web analytics
September 23, 2014 / 28 Elul, 5774
At a Glance
Blogs
Sponsored Post
Meir Panim with Soldiers 5774 Roundup: Year of Relief and Service for Israel’s Needy

Meir Panim implements programs that serve Israel’s neediest populations with respect and dignity. Meir Panim also coordinated care packages for families in the South during the Gaza War.



GOYESHE KOP

There’s No Such Thing as Judeo-Christian Values

The label “Judeo-Christian” tends to assume, at the expense of Judaism, that Christians and Jews believe essentially the same things.
no Judeo Christian

Photo Credit: Yori Yanover

Back in 2008, David Klinghofer, who used the be the Forward’s token Republican, published a book titled How Would God Vote?: Why the Bible Commands You to Be a Conservative. I seriously disliked his book, not because I see anything wrong with Conservatism or Conservatives – my most admired politicians have been Sam Nunn and Henry “Scoop” Jackson – but I couldn’t stomach the liberties Klinghofer was taking with rabbinic tradition, to produce a book that, in my opinion, belonged on the shelves of a Presbyterian, and not a Jewish library.

My good friend and publisher Larry Yudelson and I decided, in the summer of 2008, to write a rebuttal which we titled, aptly enough: How Would God REALLY Vote: A Jewish Rebuttal to David Klinghoffer’s Conservative Polemic.

Larry contributed most of the entries, I was responsible for, I believe, 5 out of the 15. One of my major peeves regarding Klinghofer’s book was his view on the  liaison between Christians and Jews.

In his opening chapter, “With God or Against Him,” Klinghoffer sets up a premise that’s hard to follow, not because of its complexity, but because of what we on the Lower East Side would call a mishmash of concepts:

It should go without saying that my political reading of the Bible is my own, drawing on the oldest biblical interpretive tradition, claiming roots that go back three thousand years and found in the Talmud and other ancient rabbinic texts. Yet Scripture’s vision of the ideal society does not belong to Jews alone. 

The paragraph reminded me of the old Jewish joke, which is better spoken, but since I don’t know most of you personally, you’ll have to do the voices in your head:

A gentile professor of Judaic Studies in Iowa finds out that to really learn the Talmud he must go to the Boro Park section of Brooklyn and find himself a teacher. The professor flies over and knocks on a basement door and this little Jew comes out. Upon seeing him, the professor asks to be taught the Talmud, but the little Jews says, “I can’t teach you Tal-mud, you got a goyeshe kop, you just don’t think Jewish.”

The professor insists. The little Jew says, “OK, solve this problem, and I’ll teach you:

“Two people go down a chimney. One stays clean, the other gets completely schmutzig, filthy. Which one washes up?”

The professor eagerly answers, “The dirty one, naturally.”

The little Jew wails: “Goyeshe kop, goyeshe kop! I told you I can’t teach you anything. Listen, the schmutzig guy sees the clean guy. Schmutzig doesn’t see any problem. But the clean guy sees the schmutzig guy and figures he must be just as dirty, so he goes and washes. I told you, you got a goyeshe kop. I can’t help you.”

The professor begs for another chance, and the little Jew gives in, suggesting a new problem to solve:

“Two people go down a chimney. One stays clean, the other gets completely schmutzig. Which one of them would wash up?”

The professor says, “Sure, I know this one, it’s the clean fellow.”

At this, the little Jew wails, “Goyeshe kop, the clean one takes a look at the dirty one and says, Moishe, you’re all schmutzig, go wash already! Enough. I really can’t help you, mister, you got a goyeshe kop.”

The professor begs for one last chance, and the little Jews says, “Fine, one last chance, I’ll give you a completely new problem, then you’ll leave me alone:

“Two people go down a chimney. One stays clean, the other gets completely schmutzig. Which one of them washes up?”

At this point, if you’re telling this joke, it’s all physical stuff, as the poor professor from Iowa freezes, unable to decide which of the two conflicting solu-tions to choose. The little Jew can’t stand it anymore and interjects, “Goyeshe kop, who ever heard of two people going down a chimney and only one of them gets schmutzig?”

For me, this joke illustrates the essence of Rabbinic Judaism. Hardly interested in developing uniform answers or dogmas, Rabbinic Jews love dispute, which enshrines all opinions. We actually celebrate the Talmud’s pluralism with the declaration: These and these, too, are the words of a living God (Eruv. 13b, Gitin 6b, to name just two out of hundreds).

How can Klinghoffer say that he represents a tradition of 3000 years of rabbinic interpretation and in the same breath claim that there’s such a specific thing as “Scripture’s vision?”

When you read Klinghoffer’s book—keep in mind the image of the little Boro Park Jew, his hands raised to the heavens, wailing: “Goyeshe kop!” Because, to be honest, someone who has internalized the free spirit of our rabbinic sages would not seriously try to classify them either as right-wing conservatives, or as left-wing liberals.

The legal foundation for rabbinic law is found in Deuteronomy 17:8-10:

If some issue is beyond your understanding, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, as it might be a matter of controversy for you, then you will go up to the place which God chooses, and inquire with the priests the Levites, and with the judge that will rule in your days. And they will show you the sentence of judgment. And you will follow their sentence, given in the place which God will choose, and you will observe to do ac-cording to all that they instruct you.

In other words, if something comes up which is too difficult for you to decide on your own, go ask somebody who knows.

This dovetails nicely with the Mishna’s recommendation: Aseh l’cha rav, “Appoint for yourself a master and a mentor.” This phrasing indicates that you are an intrinsic part of the equation and that the arbiter you choose should be one who knows and understands you and your circumstances.

These two combined ideas, that you should seek advice on stuff you can’t figure out for yourself, and that the advice you seek should come from someone who knows you, suggest that the average Joe in Torah Land is a highly intuitive person and well versed in the law, who follows his personal notions and personal path, except when he gets stuck.

We are encouraged to act independently and intuitively concerning the entire gamut of Torah law—in matters large and small. The phrasing of the text (Deuteronomy 17:8) is ki yipaleh mimcha, lit.: “Should it be too wondrous for you.” This suggests a reliance for deciding proper behavior based on relative intuition, rather than strict knowledge.

This extremely individualized approach to morality and the law is profoundly emphasized when the Mishna describes wealth as a function of an individual’s assessment of his own satisfaction, rather than some arbitrary number of gold pieces in his coffers. In the Mishna’s view: Eizaehu Ashir? Hasame’ach b’chelko. “Who is wealthy? One who is content with his share.” (Avot 4)

Indeed, I would define the rabbinic view on politics as the sanctification of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Contentment. (Could this be characterized as a conservative idea?)

If the Torah envisions us as independent thinkers, each pursuing a personal definition of material well being, how could it possibly advocate a party line, whether conservative Republican or liberal Democratic? It stands to reason that, at its core, the Torah would encourage us to examine which of the two choices best matches our individual political needs and aspirations and vote accordingly.

In that sense, abortion is not a “yes” or “no” issue, to be decided on a strictly dogmatic basis, but an issue that reflects conflicting public and private needs. Likewise, every topic Klinghoffer deals with in his book, from women’s issues to gay marriages to state-run schools to taxes to war, should be examined not according to dogma, but according to needs.

This pragmatic approach to politics rejects ideological litmus tests from the left, too. (This is why the American political system, with its direct voting for a local representative, is much more in line with rabbinic tradition than the Israeli system, in which one votes for a slate, often one based on ideology.) Government’s job is to help improve my living conditions, not my morality.

Klinghoffer writes:

As an Orthodox Jew, I offer this book as a call to arms to America’s mostly Christian conservative voters.

And:

John McCain was right when he said, in a 2000 interview on beliefnet.com, that our “nation was founded primarily on Christian principles. ” That fact should have practical consequences.

Klinghoffer proceeds to contrast these views with those of whom he dubs the “New Atheists.” But I suspect that inside the Orthodox Jewish world, Klinghoffer would have a hard time convincing anyone of the need to apply “practical consequences” to the Christian principles upon which this country was, supposedly, founded.

He would likely hear angry grumbling on topics like the Crusades, during which Christian zealots decimated Jewish communities. He might hear a thing or two about how the Inquisition applied its Christian values to destroy the thriving Jewish centers of Spain and Portugal. Or he might hear about the European Holocaust and our annihilation at the hands of our faithful Christian neighbors. Pope Pious XII’s name might pop up in that context, as an example of how conservative Christian leaders responded when Jews were swept away in rivers of their own blood.

But even if we were to forgive Klinghoffer’s imperfect awareness of Jewish history, the very assumption of such a thing as universally accepted Christian principles is patently wrong, just like the notion that the U.S. Constitution is based on them.

Klinghoffer must be familiar with historian Brooke Allen’s popular book Moral Minority (Ivan R. Dee, 2007), in which she shows that the six most important founders—Franklin, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and Hamilton—were Enlightenment-style deists, who rejected the notion of making religion a basis for political life.

They valued the separation of church and state. They devoted a passage in the US Constitution to eschewing religion as a basis for political life. They talked about God the “Divine Author” (Washington) or the “Superior Agent” (Jefferson). The Founding Fathers weren’t atheists—nobody was in the 18th century. (Nobody except Thomas Paine, that is.) But to suggest that someone like George Washington would look to the Bible to “apply practical consequences” to political life is tantamount to telling a lie—which we have on reliable tradition that our first president was incapable of doing.

Putting aside the argument over historical revisionism, try Googling “Christian principles” and see if you can come up with any meaningful consensus. I couldn’t.

Jewish principles are easier to pin down: Open a siddur (prayer book) and right after the morning service, you find Maimonides’ Thirteen Principles of Faith. They are short, compact, and easy to remember—and there is even a rhyming version for sing-alongs.

Maybe Klinghoffer was spoiled by that gem of rabbinic marketing prowess and he figured the gentile prayer books offered a similar amenity. Fuggedaboutit. Everyone—from Marxist Catholics to Attila the Hun Evangelists—cites his own unique idea of Christian principles as the basis for his agenda. The Bible is a big book and there are enough verses to suit everyone’s moral preferences. You want a couple of examples?

The National Council of Churches Justice and Advocacy Commission offers the following “Christian Principles in an Election Year:”

1. War is contrary to the will of God.
2. God calls us to live in communities shaped by peace and cooperation.
3. God created us for each other, and thus our security depends on the well being of our global neigh-bors.
4. God calls us to be advocates for those who are most vulnerable in our society.
5. Each human being is created in the image of God and is of infinite worth.
6. The earth belongs to God and is intrinsically good.
7. Christians have a biblical mandate to welcome strangers.
8. Those who follow Christ are called to heal the sick.
9. Because of the transforming power of God’s grace, all humans are called to be in right relationship with each other.

On the other hand, a story on Ekklesia (“a think-tank that promotes transformative theological ideas in public life”) from April 15, 2003, informs:

The Rev. Pat Robertson, the founder and chairman of the Christian Broadcasting Network and the Christian Coalition, said many Christians who support the war believe the biblical principles of loving one’s enemy means that precautions must be taken to minimize civilian casualties.

“…As long as we continue the course we’re on,” Mr. Robertson said, referring to the overall concern for Iraqi civilians, “we’re on solid ground, not only in terms of Christian, biblical concepts, but also in terms of public relations.”

As Iraqi casualties, by conservative counts, have reached a hundred thousand (not to mention the countless injured and an estimated two million displaced) one shudders at the projected magnitude of the butchery had the good reverend not insisted upon minimizing civilian suffering….

So, which are the authentic Christian principles that the U.S. is founded upon? “Welcome the stranger,” or “shoot every stranger that moves?” Klinghoffer is not very specific here, although I suspect that the kind of Christian principles he endorses would have driven Jesus into one of his famous table-throwing tantrums.

But even if, somehow, the Bible Belt’s Jesus Jumpers found common Christian principles with St. John the Divine’s watercress sandwich crowd—which is one big If—what resonance would these principles have with religious Jews?

Having conjured the notion of universal Christian principles out of whole cloth, Klinghoffer now moves on to another product of the American imagination: “Judeo-Christian values.”

…Pretending to fight “theocracy,” secularists are in fact attempting a radical redirection of American life that seeks to silence the authentic Judeo-Christian heritage that has sustained America since the country’s inception.

Klinghoffer should read Arthur Allen Cohen’s The Myth of the Judeo-Christian Tradition (Harper & Row, 1969), which questions the appropriateness of the term, theologically and historically, suggesting instead that it is an invention of American politics.

Cohen thinks that there is simply no such thing as Judeo-Christian tradition. He points to the fact that the two religions have had separate theological agendas for the last two thousand years.

Or, if Klinghoffer prefers a gentile’s opinion:

The label “Judeo-Christian” tends to assume, at the expense of Judaism, that Christians and Jews believe essentially the same things. Besides glossing over the very real and important theological and liturgical differences, it tends to subsume Jewish traditions within an umbrella that is dominated by Christian ideas and practices. (Religion and the Workplace: Pluralism, Spirituality, Leadership, by Douglas A. Hicks; Cambridge University Press, 2003)

Let’s be clear: Far from “sharing” one tradition, Orthodox Jews are prohibited from marrying Christians, setting foot inside a Christian church—and we can’t even drink from an open bottle of kosher wine that has been used by a Christian. We reject the Christian idea of salvation, we abhor Christian divine teachings on every subject, and we are repulsed and outraged by incessant attempts by Christian missionaries to bring us into their fold.

It is particularly disturbing when Klinghoffer makes statements which reveal his complete assumption of elements of New Testament Pauline ideology, for instance, the requirement that wives submit to their husband’s authority. There is no mandate on precisely how a woman should behave with her husband—Jews expect the happy couple to work it out for themselves. Also, while divorce may be a tragedy, and God cries, it is in no way banned—in Judaism, that is. The story in Christianity, and Klinghoffer’s “Judeo-Christian Biblical America,” is different.

Incidentally, we have more in common with Muslims than we do with Christians; Jewish law permits Jews to enter a mosque… but not a church.

To insist that we have some kind of bond with religious Christians because of similar core values, is to propagate a terrible lie. Christians who base their views on what they call the Old Testament, don’t view Mosaic law as an abiding legal text. The Church has abolished Torah law as part of its attempt to abolish the very idea of Jewish nationhood.

Pauline anti-Judaism seems not to be through the left hand as an implication of his Christology; rather his teaching on the law appears to be a spear in his right hand aimed straight at the heart of Judaism, that is, Torah… [Paul] does not disagree with individual Jews but with Judaism itself, saying that Christianity has replaced it. By attacking the law as such, Paul appears to attack not abuses and personal failings but the essence of Israel. (Paul and the Torah, by Lloyd Gaston; University of British Columbia Press, 1987.)

Jews and Christians differ on every single fundamental principle—even on the meaning of core Scriptural texts. More crucially, Christians rely on the Old Testament for legal delineation; whereas Jews rely solely upon our rabbinic tradition. We never, ever turn to our Bible for legal guidance, only to our rabbinic literature. To suggest that our Sages had anything at all in common with the likes of Jerry Falwell, Jimmy Carter or Pat Robertson is a slap in the face of 2500 years of scholarship.

“Judeo-Christian” is as valid a concept as happy-joylessness, or tall dwarves. Klinghoffer’s yearnings for this repugnant “ideal” is a deviant phenomenon without a trace of commonality in traditional Jewish thought, ancient or modern.

I have deep respect for religious leaders active in the interfaith arena, who seek to communicate and cooperate with Christians on political and social issues. But I resent Klinghoffer’s attempt to erect an ideological partnership between Christianity and its blameless victims.

David Klinghoffer attempts to rile up his readers through an attack on the “atheist left.” In the process, he manages to break away from the very rabbinic Judaism he claims as his base. This book will attempt to correct his errors, which are numerous, not in an attempt to persuade readers that God’s vote is with liberal lefties rather than with conservative righties, but, instead, to uphold our rabbinic tradition of multiple opinions. What this means in practice is that you can’t cry “God says so” in a crowded town hall meeting.


This article was originally published in How Would God REALLY Vote: A Jewish Rebuttal to David Klinghoffer’s Conservative Polemic by Larry Yudelson and Yori Yanover. Starting this week, readers can access the Kindle Edition for only $5.99.

About the Author: Yori Yanover has been a working journalist since age 17, before he enlisted and worked for Ba'Machane Nachal. Since then he has worked for Israel Shelanu, the US supplement of Yedioth, JCN18.com, USAJewish.com, Lubavitch News Service, Arutz 7 (as DJ on the high seas), and the Grand Street News. He has published Dancing and Crying, a colorful and intimate portrait of the last two years in the life of the late Lubavitch Rebbe, (in Hebrew), and two fun books in English: The Cabalist's Daughter: A Novel of Practical Messianic Redemption, and How Would God REALLY Vote.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

14 Responses to “There’s No Such Thing as Judeo-Christian Values”

  1. great place for truth the Jewish news,

  2. Charlie Hall says:

    'Henry “Scoop” Jackson '.

    Jackson was "Conservative" on, well, almost nothing. He was a strong supporter of civil rights for all in the US and other countries, and of government intervention to further that. He also had a spectacular record on the environment. And of course with that ideology he was a huge supporter of Israel. :)

  3. Charlie Hall says:

    "Franklin, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and Hamilton".

    Washington and Hamilton were devout Anglicans, although for some reason never fully explained Washington seems to have rarely if ever taken communion. But both were religious liberal Christians even in the modern sense of the term. Washington's support for the small Jewish community in America was without precedent among Christian rulers, and Hamilton became one of America's first abolitionists.

    Adams became a heretical Unitarian, Madison seems to have been irreligious, and Franklin and Jefferson would not correctly be considered Christian by the standards of that time or of today. Furthermore, after Washington, the next US President of whom it is certain that he was a member of a non-heretical Christian church at the time of his election was Benjamin Harrison, a Presbyterian Elder, elected 1888. The idea that the United States was founded by Christians to be a Christian society is simply false!

  4. Charlie Hall says:

    With those rather minor corrections, Yori Yanover's critique is dead on. Christianity and Judaism do agree on some things, but disagree on a lot. And Klinghoffer's presentation of Christianity is not fully accurate, as it presents politically conservative evangelical positions as the norm. Most Presbyterians, Methodists, and Catholics don't hold by them any more than Jews do.

  5. Linda Dudley says:

    I am learning from the Torah in the last 2 years that God is not in my realm of thinking. He is not in a theological “Christian box ” nor do do I feel led of late to ever call myself a Christian again. I feel less guilt driven and more Love driven than in any denominational teaching out there. God is God, the great I AM! Torah is God’s Breath to us. Revealing Himself when sought. Thank you for bringing me to a clearer understanding of the differences between the two

  6. YOU: Far from “sharing” one tradition, Orthodox Jews are prohibited from marrying Christians, setting foot inside a Christian church.
    ME: Then how do you explain the historical fact that during the reign of Jew-friendly Popes, Rabbis were invited and did indeed lecture in front of.

    a Christian audience at certain Italian Catholic Cathedrals as long ago as the 1300-1400s AD? Given that there was NO such thing as Orthodox.

    Judaism until the clearly German-oriented movement called Reform Judaism had begun to gain strength, why do you view historical attitudes.

    shared by some, but not all European Jews, centuries earlier by the term Orthodox Jews. 'Orthodox' was invented in response to the Reform.

    Judaism phenomenon of the 19th century. I think you are simply labeling stuff you like personally as Orthodox and then either denying or leaving.

    historical facts you do not like or agree with to present and promote YOUR view of Orthdox Judaism which I know is not shared by all those called.

    by that term.

    YOU: We reject the Christian idea of salvation,
    ME: So the God that describes Himself as just and merciful in the Torah and who is always delighted by sinners who sincerely repent and change their ways is not the God of the Jews? How about a God who gave 10 generalized laws to be used a guide for the average common believer to live by in order to achieve admittance into Heaven? No, not the God of Judaism? I would say that you have no idea what you are talking about and would either ignore or deny the truth that all fundamental aspects of the 'Christian idea of Salvation' originated from Judaism as practiced by the residents of Judea around the year 33 AD. No author or scholar has ever shown that the Christian doctrine of Salvation comes from Egypt, Greece, Babylon, or Rome. Many authors have shown they come from Jerusalem.

    YOU: We abhor Christian divine teachings on every subject.
    ME: So you abhor the teachings and folklore about the Archangel Michael, Gabriel, or Raphael? Would that include teaching subjects like the Merkaba of Ezekiel, the Maccabee derived doctrine of Purgatory, or the repeated emphasis that the God of Israel created all people, all life, and all matter in the material universe and is therefore the God of all? I'll bet you do not really know what is meant by divine as opposed to say 'sacred', 'traditional', 'fundamental', etc. But it sounded good and it felt good personally to write it that way, huh? Or do only abhor those 'Christian divine teachings' that are basically the exact same as traditional Jewish teachings simply because they are Christian? Would you abhor them if they were Jewish only or if the Christians were prohibited from teaching them, so that you could think of them as Jewish only?

    YOU: We are repulsed and outraged by incessant attempts by Christian missionaries to bring us into their fold.
    ME: Would those Jews who actually decide to become Messianic Jews or Jewish Christians also say they were repulsed and outraged by their.

    encounters. Don't get me wrong, I'm Catholic who refuses to talk to any pair of young Mormon men wearing black ties and nice white shirts and.

    black pants. I usually close the door on most Jehovah's Witnesses and others within about 60 seconds, but I would never say such arrogant,

    snobbish things such as 'repulsed' or 'outraged' in describing very kind, loving simple people who have been raised and educated to believe what.

    they are doing is not only right, but necessary for their own personal salvation. They truly believe they must annoy you to go to Heaven for.

    themselves. I'd be far more 'repulsed' by those peddling ponzie schemes or network product sales.

    I have met Jews (a few Israeli) and have read the writings of a great deal more Jews (several of them Rabbis) who would disagree with what YOU 'reject' or 'abhor' and are 'repulsed' and 'outraged' by. Since you are NOT a Rabbi, how does that square with your claim to speak for Orthodox Jews in general. Perhaps what you meant to say is that you speak for that portion or percentage of Orthodox Jews who actually agree with what you have written. In America at least, the Orthodox community is reported to vote majority Republican every election since Reagan and perhaps earlier. I'm fairly sure that 'repulses' you though, so you forget to include that glaring statistic. I'm done mocking you, but I did enjoy every minute of it. God bless and Shalom.

  7. YOU: Far from “sharing” one tradition, Orthodox Jews are prohibited from marrying Christians, setting foot inside a Christian church.
    ME: Then how do you explain the historical fact that during the reign of Jew-friendly Popes, Rabbis were invited and did indeed lecture in front of a Christian audience at certain Italian Catholic Cathedrals as long ago as the 1300-1400s AD? Given that there was NO such thing as Orthodox Judaism until the clearly German-oriented movement called Reform Judaism had begun to gain strength, why do you view historical attitudes shared by some, but not all European Jews, centuries earlier by the term Orthodox Jews. 'Orthodox' was invented in response to the Reform Judaism phenomenon of the 19th century. I think you are simply labeling stuff you like personally as Orthodox and then either denying or leaving historical facts you do not like or agree with to present and promote YOUR view of Orthodox Judaism which I know is not shared by all those called by that term.

    YOU: We reject the Christian idea of salvation,
    ME: So the God that describes Himself as just and merciful in the Torah and who is always delighted by sinners who sincerely repent and change their ways is not the God of the Jews? How about a God who gave 10 generalized laws to be used a guide for the average common believer to live by in order to achieve admittance into Heaven? No, not the God of Judaism? I would say that you have no idea what you are talking about and would either ignore or deny the truth that all fundamental aspects of the 'Christian idea of Salvation' originated from Judaism as practiced by the residents of Judea around the year 33 AD. No author or scholar has ever shown that the Christian doctrine of Salvation comes from Egypt, Greece, Babylon, or Rome. Many authors have shown they come from Jerusalem.

    YOU: We abhor Christian divine teachings on every subject.
    ME: So you abhor the teachings and folklore about the Archangel Michael, Gabriel, or Raphael? Would that include teaching subjects like the Merkaba of Ezekiel, the Maccabee derived doctrine of Purgatory, or the repeated emphasis that the God of Israel created all people, all life, and all matter in the material universe and is therefore the God of all? I'll bet you do not really know what is meant by divine as opposed to say 'sacred', 'traditional', 'fundamental', etc. But it sounded good and it felt good personally to write it that way, huh? Or do only abhor those 'Christian divine teachings' that are basically the exact same as traditional Jewish teachings simply because they are Christian? Would you abhor them if they were Jewish only or if the Christians were prohibited from teaching them, so that you could think of them as Jewish only?

    YOU: We are repulsed and outraged by incessant attempts by Christian missionaries to bring us into their fold.
    ME: Would those Jews who actually decide to become Messianic Jews or Jewish Christians also say they were repulsed and outraged by their encounters. Don't get me wrong, I'm Catholic who refuses to talk to any pair of young Mormon men wearing black ties and nice white shirts and black pants. I usually close the door on most Jehovah's Witnesses and others within about 60 seconds, but I would never say such arrogant, snobbish things such as 'repulsed' or 'outraged' in describing very kind, loving simple people who have been raised and educated to believe what they are doing is not only right, but necessary for their own personal salvation. They truly believe they must annoy you to go to Heaven for themselves. I'd be far more 'repulsed' by those peddling ponzie schemes or network product sales.

    I have met Jews (a few Israeli) and have read the writings of a great deal more Jews (several of them Rabbis) who would absolutely disagree with what YOU 'reject' or 'abhor' and are 'repulsed' and 'outraged' by. Since you are NOT a Rabbi, how does that square with your claim to speak for Orthodox Jews in general. Perhaps what you meant to say is that you speak for that portion or percentage of Orthodox Jews who actually agree with what you have written. In America at least, the Orthodox community is reported to vote majority Republican every election since Reagan and perhaps earlier. I'm fairly sure that 'repulses' you though, so you forget to include that glaring statistic. I'm done mocking you, but I did enjoy every minute of it. God bless and Shalom.

  8. PS: You have a lot of very interesting things when I get down time love to look at thanks for posting.. Shabbat Shalom in Messiah Yeshua..

  9. May the LORD God bless you in the name of St. Judas Maccabaeus.

  10. Immanuel Ben Yehudah Gomez I prefer as an English speaker the spelling Joshua. For was not the authentic name and pronunciation of our LORD and Savior Jesus Christ the exact same as the one who followed Moses as the religious leader of the Israelites. Do you still refer to Moses' assistant as Joshua, but to the Son of Mary and Joseph, the Nazarene as Yeshua. If so why the difference?

  11. Ch Hoffman says:

    Rarely do I ever consider this writer's material of even limited value; however, in this instance, his calling out of the myth of "Judeo-Christian" values is worthy of note

    We are not them
    They are not us

  12. Yeremiahu Rueben Yonteff says:

    Wonderful Article!!!

  13. Godwin Akkub says:

    If Judeo-Christianity does not exist in Israel , it does in Africa especially Ethiopia and Nigeria which claim Jewish origins. In both African countries , their ancient Hebraic Judaism were corrupted with Christianty during colonization leaving them as Judeo-Christians . While Ethiopian Judeo- Christians still parade replicas of the Ark of Covenant to this day , Nigerian Jews better known as Heboes or Hebrews decorate their Churches with replicas of Magen David . To learn more of these practices , order today the book , Cow Without Tail , from amazon.com or barnessndnoble.com.

    Also , the Six-pointed Judaic Star of David can easily be configured to represent the Christain Star of Bethlehem . The rabbinic kippahs are also worn by the Christian clergy , from Pope to Bishops . To disagree with the concept of Judeo-Christianity is to deny the historical evolution of Christianity from Jewish roots unless Christ is no longer a Jew but a Palestinian Arab !

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Top Story
Yamam Hebron Shootout
Israel SWAT Team Exchanging Fire with Hamas Kidnappers in Hebron [video]
Latest Blogs Stories
Jordana

When I think back to one year ago it actually feels like a lifetime ago; I was truly another person.

eretz-israel-struck

To continue meriting the Promised Land, Jews must consider & always improve upon their own behavior.

Brit Milah

Though the Talmud doesn’t give instructions, Metzitza has always been done B’Peh – by oral suction.

Obama and Netanyahu in the Oval Office

ISIS and Hamas are cut from the same cloth. Obama should listen to Netanyahu.

Last night I attended the big festive celebration of ten years of Menachem Begin Heritage Center and Museum. Security was tight, almost like at a foreign airport, because both Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and President Ruby Rivlin were to be there. And yes, they were and yes they spoke. Officially the evening was a tribute […]

Hamas’ tunnels were destroyed as were plans for their unparalleled terror attacks on Rosh Hashana.

Grandmaster Michael Adams talks about life as a professional chess player.

The Jewish Press stressed the possible ramifications of such a breach of Israeli political protocol

Why some countries are more economically successful than others? Tune in for the answer…

If not scared by God be scared by man; Hopefully ethics will integrate into lives for proper reasons

Smear campaigns by people with agendas other than justice do not faze him; He does what is right.

Countries like Turkey, Europe and even the US have proven fertile ground for recruiting terrorists

How many times have you heard anti-semites spew words like Israel are Nazis, or what you are doing to the Arabs is worse that what the Nazis did to the Jews?!…

My blog, Israpundit, was hacked, and I had to move to a new domain…

There’s much confusion about the definition of Daas Torah; simply put it means the wisdom of Torah.

We’ll never be able to negotiate a true, lasting peace with the Arabs.Their aim is our destruction.

More Articles from Yori Yanover
rain ATM

A Jerusalem woman is trying to hold on to her umbrella while withdrawing some cash at a Meah Shearim ATM, Sunday, March 9, 2014. The rain appeared out of the blue (which is how rain should), after a warm week that started to feel like summer. Well, it don’t feel like summer no more. Last […]

Rabbi Meir Mazuz (seen visiting a synagogue in Crown Heights, Brooklyn) declared in a public Internet psak that it is legal for a Jew to go up to temple Mount.

Needless to say, Shas, the Haredi Sefardi party, is not happy.

“The only difference between this world and the time of Meshiach is our bondage to the gentile kingdoms.”

Here’s the Israeli Navy boat INS Hanit arriving in Eilat on Saturday, March 8, 2014, after capturing the Klos C, which was carrying dozens of advanced Iranian-supplied weapons made in Syria and intended for Palestinian guerrillas in the Gaza Strip. Here’s Israeli Navy Commander Vice Admiral Ram Rotberg speaking with the INS Hanit soldiers in […]

Pat Condell has a new video out, so, sit back, have fun. By the way, Message to Offended Muslims should not be confused with Message to Off Handed Muslims. Also, I’d love to hear what he has to say about Haredim.

The description that came with this picture says: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks with American actor Bette Midler during an event at the house of Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan in Hollywood on March 6, 2014. But Bette Midler is not really an actor, she’s a singer who made movies for the LGBT community and […]

We will shut them up in the campuses, we will shut them up in the high schools, we will shut them up at the 92nd St. Y.

An Israeli female soldier (because they’re better at removing babies from their homes) evacuates a baby from a settlement in Judea and Samaria some time in the recent past. I’m thinking, if the baby was angry enough, couldn’t he evacuate in return, right there in her arms? Imagine the same picture, except with a settler […]

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/yoris-news-clips/theres-no-such-thing-as-judeo-christian-values/2013/12/26/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: