Pro-Jesus Jews paid Rick Santorum

[BigSkyBob]

Religious freedom includes the freedom to embrace, abandon or change religion. It also includes the right to share your faith with anyone willing to listen.

The notion that if you are ethnically Askenazi then you should or ought practise Judaism [or be an atheist] is nonsense. Religious freedom includes the freedom of persons of Askenazi descent to embrace any religion, including the belief in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Part of the religious freedom of Christians is the freedom to share their faith in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ to any person whom is willing to listen, including people of Askenazi descent.

Askenazi folk whom have exercised their religious freedom by embracing Jesus Christ don't forfeit their right to organize fellow believers, host conferences or hire speakers. What is being suggested is here is utterly outrageous. The alternative is demanding that Christians shun these people. While some Jews may shun such folks for theological reasons, it makes no theological sense for a Christian to shun another human being for embracing Jesus Christ.

[BigSkyBob]

And really the only real controversy I see in the Messianic Jewish doctrine is that if they accept all the teachings about Jesus they'd have to accept the New Testament which makes it pretty hard to argue as well that all the Old Testament kosher laws and whatnot are still in effect.

The "controversy" is that they have committed "high treason" and try to induce others do the same. From the proper Jewish religious standpoint, they have abandoned Judaism and embraced Christianity and are set on a mission to convert other Jews to Christianity. In general, Jews (at least, religious Jews) do not look well at any outfit that tries to convert Jews, and Messianic Jews' missionary activity is directed specifically at Jews. You know, even many fairly moderate, not necessarily Orthodox, Jews fret a lot about things like intermarriage and assimilation and such. And here is this whole missionary outfit, bent on destroying the community. Add to this the "false advertising" (Christians claiming to practice Judaism to confuse the simpleminded and the uneducated), and you can see, why there is not much love lost.

Then, again, I don't think they matter enough for most people to care. Talking to them, speaking in their meetings isn't going to matter much, methinks. If a presidential candidate were to actively ally himself w/ their missionary activity, it would be another matter. Not because of the Jews-for-Jesus themselves, but because a US President bent on converting the Jews would be viewed as a dangerous and committed enemy.

1) The "proper" Jewish position is that the return of the Messiah ought to be acknowledged. That is incontrovertible. The debate is merely over whether, or not, Jesus Christ was the Messiah.

2) Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and other such sects are as much "the Pariahs" of Christianity as Messianic Jews are of Judaism.  Basically, Seventh Day Adventists accept Jesus as the Messiah, and reinterpret the Old Testament from a Christian perspective. They celebrate the Sabbath, but, interpret Old Testament passages as commanding vegetarianism. Messianic Judaism accepts Jesus as the Messiah, and reinterprets Jewish tradition in that light. Messianic Judaism is certainly more "Jewish" and less "Christian" than the Seventh Day Adventists. That would make Messianic Judaism even more of a "pariah" among Christians than Seventh Day Adventists.   Calling them closet Christians is theological nonsense.

3) Messianic Jews have concluded that Jesus Christ was in fact the foretold Messiah. That is not "high treason." That is a theological disagreement. Labeling attempts to persuade other Jews to accept their theological beliefs can't be characterized as an attempt to "destroy" the community.

4) Some of the Jews whom have married Christians are raising their children as Christians. If this is merely a "fret," how could embracing a mishmash of the two be so much worse?

[BigSkyBob]

I agree that Jews For Jesus are not actual Jews and a somewhat shady group, though ultimately harmless. My real issue is that the type of people that is being speculated this would hurt Santorum of wouldn't respond much better to simple "normal" conversions to Christianity. Someone born in Borough Park who ignored the "Messianic Judaism" nonsense and just became a Presbyterian or Catholic or evangelical or whatever likely would still be ostracized by that community. The idea of "hereditary religion" REALLY offends me, this is kind of a personal issue that hits close to home so I shouldn't go into the details, let me just say it's largely affected by the (admittedly more mild but still there) attitudes in some Catholic communities (not all or even most Catholics fall into this I'll admit, including the ones from my family, but hearing about the attitudes some take like that woman in the hospital who dealt with Nathan's Buddhist relative often quite hits a nerve.) But this isn't the place for that.

And as not even being a Republican it's really none of my business and how it'd affect my vote doesn't matter, sure. And yeah they have the right to think that way, just as people have the right to vote against anyone for being Jewish or vote against Obama for being black. My point is more that people who adhere to this type of thinking are more morally repugnant than Santorum, and that's saying A LOT.

BRTD, your own experience, such as it is, is kind of a ridiculous comparison.  Throughout its history, Judaism and the Jewish people have been pushed to extinction.

1) It is highly ironic that many of those whom bitch and moan about the "extinction" of "Judaism" are themselves folks whom have personally abandoned Judaism for atheism. Seems there are doing their part for the extinction of the religion.

2) I thought the goal atheism included the "extinction" of Judaism. As one of the religions with a minimal number of adherents, presumably, it would be one of the first to die. Is the drive for atheism suppose to exclude Judaism?

3) Rhetoric that equates "assimiliation" with "extinction" is hyperbolic and wrong. Genetically, twenty million people 1/4 Askenazi, or 5 million pure-blood Askenazis constitute the exact same share of the gene pool.

[BigSkyBob]

BRTD, you crack me up bro. Your Great Aunt Peggy and Uncle Bob's being peeved at the venue of a wedding is hardly comparable to the Jewish experience. And I'm also sure it pains you greatly to have to explain the proper use of the word emo, but I think you will live.

Now, you stated: "There's a huge difference between attempting to annihilate one culture and someone from that culture simply abandoning it." However, many in the Jewish community would beg to differ because they would feel that it is one and the same thing.  If enough people simply abandon their culture and religion it is functionally the same thing, just done at one's own hands.

That may very well be their personal preference, but,it simply isn't a valid moral claim on another individual in a society that supports the religious freedom of each individual. As an American I would think your attitude towards such cultural/religions abandonment should be, "While I disagree most vigorously with any individual of Askenazi descent abandoning the Jewish religion, or their Jewish cultural identity, I will defend to the death their right to do it."

Nobody says, "While I oppose treason most vigorously, I will defend to the death your right to commit treason." That is beause treason is unacceptable. Those that use rhetoric like "high treason" are implicitly denying the rights of certain individuals to embrace, change or abandon any religion they choose. That's immoral and wrong.

[BigSkyBob]

I agree that Jews For Jesus are not actual Jews and a somewhat shady group, though ultimately harmless. My real issue is that the type of people that is being speculated this would hurt Santorum of wouldn't respond much better to simple "normal" conversions to Christianity. Someone born in Borough Park who ignored the "Messianic Judaism" nonsense and just became a Presbyterian or Catholic or evangelical or whatever likely would still be ostracized by that community. The idea of "hereditary religion" REALLY offends me, this is kind of a personal issue that hits close to home so I shouldn't go into the details, let me just say it's largely affected by the (admittedly more mild but still there) attitudes in some Catholic communities (not all or even most Catholics fall into this I'll admit, including the ones from my family, but hearing about the attitudes some take like that woman in the hospital who dealt with Nathan's Buddhist relative often quite hits a nerve.) But this isn't the place for that.

And as not even being a Republican it's really none of my business and how it'd affect my vote doesn't matter, sure. And yeah they have the right to think that way, just as people have the right to vote against anyone for being Jewish or vote against Obama for being black. My point is more that people who adhere to this type of thinking are more morally repugnant than Santorum, and that's saying A LOT.

BRTD, your own experience, such as it is, is kind of a ridiculous comparison.  Throughout its history, Judaism and the Jewish people have been pushed to extinction.

1) It is highly ironic that many of those whom bitch and moan about the "extinction" of "Judaism" are themselves folks whom have personally abandoned Judaism for atheism. Seems there are doing their part for the extinction of the religion.

2) I thought the goal atheism included the "extinction" of Judaism. As one of the religions with a minimal number of adherents, presumably, it would be one of the first to die. Is the drive for atheism suppose to exclude Judaism?

3) Rhetoric that equates "assimilation" with "extinction" is hyperbolic and wrong. Genetically, twenty million people 1/4 Askenazi, or 5 million pure-blood Askenazis constitute the exact same share of the gene pool.

1. Such people are sentimental about "Jewish culture" but ignore the religious reality that underpins all "Jewish cultures".

2. Does Judaism have anything to offer the rest of humanity? It's about the most benign of current religious traditions. I suspect that the theology is simpler and thus allows more emphasis on ethics than upon divisive debates.    

3. Consider that the non-Jewish spouse in an interfaith marriage has some chance of converting to Judaism. This is especially likely if both spouses begin with favorable views of Judaism.  Judaism is not as based on ethnicity as it was when Jews were endogamous groups in ghettos and shtetls.

1) So I take it that you are an honest to goodness Jewish theist?

2) Do Christianity, Islam, Buddism, Hinduism, and the other smaller religions "offer" anything to mankind? That is an interesting question. Perhaps they do. But, I have yet to meet an atheist whom thinks it important that folks other than himself practise any of these religions. Certainly, few here seem to think Rick Santorum's Catholism means he has some special wisdom to offer mankind.

Those that believe that "religion is the opiate of the masses" would, presumably, answer that Judaism is the opiate of the Jewish masses.

3) Claiming Jewishness is not tied to race is an opinion that would put you well outside the mainstream of "Jewish" thinking.

[BigSkyBob]

BRTD, you crack me up bro. Your Great Aunt Peggy and Uncle Bob's being peeved at the venue of a wedding is hardly comparable to the Jewish experience. And I'm also sure it pains you greatly to have to explain the proper use of the word emo, but I think you will live.

Now, you stated: "There's a huge difference between attempting to annihilate one culture and someone from that culture simply abandoning it." However, many in the Jewish community would beg to differ because they would feel that it is one and the same thing.  If enough people simply abandon their culture and religion it is functionally the same thing, just done at one's own hands.

That may very well be their personal preference, but,it simply isn't a valid moral claim on another individual in a society that supports the religious freedom of each individual. As an American I would think your attitude towards such cultural/religions abandonment should be, "While I disagree most vigorously with any individual of Askenazi descent abandoning the Jewish religion, or their Jewish cultural identity, I will defend to the death their right to do it."

Nobody says, "While I oppose treason most vigorously, I will defend to the death your right to commit treason." That is because treason is unacceptable. Those that use rhetoric like "high treason" are implicitly denying the rights of certain individuals to embrace, change or abandon any religion they choose. That's immoral and wrong.

 I am not Jewish and if you read carefully I did not advocate or advance either position. However, there is a reasoning and history behind the pov as there are with various other religious and cultural groups.  Were the Cherokee that lived like the White man sell outs, who exactly is an Uncle Tom or an Oreo, who is a collaborator-  communities typically have a hard enough time sorting these things out themselves. Here each person can follow their own conscience or values- some may not like their choices.

Let me get this straight, as an American you would defend to the death the rights of persons of Askenazi descent to change religion or cultural affiliations?

[BigSkyBob]

Let me get this straight, as an American you would defend to the death the rights of persons of Askenazi descent to change religion or cultural affiliations?

Just to make something clear. I am not an American, but I would defend the right of any individual, including any Jew, to convert to or to practice any religion he or she might want to (or to no religion), the same as I would defend any of my own rights (whether I would defend anything whatsoever "to the death" is an open question: I never faced such a choice, and sincerely hope never to face it, so I wouldn't know how I'd behave - probably run for my dear life, I guess). Without this right, the religious freedom looses its meaning: and I do strongly believe in religious freedom.

These were your words in this thread:

"The "controversy" is that they have committed "high treason" and try to induce others do the same."

That is very strange rhetoric to describe behavior that you consider perfectly within ones rights.

[BigSkyBob]

These were your words in this thread:

"The "controversy" is that they have committed "high treason" and try to induce others do the same."

That is very strange rhetoric to describe behavior that you consider perfectly within ones rights.

And I stand by these words. They committed "high treason" from the standpoint of a community, to which I myself am almost equally traitorous. And, as you know, I, generally, consider "high treason" to be a rather laudalbe act )

But in this thread we are not discussing MY reaction: I am not even a US citizen, so I am perfectly irrelevant here. We are trying to figure out how a certain voting block would behave. That voting block, most definitely, would not be as amused as I am at present )

So, when you said, "The "controversy" is that they have committed "high treason" and try to induce others do the same," what you really meant is that didn't really commit "high treason" by your personal standard?

[BigSkyBob]

I can only speak for myself, but my hostility towards the "Jews" for Jesus groups is greatly exacerbated by the fact that they pretend to still be Jews and do so as a tactic to try to trick Jews into converting. ... However, "Jews" for Jesus are not simply Jews who converted.  They pretend to be Jews for the specific purpose of creating confusion within the Jewish community and then manipulating that confusion to try to lure in actual Jews and trick the uninformed into converting.  To argue that that is a run-of-the-mill conversion or just another type of Judaism is absurd at best and feigned ignorance at worst.  "Jews" for Jesus are up there with the Mormons who were trying to "convert" the bodies of Holocaust victims in terms of offensiveness to the Jewish community.

First of all, Messianic Judaism is in key respects both a form of Judaism and a form of Christianity. To deny that it is Judaic in key respects is theological ignorance. Like Sikhism, it is a fusion of two religions. Perhaps, it is best described as a new religion. Second, like any other religion in America, it has the right to share its faith with any other American willing to listen, including Ashenazis. It is totally inappropriate that you used the language of criminality, specifically fraud, to characterize their attempts to gain converts. Messianic Judaism is trying to gain converts by convincing persons of Askenazi descent of the correctness of their belief system, just as you see pairs of young men with white shirts, and black ties riding bicycles.

Claiming that the adherents they have gained is the result of "confusion" "trickery" or fraud is a denial position. Persons of Askenazi descent join Messianic Judaism because they became convinced of the correctness of their belief system. Such denial becomes a bit bizarre when on the walls of their temple they boldly write their belief in Yeshua, yet are accused on not being foreright. Are we now to have a religion police that telling religions that they cannot worship a man named Yeshua as "Yeshua" just because other religions use the Western variation of the name "Jesus?"

Finally, both modern Judaism, and Christianity claim to be the theological heirs of the religion of Moses. This simply isn't an area where any binding intellectual trademarks exist. Messianic Judaism makes the same claim.  Noone here has any obligation to take a position in this debate.