The story of Purim.... why did they kill Haman(boo!)'s sons?

[Sandman]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
There is a more or less clear (at least in theory) division between the religious and the secular (render unto caesar that which is caesars) and religion transcends nationality (savior to the jews and also to the gentiles) These things are at the heart of Christianity.

Neither is really applicable to Jewish civilization. The religious sphere is interwoven with the secular sphere.

The same is explicitly true of Islam. Classical Islamic law covers all areas of life. Seperation of church and state being 'at the heart of Christianity' in theory is also a stretch.

It's also fairly common for Christianity to be co-opted into national churches. The link between nation and church is obviously not as strong as with Judaism, but it's still there.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
No ****ing clue. I can ask when I see him later

I'm going to guess that it's pretty big, though. Lonny teaches grade 3s, Ben teaches grade 5s, and I think they each have like 20-30 kids

Shot in the dark, but I don't suppose your roommates know someone named Maggie Heidema?

[Az]

On of the things I find objectionable about Judaicism is the "once a Jew always a Jew" thing. If I'm a Christian, I can apostatize. If I'm a member of a nation, I can be assimilated into another. But if I'm a Jew, I'm apparently doomed to remain one no matter what I do.

this isn't the jewish concensus pov, this's the nazi view, IIUC. jews would consider you to be non-jewish if you accept a different religion than judaism.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Az

On of the things I find objectionable about Judaicism is the "once a Jew always a Jew" thing. If I'm a Christian, I can apostatize. If I'm a member of a nation, I can be assimilated into another. But if I'm a Jew, I'm apparently doomed to remain one no matter what I do.

this isn't the jewish concensus pov, this's the nazi view, IIUC. jews would consider you to be non-jewish if you accept a different religion than judaism.

I suppose LOTM is a nazi, then.

[Az]

His view is out of the jewish concensus, then, definetly. Jewish nationality allows atheism but not acceptance of a different religion. This is the concensus, and thus it's true ( because there is no other definition for nationality but the self definition, and the concensus amongst said nationality)

[Spiffor]

I don't know about the Jewish consensus in Israel, but it is far from clear in France. Whenever one asks if I am a Jew, I reply that my mother's mother was jewish, while I'm an atheist. Most Jews that I know consider me Jewish, despite the fact that my mother is atheistic as well (and probably more hardline than I am).

Generally speaking, I like to represent myself as a goy when talking to bothersome Jews, and I li,ke to present myself as a Jew when talking to mild antisemites (I avoid hardcore antisemites)

[Az]

As I said, Jews can be atheists. Like me.

[Spiffor]

Ah yes, I should definitely read posts before replying to them

[lord of the mark]

By Jewish law a born Jew is always a Jew, even if they get baptised, etc. IE within the tradition of the civilization. (A convert TO Judaism, who subsequently converts to or returns to Christianity or Islam, is considered as having been insincere in their original conversion)

The folk attitude is different, and, I would say, reflect historical social reality. At least in Europe, for hundreds of years, most Jews lived in ghettos. They were not allowed out of the ghetto at night, and gentiles were not allowed in. Social intereactions between Jews and Gentiles were quite limited. A Jew who converted to Christianity left the ghetto, and pretty much lost all connections with the Jewish community, including their own immediate family. A Jew who declared himself an atheist, however, remained within ghetto walls, since Christian society didnt recognize atheism as a reason for letting someone out - so his interactions would continue to be with Jews - his "fate" would still be with the Jewish people, so to speak - while the Christian convert had not only changed his religion, but cast his lot in with a different people.

While strict ghettoization did not occur in Islam, I think the social dynamic was similar.


I think this accounts for why, in the folk attitude, Jews are willing to accept atheist Jews, socialist Jews, anarchist jews - but when someone brings up Trotsky, or other Bolsheviks, there is a tendency to speak of them as of "jewish birth" The leaders, at any rate, had seperated themselves from the jewish people, and seperated themselves from its fate, in ways that atheists Zionists, Bundists, etc, had not.

Social attitudes are of course evolving.

However despite this difference between Halacha and social attitudes, both take a view of what it is to be a Jew that makes it clear that its neither being a member of a "religion", or of a "nation". As R. Abraham Joshua Heschel once said "Israel is not one species of the genus nation, it is the ONLY species of the genus Israel"

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Sandman


The same is explicitly true of Islam. Classical Islamic law covers all areas of life. Seperation of church and state being 'at the heart of Christianity' in theory is also a stretch.

It's also fairly common for Christianity to be co-opted into national churches. The link between nation and church is obviously not as strong as with Judaism, but it's still there.

I would agree that in terms of religion extending to "Secular" spheres of life, Islam is closer to Judaism than either is to Christianity. However you can be a member of different nations while still being part of the muslim ummah, and to join Islam you need only accept certain beliefs, and not join a national grouping in the same way. So while you DO end up joining a grouping, the ummah, its not role is different than in Judaism. In Judaism you join am israel, and having joined am israel, you become subject to the Torah. In Islam you submit to Allah, and having submitted, you become part of the Ummah.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


Christianity from earliest times included this idea.

Christians are called vhildren of Abraham (in the NT).

JM

Im not talking about a general term for a collective. When you are called to the torah, are married, and in many other ritual and legal contexts, you are called by your full Jewish name, which includes a patronymic. Thus you are, say, Ariel Ben David v Hannah (Ariel son of David and Hannah, David having been your fathers name, and Hanna your mothers) or in some contexts Ariel ben David or Ariel Ben Hannah. A Jew by Choice (the PC word for a convert to Judaism, if you will) who takes the first name Ariel, is called Ariel Ben Avraham v Sarah. Jewish commentary on conversion leads in this direction too - the convert didnt "convert" they discovered the people whom their sould properly belonged to all along. Thus it is essential to give them a pseudogeneology, as this reinforces the concept that all Jews, even converts, are "born" into the Am Israel. Much as mainstream Christianity does the opposite - giving infants a "conversion" ceremony of baptism, even though everyone knows theyve been born into the community. Because conversion, and proselytization are deep in the heart of Christianity.

[Az]

I think this accounts for why, in the folk attitude, Jews are willing to accept atheist Jews, socialist Jews, anarchist jews - but when someone brings up Trotsky, or other Bolsheviks, there is a tendency to speak of them as of "jewish birth" The leaders, at any rate, had seperated themselves from the jewish people, and seperated themselves from its fate, in ways that atheists Zionists, Bundists, etc, had not.

Due to the specific place they've been in time and place, and to emphasize ideology, I think.

However despite this difference between Halacha and social attitudes, both take a view of what it is to be a Jew that makes it clear that its neither being a member of a "religion", or of a "nation". As R. Abraham Joshua Heschel once said "Israel is not one species of the genus nation, it is the ONLY species of the genus Israel"

This might be the prevalent view in America, but not in Israel, me thinks. Besides, we're seeing the emergence of an Israeli nationality, which is derived of Zionism, a geographically specific ideology (however, ironically, the most vocal visionaries and proponents of an Israeli nationality were anti-zionist ). These self-groupings are fragile, though, and thus it's vital that they take the jump into social life and everyday behavior, as they do, now.

[lord of the mark]

and yes, Az, i know about the Brother Daniel case.

[Az]

and yes, Az, i know about the Brother Daniel case.

yep.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Az

However despite this difference between Halacha and social attitudes, both take a view of what it is to be a Jew that makes it clear that its neither being a member of a "religion", or of a "nation". As R. Abraham Joshua Heschel once said "Israel is not one species of the genus nation, it is the ONLY species of the genus Israel"

This might be the prevalent view in America, but not in Israel, me thinks. Besides, we're seeing the emergence of an Israeli nationality, which is derived of Zionism, a geographically specific ideology (however, ironically, the most vocal visionaries and proponents of an Israeli nationality were anti-zionist ). These self-groupings are fragile, though, and thus it's vital that they take the jump into social life and everyday behavior, as they do, now.

My sense is that in Israel there is division about what is meant among different sectors of the Jewish population, and that the same individual may hold different views at different times and for different purposes. Its one thing to say, polemically, that someone who doesnt share "our fate" and lives pleasantly in Great Neck or West LA while "our" children to service in the territories, and "we" are vulnerable to bombs, doesnt deserve to be called a Jew, its another thing to say that new olim werent jews till they arrived, or that ones own grandfather wasnt Jewish because he never made aliyah. Of course theres talk about changing definitions to allow for secular conversion, as a way of dealing with the Russian problem - while thats not "halachacily right" from the Orthodox or Conserv POV, AFAIK all proposals still allow for both birth, and religious conversion, to play a role.


I also wonder if you mean "anti-zionist" or "post-zionist"