate
# 16058
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Some scholars I think believe that Judaism was a far more missionary faith before Christianity came along. Once Christianity arrived, it was offering all the advantages of Judaism plus eating pork. And no circumcision. It is at that stage, allegedly, that Rabbinic Judaism discovered that God had made a covenant with Noah that applied to Gentiles and therefore there was no need to evangelise.
Do you have any evidence for either the Judaic missionary outreach or a Rabbinical recognition of a covenant with Noah for the gentiles?
Missionary perhaps not but Idumea/Edom was forcibly converted in the 2nd century BCE (Josephus, Antiquities, xiii.9). The idea of the seven laws of Noah applying to gentiles seems to go back a long way, certainly to Maimonides in the 12th century and I suspect it is in the Talmud.
--------------------
spinner of webs
Posts: 1093 | From: San Francisco Bay area | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
Perhaps. I've never seen evidence of Judaism as a missionary faith or that there was a deliberate decision to drop it in recognition of Christianity or Islam as a successor to the Gentiles. I'd certainly be interesting in any evidence and not just the musings of scholars seeking to claim Jewish recognition of Christianity.
I do not have an article with me. The most obvious evidence would be the numbers of gentile godfearers that Paul meets in synagogues in the Book of Acts. How did they get there if there had been no real attempt at outreach?
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Croesos:
Didn't the Six Day War begin with a surprise attack by the Israelis on Egyptian military airfields? You mention the conflict, so you obviously know it existed, but you seem to have a very revised history of it.
This is an exaustive subject worthy of another thread. But in brief. During 1966 and 67, Israeli borders were subject to Syrian backed terrorist attacks, which U Thant of the UN described as " a deplorable menace to peace." So Israel threatened Syria. As Egypt and Syria had a mutual defence pact, Nasser of Egypt started massing troops in the Sinai Peninsular. he then closed the Strait of Tiran, which was regarded by the West as an international sea lane, though Egypt disputed that, and decalred "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight."
I accept that Israel made a pre-emptive strike, but I don't accept that they started the war. They were surrounded by countries preparing for war against them, who had declared that intention, and were massing militarily to make it a reality. We may never agree on this, but I see this as a raction to foreign aggression, not as the initiation of aggression.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
Do you have any evidence for either the Judaic missionary outreach or a Rabbinical recognition of a covenant with Noah for the gentiles?
Wikipedia article on
the Noachide laws. The texts adduced in that article for the Second Temple period don't talk about a covenant - merely about Noah instructing his children; it's only in the Talmudic documents, after the fall of the Temple, that there seems to be explicit mention of a covenant that applies to Gentiles.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Israel has never initiated an attack on its neighbours, and lives with its back to the sea.
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
I repeat that I don't always approve of the excessive retaliation that Israel uses when attacked, from Golan, Egypt, Gaza or Lebanon. But it has always been attacked first, before responding.
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
I accept that Israel made a pre-emptive strike, but I don't accept that they started the war.
That last statement is a direct contradiction of the first two. A pre-emptive strike, by definition, means "initiat[ing] an attack" and not waiting to be "attacked first before responding". There's more than just a semantic difference between saying "Israel has never initiated an attack on its neighbours" (your first two posts) and "the times Israel did initiate attacks on its neigbours it was justified by X, Y, and Z" (your last post).
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
During 1966 and 67, Israeli borders were subject to Syrian backed terrorist attacks, which U Thant of the UN described as " a deplorable menace to peace."
At the same time as the UNSC deplored Israel's actions against Jordan. And U Thant criticised Israel for its leaders pronouncement which were "so threatening as to be particularly inflammatory". Israel was making repeated threats to invade both Syria and Egypt, and had already commited military invasions of Jordan and Syrian territory in recent months.
And Egyptian fears were hardly baseless considering Israel had previously commited an unprovoked full scale invasion eleven years before in collusion with UK and France. An even worse example of Israel's blatent instigation of violence against its neighbours.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Please could we take the discussion of the sins, or otherwise, of the Israeli state to a different thread please.
Doublethink
Purgatory Host
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
The 7 Noahide Laws are a product of the Talmudic era, not of the Biblical era. They were, and still are, little known amongst Jews. They were revived in their modern form by Rabbi Elijah Benamozegh of Livorno, Italy (1823-1900) in his book "Israel and Humanity" written in 1863, but not published until 1914(in French). Benamozegh's parents were migrants from Fez in Morocco, and he greatly benefitted from the relatively liberal religious outlook of 19th century Italy, so he was comfortable with both Christianity and Islam, seeing them both as compatible with Noahide living. He was also conversant with the ideas of Greek philosophy.
The modern Noahide movement has been highjacked by the ultra conservative Chabad Lubavitch organisation, which, although it appears from the outside to be an outreach, is just a clever way of keeping gentiles at arms length. In their view, Righteous Gentiles may have a place in the world to come, if they totally repudiate their past religious affiliations, but no Lubavitch rabbi would let a Noahide marry his daughter! They are vehemently opposed to all things Christian, but, of course, that's the sort of person who would want to be a Noahide anyway.
Not to be confused with the Godfearers of Acts. They were gentiles who accepted the God of the Jews, but who hadn't yet taken on the full yoke of the Law. In Acts 15:29 gentile followers of Christ were given the same rules as Godfearers, to "abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood and from what is strangled, and from unchastity." I suspect that the Church leaders in Jerusalem hoped that the followers of Christ, as well as the Godfearers would progress to the point of full conversion, but that they could associate themselves with the group on that basis. But of course Church history took a different turn with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
JoannaP
Shipmate
# 4493
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Some scholars I think believe that Judaism was a far more missionary faith before Christianity came along. Once Christianity arrived, it was offering all the advantages of Judaism plus eating pork. And no circumcision. It is at that stage, allegedly, that Rabbinic Judaism discovered that God had made a covenant with Noah that applied to Gentiles and therefore there was no need to evangelise.
I admit I cannot provide a source for this but I have read or heard that Judaism ceased to be a missionary faith as a result of some sort of deal with the Romans; they would not be persecuted as long as they did not persuade others to convert.
--------------------
"Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow." R. H. Tawney (quoted by Isaiah Berlin)
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 1877 | From: England | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by JoannaP:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Some scholars I think believe that Judaism was a far more missionary faith before Christianity came along. Once Christianity arrived, it was offering all the advantages of Judaism plus eating pork. And no circumcision. It is at that stage, allegedly, that Rabbinic Judaism discovered that God had made a covenant with Noah that applied to Gentiles and therefore there was no need to evangelise.
I admit I cannot provide a source for this but I have read or heard that Judaism ceased to be a missionary faith as a result of some sort of deal with the Romans; they would not be persecuted as long as they did not persuade others to convert.
I could imagine that with the invasion of Israel by Romans, the destruction of the second Temple and the diaspora, the Rabbinical Jews may have made outreach a low priority.
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
But he's not incidental to the story of the Jews, even if he's irrelevant to their theology.
I like Simon Schama as a historian, and I enjoyed the programme greatly. But in glossing over Jesus in one line, I suspect that Schama, like many other Jewish historians, has a "Jesus problem." This isn't caused so much by Jesus' own place in Jewish history, as by the abominations of the Church towards the Jews for two milleniia. By "The Church" in this context, I mean Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant. From John Chrysostom, the Golden Mouthed, who was foul-mouthed in his dealings with the Jews, through centuries of Catholic Inquisitions, murders and forced conversions, to Martin Luther's evil spoutings, which were arguably a blueprint for the Holocaust, great atrocities have been carried out in the name of the Prince of Peace.
Fortunately, there is a group of modern Jewish scholars, such as Talmudic scholar Daniel Boyarin, who see Christianity as having its origins firmly within the Jewish traditions of its time, and recognising that both Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism are descendents of the Judaism of Jesus' time. There are many things I love about Judaism, and so much of what we take for granted as Christians, such as ritual washing away of sins (baptism), the Messiah who will redeem all humanity, repentance and faith, even the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist, emphasised in Catholic and Orthodox theology, all all firmly rooted in Judaism.
I noticed that Schama began his journey with Moses the Lawgiver, rather than with Abraham, the Father of Faith. This is significant to me, because, it's only with the Law, or Torah, given to Moses, that Judaism as such begins. Although Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are the Patriarchs on whose merits the Jews depended for generations, the story of Abraham is as relevant to Christianity as it is to Judaism, as beautifully explained by Paul in Galations. When Abram's faith was counted to him as righteousness (Gen 15:6), it was before the circumcision, and before the Torah (by several hundred years). The priesthood of the Order of Melchizedek (Heb 7:11 from Gen 14:18-20) predates the Levitical priesthood by centuries, and is the eternal priesthood of Christ.
Pope Benedict XVI has written:
"The faith of Israel was directed to universality. Since it is devoted to the one God of all men, it also bore within itself the promise to become the faith of all nations. But the Law, in which it was expressed, was particular, quite concretely directed to Israel and its history; it could not be universalised in that form. In the intersection of these paradoxes stands Jesus of Nazareth, who Himself as a Jew lived entirely under the Law of Israel but knew Himself to be at the same time the mediator of the universality of God..."
I genuinely believe that the Jews, in their history of four millennia, have had the divine protection of God's chosen people. Perhaps they were chosen to bring the universality of God to the world through Jesus, but they remain a remarkable people. It's unlikely that Simon Schama will ever see it that way, but he is rightly proud of his people's survival against great odds, and their awesome achievements in the world.
I 'Like' all of the above.
Thank you.
IU just wish the church would understand modern Israel a little bit more - if they understood the Jews and Judaism more then we might do just that ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I attended a barmitzvah and a wedding at the same synagogue in the space of a weekend and one of the great impressions i received - even from a Reform synagogue - is how much 'The Land' is vital to their history, their faith, their culture, their spirituality and their communal hopes. The land is not history, it's ever-present in their total identity.
I wish the Church would realise this and support them.
[ 05. September 2013, 11:53: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Support them in what? Taking bits of it not allocated to them from the people already living on it? That's the troubling bit.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Support them in what? Taking bits of it not allocated to them from the people already living on it? That's the troubling bit.
People already living there? They were deserted.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Support them in what? Taking bits of it not allocated to them from the people already living on it? That's the troubling bit.
People already living there? They were deserted.
I'm talking about the building of settlements in the occupied territories now, not what may or may not have been the case in 1948, as implied by your "were". Should we support that? Why?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
[should add; just noticed DoubleThink's warning upthread. Muddy - we can drop it or take it elsewhere.]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
Anyone interested in the question of Judaism as a missionary faith might wish to have a look at Shlomo Sands's book 'The Invention of Judaism.' I liked it, but it has received a mixed reception.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I wish the Church would realise this and support them.
I would have thought that Mudfrog's support for the Jews in the Land of Israel came from an Evangelical Christian perspective, similar to that of the American Bible Belt. But reading this, I realise I was wrong and I owe him an apoplogy. Having Jewish friends or contacts can enable us to see it more from their point of view. Christianity tends to be an other worldly religion. Pie in the sky when we die, as a reward for all our suffering here. Judaism is more about this world. Seeking eternal salvation would mean little to most Jews. It's about doing God's will in the present moment, trusting entirely in His providence for us in this world, with a hope that He may grant us resurrection to a place in the world to come.
Similarly, as Christians, we hope for the New Jerusalem of the next world, and we carry our Temple within. To Jews, the earthly Jerusalem and its Temple is the conduit of God's power on earth, the dwelling of the Shechinah. Throughout the long exile, the prayer is always the same at Passover seder, "Next year in Jerusalem." Although Jerusalem is regarded as a Holy City by Islam, it never appears even once in the koran. Try to count the number of times it appears in Jewish Scripyure! While none of this means that the rights of the Muslims and Palestinians can be ignored, those of us whose religious culture revolves around a Divine Messiah sent to the lost sheep of the House of Israel, should at least cultivate enough empathy to understand that, running through every Jew like a stick of Brighton rock, is the belief that God granted the Land to their people in perpetuity.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I wish the Church would realise this and support them.
I would have thought that Mudfrog's support for the Jews in the Land of Israel came from an Evangelical Christian perspective, similar to that of the American Bible Belt. But reading this, I realise I was wrong and I owe him an apoplogy. Having Jewish friends or contacts can enable us to see it more from their point of view. Christianity tends to be an other worldly religion. Pie in the sky when we die, as a reward for all our suffering here. Judaism is more about this world. Seeking eternal salvation would mean little to most Jews. It's about doing God's will in the present moment, trusting entirely in His providence for us in this world, with a hope that He may grant us resurrection to a place in the world to come.
Similarly, as Christians, we hope for the New Jerusalem of the next world, and we carry our Temple within. To Jews, the earthly Jerusalem and its Temple is the conduit of God's power on earth, the dwelling of the Shechinah. Throughout the long exile, the prayer is always the same at Passover seder, "Next year in Jerusalem." Although Jerusalem is regarded as a Holy City by Islam, it never appears even once in the koran. Try to count the number of times it appears in Jewish Scripyure! While none of this means that the rights of the Muslims and Palestinians can be ignored, those of us whose religious culture revolves around a Divine Messiah sent to the lost sheep of the House of Israel, should at least cultivate enough empathy to understand that, running through every Jew like a stick of Brighton rock, is the belief that God granted the Land to their people in perpetuity.
It's really true.
When I attended those services it struck me again and again how much value they put on the land - and 'value' is far too weak a word.
I actually found it quite moving to hear the prayers and the readings that constantly mentioned Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Sarah, Rebekah and Rachel(well, it was Reform!) and the land that was promised.
I regret that overall, the Church came to believe a replacement theology - that the church has replaced the Jews in God's covenant promises. Oh what tragedy! Of all false, unBiblical, non-Christian teaching this is the cause of the 2000 year hatred of God's covenant people. The holocaust was the final act of anti-Semitic hatred that comes from the Church's replacement theology!
The problem is, I feel, that Israel (and like her Old Testament ancestors she is far from perfect) now suffers from worldwide anti-Semitic hostility: we can argue the point about occupied territories until the Lord returns to Jerusalem, but the underlying attitude is one of anti-Semitism:
"what right have you Jews to have the land?"
Theologically the Gentiles did not inherit the covenant promises to Israel, replacing the Jews in God's eyes as the elect; the Gentiles are, by grace, merely grafted into the vine. We share the promises, we have not inherited them wholesale!
No, I don;'t follow the American evangelical view particularly - the sight of Californian Christians dressing up in talith and yarmulka and dancing like Israelis makes me laugh! But I read what Paul said, I hear what the Jews say in services, and I just wish that we Gentiles would treat the Jews as brothers and sisters within the covenant of the God of Abraham, Isaace, Jacob, Moses, David and Solomon - and of course Jesus who fulfils those covenant promises to Gentiles now and to all Israel at the second coming when they will willingly and with great rejoicing recognise him as their Messiah.
In the meantime, if we in the early years could have learned to co-exist with the Jews, allowing them to worship their way and not rejecting the Jewish practices and traditions in the Church's own liturgy and heritage, then the last 2000 years could have been so different!
The synagogue and Jewish story would have been so different, the Church would look so different, the Middle east would have looked so different!
Of course that's all very simplistic, naive and 'a bit late now!' But what would ease the problem now would be for the church not just to apologise for anti-Semitism but to recognise that the Jews are still God's covenant people, that "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." (Rom 11:29).
If we could stand with the Jews as a faith community because we share the same covenant (albeit as believers that the Messiah has come), it would change our attitude to Israel's existence, give us a more objective and understanding view of what they do right AND what they are doing wrong.
I believe the Church needs to stand with the Jews - especially against the Muslim world. Church and Synagogue should cultivate a 'special relationship' of respect, mutual understanding, common heritage, and hope; and even love.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Sorry, I forgot to say that there are many who would say that we should cultiate our common heritage etc, etc, etc with the Muslims - well of course that's very noble - going back to Abraham and all that; but Islam is replacement theology par excellence! Being the youngrer faith tradition they believe that they far and away supercede Judaism and Christianity and they believe they are covenanted with Allah through Ishmael of course, not Isaac.
We know that God's promises came through Isaace and then Jacob (Israel) and then most significantly to Moses who, as has been said 'upthread' is the one who brought the Covenant that turned them from Israelites into Jews.
We therefore share no covenants with the Muslim world who have entirely rejected the Covenant with YHWH, not recognising Isaac and Jacob nor Moses as the ones through whom YHWH made covenant and gave the Promised Land to the Jews.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Muddy, it's not "what right do you Jews have to the land?"; it's "what right has ANYONE to take land of the people who are there now?"
Accusing folk like me who think that a religious claim is insufficient to override normal rights of ownership of Anti-semitism is old, tired, insulting, and if you do it again I'll see you in Hell.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
I'm not going to enter into a discussion about this because it's a tangent that could overtake this thread entirely. I'm talking about the the importance of the whole land of Israel to the Jews, culturally, historically and theologically. One needs to understand this in order to answer the question 'why do the Israelis want the land of Israel?' Whether their occupation is recognised by the international community or not is almost irrelevant to this particular context. We might indeed fell the occupation is illegal - but that's only because the western Christian nations made the rules! Had Britain or anyone else decided that borders should be different, well, who knows what the result would be today.
The issue here is simply this - Jewishness is not confined to worship, doctrine, cultural practices, language etc, etc and all those stereotypes that many will see as defining Jewishness; Jewishness necessarily and essentially begins and ends with the Promised Land. The land itself is part of the religion. It is inescapable and is an inextricable part of the covenant that makes these people Jews:
"I will be your God, you will be my people and this is the land I am giving you."
To deny them this is to deny their religion and that is antisemitism.
[ 06. September 2013, 08:34: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
The land itself is part of the religion. It is inescapable and is an inextricable part of the covenant that makes these people Jews:
"I will be your God, you will be my people and this is the land I am giving you."
To deny them this is to deny their religion and that is antisemitism.
No one is denying that Zionism is one expression of Judaism (it not being a monolithic religion). But to follow on to your second sentence, you're calling a lot of Jews antisemitic.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
Jews are not of one mind about Zionism; it's perfectly possible to be a good Jew without supporting the State of Israel. It's not a very comfortable position for a Jew to take, but there are a significant number who do.
The Orthodox Jewish theological justification for anti-Zionism (held, for instance by the Satmar Hasids) is well outlined in the first essay in Gershom Scholem's 'The Messianic Idea in Judaism and Other Essays.'
The Liberal, Reform, and secular Jewish anti-Zionist views tend to refer to ethical and political arguments, and, of course, to the Nevi'im--the Prophets.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Muddy - if you're not getting into a discussion about this then don't.
I am not willing to say "OK, it's really important to you, so that's fine, we'll chuck out everyone else currently living there, or make them second class citizens, just for you benefit, and fuck 'em."
I have a suspicion that the land is pretty damned important to Palestinian Muslims and Christians, on account of it being their home, where they live. Why should that play second fiddle to Zionist claims on the land? I know you don't like Muslims much because you've made that pretty clear from time to time, but that doesn't explain your "tough shit the Jews want it so they should have it" attitude towards the Christians.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Jewishness necessarily and essentially begins and ends with the Promised Land. The land itself is part of the religion. It is inescapable and is an inextricable part of the covenant that makes these people Jews:
"I will be your God, you will be my people and this is the land I am giving you."
To deny them this is to deny their religion and that is antisemitism.
Like you Muddy, I am a supporter of Israel - albeit a non-dispensational, non-Zionist, and not uncritical supporter - but what you have written is simplistic.
The issue of what constitutes Jewishness, and its relationship to religion and the Land, is incredibly complex.
I am presently reading David Caute's just- published Isaac And Isaiah: The Covert Punishment Of A Cold War Heretic, about the rivalry between Isaac Deutscher and Isaiah Berlin, both non-religious Jews, but with radically different ideas about Jewishness and Israel.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Muddy - if you're not getting into a discussion about this then don't.
I am not willing to say "OK, it's really important to you, so that's fine, we'll chuck out everyone else currently living there, or make them second class citizens, just for you benefit, and fuck 'em."
I have a suspicion that the land is pretty damned important to Palestinian Muslims and Christians, on account of it being their home, where they live. Why should that play second fiddle to Zionist claims on the land? I know you don't like Muslims much because you've made that pretty clear from time to time, but that doesn't explain your "tough shit the Jews want it so they should have it" attitude towards the Christians.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
We therefore share no covenants with the Muslim world who have entirely rejected the Covenant with YHWH,
I feel the same way about the Jews. We share no covenants with them since they have rejected YHWH. Jesus is YHWH and both the Muslims and the Jews reject Him.
To bring things back to the OP, I was struck by the programme as it highlighted the venerance Jews accord the torah scrolls. This made me think there has perhaps been a unfortunate prevelant strain throughout Judaism to idolise the Law. After the temple was destroyed their reaction was not to turn back to YHWH himself, but to turn to the Law and spend decades analysing it and clarifying it. As they describe the situation, they built a fence around the Law so no one could come close to defile it, even accidently. But in doing so they made an idol of the Law, and forgot YHWH. As the most striking example of this they even forgot how to pronounce his name!
And I think Judaism's obsession with the Land nowadays is another idol. To replace the God of Israel with the Land of Israel is a corruption of ancient Judaism, whose most faithful and inspiring scriptures came out of times where they had no land of their own at all. The Israelites originated as nomadic wanderers and aliens in foreign lands. I see Zionism as a corruption of ancient Judaism, not the truest understanding of it as Mudfrog claims.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
I feel the same way about the Jews. We share no covenants with them since they have rejected YHWH. Jesus is YHWH and both the Muslims and the Jews reject Him.
Woah! We don't share ANY covenants with the Jews? ![[Confused]](confused.gif) The covenants CAME from them. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) Our Saviour is Jewish, our Scriptures are Jewish! Paul makes it clear that we Gentiles are grafted into the vine. I am humble and happy to be in that position.
My views on this are akin to Kaplan Corday's, I think. I take a cautiously nuanced view of Zionism. I certainly don't think that modern-day Israel is above criticism (although I would waspishly point out that modern-day Israel is a damn sight more enlightened about women's rights - and other rights - than most of her neighbours), and I certainly would not slam every critic as Israel as intrinsically anti-Semitic, as my more fundie friends are (unfortunately) wont to do.
But I am also very wary of the Church grabbing "all the OT blessings for ourselves and leaving all the OT curses for the Jews", as Michele Guinness has eloquently put it. That is the darker side of replacement theology, and yes the Church IS responsible for much anti-Semitism down the centuries, and that can be traced directly to the pernicious theology of "well, they rejected Jesus so they deserve to be punished" POV. Ugh. ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
As for Islam, I tend towards CS Lewis's view that it's a more simplistic and harsher version of OT Judaism. Mohammed, it seems to me, was impressed by the moral and spiritual purity of it all but put his own spin on it. *ducks and runs* ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Holy Smoke
Shipmate
# 14866
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
...The Israelites originated as nomadic wanderers and aliens in foreign lands. I see Zionism as a corruption of ancient Judaism, not the truest understanding of it as Mudfrog claims.
If you were living in Russia a hundred years ago, then I think you would have seen Zionism as a practical solution to finding somewhere to live without being subject to regular persecution.
Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
My views, which I thought I was pretty clear about, tbh, do not come from evangelical American Christianity nor any form of Zionism, but were inspired by my weekend in a reform synagogue!! (Hardly a hot bed of Zionism or Christian fundamentalism I think you'd agree!)
I repeat: my basic point is that the Jews - and we are discussing The Story of The Jews - are 'onsessed', better: preoccupied, with the land of Israel. Their Jewishness stems from Moses who gave the covenant which included the land of canaan.
That's all i'm saying really - together with the fast that, agree or disagree with the actions of the Israeli government and its building contractors - that the land is part of what makes them Jewish. Deny them the land and you destroy the hope that sustained them between AD70 and 1948.
Kaplan, I recognised that what I wrote was simplistic and I agree with you and Laurelin.
I do not agree with Hawk or Karl.
Hawk, your post was very dismissive of Judaism and the covenant to the point of anti-semitism.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Again, Muddy, what about the non-Jewish people currently owning the land? What happens to them if you give it to the state of Israel? What of their rights to the land where they live?
Your problem here is you're only apparently interested in one perspective, and an extreme Zionist one at that.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
As I said further up the thread, you can be a good Jew without being a Zionist, and there are plenty of Jews who aren't Zionists, and even more whose Zionism is nuanced in one way or another.
Mudfrog, your weekend in a Reform synagogue (where you despised the worship as I recall) doesn't make you an expert on the subject.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Again, Muddy, what about the non-Jewish people currently owning the land? What happens to them if you give it to the state of Israel? What of their rights to the land where they live?
Your problem here is you're only apparently interested in one perspective, and an extreme Zionist one at that.
I reject your opinion of what I'm saying.
You also imply that 1948 should not have happened either.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
Mudfrog, your weekend in a Reform synagogue (where you despised the worship as I recall) doesn't make you an expert on the subject.
I never said I despised it - I was privileged to be there and found i could worship easily. I believe I commented on the seemingly careless way that the prayers were read.
I never said I was an expert; I am merely suggesting that the land is part and parcel of the faith and cannot be divorced from it.
I reject the Zionist accusation.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I am merely suggesting that the land is part and parcel of the faith and cannot be divorced from it.
I reject the Zionist accusation.
Sorry, but that *is* Zionism. You can reject the label as much as you like, but while you hold Zionist views, people will generally refer to them, and you, as Zionist.
Alternatively, if you don't want to be called a Zionist, you can hold that Judaism, while rooted in the land, does not claim an exclusive divine mandate on the land. Because that would make you not a Zionist.
Simples.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
Jews are not of one mind about Zionism; it's perfectly possible to be a good Jew without supporting the State of Israel.
Agreed - but I have certainly been accused of Anti-Semitism because I have criticised the Israeli Government's security policy.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
Jews are not of one mind about Zionism; it's perfectly possible to be a good Jew without supporting the State of Israel.
Agreed - but I have certainly been accused of Anti-Semitism because I have criticised the Israeli Government's security policy.
Sure. The story of the Jews sadly also includes a lot of mutual sniping and vituperation. Which is 'loshon hara'--evil speech, a very major sin.
[ 06. September 2013, 18:23: Message edited by: Amos ]
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Holy Smoke
Shipmate
# 14866
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I am merely suggesting that the land is part and parcel of the faith and cannot be divorced from it.
I reject the Zionist accusation.
Sorry, but that *is* Zionism. You can reject the label as much as you like, but while you hold Zionist views, people will generally refer to them, and you, as Zionist.
Alternatively, if you don't want to be called a Zionist, you can hold that Judaism, while rooted in the land, does not claim an exclusive divine mandate on the land. Because that would make you not a Zionist.
Simples.
Sorry, but I think Mudfrog's correct - the claim to the land of Israel is part and parcel of the faith. Zionism was about putting that into practice, by emigrating to what was then Palestine, and later by creating the modern state of Israel. One can't practice, or at least convert to Judaism without accepting that claim, but one need not approve of the politics of the last fifty years, or of the current Israeli government, for example.
Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
One can't practice, or at least convert to Judaism without accepting that claim
[citation needed]
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
Sorry, but I think Mudfrog's correct - the claim to the land of Israel is part and parcel of the faith. Zionism was about putting that into practice, by emigrating to what was then Palestine, and later by creating the modern state of Israel. One can't practice, or at least convert to Judaism without accepting that claim, but one need not approve of the politics of the last fifty years, or of the current Israeli government, for example.
And yet some of the most ultra-Orthodox Jewish sects are anti-Zionist. Their reasoning is that the Jewish state should not be re-established until the time of the Messiah (and that therefore the current Israeli state is an abomination created in defiance of G-d's will). Do they count as not really Jewish?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Holy Smoke
Shipmate
# 14866
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
Sorry, but I think Mudfrog's correct - the claim to the land of Israel is part and parcel of the faith. Zionism was about putting that into practice, by emigrating to what was then Palestine, and later by creating the modern state of Israel. One can't practice, or at least convert to Judaism without accepting that claim, but one need not approve of the politics of the last fifty years, or of the current Israeli government, for example.
And yet some of the most ultra-Orthodox Jewish sects are anti-Zionist. Their reasoning is that the Jewish state should not be re-established until the time of the Messiah (and that therefore the current Israeli state is an abomination created in defiance of G-d's will). Do they count as not really Jewish?
I think I've answered that question. One can accept the legitimacy of the claim to the historical land of Israel, without accepting the legitimacy of the current state of Israel, for example.
[ 06. September 2013, 19:40: Message edited by: Holy Smoke ]
Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Holy Smoke
Shipmate
# 14866
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
One can't practice, or at least convert to Judaism without accepting that claim
[citation needed]
I don't have one right now, but it is surely implicit in the faith and in the scriptures and in the history of the Jewish people.
Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
Sorry, but I think Mudfrog's correct - the claim to the land of Israel is part and parcel of the faith. Zionism was about putting that into practice, by emigrating to what was then Palestine, and later by creating the modern state of Israel. One can't practice, or at least convert to Judaism without accepting that claim, but one need not approve of the politics of the last fifty years, or of the current Israeli government, for example.
And yet some of the most ultra-Orthodox Jewish sects are anti-Zionist. Their reasoning is that the Jewish state should not be re-established until the time of the Messiah (and that therefore the current Israeli state is an abomination created in defiance of G-d's will). Do they count as not really Jewish?
I think I've answered that question. One can accept the legitimacy of the claim to the historical land of Israel, without accepting the legitimacy of the current state of Israel, for example.
Except anti-Zionist Jews reject the legitimacy of a present-day claim to the land of Israel. They believe there was a legitimate claim in the past, and there will be one again in the time of the Messiah, but none of that resembles anything which can really be called "Zionism".
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
One can't practice, or at least convert to Judaism without accepting that claim
[citation needed]
I don't have one right now, but it is surely implicit in the faith and in the scriptures and in the history of the Jewish people.
Okay, but on even a cursory inspection of actual Jewry - the diversity of what they believe and how they practice their religion - your assertion doesn't stand up.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Holy Smoke
Shipmate
# 14866
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
One can't practice, or at least convert to Judaism without accepting that claim
[citation needed]
I don't have one right now, but it is surely implicit in the faith and in the scriptures and in the history of the Jewish people.
Okay, but on even a cursory inspection of actual Jewry - the diversity of what they believe and how they practice their religion - your assertion doesn't stand up.
If this thread has demonstrated anything, it is that it is extremely doubtful if one can make any intelligent observations from a 'cursory inspection of actual Jewry'.
Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
