Sunday, April 25, 2004
Piecing together historical reasons for the divide between Jewish and Gentile Christianity
I don't think that supercessionism works theologically (not without ignoring many clear texts about how Israel, physical, ethnic and geographical, are God's chosen people and land which he will not abandon, but rather through whom he will manifest himself on earth and to all the other nations). I see it as a defense
invented in light of a social and historical reality of two largely seperate groups who had no use for each other, who often argued about the theology surrounding this man Jesus. The Jesus followers were increasinlgy associated and associating with a huge body of Gentiles who found Paul's teaching about this Jewish Rabbi to have brought them together with the Jewish believers in Jesus. Who knows how much they differed from the local practices of the Jews where they lived (the sources on this are fairly scant, but there may be a few things in Justin Martyr, Jerome and Epiphanius). The Jewish believers may have kept the then developping halacha (rabbinic decisions regarding the application of the Written Torah - 5 books of Moses - to the specific situations of everyday life). The Jewish church must have found itself torn between the Jewish identity and community and the ever growing Gentile followers of Jesus. When they were condemned by Gamliel and the Tannaitic Rabbis (those mentionned in the Mishna, which was redacted c.200), and the consequent social excommunication ("cut off") they may have identified more closely with the large body of non-Jewish believers.
So the divide is making more historical sense. Yet a developping negative view of Jews may well have affected the general movement away from the then developping Judaism of the Rabbis which even after the destructions of 70 and 135, still held on to a form of national and genetic naitonalism, and a hope to rebuild the temple and restart the Temple cult. All of this would have made them repugnant in the eyes of the general society. After the two revolts, the Jews were a
humiliated people, and very unliked if not hated in places. The two revolts, occured in Palestine, but there were actually three, and the middle revolt may have been more important in creating enmity for Jews accross the Empire. The revolts are: the Great Revolt (66-73), the uprisings in Cyrene, Cyprus, Libya and
Egypt (very bloody and destructive) under Hadrian 115-117, and the final defeat, Bar Kosiba 131-135. In Gager's account, these wars were the reasons for the first antisemitism. He also looks back to the Machabean revolt, especially for the roots of open hostility between Greeks and Jews. Yet there is no
literature from the period making clear the Greek view of Jews. In Alexandria there are very bloody riots in 38-41 CE, which seem to have been caused by Jews trying to attain Greek citizenship so as to avoid the tax levied by the Romans on all non (Roman?) citizens. The Romans allowed a special exemption of the
Greek citizens of Alexandria. The Jews of the city tried to obtain citizenship, which was heavily resented by the Greeks. Gager describes the riots as a way of Greeks striking indirectly at Rome. The Jews were a protected people under Roman law. The visit of Agrippas to Alexandria, on his way to inherit a kingdom in Palestine, greatly increased anit-Jewish feeling. Before the wars made them a problem for the Romans, and before the bids for citizenship caused them to be resented by the Greeks, the Jews and their religions seem to enjoy a lofty respect in the fragmented literature thatwe have dating as far back as 300 BC. The most common view of Jews, is that they are "a nation of philosophers". Many sources list them as one of the sources of Greek philosophy, along with Egypt, India, Chaldea.
There may be a more direct cause for the evidently conscious development of the early church away from and against Jewish customs. Not only would the empire wide view of Jews have distanced the developing church from the Jews, but also the well established pre-Christian antisemitism of Alexandria and Antioch would have flowed into Christianity. These became centers of Christianity, and it is likely that their view of Jews endured and affected their theology. If history is any judge, the whole man is not made perfect at the moment of trusting Jesus.
Before the Destruction of Jerusalem, the Jewish Christians went East of the Jordan to Pella, and settled south-east of the Sea of Galilee, which was full of Greek speaking peoples (archaeological inscriptions attesting). Only one source, Eusebius, indicates it, but it is so potentially helpful in reconstructing the devlopment of Christianity away from Judaism that it must be quoted:
"The people of the church of Jerusalem were commanded by an oracle given by revelation before the war to those in the city who were worthy of it to depart and dwell in one of the cites of Perea wihch they called Pella. To it those who believed on Christ migrated from Jerusalem, that when holy men had altogether deserted the royal capital of the Jews and the whole land of Judaea, the judgement of God might at last overtake them for all their crimes against the Christ and his Apostles, and all that generation of the wicked be utterly blotted out from among men." (Historia Ecclesiastica III 5,3 quoted in The Flight of the Jerusalem Church to Pella of the Decapolis by Ray A. Pritz)
This week I am going to visit this location and see what there is to see. along with the mountains of Edom and Moab, the Gilead, and Mt. Nebo, it is the major attraction for the planned voyage on Thursday and Friday.
I wanted to draw more from that passage than can be learned. I first supposed that the oracle referred to an oracle not unlike Agibus prophesy of the famine throughout the Empire (Acts ). Until evidence of such a prophecy shows up in another author, it is probably best to assume that the prophecy is that of Jesus made in the Olivet Discourse (Matt 25, especially verses 15-25. This passage has parallels in Mark 13 and Luke 21). The Church may just be obeying his command to leave Jerusalem before its coming destruction. From the map, it appears the Pella is indeed on a mountain side, on the slope of the mountains which form the Jordan river valley. Yet why did they go so far away from Jerusalem? Pella is south of Jabesh-gilead (era of Joshua and the Judges), within the territory that would have been called Gilead in the territory of Mannaseh. Jesus' prophecy connects the destruction of Jerusalem with his immanent coming. Why would they have gone here to await his coming?
Add to all this, that according to Eusebius (whose account some view as too biased
to be of historical value on the Revolt) when the christians refused to join
the Bar Kosiba Revolt, they were killed by B.K. This would fit with his harsh
character, he is known to have dealt harshly with those desisting or not
contributing or failing to perform their duty. Even an isolated killing can divide whole social groups. If Bar Kosiba's persecution and killing of the Jews was a systematic as it Eusebius paints it, this single persecution would go a long way in explaining the divide.
The text that Eusebius quotes from Justin Martyr reads "For in the present Jewish war it was only Christians whom Bar Chocheba, the leader of the rebellion of the Jews commanded to be punished severely, if they did not deny Jesus as the Messiah and blaspheme him."
In the Latin version he writes "Cochebas, duke of the Jewish sect, killed the Christians with all kinds of persecutions, (when) they refused to help im against hte Roman troops."
Eusebius ascribes two motivations to Bar Kosiba for killing Christians. First he says that they were killed if they would not blaspheme and recant Jesus as Messiah. He also says that they were killed because they would not fight with Bar Kosiba. It is possible that because of the Messianic beliefs that filled the air regarding Bar Kosiba, the Christians were unwilling to fight for him. If they won, then they would have brought about the reign of another Messiah. And Jesus had warned them against others who would come in his name saying, I am he... My professor, Duker-Fishman, just said that the possible messianic beliefs around B.K. (Akiba, the leading sage of his age acknowledged that B.K.
was the Messiah) ensured that the Christians didn't join.
That revolt probably goes a long way in dividing Jewish Christians from Jews
who followed the Rabbi's view of him. The Christians leave Palestine in order
to avoid the war, thereby betraying ties to the land, and their
Jewish "brothers" (a term B.K. used often in his letters). Quite possibly
(i.e. as reliable as Eusebius is. He quotes Justin Martyr once.), B.K. also
killed them, and not for merely not cooperating, but because of belief in
Jesus. However, one must be careful not to overemphasize the fact that Christians didn't help in Bar Kosiba's revolt. Nothing is heard from the Jewish Diaspora as far as assisting the Judaean
Rebels. It seems as if many Jews turned a blind eye to the revolt. On the other hand the double desertion of Christians both in the Great Revolt and in Bar Kosiba's would bring in a special aspect
of abandonment beyond that of the Jews already in the Diaspora.
Into this developping scheme, I need to fit the following:
- 112 CE: Sabbath observance ended by Bishop of Rome
- period of Yavne under Gamliel (c.80-118): the 19 'Blessings', against
the "Minim" and slanderers of the Shemoneh Esreh, an integral part of the
daily and festal liturgies, is added by R. Gamliel II. Although not named as
such (in Tanaitic lit they are called "notsrim", translated Nazarenes), this
euphemistic 'blessing' is a curse upon the Christians who are associated with
slanders and those who "throw off the yoke of Torah".
What did Jewish Christians do during the Hadrianic persecutions (117) which
attacked all the positive commandments of Judaism (festivals, public prayer
and Torah reading, wearing of tzit-tzit, tefillin, ordination of rabbis ...)?
Did they leave them? Did some die for them as did the Ten Martyrs (Jewish)?
With regard to persecution, it seems that it would have been advantageous for
Christians to have been regarded as merely another sect of the Jews. Judaism was a tolerated
religion. Did the Rabbis and Nasi refuse to define them as Jews to the Roman
leaders? or did the christians define themsevles as not Jewish? Of course, both sides were active in the process. What crucial points in the process can be identified?
How seperate were were the communities? Did they have social intercourse?
Pella is in Greek speaking territory. What contact would Jewish believers have
had with other Jews (those following the Rabbis and any surviving remnants of the other sects). It would seem that this emigration could have cut them off from the rest of the Jews following the rest of the Rabbis.
How long did they share the same synagogues? even with Paul, you have a group
meeting by the river on the Lord's Day. Yet as Paul used the Sabbath for
reasoning from the scriptures in the Synagogue, and the gospels mention that
it was Jesus' custom ("nomos" translates as both custom and law) to enter the
synogogue on Sabbath, it seems they kept the Sabbath, and kept it with fellow Jews. They also
commemorated the Lord's Day (Revelation 1:1, Acts)
Why would a Jew be forbidden from being healed by the several healers
(surnamed Yaakov) who healed in Jesus' name? (Talmud ___) Does this prohibition take its historical precedent from as far back as the problems with Jesus' healing, and with Peter and John's
healing?
I don't think that supercessionism works theologically (not without ignoring many clear texts about how Israel, physical, ethnic and geographical, are God's chosen people and land which he will not abandon, but rather through whom he will manifest himself on earth and to all the other nations). I see it as a defense
invented in light of a social and historical reality of two largely seperate groups who had no use for each other, who often argued about the theology surrounding this man Jesus. The Jesus followers were increasinlgy associated and associating with a huge body of Gentiles who found Paul's teaching about this Jewish Rabbi to have brought them together with the Jewish believers in Jesus. Who knows how much they differed from the local practices of the Jews where they lived (the sources on this are fairly scant, but there may be a few things in Justin Martyr, Jerome and Epiphanius). The Jewish believers may have kept the then developping halacha (rabbinic decisions regarding the application of the Written Torah - 5 books of Moses - to the specific situations of everyday life). The Jewish church must have found itself torn between the Jewish identity and community and the ever growing Gentile followers of Jesus. When they were condemned by Gamliel and the Tannaitic Rabbis (those mentionned in the Mishna, which was redacted c.200), and the consequent social excommunication ("cut off") they may have identified more closely with the large body of non-Jewish believers.
So the divide is making more historical sense. Yet a developping negative view of Jews may well have affected the general movement away from the then developping Judaism of the Rabbis which even after the destructions of 70 and 135, still held on to a form of national and genetic naitonalism, and a hope to rebuild the temple and restart the Temple cult. All of this would have made them repugnant in the eyes of the general society. After the two revolts, the Jews were a
humiliated people, and very unliked if not hated in places. The two revolts, occured in Palestine, but there were actually three, and the middle revolt may have been more important in creating enmity for Jews accross the Empire. The revolts are: the Great Revolt (66-73), the uprisings in Cyrene, Cyprus, Libya and
Egypt (very bloody and destructive) under Hadrian 115-117, and the final defeat, Bar Kosiba 131-135. In Gager's account, these wars were the reasons for the first antisemitism. He also looks back to the Machabean revolt, especially for the roots of open hostility between Greeks and Jews. Yet there is no
literature from the period making clear the Greek view of Jews. In Alexandria there are very bloody riots in 38-41 CE, which seem to have been caused by Jews trying to attain Greek citizenship so as to avoid the tax levied by the Romans on all non (Roman?) citizens. The Romans allowed a special exemption of the
Greek citizens of Alexandria. The Jews of the city tried to obtain citizenship, which was heavily resented by the Greeks. Gager describes the riots as a way of Greeks striking indirectly at Rome. The Jews were a protected people under Roman law. The visit of Agrippas to Alexandria, on his way to inherit a kingdom in Palestine, greatly increased anit-Jewish feeling. Before the wars made them a problem for the Romans, and before the bids for citizenship caused them to be resented by the Greeks, the Jews and their religions seem to enjoy a lofty respect in the fragmented literature thatwe have dating as far back as 300 BC. The most common view of Jews, is that they are "a nation of philosophers". Many sources list them as one of the sources of Greek philosophy, along with Egypt, India, Chaldea.
There may be a more direct cause for the evidently conscious development of the early church away from and against Jewish customs. Not only would the empire wide view of Jews have distanced the developing church from the Jews, but also the well established pre-Christian antisemitism of Alexandria and Antioch would have flowed into Christianity. These became centers of Christianity, and it is likely that their view of Jews endured and affected their theology. If history is any judge, the whole man is not made perfect at the moment of trusting Jesus.
Before the Destruction of Jerusalem, the Jewish Christians went East of the Jordan to Pella, and settled south-east of the Sea of Galilee, which was full of Greek speaking peoples (archaeological inscriptions attesting). Only one source, Eusebius, indicates it, but it is so potentially helpful in reconstructing the devlopment of Christianity away from Judaism that it must be quoted:
"The people of the church of Jerusalem were commanded by an oracle given by revelation before the war to those in the city who were worthy of it to depart and dwell in one of the cites of Perea wihch they called Pella. To it those who believed on Christ migrated from Jerusalem, that when holy men had altogether deserted the royal capital of the Jews and the whole land of Judaea, the judgement of God might at last overtake them for all their crimes against the Christ and his Apostles, and all that generation of the wicked be utterly blotted out from among men." (Historia Ecclesiastica III 5,3 quoted in The Flight of the Jerusalem Church to Pella of the Decapolis by Ray A. Pritz)
This week I am going to visit this location and see what there is to see. along with the mountains of Edom and Moab, the Gilead, and Mt. Nebo, it is the major attraction for the planned voyage on Thursday and Friday.
I wanted to draw more from that passage than can be learned. I first supposed that the oracle referred to an oracle not unlike Agibus prophesy of the famine throughout the Empire (Acts ). Until evidence of such a prophecy shows up in another author, it is probably best to assume that the prophecy is that of Jesus made in the Olivet Discourse (Matt 25, especially verses 15-25. This passage has parallels in Mark 13 and Luke 21). The Church may just be obeying his command to leave Jerusalem before its coming destruction. From the map, it appears the Pella is indeed on a mountain side, on the slope of the mountains which form the Jordan river valley. Yet why did they go so far away from Jerusalem? Pella is south of Jabesh-gilead (era of Joshua and the Judges), within the territory that would have been called Gilead in the territory of Mannaseh. Jesus' prophecy connects the destruction of Jerusalem with his immanent coming. Why would they have gone here to await his coming?
Add to all this, that according to Eusebius (whose account some view as too biased
to be of historical value on the Revolt) when the christians refused to join
the Bar Kosiba Revolt, they were killed by B.K. This would fit with his harsh
character, he is known to have dealt harshly with those desisting or not
contributing or failing to perform their duty. Even an isolated killing can divide whole social groups. If Bar Kosiba's persecution and killing of the Jews was a systematic as it Eusebius paints it, this single persecution would go a long way in explaining the divide.
The text that Eusebius quotes from Justin Martyr reads "For in the present Jewish war it was only Christians whom Bar Chocheba, the leader of the rebellion of the Jews commanded to be punished severely, if they did not deny Jesus as the Messiah and blaspheme him."
In the Latin version he writes "Cochebas, duke of the Jewish sect, killed the Christians with all kinds of persecutions, (when) they refused to help im against hte Roman troops."
Eusebius ascribes two motivations to Bar Kosiba for killing Christians. First he says that they were killed if they would not blaspheme and recant Jesus as Messiah. He also says that they were killed because they would not fight with Bar Kosiba. It is possible that because of the Messianic beliefs that filled the air regarding Bar Kosiba, the Christians were unwilling to fight for him. If they won, then they would have brought about the reign of another Messiah. And Jesus had warned them against others who would come in his name saying, I am he... My professor, Duker-Fishman, just said that the possible messianic beliefs around B.K. (Akiba, the leading sage of his age acknowledged that B.K.
was the Messiah) ensured that the Christians didn't join.
That revolt probably goes a long way in dividing Jewish Christians from Jews
who followed the Rabbi's view of him. The Christians leave Palestine in order
to avoid the war, thereby betraying ties to the land, and their
Jewish "brothers" (a term B.K. used often in his letters). Quite possibly
(i.e. as reliable as Eusebius is. He quotes Justin Martyr once.), B.K. also
killed them, and not for merely not cooperating, but because of belief in
Jesus. However, one must be careful not to overemphasize the fact that Christians didn't help in Bar Kosiba's revolt. Nothing is heard from the Jewish Diaspora as far as assisting the Judaean
Rebels. It seems as if many Jews turned a blind eye to the revolt. On the other hand the double desertion of Christians both in the Great Revolt and in Bar Kosiba's would bring in a special aspect
of abandonment beyond that of the Jews already in the Diaspora.
Into this developping scheme, I need to fit the following:
- 112 CE: Sabbath observance ended by Bishop of Rome
- period of Yavne under Gamliel (c.80-118): the 19 'Blessings', against
the "Minim" and slanderers of the Shemoneh Esreh, an integral part of the
daily and festal liturgies, is added by R. Gamliel II. Although not named as
such (in Tanaitic lit they are called "notsrim", translated Nazarenes), this
euphemistic 'blessing' is a curse upon the Christians who are associated with
slanders and those who "throw off the yoke of Torah".
What did Jewish Christians do during the Hadrianic persecutions (117) which
attacked all the positive commandments of Judaism (festivals, public prayer
and Torah reading, wearing of tzit-tzit, tefillin, ordination of rabbis ...)?
Did they leave them? Did some die for them as did the Ten Martyrs (Jewish)?
With regard to persecution, it seems that it would have been advantageous for
Christians to have been regarded as merely another sect of the Jews. Judaism was a tolerated
religion. Did the Rabbis and Nasi refuse to define them as Jews to the Roman
leaders? or did the christians define themsevles as not Jewish? Of course, both sides were active in the process. What crucial points in the process can be identified?
How seperate were were the communities? Did they have social intercourse?
Pella is in Greek speaking territory. What contact would Jewish believers have
had with other Jews (those following the Rabbis and any surviving remnants of the other sects). It would seem that this emigration could have cut them off from the rest of the Jews following the rest of the Rabbis.
How long did they share the same synagogues? even with Paul, you have a group
meeting by the river on the Lord's Day. Yet as Paul used the Sabbath for
reasoning from the scriptures in the Synagogue, and the gospels mention that
it was Jesus' custom ("nomos" translates as both custom and law) to enter the
synogogue on Sabbath, it seems they kept the Sabbath, and kept it with fellow Jews. They also
commemorated the Lord's Day (Revelation 1:1, Acts)
Why would a Jew be forbidden from being healed by the several healers
(surnamed Yaakov) who healed in Jesus' name? (Talmud ___) Does this prohibition take its historical precedent from as far back as the problems with Jesus' healing, and with Peter and John's
healing?
Friday, April 23, 2004
check out the adds on my blog! a Hebrew calendar website? I've been trying to get a good one for a while. What day of the Omer do you think it is? I think its the thirteenth. What do you think will be next? A link to the Qumran library? I hope so, I need one - the library is closed and I had wanted to get the translation of their library out and read some of their documents. I've now been on the computer too long to make hiking feasible before sunset and Sabbath arrive. but Qumran should still happen. I only wish I could read some of their scrolls while there. I just found a site that has the Babylonian Talmud, fully footnoted I printed off the sections on the Messiah. My library won't let me check it out - none of the Talmud leaves either library, nor Mishneh Torah, or any of the really important stuff. strangely, Tanaach (the Bible) does. must be because of what Protestants have done with it - made it everyman's book. Even Jews can't go on in "splendid isolation". we have changed the way and place they read their texts too.
Ah the wonders of the internet - I feel like I've stolen something. they wouldn't let me take it out, but I got it anyway. now I'll be carrying it around in my backpack and who knows where that will go. But I guess if its not in Hebrew, the text itself is a step removed from the holiness with which it is usually treated. I wonder who allowed them to put it on the net.
however, if anyone wants to save me a huge printing bill, and would like to make me a nice gift for my birthday (July 1) I would love of various Jewish books. I don't need the Talmud yet. I can study that at Shul or in a library.
The obvious starter is a copy of the Scriptures in Hebrew. After just starting these Jewish studies, it is obvious that If I am to be taken even remotely seriously in the Jewish world, then I must have a thoroughgoing knowledge of the Scriptures in Hebrew. The Sages often make conclusions from the exact letters, or word plays which are evident only in the Hebrew. And translation is always a narrowing of meaning, a shift in the ambiguity inherent in all language. The leap made from one language to another (with the Septuagint) is like trying to take the gospel to another coutnry and culture, it is a whole knew contextualization within the conceptual and syntactical structures of a strange lanugage. Language is the greatest cultural edifice, and if it is at all important to understand the culture of the text, I must become thoroughly familiar with Hebrew. It is one of the great indications of how far Christianity left its Jewish roots behind, that it used the Septuagint as its holy text. Christianity has missed a lot of wealth not to mention made bad arguments, and misunderstood many things because of its dissasociation from the Jewish communities and the Hebrew Bible. I'm not content to follow in that path of ignorance. The leap made from one language to another (with the Septuagint) is like trying to take the gospel to another coutnry and culture, it is a whole knew contextualization within the conceptual and syntactical structures of a strange lanugage. As such, a translation is legitimate, and worthy, but still its not the original context of the message, the revelatoin. Language is the greatest cultural edifice, and if it is at all important to understand the culture of the text, I must become thoroughly familiar with Hebrew. Every bit of Hebrew I have been able to understand, either in the Bible or in the Siddur (prayer book) has been a delight. I love it. I am thrilled by being able to read these ancient texts in their ancient language. I'm divided on if I should get the Artscroll (Stone Edition), or the Jerusalem Bible, or the Biblia Hebraica, Stuttgartsen. The last mentionned is the scholarly, critical edition with no English translation. Since my Hebrew will not be good enough to read just the Hebrew for the next few years, I'll need one of the first two which have an english translation, one of the first two mentionned. I've talked to only a handful of people regarding recomendations on which translation, soon I'll post which I'd like.
- I thought I would need a siddur too, but it seems that one has been dropped into my lap.
- I would also love a copy of Menachem Stern's "Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism." 3 volumes.
its a book that we are using in the "Godfearers and Judaizers" research seminar I'm a part of. I can see myself returning to it for years in my studies. I was thrilled to be using it the other night. I could read the English and then identify the names of places and people, or find key verbs in the Greek. I think I might actually learn greek this way. as opposed to reading textst I don't care about.
- I've been studying through a copy of "The Book of Redemption" by Ramban (aka Nachmanides) and would love to own it. Its a short little booklet, but not easy to find. maybe Jewish publishing houses would have it. its edited by Rabbi Dr. Charles B. Chavel.
- I would also love a copy of Eusebius's "Historia Ecclesia." Penguin edition is fine. this could cost just a few bucks at a used bookstore.
... from adds to birthday wish list ...
Ah the wonders of the internet - I feel like I've stolen something. they wouldn't let me take it out, but I got it anyway. now I'll be carrying it around in my backpack and who knows where that will go. But I guess if its not in Hebrew, the text itself is a step removed from the holiness with which it is usually treated. I wonder who allowed them to put it on the net.
however, if anyone wants to save me a huge printing bill, and would like to make me a nice gift for my birthday (July 1) I would love of various Jewish books. I don't need the Talmud yet. I can study that at Shul or in a library.
The obvious starter is a copy of the Scriptures in Hebrew. After just starting these Jewish studies, it is obvious that If I am to be taken even remotely seriously in the Jewish world, then I must have a thoroughgoing knowledge of the Scriptures in Hebrew. The Sages often make conclusions from the exact letters, or word plays which are evident only in the Hebrew. And translation is always a narrowing of meaning, a shift in the ambiguity inherent in all language. The leap made from one language to another (with the Septuagint) is like trying to take the gospel to another coutnry and culture, it is a whole knew contextualization within the conceptual and syntactical structures of a strange lanugage. Language is the greatest cultural edifice, and if it is at all important to understand the culture of the text, I must become thoroughly familiar with Hebrew. It is one of the great indications of how far Christianity left its Jewish roots behind, that it used the Septuagint as its holy text. Christianity has missed a lot of wealth not to mention made bad arguments, and misunderstood many things because of its dissasociation from the Jewish communities and the Hebrew Bible. I'm not content to follow in that path of ignorance. The leap made from one language to another (with the Septuagint) is like trying to take the gospel to another coutnry and culture, it is a whole knew contextualization within the conceptual and syntactical structures of a strange lanugage. As such, a translation is legitimate, and worthy, but still its not the original context of the message, the revelatoin. Language is the greatest cultural edifice, and if it is at all important to understand the culture of the text, I must become thoroughly familiar with Hebrew. Every bit of Hebrew I have been able to understand, either in the Bible or in the Siddur (prayer book) has been a delight. I love it. I am thrilled by being able to read these ancient texts in their ancient language. I'm divided on if I should get the Artscroll (Stone Edition), or the Jerusalem Bible, or the Biblia Hebraica, Stuttgartsen. The last mentionned is the scholarly, critical edition with no English translation. Since my Hebrew will not be good enough to read just the Hebrew for the next few years, I'll need one of the first two which have an english translation, one of the first two mentionned. I've talked to only a handful of people regarding recomendations on which translation, soon I'll post which I'd like.
- I thought I would need a siddur too, but it seems that one has been dropped into my lap.
- I would also love a copy of Menachem Stern's "Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism." 3 volumes.
its a book that we are using in the "Godfearers and Judaizers" research seminar I'm a part of. I can see myself returning to it for years in my studies. I was thrilled to be using it the other night. I could read the English and then identify the names of places and people, or find key verbs in the Greek. I think I might actually learn greek this way. as opposed to reading textst I don't care about.
- I've been studying through a copy of "The Book of Redemption" by Ramban (aka Nachmanides) and would love to own it. Its a short little booklet, but not easy to find. maybe Jewish publishing houses would have it. its edited by Rabbi Dr. Charles B. Chavel.
- I would also love a copy of Eusebius's "Historia Ecclesia." Penguin edition is fine. this could cost just a few bucks at a used bookstore.
... from adds to birthday wish list ...
"Is the mistake, if one exists, genuine or sarcastic?"
(pulled from a list of questions raised in my class on the Godfearers. What did you read in it? a philosophical question is th funniest, a historical question about texts is the dullest? so why do I want to do history?)
(pulled from a list of questions raised in my class on the Godfearers. What did you read in it? a philosophical question is th funniest, a historical question about texts is the dullest? so why do I want to do history?)
I have reservered a ticket back to the States. I'm on the
waiting list for flying June 7th, arriving at 21:20 in Toronto,
and approved for a flight that leaves the 8th and arrives at 17:50. I wondered at the amazingly short flights, and then remembered that I'm flying East, which means that I'm getting some miles above the earth, letting it whirl by and coming down in another time zone. That's what it will feal like even if it
isn't the case. I will be seeing friends from Augustine while there for a day or few, then coming down to see the family, before finding a place of work for the summer (probably Phoenix).
Its a Friday morning. Fridays are like Saturday's back home. its the day off before the holy day. I have loved being able to keep Sabbath on the Sabbath here. I will definitely miss it back in the States. I'll keep keeping it, but it just won't be as easy.
I hope to head off to Qumran now. I read Josephus' account (Jewish Wars,
Book II, section 9?) of the Essene's customs early this morning - I'v got a very strange sleeping routine. like normal, its not really a routine. If possible, I'll follow that with a hike in Wadi Qelt, a Wadi near Jericho, - supposed to be beautiful (and the Lonely Planet tour guide I have is between very critical, and excessively negative on most everything here. though it does stand in awe of some of the natural features of this region).
I have a Sabbath meal planned with Rebecca and Naomi (two Orthodox girls who have become my closest friends during my stay here), and hope to surround that with worship in an as yet undetermined Shul (the Yiddish word for synagogue), and dinner wth an as yet undertermined host, hopefully Rabbi Mauklus, who apparently invites a ton of people over every shabbat evening, and apparently welcomes Christians and Messianic Jews and fringe people, those whom most Rabbis wouldn't knowingly invite. I hope to worship at Narkiss Street Church in the morning - I haven't been able to make it since the time I wrote about it on this blog - too long - they are very cool people. Rebecca and Naomi are within walking distance. Actually, I walk everywhere on Sabbath anyway because the buses don't run and I'd have to pay the sherut people to ride. I love the Sabbath of this land. During Pesach, the first and the 7th days were special sabbaths, following the law as it is given in Exodus 14, and those were beautiful as well. On the morning of the second sabbath, I walked up from my dorms, and just before I stepped up from behind the wall on to the main road, I though, or rather my soul was stirred to the reflection of how much I love the Sabbaths in this country. Though I don't agree that vehicles should necessarily not run (the Orthodox view the ignition of the engine, and every time you accelerate to break the prohibition of not lighting a fire on the Sabbath), I do love the quiet it provides. I could hear the birds singing, and just feel the deep stillness of the city at 9 in the morning. beauty. As I stepped over the 3 foot wall, the silence was shattered by a car wizzing by - someone who doesn't keep the Sabbath according to the Orthodox, and I wished that everyone did. Yet when you walk through some of the religious neighborhoods, and I do on the way to Narkiss Street, they are filled with quiet - amazing. People walk on the streets, and you can hear the yelling of kids playing from way down the street. Bearded, and earlocked men walk quickly, either to or from the Shul, huge prayer books or Talmuds in hand. They can take these book out because it is within the eruv - i.e. within a private place, a home. And though I can't speak the language, though I am dressed differently, as I walk through their public home, I am in a home of mine, the home of those who keep the Sabbath.
Monday and Tuesday (2nd and 3rd days of the week), are Memorial and
Independence days, respectively, and hence days off of school. I have 3 classes on Wednesday, but then Thursday and Friday off. I plan to go up to the Jezreel Valley area, and see, Tel Megiddo, Tel Jezreel, and Beit Shean, on one day, and who knows what the next day: possibly Mt. Tabor,... or possibly Mt. Carmel and Acco? I'll decide the night before. An American friend from School, Aviv, invited me to spend a day with him at a settlement on the Gaza Strip - probably Independence Day - Tuesday. He says there will be parades and big celebrations. As Israel will be pulling out of there within the next two years, I think I ought to take this chance to go and see a settlement in the Strip before it is given over. Even OSA says its OK to travel in the Occupied Territories if you are going somewhere specific and have made arrangements ahead.
Thursday and Friday, I have thought of going over to Jordan. I want to start
at the southern end (the Arava border crossing near Eilat) and come north. I
want to see the territory of Israel's ancient enemies, Edom and Moab, then
North of the Jabbok River, is the territory called Gilead, where the half tribe
of Manasseh settled along with another. I want to see those mountains, they loom up way above the dead sea, and when I was there over Pesach (Passover) break I wanted to swim accross that bouyant water and hike among them. They are larger than the cliffs dropping from the Judaean Desert into the Dead Sea. I can see them as a faint outline from the lookout point at Rotheberg in Jerusalem. I also want to see Mt. Nebo, which Moses climbed for a view of the promised land, before he died and God buried him - no one knows where (a little mysterious for Israel's greatest man of God). Also Pella, a city of the Decapolis some 40 miles southeast of the shores of the Sea of Galilee, where the Christians fled before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70. It was in Greek territory, and outside of
Israel, I think that this may have had a huge part in bringing on the parting
of the ways between Judaism and Christianity which were then merely Jews who followed the mass of rabbis, and Jews who believed that their Rabbi, Yeshua, had brought about something unprecedented - the character of which was still being thought through.
I want to see Jesus' baptismal site, (not sure which side of the Jordan it is on) but the tour book (4 years old) said it was off limits.
we'll see how this all turns out. Hopefully better than plans for travelling
did this Pesach break. They were a little stunted because I hadn't invited anyone to come with me ahead of time, and so I hesitated at going on my own. Its hard to share such historically and topographically amazing sites with yourself. I want to reach out and tell someone what happenned here, or be informed by one of them who knows more than I. Later I will tell about the man I met at Tell Goren at En Gedi, just as twilight came on, who showed me some of the ruins there. His voice was not unlike Darth Vader's as he had a machine to vibrate and replace the sound of what must have been a missing voice box.
waiting list for flying June 7th, arriving at 21:20 in Toronto,
and approved for a flight that leaves the 8th and arrives at 17:50. I wondered at the amazingly short flights, and then remembered that I'm flying East, which means that I'm getting some miles above the earth, letting it whirl by and coming down in another time zone. That's what it will feal like even if it
isn't the case. I will be seeing friends from Augustine while there for a day or few, then coming down to see the family, before finding a place of work for the summer (probably Phoenix).
Its a Friday morning. Fridays are like Saturday's back home. its the day off before the holy day. I have loved being able to keep Sabbath on the Sabbath here. I will definitely miss it back in the States. I'll keep keeping it, but it just won't be as easy.
I hope to head off to Qumran now. I read Josephus' account (Jewish Wars,
Book II, section 9?) of the Essene's customs early this morning - I'v got a very strange sleeping routine. like normal, its not really a routine. If possible, I'll follow that with a hike in Wadi Qelt, a Wadi near Jericho, - supposed to be beautiful (and the Lonely Planet tour guide I have is between very critical, and excessively negative on most everything here. though it does stand in awe of some of the natural features of this region).
I have a Sabbath meal planned with Rebecca and Naomi (two Orthodox girls who have become my closest friends during my stay here), and hope to surround that with worship in an as yet undetermined Shul (the Yiddish word for synagogue), and dinner wth an as yet undertermined host, hopefully Rabbi Mauklus, who apparently invites a ton of people over every shabbat evening, and apparently welcomes Christians and Messianic Jews and fringe people, those whom most Rabbis wouldn't knowingly invite. I hope to worship at Narkiss Street Church in the morning - I haven't been able to make it since the time I wrote about it on this blog - too long - they are very cool people. Rebecca and Naomi are within walking distance. Actually, I walk everywhere on Sabbath anyway because the buses don't run and I'd have to pay the sherut people to ride. I love the Sabbath of this land. During Pesach, the first and the 7th days were special sabbaths, following the law as it is given in Exodus 14, and those were beautiful as well. On the morning of the second sabbath, I walked up from my dorms, and just before I stepped up from behind the wall on to the main road, I though, or rather my soul was stirred to the reflection of how much I love the Sabbaths in this country. Though I don't agree that vehicles should necessarily not run (the Orthodox view the ignition of the engine, and every time you accelerate to break the prohibition of not lighting a fire on the Sabbath), I do love the quiet it provides. I could hear the birds singing, and just feel the deep stillness of the city at 9 in the morning. beauty. As I stepped over the 3 foot wall, the silence was shattered by a car wizzing by - someone who doesn't keep the Sabbath according to the Orthodox, and I wished that everyone did. Yet when you walk through some of the religious neighborhoods, and I do on the way to Narkiss Street, they are filled with quiet - amazing. People walk on the streets, and you can hear the yelling of kids playing from way down the street. Bearded, and earlocked men walk quickly, either to or from the Shul, huge prayer books or Talmuds in hand. They can take these book out because it is within the eruv - i.e. within a private place, a home. And though I can't speak the language, though I am dressed differently, as I walk through their public home, I am in a home of mine, the home of those who keep the Sabbath.
Monday and Tuesday (2nd and 3rd days of the week), are Memorial and
Independence days, respectively, and hence days off of school. I have 3 classes on Wednesday, but then Thursday and Friday off. I plan to go up to the Jezreel Valley area, and see, Tel Megiddo, Tel Jezreel, and Beit Shean, on one day, and who knows what the next day: possibly Mt. Tabor,... or possibly Mt. Carmel and Acco? I'll decide the night before. An American friend from School, Aviv, invited me to spend a day with him at a settlement on the Gaza Strip - probably Independence Day - Tuesday. He says there will be parades and big celebrations. As Israel will be pulling out of there within the next two years, I think I ought to take this chance to go and see a settlement in the Strip before it is given over. Even OSA says its OK to travel in the Occupied Territories if you are going somewhere specific and have made arrangements ahead.
Thursday and Friday, I have thought of going over to Jordan. I want to start
at the southern end (the Arava border crossing near Eilat) and come north. I
want to see the territory of Israel's ancient enemies, Edom and Moab, then
North of the Jabbok River, is the territory called Gilead, where the half tribe
of Manasseh settled along with another. I want to see those mountains, they loom up way above the dead sea, and when I was there over Pesach (Passover) break I wanted to swim accross that bouyant water and hike among them. They are larger than the cliffs dropping from the Judaean Desert into the Dead Sea. I can see them as a faint outline from the lookout point at Rotheberg in Jerusalem. I also want to see Mt. Nebo, which Moses climbed for a view of the promised land, before he died and God buried him - no one knows where (a little mysterious for Israel's greatest man of God). Also Pella, a city of the Decapolis some 40 miles southeast of the shores of the Sea of Galilee, where the Christians fled before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70. It was in Greek territory, and outside of
Israel, I think that this may have had a huge part in bringing on the parting
of the ways between Judaism and Christianity which were then merely Jews who followed the mass of rabbis, and Jews who believed that their Rabbi, Yeshua, had brought about something unprecedented - the character of which was still being thought through.
I want to see Jesus' baptismal site, (not sure which side of the Jordan it is on) but the tour book (4 years old) said it was off limits.
we'll see how this all turns out. Hopefully better than plans for travelling
did this Pesach break. They were a little stunted because I hadn't invited anyone to come with me ahead of time, and so I hesitated at going on my own. Its hard to share such historically and topographically amazing sites with yourself. I want to reach out and tell someone what happenned here, or be informed by one of them who knows more than I. Later I will tell about the man I met at Tell Goren at En Gedi, just as twilight came on, who showed me some of the ruins there. His voice was not unlike Darth Vader's as he had a machine to vibrate and replace the sound of what must have been a missing voice box.
Thursday, March 25, 2004
L'Chaim b'Oxford!
Congratulations to Bethany!
Dear Miss Boyd,
I am pleased to inform you that you have been accepted as a student for the 2004-2005 MSt in Jewish Studies course and that the Centre has awarded you a full scholarship. A letter will be sent to you at your Kampala address.
With best wishes and we look forward to welcoming you to Oxford in October.
Martine Smith-Huvers
--
Martine H P Smith-Huvers
Student Registrar
Oxford Centre for Hebrew and Jewish Studies
Congratulations to Bethany!
Dear Miss Boyd,
I am pleased to inform you that you have been accepted as a student for the 2004-2005 MSt in Jewish Studies course and that the Centre has awarded you a full scholarship. A letter will be sent to you at your Kampala address.
With best wishes and we look forward to welcoming you to Oxford in October.
Martine Smith-Huvers
--
Martine H P Smith-Huvers
Student Registrar
Oxford Centre for Hebrew and Jewish Studies
Tuesday, March 23, 2004
"Shema" followed by "Our Father" - I think I've found a place to worship.
I was delighted to find a church which recites the "Shema" (Deuteronomy 6 following verse 4) followed by the "Our Father". They meet in what is marked on the map as "the Baptist Church". Its architecture is typically utiltarian. The English speaking Christians are known as "Narkis Street Congregation", though four congregations share the building. I look forward to meeting other (more) members of the Christian community here in Jerusalem through this church. I was also delighted to hear of their giving to Lebanese refugees through a family who lives among the refugees. Unfortunately it is over an hour away by foot. It meets on the Sabbath so paying for transportation isn't an option. It is also near the place of some friends I've made, near their Hasidic shul (synagogue). more impressions to follow...
I was delighted to find a church which recites the "Shema" (Deuteronomy 6 following verse 4) followed by the "Our Father". They meet in what is marked on the map as "the Baptist Church". Its architecture is typically utiltarian. The English speaking Christians are known as "Narkis Street Congregation", though four congregations share the building. I look forward to meeting other (more) members of the Christian community here in Jerusalem through this church. I was also delighted to hear of their giving to Lebanese refugees through a family who lives among the refugees. Unfortunately it is over an hour away by foot. It meets on the Sabbath so paying for transportation isn't an option. It is also near the place of some friends I've made, near their Hasidic shul (synagogue). more impressions to follow...
websites of interest
I found a website with great pictures of archaeological excavations in Israel. As I shall be seeing some of these I thought that you (all) might enjoy a look. these are much better than I can provide. and the site has links to other worthwhile sites. the address is www.bibleplaces.com. this may be the way I see many places for the first and only time. In light of escalating violence - though Israel's decision to continue assasination attempts on others, Nazrallah and Arafat's names have come up, might keep them at bay, fending for their own lives, unorganized and leaderless - I might be spending Pesach vacation (we get two weeks off for Passover) in the dormitories and wandering Jerusalem on foot. That would mean that this site coudl be the extent of some day's explorations.
I hope to go to a Greek Ulpan tonight! That is, a group of people will be meeting to speak only in Koine Greek for 3 hours tonight. What makes it better, is I've read an article, "Jesus and the Oral Law" by David Bivin, by the host of tonight's ulpan. Amazing! the people that I read in books and articles, actually live and teach here. This guy is somewhat affiliated to the Jerusalem school, a group of scholars who posit that there was a Hebrew antecedent to the New Testament which has only survived in the Greek. I find this hypothesis interesting. I know one of the associated members, Brian Kvasnicka, and was delighted to learn we was a missionary kid from Southeast Asia, and know someone from ICA. We've been talking. Its great to meat people like this, interested and studying in areas that can be of great help to what I really care about, just while in the library here at Hebrew University. the Jerusalem School's website is www.js.org. they also have some good links.
that article, "Jesus and the Oral Torah", is worth reading. the address is http://www.jerusalemperspective.com/articles/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=1441
(it can be found through a link from the Jerusalem school's website; click on "hakesher", then "teacher materials", its under David Bivin's name.)
While I think that his claim that Jesus considered the Oral Law authoritative is overwraught, the article as a whole helps to make more sense of Jesus, by filling in some of the historical vacuum in which we read the gospel accounts.
I find it exciting because it points in the direction of many insights we can gain by understanding Jesus in light of the Judasim of his day (which is not unconnected from the Judaism of today). this is an area I have much to learn from.
I hope to go to the Jerusalem Archaeological Park this friday. They have done extensive excavations to the south of the Temple Mount. this is the closest that archaeologists can get to uncovering the Temple Mount since Israel has slowly relinquished control of the Mount (won in war) to the point where they have no control over the Mount itself. Many of my professors mention concern that Muslims are harming or stealing archaeological evidence from the Temple Mount itself, as they claim that there never was a temple there. The history is fascinating. The emperor Hadrian built a temple to Jupiter and erected a statue of himself mounted on a steed. It is unclear whether this was the cause or affect of the Bar Kochba revolt (132-135 AD). Julian the Apostate attempted to rebuild the temple on its original site in the 7th century, but due to mysterious events, the project was brought to a dramatic halt. Not long after, Muslim conquerors built the Dome of the Rock and El-Aqsa Mosque (actually holier than the Dome of the Rock, which stands over the site of the 2nd Temple) on the same site. There is a link to this site from bibleplaces.com. its own address is www.archpark.org.il. You can get an idea of the history I'll be checking out if not Friday, then soon.
I found a website with great pictures of archaeological excavations in Israel. As I shall be seeing some of these I thought that you (all) might enjoy a look. these are much better than I can provide. and the site has links to other worthwhile sites. the address is www.bibleplaces.com. this may be the way I see many places for the first and only time. In light of escalating violence - though Israel's decision to continue assasination attempts on others, Nazrallah and Arafat's names have come up, might keep them at bay, fending for their own lives, unorganized and leaderless - I might be spending Pesach vacation (we get two weeks off for Passover) in the dormitories and wandering Jerusalem on foot. That would mean that this site coudl be the extent of some day's explorations.
I hope to go to a Greek Ulpan tonight! That is, a group of people will be meeting to speak only in Koine Greek for 3 hours tonight. What makes it better, is I've read an article, "Jesus and the Oral Law" by David Bivin, by the host of tonight's ulpan. Amazing! the people that I read in books and articles, actually live and teach here. This guy is somewhat affiliated to the Jerusalem school, a group of scholars who posit that there was a Hebrew antecedent to the New Testament which has only survived in the Greek. I find this hypothesis interesting. I know one of the associated members, Brian Kvasnicka, and was delighted to learn we was a missionary kid from Southeast Asia, and know someone from ICA. We've been talking. Its great to meat people like this, interested and studying in areas that can be of great help to what I really care about, just while in the library here at Hebrew University. the Jerusalem School's website is www.js.org. they also have some good links.
that article, "Jesus and the Oral Torah", is worth reading. the address is http://www.jerusalemperspective.com/articles/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=1441
(it can be found through a link from the Jerusalem school's website; click on "hakesher", then "teacher materials", its under David Bivin's name.)
While I think that his claim that Jesus considered the Oral Law authoritative is overwraught, the article as a whole helps to make more sense of Jesus, by filling in some of the historical vacuum in which we read the gospel accounts.
I find it exciting because it points in the direction of many insights we can gain by understanding Jesus in light of the Judasim of his day (which is not unconnected from the Judaism of today). this is an area I have much to learn from.
I hope to go to the Jerusalem Archaeological Park this friday. They have done extensive excavations to the south of the Temple Mount. this is the closest that archaeologists can get to uncovering the Temple Mount since Israel has slowly relinquished control of the Mount (won in war) to the point where they have no control over the Mount itself. Many of my professors mention concern that Muslims are harming or stealing archaeological evidence from the Temple Mount itself, as they claim that there never was a temple there. The history is fascinating. The emperor Hadrian built a temple to Jupiter and erected a statue of himself mounted on a steed. It is unclear whether this was the cause or affect of the Bar Kochba revolt (132-135 AD). Julian the Apostate attempted to rebuild the temple on its original site in the 7th century, but due to mysterious events, the project was brought to a dramatic halt. Not long after, Muslim conquerors built the Dome of the Rock and El-Aqsa Mosque (actually holier than the Dome of the Rock, which stands over the site of the 2nd Temple) on the same site. There is a link to this site from bibleplaces.com. its own address is www.archpark.org.il. You can get an idea of the history I'll be checking out if not Friday, then soon.
Some Thoughts on Yassin's Assasination (from one
who just started reading the papers two days ago. Yes, I'm opinionated,
and feel free to share that mostly uneducated opinion. Don't equate
uneducated with uninformed. I've been talking to people here at Rothberg,
and it is their views that underly my own. so much for a disclaimer.)
So, I was writing Bethany telling her to keep up with the news so as to be
safe. And of course the irony of the idea hit me. OK, I need to read the
papers too. So, I've been pointed toward the Ha-Aretz, reputed to be the
more articulate (uses higher level Hebrew, of course that doesn't matter much in English
translation), artsy, and also left wing papers in Israel. The paper's name
means, 'the Land'. If you'd like to keep up with a better source than what
you're getting in the states. look into www.haaretz.com
I think that if Israel is going to strike at all it needs to strike hard, and
fast. Now that Yassin is dead, it makes sense to take out Nasralla. I don't
know about Arafat (the article puts them on a hit list of sorts) - though he is
a terrorist, and (I believe) is sufficiently related to terror attacks to be
worthy of death, he seems more an impotent figurehead whose death isn't needed
for security and would probably just bring greater hatred and possible military
intervention on the part of the greater Arab world.
I'm sitting here wondering where this assertive action suddenly came from.
Though I have thought that Israel is entitled to the same kind of reaction the
US was and is in its "War on Terror", to hunt down terrorists, even going into
nations which protect, refuse to evict, and fund them; I had not expected it to
come. I thought that Israel was going to bow to the pressure of Europe and to
a lesser degree the US and just continue to guard their borders, expect suicide
bombings and border skirmishes, cut their losses and hope that the Palestinians
would see the hopelessness of terror and become civilzed members of the Western
world. Yeah, it is a ridiculous hope, seeing as Palestinian children are
brought up to consider murderers 'martyrs' and to burn Israeli flags.
If these ideas can't be stopped at the level of mosque and school, then the
only option left is military. Either they hold off an enemy, while cutting
their losses (largely civilian); or they attack and destroy the enemy. They
have tried the defensive option for periods of various years. The response up
until Yassin was the first, defensive, option. Now they are trying (or finally
succeeding in) the second approach. Judging by the continued attacks on
Israel, the many planned attacks that were discovered and prevented (5 on just
Jerusalem in the last 2 weeks), this was a solution that was only tolerable if
Israel was willing to consider Palestinian (Arab?) anger and violence more
sacred than Israeli civilian's lives.
It doesn't seem likely that these ideas can be evicted from Palestinian society
by force, which leaves the military options either of outlasting them, while
sustaining continues attacks on Israeli civilians, or beating them by direct
military intervention (assasination is loosely part of this). The Palestinian
war is against all Israelis, and since they can't match the firepower of the
IDF, the main target has been Israeli civilians. Those are hard losses to
sustain. That the Western world has asked Israel to sustain them while
maintaining justice for Palestinians is a tall order. Israel already
incorporates something like a million "Arab-Israelis" into its society. They
do this because these Arabs, while having ties to the Palestinian and broader
Arab world, are moderates and don't think violence will lead to an answer.
They can live and work in Israeli society pretty much because they look for an
answer beyond violence. The constitutions of some of these terror/charity
groups, in print and readily available, quite clearly view violence as either
the answer, or the way of getting to the answer. Israel currently incorporates
a large section of Palestinian society. It does so completely on trust. These
are people who they choose to trust, because they refuse to consider all Arabs
the enemy. They take the risk of that trust being betrayed, and having an
enemy amongst them. This is the risk that Israel takes. The European, and to
some degree the Western world, asks them not just to do this, but to allow the
attacks to continue on pace, and simply sustain losses.
Israel needs to follow Macchiavelli's advice concerning how a prince should
commit his crimes. If they are going to commit terrible stuff [(so considered
by Arabs and Europeans (in my view Yassin's, and other leaders of terror
organizations, death is long overdue)] then they need to do it all at once.
take out the powerful, active, and clearly guilty leaders. killing those who
are past real power will just make the Islamic and Arab world angry. killing
those who haven't been active or who aren't clearly related to terror
activities will estrange Israel further from the Western world. I don't know
how it is that people think that if a Palestinian who was once a freedom
fighter, or planne attacks, reforms his ways, or is not currently active
(however that is defined, who can ?) he should be let alone; while in the
Western world, a crime follows you your entire life. what is this? because
they are criminals accross international sovereignty lines, and because they
come from the Arab world, with whom relations are already strained, and whose
power (if not military, at least by shear numbers) they are only accountable
for their crimes within a few short hours of having committed it? They cannot
be pursued and killed later in their lives?
who just started reading the papers two days ago. Yes, I'm opinionated,
and feel free to share that mostly uneducated opinion. Don't equate
uneducated with uninformed. I've been talking to people here at Rothberg,
and it is their views that underly my own. so much for a disclaimer.)
So, I was writing Bethany telling her to keep up with the news so as to be
safe. And of course the irony of the idea hit me. OK, I need to read the
papers too. So, I've been pointed toward the Ha-Aretz, reputed to be the
more articulate (uses higher level Hebrew, of course that doesn't matter much in English
translation), artsy, and also left wing papers in Israel. The paper's name
means, 'the Land'. If you'd like to keep up with a better source than what
you're getting in the states. look into www.haaretz.com
I think that if Israel is going to strike at all it needs to strike hard, and
fast. Now that Yassin is dead, it makes sense to take out Nasralla. I don't
know about Arafat (the article puts them on a hit list of sorts) - though he is
a terrorist, and (I believe) is sufficiently related to terror attacks to be
worthy of death, he seems more an impotent figurehead whose death isn't needed
for security and would probably just bring greater hatred and possible military
intervention on the part of the greater Arab world.
I'm sitting here wondering where this assertive action suddenly came from.
Though I have thought that Israel is entitled to the same kind of reaction the
US was and is in its "War on Terror", to hunt down terrorists, even going into
nations which protect, refuse to evict, and fund them; I had not expected it to
come. I thought that Israel was going to bow to the pressure of Europe and to
a lesser degree the US and just continue to guard their borders, expect suicide
bombings and border skirmishes, cut their losses and hope that the Palestinians
would see the hopelessness of terror and become civilzed members of the Western
world. Yeah, it is a ridiculous hope, seeing as Palestinian children are
brought up to consider murderers 'martyrs' and to burn Israeli flags.
If these ideas can't be stopped at the level of mosque and school, then the
only option left is military. Either they hold off an enemy, while cutting
their losses (largely civilian); or they attack and destroy the enemy. They
have tried the defensive option for periods of various years. The response up
until Yassin was the first, defensive, option. Now they are trying (or finally
succeeding in) the second approach. Judging by the continued attacks on
Israel, the many planned attacks that were discovered and prevented (5 on just
Jerusalem in the last 2 weeks), this was a solution that was only tolerable if
Israel was willing to consider Palestinian (Arab?) anger and violence more
sacred than Israeli civilian's lives.
It doesn't seem likely that these ideas can be evicted from Palestinian society
by force, which leaves the military options either of outlasting them, while
sustaining continues attacks on Israeli civilians, or beating them by direct
military intervention (assasination is loosely part of this). The Palestinian
war is against all Israelis, and since they can't match the firepower of the
IDF, the main target has been Israeli civilians. Those are hard losses to
sustain. That the Western world has asked Israel to sustain them while
maintaining justice for Palestinians is a tall order. Israel already
incorporates something like a million "Arab-Israelis" into its society. They
do this because these Arabs, while having ties to the Palestinian and broader
Arab world, are moderates and don't think violence will lead to an answer.
They can live and work in Israeli society pretty much because they look for an
answer beyond violence. The constitutions of some of these terror/charity
groups, in print and readily available, quite clearly view violence as either
the answer, or the way of getting to the answer. Israel currently incorporates
a large section of Palestinian society. It does so completely on trust. These
are people who they choose to trust, because they refuse to consider all Arabs
the enemy. They take the risk of that trust being betrayed, and having an
enemy amongst them. This is the risk that Israel takes. The European, and to
some degree the Western world, asks them not just to do this, but to allow the
attacks to continue on pace, and simply sustain losses.
Israel needs to follow Macchiavelli's advice concerning how a prince should
commit his crimes. If they are going to commit terrible stuff [(so considered
by Arabs and Europeans (in my view Yassin's, and other leaders of terror
organizations, death is long overdue)] then they need to do it all at once.
take out the powerful, active, and clearly guilty leaders. killing those who
are past real power will just make the Islamic and Arab world angry. killing
those who haven't been active or who aren't clearly related to terror
activities will estrange Israel further from the Western world. I don't know
how it is that people think that if a Palestinian who was once a freedom
fighter, or planne attacks, reforms his ways, or is not currently active
(however that is defined, who can ?) he should be let alone; while in the
Western world, a crime follows you your entire life. what is this? because
they are criminals accross international sovereignty lines, and because they
come from the Arab world, with whom relations are already strained, and whose
power (if not military, at least by shear numbers) they are only accountable
for their crimes within a few short hours of having committed it? They cannot
be pursued and killed later in their lives?
Sunday, February 22, 2004
Early and in-process thoughts on Zionism
Secularism has never seemed as viable, and impossible an option as it has here. sat in on a class I probably won't take tonight - it was about Jewish Identity. we talked Zionism. crazy stuff. So, in the prof's words (who is obviously not religious) Zionism is absolutely a rejection of waiting for God's intervention and privileged relationship with the Jewish people. They go ahead and get the people back to the land, and they do it without Messiah. They, by careful planning, coordination, diplomacy build a nation on their own. There is a song that was popular back in the 50s with Zionists which said, 'we have seen no miracle. No vessel of oil ...' then I loose it. it alludes to the miraculous oil of hannukah.
On the othe hand, instead of seeing merely the absence of God, this fits in really well either with co-creating with God. This holds that God brings about his plans through us. we are his agents. We can't just wait around for him to act, we have got to do stuff. this is how Zionism can be joined to faith. Yet, again, Zionists have while taking action to build a country for Jews, and to do it on their own strength, said that they are Messiah.
of course the religious, the haredim, adamantly disagree with this. They condemn the Zionists for open rebellion toward God, lack of faith or open denial. the trouble with the religious view is that it is patient to the point of fatalism. Fatalism is what made Islam entirely impotent in so many areas. I still don't know how Christianity avoided it - some of Paul's talk on God's rule and predestination is strong enough that fatalism could have been the result. I guess he also urges action often enough that people knew they had to work toward God ordained goals.
What it was making me think earlier tonight was about the story of how one of the disciples of the Baal Shem Tov (the greatest Chasidic master. his name means 'master of the good Name') tried to capture all the prayers of Israel on Yom Kippur and thus bring the Messiah down. The Baal Shem Tove, thwarted his attempt and rebuked him. thus, the Kabbalah (Mystical Jewish texts) taught not to force the hand of God, nor to force the Messiah's return. At the same time, it speaks of the ability of ordinary Jews to hasten his return, thus being an active agent in redemption, by truly repenting, returning to true piety and faith, to prayer and to study.
Secularism has never seemed as viable, and impossible an option as it has here. sat in on a class I probably won't take tonight - it was about Jewish Identity. we talked Zionism. crazy stuff. So, in the prof's words (who is obviously not religious) Zionism is absolutely a rejection of waiting for God's intervention and privileged relationship with the Jewish people. They go ahead and get the people back to the land, and they do it without Messiah. They, by careful planning, coordination, diplomacy build a nation on their own. There is a song that was popular back in the 50s with Zionists which said, 'we have seen no miracle. No vessel of oil ...' then I loose it. it alludes to the miraculous oil of hannukah.
On the othe hand, instead of seeing merely the absence of God, this fits in really well either with co-creating with God. This holds that God brings about his plans through us. we are his agents. We can't just wait around for him to act, we have got to do stuff. this is how Zionism can be joined to faith. Yet, again, Zionists have while taking action to build a country for Jews, and to do it on their own strength, said that they are Messiah.
of course the religious, the haredim, adamantly disagree with this. They condemn the Zionists for open rebellion toward God, lack of faith or open denial. the trouble with the religious view is that it is patient to the point of fatalism. Fatalism is what made Islam entirely impotent in so many areas. I still don't know how Christianity avoided it - some of Paul's talk on God's rule and predestination is strong enough that fatalism could have been the result. I guess he also urges action often enough that people knew they had to work toward God ordained goals.
What it was making me think earlier tonight was about the story of how one of the disciples of the Baal Shem Tov (the greatest Chasidic master. his name means 'master of the good Name') tried to capture all the prayers of Israel on Yom Kippur and thus bring the Messiah down. The Baal Shem Tove, thwarted his attempt and rebuked him. thus, the Kabbalah (Mystical Jewish texts) taught not to force the hand of God, nor to force the Messiah's return. At the same time, it speaks of the ability of ordinary Jews to hasten his return, thus being an active agent in redemption, by truly repenting, returning to true piety and faith, to prayer and to study.
I am reading Jacob Neusner's book, Judaism and Christiainity in the Age of Constantine. The following passage is from the foreward and captured my imagination.
"Judaism and Christianity in the age of holocaust come together as they have not since the beginning, and as they have not been able to since the fourth century. The relationship of subodinated, patient Judaism and world-possessing Christiantiy - a relationship wich began in the age of Constantine - has ended. to be sure not in ways either had anticipated. The confrontation has ceased. In their contemporary encounter Judaism and Christianity have entered a new epoch of relationshi - not yet dialogue, but no longer confrontation. For that, at least, we have, all of us, to give thanks. Why at just this time, in just this dreadful way, God has brough us to the threshold of a mature reconciliation, no one knows. Perhaps it is for a blessing, held back until, mourning unspeakable tragedy, we rejoined ranks, not before "Auschwitz" or Golgotha but before Sinai. There in a cleft in the rock we shall shelter before the Presence. There we shall hear, after the mighty noice, a voice of silence. And that is all."
the silence of God.
I take 'silence' to refer to the absence of God's direct presence. The Zionists responded to that silence by taking things into their own hands. When the silence of God is an almost palpable fact, what else can we do?
That silence can also refere to silence over the battles Christians and Jews have fought against eachother. Silence covering the theological disputes that could and have raged. The silence of Easau and Jacob brought back together peacefully.
"Judaism and Christianity in the age of holocaust come together as they have not since the beginning, and as they have not been able to since the fourth century. The relationship of subodinated, patient Judaism and world-possessing Christiantiy - a relationship wich began in the age of Constantine - has ended. to be sure not in ways either had anticipated. The confrontation has ceased. In their contemporary encounter Judaism and Christianity have entered a new epoch of relationshi - not yet dialogue, but no longer confrontation. For that, at least, we have, all of us, to give thanks. Why at just this time, in just this dreadful way, God has brough us to the threshold of a mature reconciliation, no one knows. Perhaps it is for a blessing, held back until, mourning unspeakable tragedy, we rejoined ranks, not before "Auschwitz" or Golgotha but before Sinai. There in a cleft in the rock we shall shelter before the Presence. There we shall hear, after the mighty noice, a voice of silence. And that is all."
the silence of God.
I take 'silence' to refer to the absence of God's direct presence. The Zionists responded to that silence by taking things into their own hands. When the silence of God is an almost palpable fact, what else can we do?
That silence can also refere to silence over the battles Christians and Jews have fought against eachother. Silence covering the theological disputes that could and have raged. The silence of Easau and Jacob brought back together peacefully.
Again, I am OK. But this time, I know the street. I was riding a bus along that street this past Friday. I know the street, I think I know the park beside which it occured. I watched it pass by my bus window several times (not the most efficient day of bus travel) and wondered what it was called, if I would ever get to walk through it ...
So, yes I have been riding the bus recently. It costs less than a dollar per ride whereas a taxi costs from 5 to 10 dollars per ride. paying 10 dollars round trip to get somewhere isn't very interesting. So, yes, I have bought a 10 ticket pass for the buses, used that up and am on my second one. I was even wondering if it was worth it to get a month pass. Its not: I don't need to go around town that often. The half hour walk to the Old City isn't bad either. But to get elsewhere, or if I need to spend that time reading, I need to take the bus.
Along with the news about the dead and wounded, I learned that Israel is putting together an outfit for the buses which will include an explosive sensor and one way turning doors. So the buses should be safe again soon. by the way I got today's news from www.haaretzdaily.com - in case you care to see the response from an Israeli paper. Some of the adds, especially those which facilitate communal charity to families of those who are killed or wounded in terrorists attacks are very telling of the patience and courage with which Israeli's bear the danger of not excluding the "Palestinians" from their country.
Today 8 died and 66 were wounded, while I was still in bed. I had stayed up until a little after 5 this morning. I had slept a bunch the night before (some 14 hours) and drunk a few mugs of coffee, and I was still up. I know excesses on both sides - too much sleep, too little sleep. I was reading with the window open so as to hear the incredible wind as it whipped through the tree top and ripped at the rooftops of the dorms 13 and 14. It was an amazing wind last night, and today has been fiercely cold. I heard the Muslim prayer calls and immediately thought, what are you doing yelling in the middle of the night? have you won another bloody victory over your enemy - killing a few more Israeli civilians? Then I realized that it was early morning and this was the normal early morning prayer call. I calmed down. When I woke this morning, my roommate was typing a text message to a friend to tell him that he was there, that he was OK.
So the prayer call had not been to celebrate another attack, but rather to open another day of Islam in Jerusalem. Another "martyr" bathes in the blood of civilians on their way to work.
So, yes I have been riding the bus recently. It costs less than a dollar per ride whereas a taxi costs from 5 to 10 dollars per ride. paying 10 dollars round trip to get somewhere isn't very interesting. So, yes, I have bought a 10 ticket pass for the buses, used that up and am on my second one. I was even wondering if it was worth it to get a month pass. Its not: I don't need to go around town that often. The half hour walk to the Old City isn't bad either. But to get elsewhere, or if I need to spend that time reading, I need to take the bus.
Along with the news about the dead and wounded, I learned that Israel is putting together an outfit for the buses which will include an explosive sensor and one way turning doors. So the buses should be safe again soon. by the way I got today's news from www.haaretzdaily.com - in case you care to see the response from an Israeli paper. Some of the adds, especially those which facilitate communal charity to families of those who are killed or wounded in terrorists attacks are very telling of the patience and courage with which Israeli's bear the danger of not excluding the "Palestinians" from their country.
Today 8 died and 66 were wounded, while I was still in bed. I had stayed up until a little after 5 this morning. I had slept a bunch the night before (some 14 hours) and drunk a few mugs of coffee, and I was still up. I know excesses on both sides - too much sleep, too little sleep. I was reading with the window open so as to hear the incredible wind as it whipped through the tree top and ripped at the rooftops of the dorms 13 and 14. It was an amazing wind last night, and today has been fiercely cold. I heard the Muslim prayer calls and immediately thought, what are you doing yelling in the middle of the night? have you won another bloody victory over your enemy - killing a few more Israeli civilians? Then I realized that it was early morning and this was the normal early morning prayer call. I calmed down. When I woke this morning, my roommate was typing a text message to a friend to tell him that he was there, that he was OK.
So the prayer call had not been to celebrate another attack, but rather to open another day of Islam in Jerusalem. Another "martyr" bathes in the blood of civilians on their way to work.
Monday, February 16, 2004
Great Jewish-Christian Dialogue and Movement Away from Absolute Truth
The first book I read cover to cover here in Israel was great - (not just the land of milk and honey, but of the long awaited good Jewish libraries!). It is called Jewish Montheism and Christian Trinitarian Doctrine: A dialogue between Pinachas Lapide adn Jurgen Moltmann. That gives you the topic and the set up. Some of the salient aspects of it are: 1) this really is a dialogue, not an argument. Amazing. seldom have I seen something so probing, on both sides (and certainly not on between Jew and Christian). 2) the first foreward (I forget the author) addressed what intellectual changes have set the stage for this kind of inter-faith dialogue. He briefly describes the move away from absolutizing "the truth" due to insights into how history, society and language necessarily bind our grasp of "the truth" thereby making our claims less than absolute. It seemed like an excellent recap of how my approach toward truth has changed since coming to Hillsdale. While frustration with the old modern project (pursuance of absolute truth known with certainty) contributed, it was not until sociology of knowledge class, (though other classes may have played a part) that I discovered an intellectually satisfying way out of that impossible project. Are my conservative friends and family surprised: the bastion of political and intellectual conservatism, Hillsdale College, taught me this stuff? :) And no, I do not know how my claims regarding the truth are situated between the objectivist's and the relativist's statements about the character of such claims. Right now, I like what I heard quoted of Habermas, "if by true you mean that I am ready to die for it (Christianity) then, it is true" (I would insert: live by it, and die for it ...) This is true belief. This is the kind of truth we should seek. Not an impersonal truth grasped but not ingested (I realize the eucharistic allusion. Judaism has parallels which are perhaps even stronger). I also like the (unfortunately pragmatic, a philosophy which I don't know, and distrust) approach which says that we attempt to know the truth in order to guide our actions by it. This takes the emphasis off of the verbal formulations of truth, and places it on the active formulation of truth. That is truth embodied in life; not truth finally, authoritatively and perfectly formulated in a creed. I appreciate the emphasis on action over knowledge. If I may invoke the distinction between belief and faith in which beleif is, 'belief that _____", while faith is "faith in _____"; the former is directed toward a thing, the latter, toward a person; then, this leads me to faith over belief. Belief gives shape to faith. Yet its origin (yes I hear Foucault) and its character (shying away from "essence") both rely on faith.
The first book I read cover to cover here in Israel was great - (not just the land of milk and honey, but of the long awaited good Jewish libraries!). It is called Jewish Montheism and Christian Trinitarian Doctrine: A dialogue between Pinachas Lapide adn Jurgen Moltmann. That gives you the topic and the set up. Some of the salient aspects of it are: 1) this really is a dialogue, not an argument. Amazing. seldom have I seen something so probing, on both sides (and certainly not on between Jew and Christian). 2) the first foreward (I forget the author) addressed what intellectual changes have set the stage for this kind of inter-faith dialogue. He briefly describes the move away from absolutizing "the truth" due to insights into how history, society and language necessarily bind our grasp of "the truth" thereby making our claims less than absolute. It seemed like an excellent recap of how my approach toward truth has changed since coming to Hillsdale. While frustration with the old modern project (pursuance of absolute truth known with certainty) contributed, it was not until sociology of knowledge class, (though other classes may have played a part) that I discovered an intellectually satisfying way out of that impossible project. Are my conservative friends and family surprised: the bastion of political and intellectual conservatism, Hillsdale College, taught me this stuff? :) And no, I do not know how my claims regarding the truth are situated between the objectivist's and the relativist's statements about the character of such claims. Right now, I like what I heard quoted of Habermas, "if by true you mean that I am ready to die for it (Christianity) then, it is true" (I would insert: live by it, and die for it ...) This is true belief. This is the kind of truth we should seek. Not an impersonal truth grasped but not ingested (I realize the eucharistic allusion. Judaism has parallels which are perhaps even stronger). I also like the (unfortunately pragmatic, a philosophy which I don't know, and distrust) approach which says that we attempt to know the truth in order to guide our actions by it. This takes the emphasis off of the verbal formulations of truth, and places it on the active formulation of truth. That is truth embodied in life; not truth finally, authoritatively and perfectly formulated in a creed. I appreciate the emphasis on action over knowledge. If I may invoke the distinction between belief and faith in which beleif is, 'belief that _____", while faith is "faith in _____"; the former is directed toward a thing, the latter, toward a person; then, this leads me to faith over belief. Belief gives shape to faith. Yet its origin (yes I hear Foucault) and its character (shying away from "essence") both rely on faith.
on whether or not I was ever saved leading into God's freedom
It will probably seem as if I never knew him, even if I did because as I draw nearer, I will experience what has not been experienced before, and so as Thomas said of what came before, "it was all straw". And yet, that earlier approach was genuine. So too were the experiences. I don't know in what sense it needs to be said, but in some sense, perhaps the relevant or important one, it was legitimate.
I want to say, that for the time, knowing what I knew, and being who I was, I knew God. I acted (interacted?) toward him as I knew best, and with my whole being. That is the central command right - love the LORD with all your heart soul and mind and strength. I did, with my whole being. until the divergence of the intellect. and yet I have not cast him off, but struggled - even as Israel did.
And, yes, I am excited by the idea that I could so interact with God, that he would, in some small sense be bound to me. just as the one who wrestled with Jacob could not overcome him. Or was it that he [God] could not because he would not; and he would not because he had given him [Jacob] freedom to make himself as he chose? Yet, even then, God "owed" Jacob. He owed him a covenant; the one god made with Abraham. God tied himself down to men in making his covenants. He is indeed master of the universe. He can give a tug on these ropes tying him to us and send us hurtling through space - yes at the breath of his mouth men are no more. In a true sense he owes us nothing. He is the one who will be as he will be. This is how he begins the revelation to Israel through Moses. As the God of total freedom. The god totally un-pinned-down. And yet with every word of revelation, every act in history, he gives us a bit more of himself. He shows us who he is. And we worship. ...
In our worship is a clinging to, a grasping of God. And in that there is a binding of God. Even God gives up freedom by choosing to love. Even he cannot be the totally free one. The mere potentiality. He is. And he is ... for us. He is only merciful in relation to us. He is only forgiving in that he forgives, and in that he forgives us.
Or, is he beyond even all these rules of relating? When I consider his greatness, I think that yes, he is beyond even these rules. But when I think of his revelation, I see that even he relates in this way.
Lest I be untrue to his revelation - though yes, he is above even his revelation – I have to say that he is within our rules of relating. Lest I be untrue to his revelation, and take him for something the impersonal God of the Greek philosophers, or the impersonal all of the East; I affirm that he relates to man. In his revelation, he is bound to man. Doubtless, he exists outside of his revelation. And there he exists unbound. Yet, as far as we are concerned, he relates to us. Thus his love for us has cost him his unbridled freedom. Yes, if God would know me, he must give up his freedom. Even God cannot overcome Jacob.
It will probably seem as if I never knew him, even if I did because as I draw nearer, I will experience what has not been experienced before, and so as Thomas said of what came before, "it was all straw". And yet, that earlier approach was genuine. So too were the experiences. I don't know in what sense it needs to be said, but in some sense, perhaps the relevant or important one, it was legitimate.
I want to say, that for the time, knowing what I knew, and being who I was, I knew God. I acted (interacted?) toward him as I knew best, and with my whole being. That is the central command right - love the LORD with all your heart soul and mind and strength. I did, with my whole being. until the divergence of the intellect. and yet I have not cast him off, but struggled - even as Israel did.
And, yes, I am excited by the idea that I could so interact with God, that he would, in some small sense be bound to me. just as the one who wrestled with Jacob could not overcome him. Or was it that he [God] could not because he would not; and he would not because he had given him [Jacob] freedom to make himself as he chose? Yet, even then, God "owed" Jacob. He owed him a covenant; the one god made with Abraham. God tied himself down to men in making his covenants. He is indeed master of the universe. He can give a tug on these ropes tying him to us and send us hurtling through space - yes at the breath of his mouth men are no more. In a true sense he owes us nothing. He is the one who will be as he will be. This is how he begins the revelation to Israel through Moses. As the God of total freedom. The god totally un-pinned-down. And yet with every word of revelation, every act in history, he gives us a bit more of himself. He shows us who he is. And we worship. ...
In our worship is a clinging to, a grasping of God. And in that there is a binding of God. Even God gives up freedom by choosing to love. Even he cannot be the totally free one. The mere potentiality. He is. And he is ... for us. He is only merciful in relation to us. He is only forgiving in that he forgives, and in that he forgives us.
Or, is he beyond even all these rules of relating? When I consider his greatness, I think that yes, he is beyond even these rules. But when I think of his revelation, I see that even he relates in this way.
Lest I be untrue to his revelation - though yes, he is above even his revelation – I have to say that he is within our rules of relating. Lest I be untrue to his revelation, and take him for something the impersonal God of the Greek philosophers, or the impersonal all of the East; I affirm that he relates to man. In his revelation, he is bound to man. Doubtless, he exists outside of his revelation. And there he exists unbound. Yet, as far as we are concerned, he relates to us. Thus his love for us has cost him his unbridled freedom. Yes, if God would know me, he must give up his freedom. Even God cannot overcome Jacob.
Sunday, February 15, 2004
I just checked the calendar and realized that this is the last week of Ulpan. Better study. Regular classes start on the 22 and 29, the undergrad and grad programs respectively. Amazing how this happenned. It doesn't seem I have been here very long.
I will be in Israel until atleast June 3 when the last exams for the grad classes (I should be taking one or two) end. When I return to study at Hillsdale, either fall of 2005 or spring of 2005. I don't know if I will continue my blog then or not. You probably hear from my hillsdale email account, which is still active. I should keep that one till the end of College (spring of 2005 of fall of 2006?). I'm telling you this because I feel that I have confused many of you with my frequent changes between email accounts.
We'll see how classes go. this was what I came here to Israel for, not to study modern Hebrew, though I have seen that it is indispensible to what I want to do, namely: read the Bible in Hebrew and understand Judaism and the modern state as they exist today.
I know that many of you care deeply about me and many also pray regularly. thank you. Being here, in Israel and among Jews, both secular and religious, has set up the context that I need for answering many of the questions that have become so important for me since late high school. Tentative answers should be forthcoming, followed by those sufficient for life: that is after all what the questions aim at: guiding action according to a relationship to God. Having given up on knowing, THE TRUTH, (impersonal, immutable, objective, outside of history, society and language) with certainty (this doesn't mean that I'm a flaming relativist either. I don't think? there will be posts attempting to explain that later); I now look for the proper way to relate to the God of Truth, who has revealed himself in history, the nation of Israel, and the Hebrew Scriptures.
I will be in Israel until atleast June 3 when the last exams for the grad classes (I should be taking one or two) end. When I return to study at Hillsdale, either fall of 2005 or spring of 2005. I don't know if I will continue my blog then or not. You probably hear from my hillsdale email account, which is still active. I should keep that one till the end of College (spring of 2005 of fall of 2006?). I'm telling you this because I feel that I have confused many of you with my frequent changes between email accounts.
We'll see how classes go. this was what I came here to Israel for, not to study modern Hebrew, though I have seen that it is indispensible to what I want to do, namely: read the Bible in Hebrew and understand Judaism and the modern state as they exist today.
I know that many of you care deeply about me and many also pray regularly. thank you. Being here, in Israel and among Jews, both secular and religious, has set up the context that I need for answering many of the questions that have become so important for me since late high school. Tentative answers should be forthcoming, followed by those sufficient for life: that is after all what the questions aim at: guiding action according to a relationship to God. Having given up on knowing, THE TRUTH, (impersonal, immutable, objective, outside of history, society and language) with certainty (this doesn't mean that I'm a flaming relativist either. I don't think? there will be posts attempting to explain that later); I now look for the proper way to relate to the God of Truth, who has revealed himself in history, the nation of Israel, and the Hebrew Scriptures.
