Read this here, if you have the patience:http://crescentandcross.wordpress.com/2006/11/07/judaism-is-nobody%E2%80%99s-friend/
It's taken me a few days since first seeing this article to work up the gumption to write a response to it. You see, this type of anti-Semitic diatribe just simply depresses me- blindly writing a polemic in which there is very little basis for the enmity is absurd. You see, this is what Mark Glenn had in mind- to write a fairly vacuous article, and get away with it, if only because no one could bother to properly respond. But I will, because of the Talmudic maxim 'Know what to respond to an heretic.' Obviously Mr. Glenn isn't a heretic, but let's not quibble over minor details, just as he doesn't bother to. Let me make it clear that I am not going to castigate Glenn for being an anti-Semite- he clearly is one, and he does not care. He views anti-Semitism as positive notion, aimed at suppressed a supposed insidious worldwide conspiracy.
Glenn's first assertion is that Judaism receives an undue amount of 'kiddie treatment' on the popular stage. Zionism, he claims, is recognizably fair game- but the second that anyone attack "j," as he calls it, there are immediately censured. I'm sure my response to him here isn't going to help the point in his mind. His second point, related to his first, is that the same dirtiness that make Zionism contemptuous, is indeed what is filthy and rotten about Judaism itself. Coupled together his argument becomes, "that is the single barrier demarcating the two items–a simple issue of letters and pronunciation, despite the fact that they are basically the same animal"
After these major two assertions, he basically attacks this supposed body with very vague and superficial rhetoric- they don't care about rules, fair mindedness, freedom of speech, etc. As these assertions are a result of his first two, that there is a coercive attitude to be nice to Judaism, and that it is in fact just as bad as Zionism, I won't really address them.
However, his first two assertions are blatantly absurd. "Zionism," Glenn claims, "is only a by-product of something else." In Glenn's worldview, since Judaism is termed as such and not Yahweism, therefore it is a religion towards the advancement of Jews, and not the advancement of G-d. Since Zionism ostensibly argues for the advancement of Jews, Judaism and Zionism must be, as a matter of course, the same thing.
Before I respond, I want to preface by saying that Judaism is most certainly the religion of the Jews, and Zionism is most certainly a movement to advance the Jews. So, there will obviously be some common denominators-namely, the Jews.
However, Glenn commits so many absurd fallacies in this part of his argument that it is hard to count them all. First, he interprets Judaism to mean the religion for the advancement of the Jews. Besides the absurdity of exegizing an English adaption of a Hebrew word, (Yahadut) Glenn also misses a much simpler definition- the religion of the Jews. Part of the basis for his 'mistake' is that Judaism, unlike pretty much any current religion, does not make its claims universal. Hinduism claims that all follow the circle of rebirth, Christianity claims that Jesus's message is for all mankind, Islam claims Mohammed's is likewise. I am not referring to a willingness to tolerate other faiths- Islam certainly does, and so does Hinduism, whereas one could make the claim that Judaism does not. What I am referring to is much simpler- the claims of the Jewish religion are local only to the Jews. This is universal in all branches of Judaism- only Jews are required, or even expected to keep Judaism. Indeed, among the more 'traditional' branches, conversion is actively dissuaded.
Therefore, Judaism is most accurately defined as the religion of the Jews. As for Glenn's other assertions, that Judaism is not concerning with correct action towards G-d, had he even thought for a moment he would realize how utterly absurd this is. An Orthodox Jew's first action in the morning is state ' I am thankful before You, ever-living King, that you returned to me my soul with kindness- great is your faithfulness,' while his last is to declare, ' In your hand I entrust my spirit when I go to sleep- and I will not fear. And if my spirit will expire, the Lord is with me, and I will not fear.' In the hours between, the 'legalism' which Glenn confuses solely for the advancement of the Jews, is more accurately put as E.P. Sanders did- as a covenant between G-d and Israel whereby right action achieves G-d's favor.
Glenn follows this with a natural next step- Gentiles exist in the eyes of Judaism only for Jew's purpose. If Judaism is about the advancement of the Jews, this contention makes sense. Furthermore, even if Judaism is only defined as the religion of the Jews, doesn't this seeming tribalism condemn non-Jews to a secondary nature within Judaism? Rabbi Jonathan Sacks contends precisely the opposite- though the obligations of ethics are born out of familial relationships, the Rabbis of the Talmud introduced the concept of 'for the ways of peace' so that Jews would be able to naturally extend there kindness to non-Jews. Unlike most Western ethics, Judaism asserts that what really creates both ethical duty and ethical consideration is having a shared circumstance. That's why the Jew is obligated to help the foreigner, for he was one. He is obligated to help his brother, for he would want help as well. This notion of motivation is perhaps very radical, but also very pragmatic- for all the highmindness of universalized ethics, they failed to properly motivate the individual to reach out to those who are indeed different. Proof in point, Glenn would never reach out to those insidious Jews. This extension on account of 'the ways of peace' asks Jews to envision a world where humanity is indeed a family, a vision fairly new to the world's purview. The groundwork for the prophetic end of peace envisioned by Isaiah and the like, is laid by the simple act of reaching out to those who are not same- no matter what faith they belong to.
Aside from this interesting point, Glenn clearly misses the basic truth that Judaism, even if it is not solely based on the written Bible, is more certainly partially based thereon. That aforementioned estalogical end- it is indeed a tenet of Judaism, and the hope of many Jews.
Glenn of course asserts that Judaism is much more insidious than this though- it promises wealth as a reward for right deed, and not eternal life. First of all, Judaism, like many other religions does speak of the afterlife- it just doesn't view this as a valid reason for right action. Further, what difference is there between doing right action for this world, or for the next- both are self-interested, and are clearly not for the aggrandizement of G-d. Further, Glenn assumes that since wealth is promised as reward, it must be a goal. While this idea may be superficially tempting, the Bible is also quite clear that 'One who loves money will never be satisfied with money.' What then of monetary reward? Perhaps it's merely for the actual advancement of the religious duty itself- Maimonides stated that poverty is not the friend of those who seek enlightenment, it dissuades, rather than helps one from achieve higher thoughts.
Further along Glenn claims that the Talmud says that Rabbi will be completely saved from the fires of hell- I'm not quite sure the polemic significance of this statement. Don't most religions believe that their clerics are acting rightly, and therefore will achieve whatever rewards await them in the next life. Further, his accusation is not entirely accurate. What the Talmud actually says is that their learning of the Torah will save them- even if a scholar were to subsequently become a heretic. What the Talmud is effectively saying is that the impact of Torah study on one's soul is at least similar to Glenn's belief in Jesus- no matter what wrongs he may do, his belief in Jesus will save him.
I'll end this for the day, as I'm getting quite bored of this. I will need at least two more posts to counter Glenn's absurdities, and I do have to start dinner sometime tonight. I hope that a little light will dispel a lot of darkness.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
You can contact "Bacon Eating Atheist Jew" who runs Judeophobe Watch blog. He generally does a better job of ridiculing people like Glenn than answering him, but he gets more traffic especially in his Atheist Jew blog.
A more serious idea would be to write this up more formally and submit it to The People's Voice themselves. If they print it then you'd get much more readership and they would be able to pretend that they are non-partisan (although get ready for lots of anti-semitic flames.)
Looks nice (although I would claim that Judaism does have a message to the world through the sheva mitzvos l'bnei Noach - even though they are not usually emphasized there is no reason they shouldn't be.)
Post a Comment