Reclaiming Judaism from Zionism

Reclaiming Judaism from Zionism

When the Zionist movement appeared in Eastern Europe in the 1880s, it found it very difficult to persuade the leading rabbis and secular Jewish thinkers of the day to support it. The leading rabbis saw the political history in the Bible and the idea of Jewish sovereignty on the land of Israel as very marginal topics and were much more concerned, as indeed Judaism as a religion was, with the holy tracts that focused on the relationship between the believers themselves and in particular their relations with God. Secular liberal or socialist Jews also found the idea of Jewish nationalism unattractive. Liberal Jews hoped that a far more liberal world would solve the problems of persecution and anti-Semitism while avowed socialists and communists wished peoples of all religions, not just the Jews, to be liberated from oppression.

This is a good article for people who seem to have a problem telling the difference between Judaism and Zionism. One is a religious belief the other is an extremist political ideology. It also discusses the West Bank and Jerusalem settlements and how Zionist use the bible to justify the theft of land.

I see Juddaism the same way I look at other religions. There's a lot of things in the Talmud and Tanach that lends itself to being interpreted in a very racist way, and that's where I think Zionism's roots are at. Its the same way that Islam or Christian texts contain things that lend their selves to being interpreted violently or zealously. The truth of the matter though is everyone is going to look at holy texts, whther Jewish or otherwise, and draw different meanings and fixate on different passages, because individuals interpret things through their personalities. While there's a bunch of violent stuff that some people will hook onto because they're, in their heart of hearts, violent, spiteful people, peaceful people will look at the Talmud and have a completely different spin on it. The insanity in religion is that everyone takes ancient, phonetic constructions and fetishize them as "Sacred". They believe written words are the words of god, when words are really. at their core, as man made as golden idols, are ultimately relativistic, and they're not the platonic measure of truth we've fooled ourselves into thinking they are. I think we just need to abandon all religion and embrace what's true, and that's love and recognizing our mutual interconnectedness to one another. You could be a deaf and dumb, not know a word of the Bible, and still know this. Labels and words just divide humanity into assumptions, stereotypes, and divisive identities.

I don't really care what people call their selves or identify with, just as long as they do it coming from a place of love. I think that takes precedence above all else.

reply to post by buster2010

Interesting article.

A friend had sent me the link to the following site. I thought it was kind of interesting:

What is Zionism?

reply to post by buster2010

. . . people who seem to have a problem telling the difference between Judaism and Zionism.

There may be a hypothetical difference between the two words but the actual thing, Judaism, would not exist without the other thing, Zionism.

There is no real thing, Judaism, that being a modern concept creating a term to explain the existence in the world of a group of Zionists.

When the Zionist movement appeared in Eastern Europe in the 1880s . . .

That was just the beginning of the open use of this label for a public acknowledgement of the institution.

. . . Jews also found the idea of Jewish nationalism unattractive.

They only objected to the methodology of bringing it about.
It is a complete denial of reality to say that Jewish nationalism is not at the very core of the mere existence of what is called "the Jews".

reply to post by jmdewey60


When did the word Jew first appear, jmdewey?

Do you mean there were no Jews at all in the world prior to the 1880s? Theodor Hertzl was a Reform Jew. But jmdewey, we have gone over this before, and since you have a problem with Jew being used to indicate a group of people, then let's look a minute at history. You say the use of the word Jew is recent, well, when was it first used?

My great-great grandparents were Ashkenazi from Bavaria, during the Hep Hep Riots of 1819, they had to escape and went to Hungary. But that's not the first time Jew was used. Thomas Jefferson built his college that invited Jews to be students in, and that is now the University of Virginia, which some of my ancestors from Baltimore went to, they were Sephardic Jews and the term Jew was used by Jefferson. So it was earlier than 1819.

They were called Jews in Medieval England. So it had further back than that, and if they were Jews in the Middle Ages, can we find them before that? Yes we can, in fact, archeologist have discovered a first century Jewish community in Cologne, Germany.

In 1215, at the Fourth Lateran Council, Pope Innocent III issued a decree that became Judenhut, or the wearing of special clothing, and guess who it was aimed at...Jews. So jmdewey, how recent was the word Jew used? Can you tell us the specific time frame, when so many other sources include the word Jew to signify a certain group of people who followed the Jewish religion?

Hmm, yes we can, in 633 AD, at the Council of Toledo the Jews had been forced into Christian baptisms to which the decree now stated...

4th Council of Toledo 633 A.D., which finds that ‘Jews must not be forced to accept the faith, which, however, if they accept the faith unwillingly, they must be forced to remain Christian.’

All of these documents are available for you to look at jmdewey. So how recent was the word Jew and the religion Judaism used? Can you pinpoint of how recent it was?

We see it in Roman sources as well...Halicarnassus also issued a decree against Jews..

Decree of the people, upon the representation of Marcus Alexander. Since we have ever a great regard to piety towards God, and to holiness; and since we aim to follow the people of the Romans, who are the benefactors of all men, and what they have written to us about a league of friendship and mutual assistance between the Jews and our city, and that their sacred offices and accustomed festivals and assemblies may be observed by them; we have decreed, that as many men and women of the Jews as are willing so to do, may celebrate their Sabbaths, and perform their holy offices, according to Jewish laws; and may make their synagogues at the sea-side, according to the customs of their forefathers; and if any one, whether he be a magistrate or private person, hinders them from so doing, he shall be liable to a fine, to be applied to the uses of the city.

So can you pinpoint the time frame of when the word Jew was used?

jmdewey60
reply to post by buster2010

 

. . . people who seem to have a problem telling the difference between Judaism and Zionism.

There may be a hypothetical difference between the two words but the actual thing, Judaism, would not exist without the other thing, Zionism.

There is no real thing, Judaism, that being a modern concept creating a term to explain the existence in the world of a group of Zionists.

When the Zionist movement appeared in Eastern Europe in the 1880s . . .

That was just the beginning of the open use of this label for a public acknowledgement of the institution.

. . . Jews also found the idea of Jewish nationalism unattractive.

They only objected to the methodology of bringing it about.
It is a complete denial of reality to say that Jewish nationalism is not at the very core of the mere existence of what is called "the Jews".

edit on 22-10-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Judaism existed long before Zionism and does not need Zionism to last throughout history. Zionism is for people that want to commit crimes and use religion as an excuse for committing those crimes.

reply to post by buster2010


And why not Zionism? In fact, the Jews were never given any citizen rights in any European country until the 1800s anyway. The citizenship rights given before WWII were also taken away by the Nazis. So if you have a group of people...by the way, the Roma in most of Europe also do not have citizenship rights today, then what does a group of people do?

Can we blame them for wanting a home, after all, they weren't allowed to be citizens in Europe anyway. That goes back a long time found throughout various nations' laws before the Middle Ages. There is simply too much documentation to provide here. But since the Jews were not wanted in Europe and laws were passed against them, so who can blame them for wanting a home?

The pogroms in Europe meant they were not welcome and could not stay. But who is land grabbing? The Jews in Palestine that were there since before 70 AD? Even the Muslims know the Jews were in Jerusalem when they invaded 600 plus years later. But what the Muslims did, was force those Jews and Christians in Jerusalem to become Muslim, and then declared that Palestine was now an Islamic state. But the Druze prove otherwise, as the Druze still maintain Jewish identity in secret, while proclaiming Islam outwardly.

Islam forced Arab language and customs onto Palestine, and guess what, Hungary would still be Arab if not for Sigismund of Hungary and Romania would be Arab if not for Vlad Tepes. But through the forcing of Arab language and culture onto a group of people, the Arabs then decreed that they were now Arab, and had nothing to do with who the original ancestors were of the people. Palestine was Jewish and Christian pre-Islamic invasion, then suddenly AFTER the Islamic invasion, Jews no longer existed in Palestine? They did exist, but through forced assimilation, Islam stole the land from Jews and Christians. So the Zionists are not stealing land from Palestenians, rather, they are moving back to the original land of their ancestors, of which many Palestenians are of Jewish and Christian descent, but cannot say that. They know they are, but cannot say it.

Use Hungary and Romania as the examples of what could happen. Sigismund and Vlad Tepes reclaimed their countries back, so why are the Jews not allowed to reclaim their land either? Islam and Arab identity was forced onto Palestine, they know it and we know it. So yes, it is a fight from Islam to maintain Arab identity in an area they know they have no right to be in, in the first place. And if they had a right, then Hungary and Romania should be Arab today.

And just how did Europe almost become Arabized? The battle that prevented them from entering Paris. If Paris had fallen, the rest of Europe would be Islamic. So why do people have a problem with Jews and Zionism, but not a problem with the Arabs invading Europe all the way to Paris?

Look at what could have happened and then ask yourself why the Jews have no right to a homeland taken away from them in the first place. Christians, it happened to your ancestors too in Jerusalem and Palestine, so what is the problem? Your ancestors almost lost Europe, they did lose 12 European countries to Islam, of which they had to fight to get back. So what's the real problem with Zionism? If the Christians can fight back, then why can't the Jews? Are we being self-centered? Are we applying a world standard for our actions that we say they are not allowed to do?

Really think about this, what would have happened if Paris did fall. You and I would not be here on the internet to discuss it. We would not have Christian identity and certainly the French would not have French identity or speak French any more, France would be Arab, have Arab culture and language and be called Arab, just as what happened to Palestine. Really take a look at history before saying the Jews have no right to Zionism.

It really is a hypocritical stance.

reply to post by WarminIndy

When did the word Jew first appear, jmdewey?

You see it being used in the Gospel of John to refer to the people who ruled the temple cult of Jerusalem (the same people who killed Jesus).

Do you mean there were no Jews at all in the world prior to the 1880s?

No, I mean that zionism was not invented in the 1880's.

. . . you have a problem with Jew being used to indicate a group of people . . .

It wasn't a word in common usage before the first century AD. It became a term in the Roman Empire to describe a resident of the region that they called Judea.

. . . sources include the word Jew to signify a certain group of people who followed the Jewish religion?

So what exactly is the "Jewish religion"?
That was what I was denying, not the existence of what we call Jews today.
My point was that as far as I can tell, the real religion of the Jews is zionism though not specifically in the form that generally goes by that name today.

reply to post by buster2010

Judaism existed long before Zionism and does not need Zionism to last throughout history. Zionism is for people that want to commit crimes and use religion as an excuse for committing those crimes.

"Zionism" is a term applied today to people like the modern so-called Israeli's but it is not restricted to that definition.

This perpetual attempt to link Judaism and Zionism is because Zionism can not survive without Judaism...They definitely need a vehicle to carry on their tasks with...But more and more Jewish people around the world are understanding the differences and distinguishing the facts between the two...People do not like Zionism as they might not like capitalism or communism.It does not have anything to do with certain group of people or a particular religion at all.

Why reclaim it? Judaism is a religion based on prophecy, and that prophecy has passed.
So it's obsolete anyways. Why not just let it die a natural death ??