Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

Article          175
Path: shodha.enet.dec.com!bacchus.pa.dec.com!decwrl!apple!lll-winken!looking!clarinews
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: clari.news.gov.international,clari.news.group.jews,clari.news.hot.east_europe
Subject: Interfaith group agrees anti-Semitism is ``sin against God''
Keywords: international, non-usa government, government, jews,
	special interest
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: 6 Sep 90 17:31:59 GMT
Lines: 40
Approved: [email protected]
Xref: shodha.enet.dec.com clari.news.gov.international:4759 clari.news.group.jews:175
Location: czeckoslavakia
ACategory: international
Slugword: czech-jews
Priority: daily
Format: daily
ANPA: Wc: 396; Id: a0935; Sel: na--i; Adate: 9-6-130ped
Codes: yigfdxx., yijjdcz., //na--i/
 
 
	PRAGUE, Czechoslovakia (UPI) -- A high-ranking committee of Roman
Catholic and Jewish representatives Thursday condemned anti-Semitism as
``a sin against God and humanity'' and called for active efforts by the
Catholic hierarchy to oppose it.
	Several dozen representatives of the International Jewish Committee
on Interreligious Consultations and the Pontifical Commission for
Religious Relations with Jews met for three days in Prague to lay the
basis for a Catholic document on the growing phenomenon in Eastern
Europe.
	The group, which last met in Rome in 1985, acknowledged that 
``certain traditions of Catholic thought and teaching practice in the
Middle Ages contributed to the creation of anti-semitism in Western
society.''
	``In modern times, many Catholics were not vigilant enough to react
against manifestations of anti-semitism,'' said its closing statement,
which was distributed at a news conference.
	``The Catholic delegates condemned anti-semitism as well as all
forms of racism as a sin against God and humanity and affirmed that one
cannot be authentically Christian and engage in anti-Semitism.''
	The conference recognized the importance of the Second Vatican
Council in improving Catholic-Jewish relations as well as later efforts
by church officials.
	It also heard personal testimony from witnesses to the Holocaust
during World War II, both of courageous Christians as well as ``those
who failed themselves as well as Jews and other victims'' in responding
to Nazism and fascism.
	``(The fact) that anti-Semitism found a place in Christian thought
and practice calls for an act of Teshuvah (repentance) and of
reconciliation on our part,'' said Archbishop Edward Cassidy, president
of the pontifical commission.
	The committee called for active efforts to fight anti-Semitism,
including setting up special courses for priests to fight it,
translating and disseminating all relevant church documents on Judaism
in Eastern Europe, and monitoring and countering events which threaten
an upsurge of anti-Semitism.
	``A new image and a new attitude in Jewish-Catholic relationship
are required,'' the group said. ``The liaison committee hopes that the
new catechism for the universal church, now in preparation, could serve
as an effective instrument to this end.''

Not to detract from those physically descended from Abraham, but I view
believers in Jesus (myself included) as the "true Jews" (Romans 2).
We are *so* blessed to have been "grafted in" (Romans 9-11) because we
have accepted God's Son as our Messiah and Redeemer.

Praise Be To God!

    
    Hi Collis...not to detract from what you said, but if there
    is any such thing as a "true Jew," I'd say that would be the
    Jew who knows his Messiah. Would you agree?
    
    Irena
    

Hello Collis,

I think I understand what you are saying (and I've recently re-read Romans 2
Romans 9-11). I'm made a little uneasy by phrases like 'believers in Jesus ...
[are] the "true Jews"'. Historically this rationale has been used by professed
Christians to practice anti-semitism. In particular this was one of the
rationales used by Hitler.

I have seen too many "hate groups" that claim to be Christian using this sort
of logic, to feel comfortable with it at any time. I realize that just because
hateful people use this reasoning does not mean that everyone who uses this
reasoning is hateful, and that in particular this does NOT imply or even
suggest that YOU might hold such abhorrent positions, but it still makes ME
uneasy.

Further, it isn't clear to me that Romans 2 says that Christians are the "true
Jews", rather that it is how you act and what you believe that makes you a Jew,
not trivial physical attributes or accidents of descent. Christians, unless they
practice Jewish law and believe it, are no more Jews than unobservant Jews.

	Peace,
	-- Charles

Yes, it is true that up until yesterday I didn't go about advertising
this belief in these words.  However, it *is* the way I think and I believe
it is accurate.

It certainly is sad that people (including me at times!) persecute
others without cause.  I'm sorry that the identification of the "true
Jew" is one of the ways that people distort for this discrimination
and persecution.

Personally, I don't believe that God wants anyone to "persecute" anyone.
Even those who reject him.  Romans 12:19, for example, tells us that
it is God's right to judge, not ours.  We, as individuals and as a
nation and as a world, are to love each other.

We are *not* Jews by practicing Jewish law.  Romans 2 argues that those
who rely on keeping the law are *not* true followers of God.  They have
replaced the righteousness that God provided with the filthy rags of
their own righteousness.  It is only those who are Jews *inwardly*, yes
those who have been circumcised in their *hearts* (regardless of any
outward circumcision) who is a "true" Jew (Romans 2:28-29).

Irena, what I hear you asking is, "what about the physical Jew if
followers of Jesus are the 'true' Jews?"  Is this right?  Yes, God *still*
has a special place for his chosen people, i.e. the physical Jews.  Romans
9-11 definately does tell us that, although rejected (today) by the
vast majority of physical Jews (who refuse to accept the gift of Jesus
Christ's death as payment for their sins - the primary teaching of the
New Testament), God will *still* be faithful to them and bring many both
to repentance and acceptance of Himself.  Praise be to God!!!

So, I'm *not* saying that the church is Israel.  Only that I am blessed
to be grafted into the tree of life, although saddened that this was
only accomplished by the rejection of the root by the previous branches.

Perhaps "true Jew" is a poor choice of words.  But I like to think that
way because that's how I understand Romans 2.

Collis

    Collis,
    
    I understand your understanding ;-)
    
    I think you're right.  We're grafted in to God's *one* olive tree. 
    Sad that the cost was not only the breaking off of natural branches,
    but the death of Jesus, but through Him, natural branches (Jews) and
    wild branches (Gentiles...anyone who isn't a Jew ;-) *are* grafted into
    the one tree of God.
    
    I struggle with "true Jew" but I know what you're saying.
    
    Steve (grateful also to be Jewish by being grafted into God's tree!)
    
    

Newsgroups: clari.news.religion,clari.news.gov.international,clari.news.group.jews
Subject: Messianic Jews ask change in Israeli citizenship law
Date: 12 Oct 90 18:22:02 GMT
 
 
	WASHINGTON (UPI) -- A group of Messianic Jews -- those who accept Jesus
as the promised Messiah -- asked Israel's parliament Friday to change the
Law of Return, which grants automatic citizenship to returning Jews but
currently excludes members of the sect.
	The request, by the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations, stems
from a December 1989 Israeli Supreme Court ruling, which held that Jews
who accept Jesus as their savior hold a faith other than Judaism.
	But leaders of the group argue that the ruling amounts to official
discrimination against Messianic Jews and note that secular Jews, who
may not believe in God, are granted automatic citizenship under the Law
of Return.
	Messianic Jews generally remain closely tied to Jewish religious and
cultural practices, keeping the Shabbat (sabbath) and observing Passover
and other Jewish holy days but break with Judaism over the question of
whether Jesus was the promised Messiah, a contention Judaism rejects.
	``The decision to exclude Messianic Jews from automatic citizenship
under the Law of Return sets a dangerous precedent,'' said Elliot
Klayman, past president of the UMJC. ``Today the Messianic Jews are
barred. Tomorrow it could be the Reconstructionist, Reform, atheist or
any other Jew whose thoughts do not conform to that of the powerful
religious parties.''
	The Law of Return was adopted in 1950 shortly after the establishment
of the state of Israel.
	It has been the focus of a great deal of controversy in recent years
as the Israeli religious establishment -- controlled by ultra-Orthodox
groups -- has sought legislation aimed to add restrictions to the law.
	Orthodox leaders have sought to bar from automatic citizenship
converts to Judaism if the conversion was performed by a Reform or
Conservative rabbi.
	The Messianic Jewish group said it is filing a formal petition with
Speaker of the Knesset Dov Shilanski on the issue and that it is writing
Israeli president Chaim Herzog and Prime Minister Yitzak Shamir as well
as President Bush on the matter.
	UMJC officials say there are some 100,000 Jews around the world who
believe in Jesus. The UMJC claims 60 congregations in the United States,
Canada and South America.
	In the letter to the Knesset, UMJC officials said that public opinion
polls in Israel have shown that 75 percent of Israeli citizens believe
Messianic Jews should have the right of citizenship under the Law of
Return.
	Refusing to do so ``creates a double standard at a time when the
question of 'who is a Jew?' is far from settled throughout the Jewish
world,'' the letter said.
	``The state of Israel was established as a refuge and homeland for
Jewish people,'' the letter said. ``It was designed to gather the
scattered back to the land as a safe haven from persecutors. The intent
of the founding fathers was to not to be exclusive but inclusive.
	``Messianic Jews fought and dies in the war against the Nazis.
Messianic Jews perished in ghettos. Messianic Jews have always paid the
price of being Jewish, just like other Jews. Must we now pay a price
exacted from us by our own brethren?'' the letter asked.

Newsgroups: clari.news.gov.international,clari.news.hot.east_europe,clari.news.election,clari.news.group.jews,clari.news.top.world
Subject: Jewish, Catholic leaders seek to stop anti-Semitism
Date: 25 Oct 90 17:37:50 GMT
 
	WARSAW, Poland (UPI) -- Jewish and Catholic leaders this week worked
to stop a rising tide of anti-Semitism in Poland through conversation
and music, in what was billed as one of the first major steps toward a
reconciliation between Jews and Catholics since World War II.
	But they face a formidable task, as evidenced Thursday by questions
posed to the election committee of Prime Minister Tadeusz Mazowiecki,
who has suffered from a whisper campaign that while he is a Catholic he
may have some Jewish heritage.
	Adam Szostkiewicz, spokesman for Mazowiecki's election committee, was
asked whether some remarks made by Solidarity leader Lech Walesa were
anti-Semitic. Walesa is his main rival for president in the Nov. 25
elections.
	``At this point we don't consider them anti-Semitic but some
questions from the crowd were,'' said Szostkiewicz. Freedom in the East
Bloc also has fostered more open expressions of hostility toward Jews,
including anti-Semitic remarks from some Walesa supporters.
	The United Jewish Appeal and the Polish government called the
reconciliation effort a ``signal event in Polish-Jewish dialogue.''
	More than 3 million Polish Jews, 90 percent of the Jewish community's
population, died in Nazi concentration camps. Now just 15,000 Jews live
in Poland, which is an overwhelmingly Catholic nation.
	Krakow's Temple Postepowa, a 100-year-old synagogue unusued since
World War II, was reopened Wednesday with a ``Concert of Remembrance and
Reconciliation.''
	Father Stanislaw Musial, who heads a committee to improve Catholic-
Jewish relations, asked forgiveness for those Poles who failed to help
Jews.
	``We are sorry for each Pole who did not extend a helpful hand and
gave up to the Nazis or tried to profit from your fear and loneliness.
For that, I apologize. Poland, full of blood of the Jews killed here
during World War II must be free of any trace of anti-Semitism.''
	Pope John Paul II, who is Polish, also expressed remorse in a message
delivered on his behalf.
	The Jewish ``nation had lived with us for generations, shoulder to
shoulder, on the same soil which became like their own motherland,
motherland of their diaspora. A terrible death was inflicted upon this
nation,'' the pope said.
	``The murderers did it on our soil, perhaps they wanted to disgrace
it. But you cannot disgrace a land with the deaths of innocent victims.
Through such death a land becomes sacred. The nation which had lived on
this land together with us remained with us after the terrible deaths of
millions of its sons and daughters. And together we are waiting for the
last judgment and resurrection.''
	A concert in the synagogue, featuring works by Beethoven and Dvorak,
was conducted by American Gilbert Levine, whose mother-in-law is one the
few who survived Auschwitz in southern Poland. He was named to head the
Krakow Philharmonic in 1987, the first American named to lead an Eastern
European cultural institution.
	Max Bruch's ``Kol Nidre,'' which expresses the grief and suffering
felt at the tremendous loss suffered by the Jewish people was performed.
	Before the concert, the Star of David was raised on top of the
synagogue. The six-pointed star was torn down in November 1939 by the
Gestapo during the German occupation.
	The United Jewish Appeal sent 250 people to Poland for the
reconciliation ceremonies, the Vatican sent an emissary, and the U.S and
Israeli ambassadors attended. A group of young Jews, most of Polish
heritage, visited the Nazi death camps at Auschwitz-Birkenau, guided by
survivors of the same camps.

    An Awe-Inspiring book about what it meant to be a Jew in the Warsaw
    Ghetto and in Treblinka and thereafter is, "For Those I Loved" by
    Martin Grey.   An outstanding example of holy relations between
    Christians and Jews is "The Hiding Place" by Corrie ten Boom.  I am
    reminded of the remark by Corrie ten Boom's father in the latter
    reference, when he said that he pitied the Nazis, because the Jews were
    the "apple of God's eye."
    
    re:  .9
    
    An even stronger argument might be made for any descendents of Judas
    Iscariot.   Yet if Jesus was to die for our sins, then someone had to
    betray him.  Someone had to perform the sacrifice. Was Jesus a fool to
    take Judas into the twelve?  Was he a fool to incarnate amongst Jews? 
    Or are these expressions of the mystery of God's will?  
    
    And is it our business anyway?  Does not the scripture say, "Vengeance
    is mine, I will repay, says the Lord."  I say rather that the very life
    of humankind on this planet may depend on reconciliation amongst Jews
    and Gentiles.  We stand on the brink of war.  Have we not learned of
    the love God requires of us?  
    
    Peace,
    
    DR

    Donald (.10),
    
    Thanks, you addressed the issues that Playtoe spoke of very lovingly
    and kindly (and Christianly, I might add).  
    
    I like your style ;')
    
    Ro
    

Article         8776
From: [email protected] (Ronnie Schreiber)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Jews for judaism bbs
Date: 4 Nov 90 22:37:00 GMT
Sender: [email protected] (newsout1.26)
Organization: FidoNet node 18:711/410 - Jews For Judaism BB, Detroit MI
 
I don't know if this violates the policies of this echo or not, so 
please bear with me if it does. No stepping on of toes is intended here.
 
We at Jews For Judaism would like to take the opportunity to announce to 
the academic community the avaiability of our online services via the 
Jews For Judaism bbs and KesherNet. If you have concerns about 
missionary activity on your campus or in your workplace and need 
information, if you have a friend or family member involved with a 
missionary group and need advice, or if you would like an informative 
presentation on the problem for your group or organization, you can 
reach us on the Jews4Judaism echo at most of the KesherNet nodes. For 
the full range of our online services (text files, relevent conferences, 
more confidential treatment of your query) you can reach the Jews For 
Judaism bbs at (313) 967-5397 [2400 baud, 8N1, 24 hrs], and the national 
Jews For Judaism staff will be at your disposal.
 
Also, it would assist us in monitoring deceptive missionary activity 
that targets Jews for you to inform us of any such activity on your 
campus.
 
If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message here or call our 
bbs. 
Thank You, 
Ronnie Schreiber 
Sysop, Jews For Judaism Computer Network 
Midwest Director, Jews For Judaism
 
Jews For Judaism is a non-profit educational and outreach organization 
that monitors and combats deceptive missionary efforts targeting Jews 
for conversion. We have a wide range of services that have received the 
endorsement of a wide spectrum of Jewish religious and communal leaders. 
Our services are provided as a resource to the Jewish community to help 
deal with the increasingly sophisticated and well-funded missionary 
efforts of groups like Jews For Jesus. To date our staff members have 
helped bring over 300 Jews back to our heritage after being involved 
with Christianity and thousands of people have seen our educational 
presentations. Our work has been profiled in newspapers across the U.S. 
and Canada, including the New York Times and Los Angeles Times.
 
 
--  
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ronnie Schreiber - via FidoNet node 1:133/411
UUCP: galbp!gisatl!18!711!410!Ronnie.Schreiber
INTERNET: [email protected]

Article         9196
From: [email protected] (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Jewish Christian Dialog
Date: 19 Nov 90 23:16:56 GMT
Sender: [email protected]
 
I just got back from a remarkable presentation sponsored by my synagogue
(Agudas Achim, in Iowa City Iowa).  The presentation was about the
Interfaith Circles program supported by Interfaith Resources Inc.
 
Interfaith Resources is devoted to building a dialog between Jews and
Christians.  In the context of, on the one side, the traditional
Orthodox Jewish position that such dialog is futile at best and
dangerous at worst, and on the other side, the never-ending attempts
by the Christian Fundamentalists to convert the Jews, this organization
can be described as representing the radical center.
 
As radical centerists, they are devoted to the idea that Christian
Jewish dialog is necessary and essential for both Christians and Jews,
but for very different reasons.  Here's what their pamphlet says:
 
   Throughout most of its history the Church has seen itself
   to be the successor of the Jews, as God's chosen people.
   This has led to disasterous events, the most evident being
   the Holocaust, committed in the heartland of Christian Europe.
   Christians are rethinking the triumphalistic attitude that
   made this possible.  Understandably, most Jews, because of
   centuries of persecutions and proselytizing, remain cautious
   in dealing with Christians.  Interfaith Circles eases an
   awkward situation by helping Christians and Jews to communicate
   as friends, dispelling the misconceptions and steriotypes
   that have been in place for too long.  Interfaith Circles
   enables individuals to enter into the Jewish-Christian
   encounter, not to convince or convert, but to learn and to
   grow in appreciation and respect for one another.
 
The Interfaith Circles program itself is community based, requiring
at least one Christian and one Jewish congregation to start.  It looks
like Iowa City may try it out (I'll say more if anything happens);
there were at least two Christian ministers at the meeting who
indicated an interest, and along with our rabbi, that makes the
necessary quorum.
 
The talk was remarkable, in part, because of the man who gave it.
The Reverend David Blewett (if I got his name right) is best described
as a Missionary Evangelist of the radical center.  He actually grew
up within the circles of Billy Graham's organization, and went to
seminary with every intention of becoming a Christian Evangelist.
 
His story has every element of traditional Christian Evangelical
witnessing, except that the punch line is not about Jesus Christ coming
into his life, but about how he came to realize the errors of the
traditional fundamentalist Christian attitude towards the Jews and
leave not only Billy Graham's organization but also the seminary where
he was studying at the time.
 
David Blewett said something like this:  "Judaism has always had the
notion of a righteous gentile, but unfortunately, this is one notion
from Judaism that Christianity has failed to incorporate.  We Christians
need to do something about this because it has been the source of some
of our greatest failings."
 
Although I describe the man as a missionary, and he agrees with me that
in a sense he is one, his mission is essentially anti-missionary.  He
is actively working against the Jews for Jesus and their fellows, both
by debating them, in public, and by attacking them in their pocket book.
He says that the latter can be very effective, but it takes work because
the key to the latter is to get the congregations that fund such anti-
Jewish missionary activity to see the harm it does and withdraw their
financial support.
 
For more information, write Interfaith Resources Inc.
                            1328 Oakwood Drive,
                            Anoka, MN  55303
 
The usual disclaimers apply.  I am not affiliated with this organization
but based on my one hour of exposure to their work, it sounds like they
are a force for good.
					Doug Jones
					[email protected]

Re:  19.13

  >...the never-ending attempts by the Christian Fundamentalists to 
  >convert the Jews, 

not just the Jews, but the whole world!

  >Throughout most of its history the Church has seen itself
  >to be the successor of the Jews, as God's chosen people.

We are grateful to be grafted on while God preserves a remnent of
physical Israel.

  >This has led to disasterous events, the most evident being
  >the Holocaust, committed in the heartland of Christian Europe.

Actually, the Holocaust was caused by deep-seated biases against Jews,
not Christian love (which loves the Jews).  Although many who claimed
to be Christians persecuted the Jews, we can all agree in this conference
(I expect) that this is *not* the model Jesus held up to us or agreed to.

Europe is hardly a Christian continent either now or 50 years ago.

  >Understandably, most Jews, because of centuries of persecutions and 
  >proselytizing, remain cautious in dealing with Christians.  

The persecution has certainly been sad.  The proselytizing, however...

  >Interfaith Circles eases an awkward situation by helping Christians and 
  >Jews to communicate as friends, dispelling the misconceptions and steriotypes
  >that have been in place for too long.  

Certainly a very worthy goal, although based on a large misunderstanding
of what Christianity really is.

  >Interfaith Circles enables individuals to enter into the Jewish-Christian
  >encounter, not to convince or convert, but to learn and to grow in 
  >appreciation and respect for one another.

There are times to share the faith and other times to learn in silence.

Growing in appreciation and respect for each other is to be applauded. 
 
  >David Blewett said something like this:  

  >"Judaism has always had the notion of a righteous gentile, but 
  >unfortunately, this is one notion from Judaism that Christianity has failed 
  >to incorporate."

If he means that there were gentiles who worshiped the true God and were
thus considered righteous, I agree.  But I strongly suspect he means that
there were those who were righteous because of what they did.  If this is
the case, I disagree strongly.  You are only righteous when God is
acknowledged as God.  This is made clear both from the Old Testament (which
Jews accept) and from the Bible (which Christians accept).  There certainly
are teachings by Jews which represent that you can be righteous apart from
God - which are simply wrong because God declares differently.  I have no
desire to spread this errorneous thinking to Christians. 

  >"We Christians need to do something about this because it has been the 
  >source of some of our greatest failings."

Actually, we fail when we attempt to become righteous by ourselves.  If
this is the basis for the ministry, a false gospel is being preached.

  >Although I describe the man as a missionary, and he agrees with me that
  >in a sense he is one, his mission is essentially anti-missionary.

It sounds to me like he's a missionary preaching a false gospel.  Despite
the fact that some of his ends are admirable.

Collis

Article          306
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: clari.news.group.jews
Subject: Hanukkah is a fun, but not a major, religious holiday
Date: 25 Nov 90 01:39:53 GMT
 
 
	UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. (UPI) -- When many non-Jewish Americans think of
Hanukkah, they envision a holiday that has the sparkle, excitement and
religious significance of Christmas.
	But that image, shared by a significant number of Jews, is grossly
inaccurate, says Rabbi Seth Mandell, director of the Penn State Hillel.
	``Because Hanukkah happens more or less around Christmas, many
mistakenly believe it to be a major holiday for the Jewish community,''
Mandell said. ``Traditionally, it is a historic holiday, not a biblical
one, and observances are different from major Jewish holidays.''
	Hanukkah, which means ``dedication'' in Hebrew, involves the lighting
of eight candles and the sharing of small gifts over eight days, usually
during the first two weeks of December, depending on the lunar cycle.
	This year Hanukkah is celebrated from the evening of Dec. 11 to Dec.
19.
	``Major Jewish holidays are usually observed with festive meals,
synagogue attendance or family gatherings,'' the rabbi said. 
``Originally, Jews didn't even share small gifts for Hanukkah. But as
more Jews moved to Christian-dominated regions, some began to give small
gifts to the children so they wouldn't feel too left out.''
	A relatively new holiday to the Jewish calendar, Hanukkah is not
mentioned in the Old Testament because events that sparked the
significance of the holiday happened late in Jewish history, Mandell
said.
	The origin of Hanukkah dates back to 164 B.C., the year the Jews
successfully rebelled against the Seleucids, a colonial power in the
region that included both Egypt and what is now Israel.
	``As the Seleucids conquered new regions, they outlawed the religious
and cultural practices of the natives in efforts to replace them with
their own culture,'' Mandell said. ``Such was the case when they
initially conquered Jewish regions from 168 to 164 B.C. The Seleucids
took over the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem, the only temple of the
Jewish religion.''
	But eventually Jews rebelled. According to tradition, when the Jews
revolted and reclaimed the Temple of Solomon, they found nearly all of
their religious and cultural artifacts destroyed or defiled except for a
golden six-branch candelabra known as the Menorah.
	``The Menorah burned with a special oil kept in the temple, but
initial attempts to find flasks of oil that were neither broken nor
defiled were unsuccessful,'' Mandell said.
	Eventually, one buried flask was found. It contained enough oil to
fuel the Menorah for one day but the oil kept all six branches lit for
eight days -- thus the miracle of Hanukkah, which some call a ``Festival
of Lights.''
	``Many people don't realize that it also represents the light of
Jewish culture shining through the Hellenistic culture of the Seleucids,
'' Mandell said. ``That's the significance of today's candle-lighting
ritual.''

Article          315
From: [email protected] (CHARLES RIDLEY)
Newsgroups: clari.news.religion,clari.news.europe,clari.news.group.jews
Subject: International Jewish delegation meets Vatican officials
Date: 5 Dec 90 19:00:47 GMT
 
 
	VATICAN CITY (UPI) -- International Jewish officials praised the ``new
spirit'' in relations with the Catholic Church Wednesday and urged that
the church keep Catholics up-to-date on developments to help combat
anti-Semitism.
	This was the main theme to emerge from a full day of talks between a
30-man delegation from the International Jewish Committee on
Interreligious Consultations and the Holy See's Commission for Religious
Relations with the Jews, held in a Pontifical Palace near St. Peter's
Square, Jewish Committee spokesman Gunther Lawrence said.
	On Thursday the Jewish delegation is to have an audience with Pope
John Paul II in the Vatican. It will be the first top-level Jewish
meeting with the pope since 1987 when an IJCIC delegation protested John
Paul's meeting with Austrian President Kurt Waldheim, accused by the
Jews of war crimes in World War II.
	The new encounter officially marked the 25th anniversary of the 
``Nostra Aetate'' (In Our Times) declaration by the Second Vatican
Council that condemned anti-Semitism and removed the centuries-old
charge that the Jews were responsible for Christ's death.
	It also aimed to build on a similar meeting between the two
delegations held in Prague in September that formally declared anti-
Semitism ``a sin against God and humanity.''
	The Jewish leaders expected the Polish pope to endorse that
declaration during Thursday's meeting to curb the resurgence of anti-
Semitism in Poland and other newly liberated countries of Eastern
Europe.
	In a speech to the only open session of the Wednesday talks, held at
the Lateran University, Rabbi Jack Bemporad, of Lawrence, N.Y., chairman
of the Interreligious Affairs Committee of the Synagogue Council of
America, urged that the ``new spirit'' be spread to the Catholic ``grass
roots.''
	He said the Jewish Community must also educate ``our own people'' to
the changes that have developed in Jewish-Catholic relations.
	``It will take a long time for the Jewish community to genuinely
trust the events that have so radically changed the church,'' he said.
	Bemporad also urged that Vatican recognition of the state of Israel 
``could do a great deal to alleviate and assist in both the relations
and the dialogue.
	``You clearly state that no theological objections to Israel exist
and that the Jewish state has a right to exist,'' Bemporad told the
Catholics at the evening session. ``Why not go all the way and establish
relations?
	``Such recognition does not imply agreement with a nation's policies,
but places the relationship on the same equal level that the Catholic
Church has with world Jewry,'' he said.
	However, Vatican sources said the pope was not ready to change his
frequently expressed position that the establishment of full diplomatic
relations with Israel could come only when the Jerusalam has a form of
international status guaranteeing access to the shrines by the three
religions that regard it as their Holy City.

Article          317
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: clari.news.interest.history,clari.news.group.jews,clari.tw.education,biz.clarinet.sample
Subject: Chief editor of Dead Sea Scrolls removed for anti-Semitic remarks
Date: 13 Dec 90 18:12:00 GMT
 
 
	CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (UPI) -- The chief editor of the Dead Sea Scrolls,
ancient Old Testament texts discovered in 1947, has been removed for
describing Judaism as ``a horrible religion'' and a ``Christian heresy.''
	John Strugnell, a professor in the Harvard Divinity School, was
relieved of his supervisory duties on the project not only because of
poor health but because of views expressed Nov. 9 in the Tel Aviv
newspaper, Haaretz, The Boston Globe said Thursday.
	Strugnell, 60, who is in an unidentified hospital, said in the
interview that he was not against the Jewish people, just their
religion.
	Asked what ``annoyed'' him about Judaism, he said in the interview: 
``It's the subsistence of the group, of Jews, of the Jewish religion.
It's a horrible religion. It's a Christian heresy.''
	``I believe that the answer for Islam, and Buddhism, and all other
religions is to become Christian. Judaism disturbs me in a different
sense, because, whereas the others became Christians when we worked hard
on them, the Jews stuck to an anti-Christian position.''
	Mark Edwards, the acting dean of the Harvard Divinity School, said in
a statement Wednesday: ``I find the statements ascribed to Professor
Strugnell personally repugnant, and Harvard Divinity School in now way
shares his views.''
	However, the school said Strugnell will remain on the project
deciphering the ancient texts of the Old Testament.
	The leadership of the project will be taken over by three remaining
editors headed by Emanuel Tov of Hebrew University in Jerusalem.
	Hershel Shanks, editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review, which is
publishing an account of the Haaretz interview, told the Globe that 
``anyone whose views are anti-Semitic and so violently anti-Israel
should not be working on these Jewish cultural treasures. When he
touches them, he stains them.''
	The scrolls are the property of the Israeli government. The Israeli
Antiquities Authority has set a 1997 deadline for finishing the
translations.
	Strugnell previously had been accused of an unreasonable delay in
publication of the scrolls that were found in caves at Qumran on the
dead Sea in 1947.
	Parts of the early texts of the Old Testament have been dated at 250
B.C. and A.D. 68 and are considered important keys to the evolution of
the Bible.
	A colleague on the project, Eugene Ulrich, a Notre Dame University
researcher, said he knew Trugnell had a pro-Arab position on modern
Middle East politics, but ``never heard him say any of the things about
Judaism that he was quoted as saying. It didn't sound like the man I
have known for 20 years.''
	Students and colleagues blamed Strugnell's statements on his poor
health, the Globe said.
	University of Chicago Professor Norman Golb said Thursday he hopes
Strugnell's removal will opens the door to full scholarly study of the
ancient manuscripts.
	Golb charged Strugnell denied access to the scrolls to scholars who
differed with his view of their content and signficance.
	Golb said he and other scholars have been denied access to the
scrolls because their finding could prove the manuscripts show early
Christianity was far removed from mainstream Judaism during the period
in which they were written, about 200 B.C. to A.D. 50.
	``I've published 50 articles and several books on Hebrew manuscripts
and Strugnell, who has yet to publish his assigned portion of the
scrolls, denies me access,'' Golb said.
	The scrolls, a collection of parchment and papyrus texts, provide the
earliest handwritten link to the age of Jesus. They are housed primarily
in the Rockefeller Museum and the Shrine of the Book in Jerusalem.
	Strugnell was in charge of the Rockefeller material, considered the
more significant information.

>	The scrolls, a collection of parchment and papyrus texts, provide the
>earliest handwritten link to the age of Jesus. They are housed primarily
>in the Rockefeller Museum and the Shrine of the Book in Jerusalem.

    The Shrine of the Book has a wonderful exhibit BTW. Included is one of
    the scrolls unrolled on a kiosk behind glass. People I was with who can
    read modern Hebrew said that much of what was written on it they could
    understand. I'm not so sure the same could be said about 2000 year old
    "English" as written Hebrew has not changed nearly as much.

    			Alfred

Article: 1824
From: [email protected] (DAVID E. ANDERSON, UPI Religion Writer)
Newsgroups: clari.news.religion,clari.news.features
Subject: Catholic-Jewish dialogue continues
Date: 1 Nov 91 00:38:31 GMT
 
_ _R_e_l_i_g_i_o_n_ _i_n_ _A_m_e_r_i_c_a
	Roman Catholic and Jewish leaders held their semiannual meeting in
late October, their first chance to assess the state of the fragile
interfaith dialogue since the visit of Polish Cardinal Josef Glemp to
the United States.
	The agenda for the day-long meeting was a full one, including work
toward a common statement on education and values that the two faith
groups have been working on for some time.
	But at the top of the list of concerns was the September visit to the
United States of the Polish primate Glemp, who has -- perhaps
inadvertantly -- cast the sensitive talks between Jews and Catholics into
a kind of chaos.
	Glemp has been at the center of the Auschwitz convent dispute -- the
establishment of a Carmelite convent on the grounds of the former
concentration camp strongly opposed by world Jewish leaders and the
years-long negotiations to move the nunnery -- and remarks he has made
during the confrontation have deeply offended Jews.
	At one point he suggested Jews were responsible for spreading
communism in Poland, getting peasants drunk and of controlling the
world's media.
	During his visit to the United States, Glemp sought to explain and
apologize for his remarks, first in a widely circulated letter to U.S.
Catholic leadersand later in a meeting with U.S. Jewish leaders.
	Jewish leaders, however, are of two minds about Glemp and -- more
importantly -- about how to proceed with the dialogue.
	During Glemp's visit, several prominent Jewish leaders decided to
boycott scheduled meetings with the primate. In addition, Rabbi Avi
Weiss, who had led demonstrations at the Auschwitz convent, succeded in
serving papers on the cardinal suing him for libel and defamation of
character.
	Rabbi Seymour Reich, one of the boycotters, resigned as chairman of
the Intenational Jewish Commission on Interrreligious Consultations
because of the failure of the Jewish leadership to reach a consensus on
the Glemp visit.
	But other Jewish leaders -- notably Rabbi Jack Bemporad, director of
interreligious affairs for the Synagogue Council of America and Rabbi
James Rudin, who holds the same post with the American Jewish Committee
-- believe that dialogue is crucial to changing even anti-Semitic
attitudes.
	``How are you going to know if he's susceptible to change unless you
see what he's done and get the measure of the man by meeting him,''
Bemporad said in an interview.
	Bemporad said Glemp had taken ``first steps'' toward rectifying his
statements, adding that ``it seems to me the best way to deal with it is
to meet ... it doesn't hurt to talk with an individual who has made the
first steps toward us.''
	In one sense, the Glemp incident is only peripherally important to
the state of Catholic-Jewish relations in the United States. On the
whole, those relations are warm and cordial and proceeding apace.
	But Bemporad said it would be wrong ``to minimize Glemp's importance.
Whether we like it or not, Poland is where the pope comes from. He has
an investment in Poland that is personal and therefore Glemp has
tremendous influence and authority.''
	And he noted that that immediately after the Sept. 20 meeting between
Glemp, U.S. Catholic leaders and the U.S. Jewish leaders, Catholic
officials flew to Rome to report on the session.
	And the division within the Jewish community could affect the way
local relations work their way out in the United States.
	``The key question right now is what is the vehicle for addressing
the next step in the dialogue,'' Bemporad said.
 _a_d_v_ _f_r_i_ _n_o_v_ _1

    I caught part of a PBS documentary on the history of anti-semistism
    last night.  I wish I had been able to see more of it; it was very
    interesting.  One thing that I did catch was the mention of Martin
    Luther's strong anti-semitism, which was truly shameful, although he
    hardly represented the only instance of this phenomenon in the history
    of Christianity.
    
    -- Mike

    
    I believe there are some differences in many areas of belief and
    practice between Judaism and Christianity, there is a commonm heritage
    that both religions share. The Jewish writer, Pinchas Lapide, comments:
    
                  We Jews and Christians are joined in brotherhood at the
      deepest level in fact that we have overlooked it and missed the
      forest of brotherhood for the trees of theology. We have an
      intellectual and spiritual kinship which goes deeper than dogmatics,
      hermeneutics, and exegesis. We are brothers in a manifold "elective
      affinity"
    
      -in the belief in one God our Father,
      -in the hope of His salvation,
      -in ignorance of His ways,
      -in humility before His omnipotence,
      -in the knowledge that we belong to Him, and He to us,
      -in love and reverence for God,
      -in doubt about our wavering fidelity,
      -in the paradox that we are dust and yet the image of God,
      -in the consciousness that God wants us as partners in the
       sanctification of the world,
      -in the condemnation of arrogant religious chauvinism,
      -in the conviction that the love of God is crippled without love of
       neighbor,
      -in the knowledge that all speech about God must remain in a 
       stammering on our way to Him.
    
    The book of Galatians gives us God's view of Jews and Gentiles today.
    Chapter 3 shows forcefully that God's blessings on the Jews were a
    means of showing His grace, which was fully expressed in the sacrifice
    of His Son, Jesus Christ, on the cross for the sins of all, Jewish and
    Gentile. The gospel was preached beforehand to Abraham, the father of
    the Jews(5:8)and was given to the Gentiles in Jesus Christ(5:14).
    
    The heritage of the Old Testament, preserved for all mankind by the
    Jews, points all of us, Jewish or Gentile, to Jesus Christ(5:22-24).
    Each man, whether of Jewish or Gentile heritage, must come to God
    through Jesus Christ. There is no other true peace with God. As 
    Galtians 3:26-29 concludes,
    
             For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For
    all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with
    Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor
    free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in
    Jesus Christ. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's
    offspring, heirs according to promise.
    
    
                                 Ray  

    Curious here:  what does this author have to say about Islam and its
    relationship to Judaism and Christianity?
    
    Daniel

>    curious: my authorized King James Version spells 'christ' with a small
>    'c'.

Must really be an unauthorized King James Version; mine has a capital "C".
Of course, mine also has 1&2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, The Rest of Esther,
The Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Song of the Three Holy
Children, History of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasses,
and 1&2 Maccabees.  If yours doesn't have those books, it is not really
an Authorized Version.

>i find it curious that it was not translated 'baptized unto
>christ'; in other words, that christ comes into our life's and not
>the other way around, that we go 'into' christ.

The translation is absolutely correct:  baptism incorporates us into
the Body of Christ which is the company of all faithful believers.

/john

    
    	I have an authorized King James version bible published by the World 
    	Publishing Co. of New York, and on Galatians 4:26-29 the word is 
    	written christ with a lower c, and the letters ch are underlined as 
    	well, but only those 2 letters.  I counted 5 instances where this 
    	takes place between 4:26-29. Also, on chapters 4 & 5 I noticed the 
    	same thing takes place in various places, the ch underlined with a 
    	lower case c.  It doesn't appear to be a coincidence.
    
    			Juan

Who says it's authorized?  Actually, my World KJV (which is not authorized,
because it's missing some of the KJV books) says it's _conformable_ (whatever
that means) to the 1611 authorized version.

And it, as well as my complete (and therefore authorized) KJV published by
Oxford University Press (Amen House), both have Christ with a capital "C"
in every occurrance in Gal 3:26-29.

As does an edition I have published by Nelson.

Send it back; demand a refund.

/john

 I have the Life Application Bible, King James Version published by Tyndale
 House and the "c" is capitalized there.



 Jim

    Of course, it should be capitalized, it is a proper name.  To deny that
    Christ is a person and affirm that Christ is an impersonal force is
    heretical.

    "Judaism developed through the ages its own characteristic style, as it
    were, its own view of life, its code and forms of worship.  It
    possesses its own traditions based on Torah and covenant.  Its
    adherents today find inspiration and spiritual contentment in it, as
    did their fathers before them, and wish to continue its historic
    identity within the configuration of other religious cultures.  Other
    religions, too, developed their characteristic ways which all religions
    have in common and much which differentiates them.  Their common
    purpose in the world will not be advanced  by merger or amalgamation. 
    Were all arts, philosophies, and religions cast into one mold, mankind
    would be the poorer for it.  Unwillingness to recognize differences in
    religions is no evidence of broadmindedness.  To ignore these
    differences is to overlook the deep cleavages which existed in the past
    and to assume a similarity of doctrine and outlook which does not exist
    in the present.  The attempt to gloss over these differences as a
    gesture of goodwill is a superficial act which serves neither the
    purposes of scholarship nor the realities of the situation.  It is far
    better and more practical to look for ways of working together on the
    basis of a forthright recognition of dissimilarities rather than on a
    fictitious assumption of identity.  Indifference to one's own faith is
    no proof of tolerance.  Loyalty to one's own is part of a larger
    loyalty to faith generally.

    "There are great areas of common interests in which all religions can
    cooperate in mutual helpfulness and respect, influencing one another
    and learning from one another.

    "Judaism, which differed and continues to differ from other religions in
    significant matters of belief and practice, has sought and seeks
    opportunities of friendly cooperation with them in all things which may
    contribute to the building of the good society, firm in its own
    convictions, reverent of theirs, hoping for the great day of universal
    reconciliation of all peoples, when "they shall not hurt nor destroy in
    all My holy mountain, and the earth shall be full of the knowledge of
    God as the waters cover the sea."

    	Abba Hillel Silver, from his book "Where Judaism Differs"

    "In three decisive moments in history, Judaism was confronted with the
    attraction of fusion and syncretism which would have transformed it
    into something quite different from what it was, and in each instance
    it rejected this categorically:  Baal-Yahwism in the days of the
    prophets; the Hellenistic-Judaic amalgam five centuries later in the
    days of the Hasidim and the Maccabees; and the Judaeo-Christological
    synthesis in the age of the tannaim.  It could not accept the orgiastic
    and licentious fertility rituals of the Canaanitish Baal worship.  It
    detected in Hellenism a distinct threat to its own sober morality, its
    code of personal piety, and its prophetic tradition of social progress. 
    It saw in Christianity, as we shall have occasion to point out, fatal
    eschatological overemphasis, an irrational antinomism, and an
    attenuation of monotheism in the concept of the God-man.

    "Judaism consciously resolved to go its own way."

    	- Abba Hillel Silver, from "Where Judaism Differs"

    "The 'burden of the Law' was regarded by loyal Jews not as a burden at
    all, but as a wholesome discipline.  The purpose of the Law was to
    increase personal holiness and to refine the spirit of man,--not to
    make him aware of his inability to fulfill it and thus force him to rely
    exclusively upon grace and redemption....

    "The Jewish  people--Pharisees, Sadducees, and the Essenes alike--could
    not have accepted Paul's conception of the Law under any
    circumstances....There has always been a debate among Jews as to the
    extent to which one is free to interpret the Written Law and by what
    technique, and whether the Oral Law is binding and to what extent. 
    Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform Jews have continued the debate to
    this day.  But no organized Jewish religious group ever maintained that
    the Law could be dispensed with altogether, that the Law was a curse or
    that faith alone was sufficient....

    "Certainly, no one who is acquainted with the determined and persistent
    struggle for the pure monotheistic faith among the people of Israel
    since the days of Moses and the Prophets could have assumed for a moment
    then or since that Judaism would find lodgment for the concept of a
    God such as one finds in the Fourth Gospel, a God who came down to
    earth, assumed human form, and suffered death for the salvation of
    men....

    "It is understandable that Fourth Gospel ideas should have found
    acceptance among those in the pagan world who had long been habituated
    to them through mystery religions, or among pagan proselytes to Judaism
    to whom such ideas would appear neither strange nor startling and among
    whom the Christian propaganda actually made its first converts.  These
    concepts might not be strongly resisted by those who, in the
    Hellenistic world, entertained the current ideas of a Logos, the Word
    made flesh, the Incarnation of divine wisdom and the mediator between
    God and man.  They certainly could not be accepted by Torah-trained
    Jews to whom the concept of the unity of God, simple and
    undifferentiated, was the very bedrock of their faith.

    "The Jewish people could not but reject such a doctrine unless it were
    prepared to abandon the most treasured and essential conviction for
    which it had struggled through the centuries and of which it believed
    itself to be the covenanted guardian and spokesman to the world.  It
    could not accept a renewed mythologizing of God, which it had resisted
    for a thousand years, even though the concept of a born, dying, and
    resurrected God might now be presented as a metaphysical idea and not as
    a concrete event which took place on a specific date in history or as a
    trinitarian conception of monotheism.  Judaism could find no room in
    its monotheism for the concept of Jesus as 'Son of God, born of the
    Virgin Mary' (The Apostle's Creed), or as 'Very God of the Very God'
    (Nicene Creed), or as 'Perfect God and the Perfect Man' (Athanasian
    Creed)....

    "Maimonides and other Jewish spokesmen regarded Jesus as well as
    Mohammed as divine instruments in preparing the way for mankind's
    universal conversion to faith in the one true God.  Maimonides wrote:
    'All these teachings of Jesus the Nazarene and the Ishmaelite
    [Mohammed] who arose after him were intended to pave the way for the
    coming of the King Messiah and to prepare the whole world to worship
    God together as one.'

    "But it was not the pristine monotheism of Judaism which Christianity
    in its missionary zeal conveyed to the Gentile world, nor exclusively
    its sturdy, practical, this-worldly ethics.  It was a syncretistic
    faith--strongly salvationist in character, with a major accent on the
    promise of immortality--far in advance of anything in the Greco-Roman
    world, but not the uncompromising monotheism of Judaism.  Its moral
    idealism excelled anything the ancient world had to offer, but it was
    unlike Judaism in that it was oriented toward a Kingdom not of this
    world.

    "Thus a mighty stream of influence flowed out of Judaism at the
    beginning of the common era and, dividing from it, watered benignly
    many lands and cultures.  Other streams were in time to flow out of it
    and, again dividing, were to pursue their independent courses through
    history.  But the river which is Judaism, replenished by the ageless
    springs of its own inspiration, continued to follow its own course to
    its appointed destiny known only to God."

    	Abba Hillel Silver, from "Where Judaism Differs"

I find it quite interesting that Abba Hillel Silver
claims that Jews could not possibly accept a suffering
Messiah (Isaiah 54), acceptance by faith apart from
the Law (Genesis 15) or the idea of a new covenant
where the Law would be written on hearts and not in
books (Jeremiah?).

All this, despite the fact that Jesus was a Jew, the
apostles were Jews, their mission was to the Jews and
many Jews responded.  (And, of course, despite the fact
that these truths are present in the Old Testament - 
although given very little emphasis today in Judaism from
what I gather.)

It is not at all surprising that many Jews rejected Jesus.
Many non-Jews reject Jesus as well.

I think that this was written with a 20th century focus and
not a first century focus.

Collis

    I think if you read Abba Hillel Silver's book, you will find that he
    addresses several of the points that you raised.
    
    -- Mike

    "Judaism is not constructed around any drama of redemption.  There is
    no term in the Hebrew language for 'salvation' in a sacramental,
    redemptive sense.  In Judaism the soul of man requires no "liberation",
    because the soul of man is not enchained.  The idea that man needs to
    be 'saved' either from the toils of life or from some Original Sin or
    from the prison house of matter or from baleful astrological influences
    is not part of Judaism.  The Bible knows of no such concept as
    'redemption from sin.'  The term ga-ol, when used in Biblical sources
    refers to redemption from slavery, from an enemy, from imminent danger
    or death or exile.  It also has legal implications.  But in no instance
    does it refer to redemption from sin.  This is true also of the terms
    pa-doh and hoshe-a, which mean help and deliverance from trouble,
    affliction or danger....

    "Saviour and Redeemer in the Christological sense are not to be found in
    the Bible.

    "Jewish theology accepts no doctrine affirming an inexorable round of
    rebirths in which the human soul is trapped and from which, in one way
    or another, it must be saved.  Nor does it accept the doctrine of man's
    corrupt origin, 'that all man descended from Adam contract original sin
    from him, and that this sin is transmitted by way of origin.'  We have
    had occasion to note in other connections that such ideas, so
    widespread in the non-Jewish world, were not unknown to Judaism, and
    that references to them are to be found in its extensive literature. 
    But they were never incorporated into the essential tenets of the
    faith....

    "Dean Inge's statement that 'the biblical doctrine of the Fall of Man,
    which the Hebrews would never have evolved form themselves, remained an
    otiose dogma in Jewish religion' is quite correct, subject only to one
    amendment--that it was never a dogma at all.  The idea of an Original
    Sin derivative from Adam, in which mankind shared, makes its first
    appearance in Jewish literature very late, in the apocalyptic II Esdras
    (1 C. C.E.) which shows definite Gnostic and Christian influences: "O
    thou Adam, what hast thou done!  For though it was thou that sinned,
    the fall was not thine alone, but ours also who are thy descendants.' 
    However, in II Baruch, an apocalyptic contemporary of II Esdras, we
    find a flat contradiction to this theory:

    	For though Adam sinned and brought untimely death upon all, yet
    	those who were born from him, each one of them has prepared for
    	his own soul torment to come, and again each one of them has
    	chosen for himself glories to come.  Adam is therefore not the cause
    	save only of his own soul, but each of us has been the Adam of his
    	own soul.

    "Paul certainly did not derive his doctrine of Original Sin, of
    humanity's involvement in it, and the manner of its atonement, from any
    authoritative Pharisaic source:

    	In asserting a direct causal relation, which he does not describe,
    	between the Fall of Adam and the sin of all men in Romans 519 he
    	[Paul] goes beyond the teaching of the Rabbis who were careful to
    	insist on the full responsibility of every individual for his sin
    	despite the effects of Adam's fall.  (W.B. Davis, Paul and Rabbinic
    	Judaism)"


    - Abba Hillel Silver, from "Where Judaism Differs"

    "Judaism is much concerned with the moral issues involved in man's
    sins, but not with Original Sin, which is a nonmoral concept of
    mythological origin.  Explanations are offered here and there in
    post-Biblical literature to account for the origin of sin as well as of
    evil in the world--problems which trouble a monotheistic faith much
    more than a dualistic or polytheistic one.  Judaism accepted neither a
    Parsee nor a Gnostic dualism to account of the existence of evil, nor a
    Neoplatonic denial of any reality to evil.  The reality of evil is
    acknowledged, and explanations are ventured by one or another teacher
    as to why God created it.  No one is obligated by his orthodoxy to
    accept any one of these theories.  In popular folklore the principle of
    evil was at times personified in Satan or the Devil, but Satan plays no
    role in the theology or creed of normative Judaism such as he assumes
    in orthodox Christian dogma.  He is no divine or demonic power with
    whom God is in eternal combat.  He is not the author of evil and has
    not the power of death (Heb. 2:14).  In the prologue to the Book of
    Job, Satan appears among the Sons of God as the adversary of man but
    not as God's antagonist, and he does not possess the power of
    independent action.  He figures more frequently in Apocrypha, the
    Apocalypses and in Rabbinic literature, but belief in his existence is
    never an article of faith.

    "Judaism's primary concern was to teach man not how sin cam into the
    world, but how to avoid sin and how to repent of sin once having
    succumbed to it.  All men are capable of sinning because all men are
    endowed with free will.

    "Judaism did not caricature life into something banal and absurd,
    fallen and tragic, to make room for some miraculous redemption.  It
    placed no such burdens and handicaps and introduced no such
    apprehensions and despair into man's moral life.  If man has committed
    a sin, he may repent and be forgiven.  The initiative, however, must
    come from man, not from God.  God's love will meet man more than
    halfway...

    "Dr. Niebuhr may be correct in stating that the central message of the
    Gospel deals with sin, grace, forgiveness, and justification.  The
    central message of Judaism, however, deals with 'doing justly, loving
    mercy and walking humbly with your God' (Micah 6:8).  'And now, Israel,
    what does the Lord require of you, but to revere the Lord your God, to
    walk in His ways, to love Him, to serve the Lord your God with all your
    heart and with all your soul, and to keep the commandments and statutes
    of the Lord which I command you this day for your good' (Dt. 1:12-13).

    "Judaism applied itself to the task of helping men to face and overcome
    their specific and individual sins, as well as the specific social
    evils which result from their collective misdeeds.  On the Day of
    Atonement men are summoned to confess and to enumerate these sins, one
    by one, before God and to seek forgiveness for 'having turned away from
    Thy good commandments and ordinances to our hut.'  Man is never
    confronted with the fact of a total and irrevocable depravity demanding
    total regeneration--rebirth into a new man.  Men do fall into sin, but
    Man, the race, has not fallen.  Judaism thinks of Man as rising from
    imperfection to higher levels.  Occasionally a poetic hyperbole in the
    Bible, as in Psalm 51, seems to suggest some inborn sin.  'Behold I was
    brought forth in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me' (Ps.
    51:7).  But, as Dr. Cohen has correctly pointed out, the thought of
    this verse is not that the marital act is sinful or that the child
    inherits sin.  Rather, the Psalmist confesses here that he has not
    resisted the sins to which all men are liable by virtue of their
    humanity, and prays for forgiveness."

    	- Abba Hillel Silver, from "Where Judaism Differs"

Re:  .35 

  >The Bible knows of no such concept as 'redemption from sin.'

I find this claim to be ludicrous.  I expect anyone at all
familiar with Judaism would understand why.

Collis

    Collis, you may find this ludicrous.  With all due respect, that
    doesn't prove anything.
    
    The statement is accurate.
    
    Sorry to disillusion you.
    
    Laura
    

    Yes, Laura.
    
    The Christian notion of redemption is not an aspect of Judaism.  It may
    have evolved from Jewish sects that existed at the time of Jesus
    (Essenes most likely), but it is not Pharasaic.  Today's Judaism is
    derived from the Parisees.
    
    Daniel

    Re: .37
    
    Well, excuse me, but Abba Hillel Silver happens to be "at all" familiar
    with Judaism--as is Emil Fackenheim, who wrote the 1989 introduction to
    the book--so I guess your assertion is incorrect.
    
    -- Mike

    I think one of the problems here is that Christians often tend to
    assume that Judaism is somehow more or less just like Christianity,
    with only a small exception of how to view Jesus; they assume that
    Christian beliefs about a whole host of fundamental issues are pretty
    much the same as the Jewish perspective.  Because Christianity has
    interpreted that part of the Bible that it shares with Judaism in a
    certain way, often to support its own theology, it often incorrectly
    assumes that Judaism must also interpret those passages in the same
    way. 

    I think a lot of this attitude actually comes from a rather patronizing
    point of view, since Christianity sees itself as the natural
    progression from Judaism, so the inference is that naturally Judaism
    *must* view theological questions in the same way that Christianity
    does.

    -- Mike

    Mike, thanks for your labor in entering all this informative material.
    
    Thanks also for your well-considered .41.
    
    Laura

Hmmm.

What, pray tell, is the Day of Atonement for?

Collis

    RE:  Yom Kippur
    
    These are a few short notes on a subject that occupies volumes of deep
    thought.
    
    We atone for our "sins".  Actually sins has a different meaning than
    the 2 words in Hebrew, which translate more closely into "mistakes" and
    "missing the mark."  The word sin is loaded with Christian implication. 
    Jews use it as a kind of shorthand, but understand it doesn't mean the
    same thing to us.
    
    There are sins against God and sins against man.  The sins against man
    cannot be forgiven unless we first make amends with the person we
    wronged,  e.g., return borrowed or stolen property, pay back money,
    make financial reparations, apologize, ask for forgiveness.  
    
    Actually, the most relevant concept for Yom Kippur is t'shuva
    (pronounced t-shoe-vah).  T'shuva means return.  We say that we do
    t'shuva.  That means we return to our true, higher selves and return to
    God.  We turn away from the paths we were following, and return to the
    ways of holiness.
    
    During the High Holiday period, a repeated phrase is "T'shuva, tefillah
    (prayer), and tzedakah (charity) may avert the evil decree."
    
    A fundamental difference is that Judaism is a communal religion. 
    Nearly all prayers are phrased in the plural, "we".  On Yom Kippur, we
    pray as individuals, as members of families, and very importantly, as a
    people.  We pray that the coming year will be a good year for the
    Jewish people in all lands.  Here in the US, we pray that the
    swastika-paintings and graveyard destruction will stop.  We are aware
    that our situation as a people is in God's hands.  We make every effort
    in communal prayer to draw close to God, to be pleasing in the eyes of
    God, to merit a good year.
    
    Yom Kippur occurs shortly after Rosh Hashonah, which begins the new
    year.  We say that God keeps a ledger with all our deeds, and at the
    end of the year "he" tallies the ledger and determines our fate (again,
    as individuals, families, and a people) for the next year.  On Rosh
    Hashonah he writes this fate, alluded to earlier as "the evil decree"
    if a bad one.  On Yom Kippur he seals it and closes the book.  So we
    pray to be written in the Book of Life, for a good year full of
    sweetness.  On Yom Kippur, it is determined who shall live and who
    shall die.
    
    This is why the High Holy Days are also called The Days of Awe.  We
    remember God's awesome power to determine our fates.
    
    About redemption:
    
    God does not "redeem" us from our sins.  God forgives us and looks on
    us with graciousness.  We don't have the concepts of damnation or
    salvation, so redemption has an entirely different meaning in Judaism
    (as described in Mike's excerpts).  
    
    When we pray to our redeemer, I think the most common image in our
    heads is that we pray for the Jews trapped in Iraq, in Russia, anywhere
    that Jews are not free.   A redeemer is one who pays a ransom to free
    the captives.  btw, Jews are all responsible to redeem each other from
    captivity.
    
    Laura
    

    I really appreciate the input of actual Jewish participants here.
    It sure beats the second-hand stuff.
    
    Richard
    

    .45
    
    Laura,
    
    Excellent summation!
    
    I think it is also important to re-emphasize a point from the book Mike
    was quoting: Judaism has no concept of Original Sin.  The rabbis teach
    that humanity lost out on Eden when Adam and Eve goofed with the apple
    tree, but there was no resulting state of "original sin" from the
    incident.  This, to me, is a crucial difference between Judaism and my
    understanding of Christianity: Jews are not "saved" through a Redeemer
    figure.  Jewish Messianic culture largely revolves around the
    "redemption" of those Jews who still live under oppression.
    
    Each Jew is accountable for his/her actions and must make amends for
    worng doing him/herself.  We also have communal responsibility for
    making amends, but the Christian theology of a savior figure is not
    present.
    
    Daniel

Thank you, Laura, very much for your entry.

How is the atonement for sins accomplished?

Collis

    Collis,
    
    About atonement.  This doesn't fit the Christian context, but I'm glad
    you are approaching with an open mind.  The simplest answer I can give
    to your question is a.) making things right, and b.) contrition.  But
    that falls far short of the sophistication of the concepts involved.
    
    If the sins are against people, you must make things right as much as
    possible.  (I think this is commonsense from any viewpoint.)
    
    If a person asks another person for forgiveness, the wronged party must
    provide that forgiveness.  To hold out is destructive of self and of
    relationship.
    
    If I sin against myself (for example by saying I study Torah more often
    but not doing so), I must make my own peace, then make peace with God.
    
    It is quite different from Catholicism where various penances or rounds
    of the rosary are prescribed.  Certainly traditional Jews follow up
    their making-things-right with congregational prayer on Yom Kippur. 
    But I never heard of any belief that the prayers are necessary for
    God's forgiveness.  Though most Jews are very uncomfortable about
    avoiding Yom Kippur services.  That's the one time each year when we
    massively come together as a people.  It's a lonely thing to leave
    yourself out.
    
    I think a more useful concept is t'shuva.  After all, if you sin, make
    right, and then go sin again, what have you accomplished?  If you
    perform t'shuva and stay with it, you've changed your life.  That's
    the key.
    
    The ethnic/communal aspect of t'shuva is important.  We make ourselves
    a more holy people by rededicating our energies to community
    organizations and charities, and to supporting the well-being of the
    people and land of Israel.  We examine our attitudes to rid ourselves
    of bigotry and xenophobia.
    
    We do believe that God has the attributes of mercy and lovingkindness
    as well as justice.  If one makes right and then approaches God with a
    spirit of contrition, one will be forgiven.  Of course, one may carry
    guilt in the heart for a lifetime.  Hopefully the guilt spurs one on to
    a better path.  Only God can judge.
    
    I hope this answers your question about atonement.  Christian beliefs
    do not neatly translate to Jewish concepts.
    
    Laura

>    It is quite different from Catholicism where various penances or rounds
>    of the rosary are prescribed.  Certainly traditional Jews follow up
>    their making-things-right with congregational prayer on Yom Kippur. 
>    But I never heard of any belief that the prayers are necessary for
>    God's forgiveness.

I never heard of any such belief either.  Who told you that?

Penance is not performed to receive God's forgiveness; God's forgiveness
is a free gift available from God to anyone who comes to Him in faith,
truly sorry for wrongs done and resolving to lead a new life.

Penance is performed for the spiritual strengthening of the penitent,
to help the penitent avoid sin in the future.  Just like any prayer.

/john

    RE:  .50
    
>    But I never heard of any belief that the prayers are necessary for
>    God's forgiveness.

>>I never heard of any such belief either.  Who told you that?

    I was referring to Jewish beliefs only.  
    
    Thanks for elucidating the purpose of penances and rounds of the
    rosary.  I didn't know that. Mskes sense when you consider that the
    priest provides absolution, THEN prescribes the penances.
    
    Laura

    The Sacrament of Penance as practiced in Catholic and other Christian
    denominations is not based on the false idea (promoted by
    anti-Catholics) that is the accumulation of merit that achieves
    salvation for oneself.  Rather, Penance is Biblical, in the imitation
    of Christ.

    Christ forgave sins because he is always God, as he forgave sins he
    performed miracles, and he delegated that ministry to the
    Apostles.  It was precisely this ministry that created the first
    conflict between him and the Jewish leaders.  (Mk 2:6) "He is
    blaspheming.  Who can forgive sins but God."

    From "The Rites of the Catholic Church" "The priest imposes an act of
    penance or expiation on the penitent; this should server not only as
    atonement for past sins but also as an aid to a new life and an
    antidote for weakness.  As far as possible, therefore, the penance
    should correspond to the seriousness and nature of the sins.  This act
    of penance may suitably take the form of prayer, self-denial, and
    especially service to neighbor and works of mercy.  These will
    underline the fact that sin and its forgiveness have a social aspect."

    Two more points: After the penitent receives a penance and prayers, the
    priest absolves him, and then says "The Lord has freed you from your
    sins.  Go in peace."  That's the order.

    "Rounds of the Rosary" is a deprecating characterization of the form of
    mental and vocal prayer that has been part of Christian prayer life
    since the 11th C.                      

    Gee, Patrick, sounds like you are offended.  Is that so?  This sort of
    response makes me feel uncomfortable here...  How about a few "I"
    statements so I know where you're at?  I'd hazard a guess that you are
    uncomfortable with my presence here.  Yes?  Why not say so?
    
    In your first paragraph are you implying that I'm anti-Catholic?  
    How can you possibly derive that?  If your statements were  not
    directed to me, I'd sure like to know that.
    
    Certainly, no offense was intended.  I find it hard to believe that
    "rounds of the rosary" is deprecating.  That takes quite a stretch of
    the imagination...   Even if the term is wrong, it certainly doesn't
    sound insulting.  What term do you use?  
    
    All I meant to say is that Judaism has no specific religious acts to be
    performed as part of atonement.  I contrasted to my little knowledge of
    Catholicism just to make that mild point.  
    
    Laura
    

    I'm surprised that you are surpised.  How often do you apply the term
    "rounds" to your prayer and mediation?
    
    Read what I wrote.  Anti-Catholics use the arguement that Catholicism
    is unbiblical in denying that Christ's sacrifice was complete. 
    Suggesting it in your reply is an error that I am happy to correct.
    
    I use the term "rounds" to describe drinks and golf.

re Note 19.54 by SDSVAX::SWEENEY:

>     Read what I wrote.  Anti-Catholics use the arguement that Catholicism
>     is unbiblical in denying that Christ's sacrifice was complete. 
>     Suggesting it in your reply is an error that I am happy to correct.
  
        Can you imagine what it would be like if one or more of the
        Jewish participants in this file screamed "anti-Semitism"
        every time somebody incorrectly described a Jewish practice
        or belief?

        Bob

There are other possibilities beside deliberate anti-Catholicism.
Do not always ascribe to malice what may be explained by ignorance.

Consider the uninstructed person who watches a scene in a confessional
in a movie -- it would be easy for a person who doesn't understand
Christian doctrine on the atonement to think that the penitent person
is earning forgivess by reciting the prayers and performing other
devotional acts or assignments given as penance.  This is honest
ignorance.

The fact is that Jesus' passion has already secured God's forgiveness for
all our sins -- we obtain the benefits of His passion when we approach
Him in faith and love.  Jesus tells us how to approach Him in love:

                "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

    If I made an assertion regarding a Jewish practice, not being a Jew, I
    would want to be very sure that I was correct.  furthermore, I'd not
    use words that suggested mockery or flippancy.

I think it is reasonable to take Laura at her word that she didn't know
that you would find "rounds of the rosary" an offensive term for "rosaries"
or "recitations of the rosary" or some other preferred term.

When someone unfamiliar with Christianity makes an error (at least the first
time) it seems that it would be more charitable to simply explain the error.

It is true that some participants in this conference continue to make false
or deprecating statements about the Faith (such as repeating the false claims
about the Church's teachings on women, claims which are being deliberately
spread by people hostile to the Church) even after they have been corrected
on that specific point.  But I haven't noticed Laura doing this.

However, I have noticed that she very frequently makes false statements about
Christianity as though they were fact (both here and in other conferences).
I still am not at all convinced that this is malice rather than extreme
collective cultural ignorance.  Those who mistaught Laura may or may not
have deliberately misrepresented the Faith.  It's very easy to pick up
completely incorrect ideas about Christianity from the popular press and
media, if those are her only teachers.

/john

    Thanks for handling this with tact and personal concern, Patrick and
    John.  If I didn't want to be better informed about Christianity, I
    wouldn't be here.
    
    Apologies to Patrick for using "rounds".  I thought it was an okay term
    because the rosary itself is round (or some are anyway).  Never thought
    about the term in connection with golf or drinks.
    
    I'm okay about this and ready to move on.  Shall we?
    
    :-)
    Laura
    

    RE :.59
    
    Laura,
     Very nice! I'm sure that *NO* malice was there at all. You have very
    gracious.........
    
    I hope you continue to note around here.....
    
    Marc H.

    I struggle with this Jewish concept of "no redemption."  I'm reminded
    of Nathan convicting David of his sins with Bathsheba.  He was guilty
    of the sin of the high hand which there is no atonement for by Jewish
    law.  Yet David pleaded for God's forgiveness...yet he could make no
    atonement for it.  Nothing.  He was at God's mercy.  Isn't that the
    idea behind redemption?
    
    Daniel, my mensch friend, how about enlightening me?  Laura, please
    feel free to input as well.  Anyone in fact.  I just miss my talks
    with Daniel.  Sorry Daniel...it's been hectic here.  BTW...when do
    you leave?  BTW...I still think you need a Savior, mensch or not.  ;^)
    
    Jill

Hi Jill!  Good to see you here!
    
Note 19.61     
CSC32::KINSELLA 
    
   > I struggle with this Jewish concept of "no redemption."  I'm reminded
   > of Nathan convicting David of his sins with Bathsheba.  He was guilty
   > of the sin of the high hand which there is no atonement for by Jewish
   > law.  Yet David pleaded for God's forgiveness...yet he could make no
   > atonement for it.  Nothing.  He was at God's mercy.  Isn't that the
   > idea behind redemption?
    
    
    I'm not familiar enough with that story to comment on it
    properly...However, one thing I'd emphasize is the evolution of the
    Jewish faith since the Biblical period.
    
    There were three major sects of Judaism at the time of Christianity's
    emergence:
    
    1) Sadducees -- These were the priestly and political class and their
    existence was very tied to the Temple and religious functions of the
    Temple.  After the Jewish Revolt there was no Temple, no Jerusalem,
    ergo, no Sadducees.
    
    2) Essenes -- An apocalyptic, Messianic sect.  They believed and
    prepared for the kind of armageddon battle of good vs evil protrayed in
    Revelations.  They also disappeared after the Jewish revolt.  The best
    guess is that the Qumran Community went to Jerusalem to fight the
    Romans and got wiped out.
    
    3) Pharisees -- The rabbis, essentially.  Judaism as we know it today
    emerged from the Pharisaic tradition and from their tradition of
    Midrash -- Biblical commentary.
    
    (I have notes better outlining the differences of these groups...I'll
    try to dig them up)
    
    I suppose the major point of this is that Judaism today is not
    necessarily defined by Scripture.  The best comparison I've heard is
    with the U.S. Consitution.  Call the Torah the Constitution and the
    case history and recorded decisions of the Supreme Court the Rabbinic
    Midrash.  The Torah is a founding document, but how it governs our
    lives and faith is ever-changing and open for interpretation and
    debate.
    
    Within that tradition, Messianic redemption has become de-emphasized. 
    It isn't gone entirely: we still end Passover seders with "Next year,
    in Jerusalem," we still leave out that glass for Elijah but the Jewish
    Messiah redeems Israel from oppression.
    
    Individuals "redeem" themselves by their actions.  If I sin against
    you, I must seek forgiveness from *you* One can sin against God too,
    but Laura's description of the "community confession" at Yom Kippur is
    very true in my experience.
    
    I've lost a lot of theological beliefs over the years, but that aspect
    of practicing the Jewish faith is still very dear to me.  Also, the
    understanding that we are imperfect but God doesn't expect perfection
    from us: God expects our best effort.
    
    I don't think you will find that in Scripture, however, and that may be
    where you are having confusion.  Solomon Schecter's "Aspects of
    Rabbinic Theology" is a good text for starting on Talmud.
    
    Daniel

I attended Shabbat worship at Temple Shalom, a local synagogue, last Friday
evening.

During a post-worship discussion, it was reemphasized to me that the doctrine
of 'original sin,' though anchored in the Genesis story, is not a part of
Jewish theology.

Shalom,
Richard
================================================================================
        <<< LGP30::DKA300:[NOTES$LIBRARY]CHRISTIAN-PERSPECTIVE.NOTE;2 >>>
                 -< Discussions from a Christian Perspective >-
================================================================================
Note 19.47                  Christianity and Judaism                    47 of 62
BUSY::DKATZ "Weird is Relative"                      21 lines  21-MAY-1993 12:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    [19].45
    
    Laura,
    
    Excellent summation!
    
    I think it is also important to re-emphasize a point from the book Mike
    was quoting: Judaism has no concept of Original Sin.  The rabbis teach
    that humanity lost out on Eden when Adam and Eve goofed with the apple
    tree, but there was no resulting state of "original sin" from the
    incident.  This, to me, is a crucial difference between Judaism and my
    understanding of Christianity: Jews are not "saved" through a Redeemer
    figure.  Jewish Messianic culture largely revolves around the
    "redemption" of those Jews who still live under oppression.
    
    Each Jew is accountable for his/her actions and must make amends for
    worng doing him/herself.  We also have communal responsibility for
    making amends, but the Christian theology of a savior figure is not
    present.
    
    Daniel

    	Richard --
    
    	Is Temple Shalom where Rabbi Howard Hirsch is?  I admire him
    	greatly for his ecumenical abilities.

Note 19.64

>    	Is Temple Shalom where Rabbi Howard Hirsch is?  I admire him
>    	greatly for his ecumenical abilities.

Yes, he is.

And, I might add, I admire Bishop Richard Hanifen (Bishop of the Colorado
Springs Diocese, for the sake of our other readers).

Shalom,
Richard

    That's probably why the Jews of the days of the Roman Empire hated Paul
    so much.  Pauls preaching on sin was very foreign to them.
    
    -Jack

    .66
    
    The Jews hated Paul.  Hmmmm.  A rather sweeping statement, even should
    there be some sort of evidence to back it up.
    
    Do you suppose Jews still hate Paul, Jack?
    
    Have you read through the rest of this string?
    
    Richard
    

    No, actually I haven't read through the string.  But consider the
    following.
    
    1. When Paul was in Damascus, the Jews lied in wait to take his life,
    and made a vow to God they wouldn't eat until he was dead.  They either
    broke the vow or starved to death.
    
    2. Paul was stoned twice by the Jews and Paul was sent to Rome on
    account of an incident with the Jewish people.
    
    3. Paul needed a 100 guards to protect him from a riot of Jews as he
       stood before Festus.  They wanted him dead.
    
    No, Paul was not welcomed amongst his own family.  He was ostracized
    from his brothers and sisters of that time.  
    
    -Jack

    	Actually, Hirsh refers to Hanifen as "my Bishop" and Hanifen
    	refers to Hirsh as "my Rabbi".
    
    	Yes, these two are integral cogs in a growing ecumenical machine
    	in this area.  More and more they look for what they have in 
    	common instead of focusing on what separates them.

    .68
    
    Oh, I never doubted that Paul had enemies.
    
    Jesus had enemies.
    
    Doubtlessly, some feel threatened and would prefer my silence as well.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    .69
    
    You won't hear any argument from me.  But I tend to welcome and encourage
    ecumenical efforts, myself.
    
    God's peace,
    Richard
    

>    You won't hear any argument from me.  But I tend to welcome and encourage
>    ecumenical efforts, myself.
    
	Richard, I think you misinterpret the spirit of my postings
    	today.  We don't always have to disagree, you know!  :^)
    
    	I support ecumenical efforts too.  See 1054.1.  In fact we
    	had both these men participating, and that's what made it
    	the success it was!    

re Ecumenical efforts and this topic:

I propose as an Ecumenical hymn:

			Oy veh, Maria!

	At worship yesterday evening at Temple Shalom (Colorado Springs),
it was announced that some of our guests were from Holy Apostles Catholic
Church and Springs Community Church.

Shalom,
Richard

    Richard:
    
    You mentioned our guests.  Does this mean you are attending the temple
    now??
    
    

    I am excited about a consolidation plan announced in the Globe last
    week about an agreement between Andover Newton Theological School and
    Hebrew College.  Hebrew College will sell its facilities in brookline
    and move to Andover Newton.  Both institutions will maintain their
    BOD's and separate institutions, but joint programs will be planned.
    
    I think that is wonderful news.  I hope this happens soon so I can
    start reaping the benefit of this interfaith dialogue as a student at
    Andover Newton.
    
                              Patricia
    

    .75
    
    I've worshiped twice at Temple Shalom in the last 3 weeks.  I
    plan to go again.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    That's great Richard.  Just out of curiosity, why have you chosen a
    synagogue to seek fellowship...considering the Jews don't believe
    Y'Shua to be the messiah?  By the way, I went to a Bamitzvah a few
    months ago and enjoyed it immensely!
    
    -Jack

.78

>    That's great Richard.  Just out of curiosity, why have you chosen a
>    synagogue to seek fellowship...

Because I feel moved by God's Spirit to do so and because I want to do so.

>    ...considering the Jews don't believe
>    Y'Shua to be the messiah?  By the way, I went to a Bamitzvah a few
>    months ago and enjoyed it immensely!

I'm glad that that doesn't present a problem for you either.

Shalom,
Richard

    Not at all.  I find the Synagogue a real intriguing place.  I once
    toyed with the idea of becoming a messianic Jew and this wasn't too
    long ago.
    
    -Jack

	Jewish Reconstructionist Movement

The fourth largest Jewish denomination in North
America, the Jewish Reconstructionist Movement
has approved same-sex marriage.
 
The Reconstructionist Movement is an offshoot from
Conservative Judaism and makes up just over two percent
of North American Jews.  They opened a rabbinical
seminary in the late 1960's and have always ordained
women, gays, lesbians, and (presumeably) bisexuals.
At the rabbinical association meeting a few years ago,
congregations were invited to go ahead with same-sex
marriage (without mandating that they have to.)
 
The Reconstructionists are little known outside of
Jewish circles but are enormously influential among
the non-Orthodox.  The founder, Mordecai Kaplan, is
one of the greatest Jewish thinkers of this century,
formerly a faculty member at the Conservative movement's
seminary.  It is by far and away the fastest growing Jewish
denomination in North America and is fully recognized by
the State of Israel (its converts are recognized for the
purposes of the law of return) and the communal structures
here in North America, like the United Jewish Appeal,
Hillel (campus ministries), and the federation umbrellas.
(In other words, the Orthodox may protest if JRM is 
used as an example of Jews who allow same-sex marriage,
but no one outside of Orthodoxy will claim that JRM
is not legitimately Jewish.)
 
Same-sex marriages are termed kiddushin in Hebrew.

			information supplied
			by an email correspondent

    Jesus wept.

	kiddushin 

	Translation?

 ZZ   The fourth largest Jewish denomination in North
 ZZ   America, the Jewish Reconstructionist Movement
 ZZ   has approved same-sex marriage.
    
    By what authority did they make this decision?
    
    -Jack

    
    Jack,  their authority is that they're the fourth smallest Jewish
    denomination, don't ya know?!!  Everywhere one goes these days, one
    sees the tyranny of "the fourth largest..." whatever!
    
    jeff

    	Didn't the article say that this sect makes up like 3% or
    	so of Jews?  Sounds like about the same as the proportion
    	of organized Christian expressions that sanction it.

"A minor saint is capable of loving minor sinners.  A great saint loves great
sinners.  The Messiah will see the merit of every Jew."

				--  Rabbi Israel Baal-Shem Tov

    There is a caveat to a broad statement such as that...
    
    "They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father.  Jesus said
    unto them, If you were Abrahams children, you would do the works of
    Abraham.  But now you seek to kill me, a man that has told you this
    truth, which I have heard from God.  You DO the deeds of your father."
    ....
    "Jesus said unto them, If God were your father, you would love me; for 
    I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself but He
    that sent me.  Why do you not understand my speech?  Because you cannot
    hear my word.  You are of the Father the devil, and the lusts of your
    father you will do. "
    
    I believe God sees merit in all of us...and I believe he loves
    unconditionally.   I also believe God will see merit on which God we
    individually choose to follow.
    
    -Jack

    .88
    
    As far as I can tell, it is the same One, Jack.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Then if this is the case, what do you think about Jesus' rebuke to some
    of the Jews of that time?
    
    -Jack

    I think the question is an unworthy one.
    
    Richard
    

    Noo...you just don't want to answer it because it contradicts the words
    of the Rabbi!  I wasn't trying to be perjorative but was just saying it
    wasn't appropriate for the Rabbi to make such a broad brush statement.  
    
    -Jack

    .92
    
    Believe whatever you want, Jack.  You will no matter what I say.  To me,
    it was an unworthy question.  Unworthy of me.  And unworthy of you.
    
    Richard
    

    Well I disagree.  If the Rabbi made a claim as he did, then it is
    worthy of the test of truth.  Jesus believed that just because one was
    born of the seed of Abraham did not make them a Jew nor did it make
    Abraham their father.  My question was to ask what the Rabbi might have
    to say about this.
    
    Another thing, you mentioned that I will believe what I want anyway.  I
    think you know me well enough to realize this isn't always true!
    
    -Jack

    Well, I disagree.  But I'm not even a minor saint.
    
    Richard
    

    Right...you could be a major saint and not even know it.  A saints a
    saints a saint!  No such thing as minor and major saints.
    
    Do you disagree with Jesus' words on this matter?
    
    -Jack

    Christians are saints.

   "It is a mistake to view ancient Judaism, especially during its rise in
the Tannaite period and its development into what later became 'normative'
for the following centuries, as a system of belief or of doctrine; instead
it was a system of piety.....

   Why then did Jesus and the apostles reject Pharisaism?  As a matter of
fact, they did not reject it.  What Jesus criticized and rejected was the very
thing the best of the Pharisees criticized and rejected -- extravagance in
interpretation, cruelty and inhumanity in the name of religion, for example
the casuistic interpretation of the 'corban' rule, and rigorous prohibition
of works of mercy on the Sabbath.  He criticized hypocrisy and pretense,
arrogant professionalism, and the whole tendency, seen in some of the worst
representatives of scribism, to identify their code of rules with the 'perfect
will of God' -- the tithing of 'mint, dill, and cummin' to the neglect of
'the weightier matters of the Law' (Matt 23.23; cf. Luke 11.42)."

	pg 10-11, _Ancient Judaism and the New Testament_, Frederick Grant
	(1959)

Oh Fred, there you go again.  Can't you see how off the mark you are?  ;-}

Shalom,
Richard

    It is an appropriate question to ask, whether Jesus' intention was to
    reform the extravagences of Judaism or institute a new religion.
    
    From birth to death, Jesus remained a faithful Jew.  It was his
    Jewish followers that severed relationships with Judaism.

    Hebrew Snarf!!

.100 MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I press on toward the goal"

    Hebrew Snarf!!

Now there's a thoughtful and well-reasoned reply! :^)

It certainly does convey the message, though.

Steve

  ZZ      From birth to death, Jesus remained a faithful Jew.  It was his
  ZZ      Jewish followers that severed relationships with Judaism.
    
    I believe a Christian is a completed Jew.  A Christian acknowledges the
    covenant that was fortold of through the Hebrew scriptures.  
    
    I agree Patricia that Christians know way too little about Judaism.  I
    believe that alot of what needs to be understood of Christianity is
    wrapped up in the Hebrew ceremonies of the Old Testament and I think we
    have robbed ourselves of this knowledge.  I do believe however that the
    writer of Hebrews and Galatians was absolutely correct though, that the
    sacrificial system of Israel was no longer of any effect...and had to
    be separated from Christianity.  The sacrifice was a forshadowing of
    things to come.  Jesus was the fulfillment of the sacrifice and
    therefore it was no longer needed.
    
    -Jack

    Jack,
    
    Why was the sacrificial system abandoned in Judaism itself?
    
                                   Patricia

    This is my understanding of it.
    
    In the year 70, A.D., Jerusalem was besiged by the Roman Government.
    The works of Josephus give a very grim account of the destruction of
    Jerusalem at this time.  Included in this destruction was of course,
    the temple.  The temple contained the Holy of Holies and all the
    instruments required by the Levitical law to undergo the sacrifice.
    
    No temple would mean the sacrifice could not be implemented.
    
    Later on, there was an organization called the council of Jania who
    instituted the new modes of worship and sacrifice amongst the Jewish
    people.  I believe this to be accurate but am not sure!
    
    -Jack 

    I don't know the answer but it seems that Judaism and the newly
    emerging Christianity both gave up the sacrificial system at the same
    time.
    
    My guess is that there are cultural reasons that both religions stopped
    sacrificing animals at this time.

    Actually, Christianity never had a sacrificial system per sae.  The
    early Christian church was made up primarily of converted Jews.  These
    Jews were being brow beaten by Judaizers to go back to sacrificing.
    
    -Jack

   Jack is pretty much correct.  Sometime in history, God told Israel
   only to sacrifice in the place He designated, which was the temple 
   in Jerusalem.  When the temple was destroyed and the Jews expelled 
   from Jerualem around 70 AD, there was no way the sacrifices could 
   be done in the manner according to the Law.  This is why lamb is 
   no longer eaten at Pesach (Passover) by most Jews - because it cannot
   be properly sacrificed in the temple.  I think the Rabbis pretty much 
   replaced the sacrificial system with prayer and good deeds.  Interestingly,
   there is prophecy in the O.T. (I've forgotten where, would have to look 
   it up) that sacrifices will again be offered in the rebuilt temple, and 
   there is a group in Israel today preparing for when that time might come 
   by researching and crafting the tools and implements necessary for 
   the Priestly system.

   Leslie

   PS.  The book that has been quoted from, author is Fred something or 
        other: what's been quoted pretty much agrees with what I've read 
        elsewhere, -- more or less :-),

    
    Anyone with the slightest knowledge of the Bible knows
    that *Jesus* was the greatest and final sacrifice for sin.  The Jews
    stopped sacrificing when their temple was destroyed in 70 A.D.  And
    this was no mistake.  God put an end to the sacrificial system not only
    actually by Christ's final propitious sacrifice but circumstantially by 
    the destruction of the temple and the repeated dispersions of the Jews.
    
    jeff

>       <<< Note 19.106 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I press on toward the goal" >>>
>
>    Actually, Christianity never had a sacrificial system per sae.  The
>    early Christian church was made up primarily of converted Jews.  These
>    Jews were being brow beaten by Judaizers to go back to sacrificing.
>    
>    -Jack

    Oh, oh Jack -- I'd have to disagree with you a bit here.  The Jewish
    Nazarene (Christian) sect continued to participate in synagogue and 
    temple life like other Jews, they didn't convert from Judaism, they 
    simply recognized Yeshua as the promised Jewish Messiah.  They continued
    to offer their sin and thank offerings in the temple, and to observe
    all the Biblical festivals like Pesach, Shavuot, Rosh haShanna, Yom Kippur,
    and Succot, to practice Brit Milah and Bar Mitzvah, and so on.  They 
    didn't have to develop their own sacrificial system because they never
    left their Jewish practices - it was all already there.

    HOWEVER, after some controversy and demonstrations by God through the 
    outpouring of His Spirit on gentile believers, it was decreed that GENTILE
    Believers did not have to convert to Judaism in order to accept new life
    and salvation in Yeshua, and to worship the God of the Bible, and be
    immersed (baptized) in their faith in Messiah.  

    Judaizers were those who said that in order to obtain forgiveness and 
    salvation through Messiah, and to fellowship with Jewish believers in
    Yeshua, it was necessary to convert to Judaism, and observe the Mosaic 
    covenant.  The decision made by the Jersulam council was that all that 
    was required of the new gentile believers was to follow the Noachide 
    covenant - not to eat the blood of animals, to abstain from sexual 
    fornication, and something else - I think its recorded in the book of Acts.
    
    If you're interested in the history of Judaism and Christianity, and how
    they diverged so much, there are a few good books I could recommend.
    We have them at home, so let me know if I should look up the titles,
    authors, and publishers for you.

    For the most part, Christians have some real misconceptions about the
    Jewish faith.  The research my husband and I started a few years ago into
    how the Christian faith grew out of its Jewish base, what the differences
    were and so on, eventually led us to becoming part of the Messianic Jewish
    movement, and really changed some (not all) of the ways we look at things.
    The Messianic synagogue we are a part of has both Jewish believers and
    non-Jewish (approx 60 % Jewish, 40 % non-Jew).  Since today's Messianic 
    Jewish movement is relatively new, there is still a lot of stuff that is 
    being worked through, and there is a LOT OF OPPOSITION from both the rest 
    of Judaism and the rest of Christianity, but I truely think the movement
    is from God (obviously, or I wouldn't be involved in it).

    Leslie

     And I agree with Jeff in that Yeshua made further sacrifice for
     the purpose of atonement unnecessary because He was the perfect,
     one-time-good-for-eternity atoning sacrifice.  I think that the 
     temple's destruction may have been for the very purpose of ending 
     the priestly/sacrificial system, but I'm not dogmatic about that 
     yet.  And I am not so sure about other types of sacrifice - especially 
     the thank offerings.  Its something I'm still looking at and don't 
     have resolved for myself yet.

     Leslie

    Some good discussion entries in here by Jack, Jeff, and Leslie.  You
    won't find me arguing against Christians needing to learn more about
    their Jewish roots.
    
    Mike

    Leslie, any sources you can provide pointers to would be appreciated. 
    Frankly, I don't see how Christians could knock the Messianic movement. 
    A solid case could be made that it is more Biblical than Protestantism.
    
    Mike

    First Jeff banging the calvary church and now mike banging at all of 
    Protestantism!.

    Patricia, you forgot to put a smiley face there...Tsk tsk tsk...naughty
    naughty!!!
    
    Leslie, I was actually referring only to the animal sacrifice.  This is
    what isn't done anymore and to my knowledge, no early Christian Church
    instituted it.  It must have been hard for Peter, a Judaizer himself,
    to forego this...considering he felt strongly the need to convert to
    Judaism first.
    
    -Jack

    Christians knock the Messianic Jewish movement because we have
    chosen to continue to observe Torah - such as observing shabbat
    (the sabbath), celebrating the Biblical holidays, and the rabbinic
    holidays as well, not eating the food prohibited in the Bible and
    so on.  This doesn't mean we follow all of Orthodox halacha though!  
    We use a modified liturgy, a Messianic Jewish siddur - which includes 
    the Shema, some traditional Rabbinic prayers such as the kaddish 
    (mourner's prayer) and others, but also incorporates references to 
    Yeshua as the Messiah.  We follow the traditional sequence for reading 
    the Torah and Haftorah (kept in the ark on the bimah) in the synagogue, 
    but add to it readings from the N.T.  So Christians say we are trying 
    to put ourselves under the Law, etcetera.   But observing Torah is not 
    done out of bondage, we do these things out of the freedom we have in 
    Yeshua and out of love for God, whose teachings and instructions these 
    are.  Plus, following them, brings tremendous blessing to one's life, 
    especially, to one's spirit.  Its hard to explain.

    And of course, just from my description above, you can probably guess
    a lot of objections all of the other Jewish groups - Reform, Conservative,
    Reconstructionist, Orthodox - have.  To them, anyone who has accepted
    Yeshua as the Messiah has gone astray and given up their Judaism, and 
    in fact, is an idolator so any observance of Torah then becomes pretend.  
    I can understand how the objections exist, but hope for a day when there 
    will be acceptance.

    Leslie

    Patricia, I'm sorry you took it that way.  For the lack of a better
    word, I directed that toward all of Christiandom - myself included.
    
    Mike

    Hi Jack,

    I was talking about animal sacrifice as well, but also the
    grain and drink offerings, etcetera.  I'm a little fuzzy on
    the details about the various sacrifices, so won't put anything
    in now, but will try to look up the details at home for you 
    later.

    Leslie

    Leslie, the few times I've celebrated the Biblical holidays has been a
    great experience for me and my family.  The object lessons that God has
    placed in them are invaluable for teaching my children about God's
    nature.  Every Christian should be doing this at a minimum. 
    Resurrection Sunday, Thanksgiving, and Christmas don't occur often
    enough to provide us an opportunity to teach our children about God. 
    Adding in the Biblical holidays are a tremendous blessing.
    
    thanks,
    Mike

The Theology of Judaism
=======================

A lecture series sponsored by University of Denver (Denver) and Temple
Shalom (Colorado Springs).

All lectures scheduled for Sunday evenings, 7:00 pm
at Temple Shalom, 1523 E. Monument (719-634-5311)

All lectures free and open to the public


  The Jewish Understanding of Hebrew Scripture		November 19, 1995
  Dr. Frederick E. Greenspahn


  Life After Death					December 17, 1995
  Rabbi David J. Zucker


  Sin and Atonement					January 21, 1996
  Dr. Howard J. Hirsch


  The Messiah						February 18, 1996
  Dr. Seth Ward


  A Jewish Understanding of the Gospels			March 24, 1996
  Dr. Howard J. Hirsch

    Richard,
    
    I would love to attend the Nov 19, lecture, but i guess not enough to
    fly to Colorado for the event.
    
    I love to see a synopsis of the talk if you are planning to attend!
    
    
                                     Patricia

    The last 3 caught my eye.  Any chance that they'll be taped?
    
    thanks,
    Mike

.121

>    The last 3 caught my eye.  Any chance that they'll be taped?

I doubt it.  And unfortunately, I probably won't be able to make it
to most of the series either.

Richard