Burning the NT

[redkim]

Thank you howie. This makes much more sense. Thanks for the clarification.

[bunsinspace]

BS"D

The Apache in America learned scalping from the whites who were given money according to how many Indian scalps they brought back.  The Israelis learned book-burning from the Christians who to this day burn sacred scrolls which took lifetimes to create and not too long ago burned all available copies of Talmud in many major Christian-ruled cities.  Not that copy-catting evildoers is justification for evil, but it gives one a sense of perspective in the very least IMHO. 

It is always the hallmark of a weak people that emulates the faith of their oppressors IMHO.  Israeli Judaism must maintain its Jewish character at all costs, so it is weak.  Hence the great reaction against illegal activities in the religious sphere.  But again, in perspective, they still lynch Jews in America for simply being Jews (cf. Crown Heights).  And in Ethiopia and almost evey Moslem land in the ME it is still considered a badge of honor to murder a Jew for no reason other than they are a Jew.  So it is a far cry from the violence that is still practiced by Christianity and Islam.  And in that environment the reaction of burning mere books is wholly appropriate considering the scale of the crime.  Even if I personally believe the various wars and violent outbreaks between the three faiths is based upon pure ignorance in every case.

[Riviya]

I find it very offensive when one of the Christians quoted in the linked article compared Jews burning the NT with the the history of Jews having their books burned in Europe.  How dare he!  As if we should have learned something!  Well we did.  When Christians are in power they oppress Jews, burn our books, kill us, force us to convert - of yeah, like they still want to convert us, but don't have the power to force us.  That's one of the reasons we find their proseletizing so offensive.   
Personally if people gave up the books voluntarily, there is nothing wrong with the burning.  It seems like it was a message to those who work hard at our conversions.

Why don't they worry about their own damn souls and bringing lapsed Christians back to the fold - oh yeah it lacks the drama and bonus points in heaven that getting a Jew to become a Christian does.   THey make me sick.   

[Acumen]

I find it very offensive when one of the Christians quoted in the linked article compared Jews burning the NT with the the history of Jews having their books burned in Europe.  How dare he!  As if we should have learned something!  Well we did.  When Christians are in power they oppress Jews, burn our books, kill us, force us to convert - of yeah, like they still want to convert us, but don't have the power to force us.  That's one of the reasons we find their proseletizing so offensive.

Well, it's apparent you don't believe in easing into a forum.   

[VLinvictus]

I find it very offensive when one of the Christians quoted in the linked article compared Jews burning the NT with the the history of Jews having their books burned in Europe.  How dare he!  As if we should have learned something!  Well we did.  When Christians are in power they oppress Jews, burn our books, kill us, force us to convert - of yeah, like they still want to convert us, but don't have the power to force us.  That's one of the reasons we find their proseletizing so offensive.   
Personally if people gave up the books voluntarily, there is nothing wrong with the burning.  It seems like it was a message to those who work hard at our conversions.

Why don't they worry about their own damn souls and bringing lapsed Christians back to the fold - oh yeah it lacks the drama and bonus points in heaven that getting a Jew to become a Christian does.   THey make me sick.   

I agree with you completely.

Missionaries should be outlawed completely. If a missionary comes into a town and tries to convert people to their pagan idolatrous religion, they should be asked to leave. If they refuse to leave, they should be removed by whatever means necessary.

[SquirleyWurley]

If something is in my possession and I want to burn it for whatever reason, the only issue is am I starting a riot or am I catching the woods or neighborhood or my house or some person on fire.

To burn the books owned by someone else, is a whole different affair.

Re: conversation and offering literature to someone -- entirely acceptable.  But if someone isn't interested, you don't persist, that's rude, it's harassment, it may even be legislated against.  And there's issues of time and place.  There's no reason to enter someone else's property and subject them to your views with a loudspeaker/bullhorn or to drop your literature on their property.

Frankly, I consider unsolicited junk mail and newspapers to be LITTERING and TRESPASSING.

[river]

Here's my take on it.  If somebody throws trash on my property, I have a right to burn it. 

[Acumen]

I find it very offensive when one of the Christians quoted in the linked article compared Jews burning the NT with the the history of Jews having their books burned in Europe.  How dare he!  As if we should have learned something!  Well we did.  When Christians are in power they oppress Jews, burn our books, kill us, force us to convert - of yeah, like they still want to convert us, but don't have the power to force us.  That's one of the reasons we find their proseletizing so offensive.   
Personally if people gave up the books voluntarily, there is nothing wrong with the burning.  It seems like it was a message to those who work hard at our conversions.

Why don't they worry about their own damn souls and bringing lapsed Christians back to the fold - oh yeah it lacks the drama and bonus points in heaven that getting a Jew to become a Christian does.   THey make me sick.   

I agree with you completely.

Missionaries should be outlawed completely. If a missionary comes into a town and tries to convert people to their pagan idolatrous religion, they should be asked to leave. If they refuse to leave, they should be removed by whatever means necessary.

Why?

[Acumen]

Here's my take on it.  If somebody throws trash on my property, I have a right to burn it. 

From what I read of the article, individuals didn't burn the books on their own respective properties.  Instead, they met somewhere near the synagogue in Neveh Rabin to burn the literature.

[Howiedds]

acumen:

Why

I don't think you can divorce the intensity of Jews' reactions from the history of missionizing for 1500 in Christian Europe. It was not, as you know, the benign efforts of Christians simply spreading the "good news" among potential converts. It was often, "convert or die,"  "convert or leave."

Then one needs to understand the feeling of Jews when they live in or even just visit Israel. There's no place like it for Jews. Despite the success of Jewish survival in this blessed land of ours, America, there is a unique feeling experienced by every Jew in Israel: the Hebrew language, the Jewish Calendar, whole communities that are kosher and observant (even for Jews not kosher and observant there's a lift of spirits). It's a Jewish land with a Jewish majority where a Jew is not in the minority. Then along come these Christian missionaries and Jews are over reacting, perhaps,  but what's behind it is, "Even here, in our place!"

individuals didn't burn the books on their own respective properties.  Instead, they met somewhere near the synagogue in Neveh Rabin to burn the literature.

The books were not confiscated from people. They were gathered house to house from people who gave them up voluntarily to be destroyed, gathered in one place, and burned. Perhaps this was an over reaction, and it was certainly insulting to Christians. But I think some Jews on this thread and many Jews elsewhere had the reaction of, "Good, paybacks are tough. You burned ours for centuries with no sensitivity or care that those were our holy books. And when you burned ours, you burned us and our children along with them. So don't be moaning to us about the insult. "

I do not agree with the burning, but I understood the emotion behind it. And I am honest enough, and prideful enough to admit that a little part of me said, "Jews are in control here. Get used to it. Never again."

[Acumen]

Howie,

Thanks for that thoughtful response.

I guess I'm just a little hesitant to turn a blind eye to the burning of religious literature for a number of different reasons.  I suspect it had a lot to do with marking one's territory, or perhaps the protection of one's culture, however it may very well be the beginnings of something more aggressive down the line.  Stifling freedom of speech or the expression of religion is a slippery slope regardless how good it feels. 

[VLinvictus]

I guess I'm just a little hesitant to turn a blind eye to the burning of religious literature for a number of different reasons.  I suspect it had a lot to do with marking one's territory, or perhaps the protection of one's culture, however it may very well be the beginnings of something more aggressive down the line.  Stifling freedom of speech or the expression of religion is a slippery slope regardless how good it feels. 

There would not have been anything to burn if the missionaries hadn't bothered the people in the first place. There are people who need saving all over the world; why did they feel the need to go and target a people that has been the victim of proselytism and persecution for centuries, a people that has been oppressed and murdered and nearly exterminated as an exiled minority in foreign lands but now is apparently not even safe from being harrassed in its own sovereign homeland? Did not your founder tell his missionaries to leave towns that do not welcome his message and shake the dust from their feet?

Two wrongs don't make a right, but this recalls how the Talmud and other Jewish books were publicly burned by Christian authorities for centuries before the Nazis came along. It may not be an admirable or advisable response, but it is understandable to want to give the descendants, spiritual or otherwise, a taste of their own medicine. "If you feel bad that we burned your sacred text, maybe now you might have just the tiniest idea of how you have made us feel for 2000 years. We put up with this in your lands, but there's no way we should need to put up with this in our land!."

Missionary proselytism -- as distinguished from those whose primary agenda is to bring food and medicine to people as an expression of their faith conviction -- shows a profound disrespect for the target population.

[SquirleyWurley]

Stifling freedom of speech or the expression of religion is a slippery slope regardless how good it feels. 

When one decides to add the unsolicited materials they received to a communal garbage fire, that is not in any way a stifling of free speech or religion.  As I said, I see non-solicited junk mail as litter.  Doesn't matter whether it is religious or not.  If it doesn't entertain me and if I have no desire for it, it's getting recycled or burned or something.

[Howiedds]

Acumen:

I guess I'm just a little hesitant to turn a blind eye to the burning of religious literature for a number of different reasons. 

As I think most Jews responded here.

I suspect it had a lot to do with marking one's territory, or perhaps the protection of one's culture,

It did.

however it may very well be the beginnings of something more aggressive down the line.

Oh, I doubt that. Despite what I posted earlier, Israelis are under no misconception that they exist in a Jewish vacuum and are every wary that they exist in a Christian western world that will come down on them like a ton of bricks if the get too uppity.

 Stifling freedom of speech or the expression of religion is a slippery slope regardless how good it feels.

The people to whom the literature was given gave it up as they would their trash to the trash collector. No one demanded it or confiscated it.

[VLinvictus]

While I am not against people empathizing with the pain and suffering of their ancestors and making sure that history doesn't repeat itself, let's not get carried away with the "vicarious suffering." 

I am not trying to be offensive, but people can get carried away with taking credit for abuses they did not have to endure.  The reality is I could very well have more Jewish ancestry than Vic.

A community is greater than the sum of the individuals that compose it. The identity, history, and experience of a community transcends the individual experiences and histories of any given person within it because it is comprised of the histories and experiences of the entirety of its membership throughout history.

It's entirely possible that you have more "Jewish ancestry" than I do, although "ancestry" doesn't really count for much. AFAIK I don't have any known Jewish ancestors, although my father's ancestors were from Poland and Belarus so it's likely that somewhere down the line there might have been some intermarriage. Who knows. But that doesn't alter the fact that I am a member of the Jewish nation now, and am thus just as Jewish as Buns who traces his lineage to Aaron.

But my individual story or yours is not what's important here. It doesn't matter if any of the residents of the town were themselves the victims of Christian violence or if their ancestors were. They are still Jews and still part of the Jewish people and therefore participate in and are rooted in the experience, history, and spirit of the Jewish people -- which has been deeply scarred by such proselytism over the centuries and only now -- as free people in a land of our own -- are those scars even beginning to heal.

[Acumen]

They are still Jews and still part of the Jewish people and therefore participate in and are rooted in the experience, history, and spirit of the Jewish people -- which has been deeply scarred by such proselytism over the centuries and only now -- as free people in a land of our own -- are those scars even beginning to heal.

How is a convert to Judaism who hasn't experienced any personal persecution by Christians rooted in the experience, history, and spirit of the Jewish people? 

[VLinvictus]

How is a convert to Judaism who hasn't experienced any personal persecution by Christians rooted in the experience, history, and spirit of the Jewish people? 

I didn't think we were talking about converts but the Orthodox residents of a village in Israel. They themselves might not have been persecuted and perhaps their parents were not. Their grandparents might have been, but as Jews they carry with them the experience of other Jews all over the world and throughout history.

If you want to talk about converts:
Leaving aside any mystical mumbojumbo about Jewish souls and so forth, I would say that a convert, like a naturalized citizen, goes through a period of acculturation and assimilation into the group. He or she becomes accepted into the national group and makes him or herself acceptable by adopting the customs, values, and identity of the group he or she seeks to join. The convert, like the prospective citizen, becomes part of the community and thus draws from the community's experience and molds himself or herself to conform with the community. The actual procedure of conversion or becoming a citizen is usually the culmination and external certification of an internal process that had already begun.

[Akiva]

Being repeatedly proselytized to may not be a form of physical persecution-- but it is very much a form of persecution nonetheless.  I would not expect anyone to understand that, save for a community who, for thousands of years, has been proselytized to by a group claiming a heritage from that very people.  As far as not accepting the validity of shared communal history and sentiment, I would say that a person who feels such must simply not have an identifiable community.

[Acumen]

How is a convert to Judaism who hasn't experienced any personal persecution by Christians rooted in the experience, history, and spirit of the Jewish people? 

I didn't think we were talking about converts but the Orthodox residents of a village in Israel. They themselves might not have been persecuted and perhaps their parents were not. Their grandparents might have been, but as Jews they carry with them the experience of other Jews all over the world and throughout history.

If you want to talk about converts:
Leaving aside any mystical mumbojumbo about Jewish souls and so forth, I would say that a convert, like a naturalized citizen, goes through a period of acculturation and assimilation into the group. He or she becomes accepted into the national group and makes him or herself acceptable by adopting the customs, values, and identity of the group he or she seeks to join. The convert, like the prospective citizen, becomes part of the community and thus draws from the community's experience and molds himself or herself to conform with the community. The actual procedure of conversion or becoming a citizen is usually the culmination and external certification of an internal process that had already begun.

How does that answer my question?  Adopting is not the same as being rooted in something.

[Acumen]

Being repeatedly proselytized to may not be a form of physical persecution-- but it is very much a form of persecution nonetheless.

How?