The BBC Goes Not Nittel on Christmas

Here in England, I meet up with Judaism's ghost.

Ghost story, that should be:

Mark Gatiss’s dramatisation of The Tractate Middoth (BBC2) by...MR James. Don’t let the title put you off: this is a terrifying story of a haunting in a library. 

More:

Gatiss's adaptation of James's spine-tingling tale will air on BBC2 at 9:30pm on Christmas Day, followed at 10:05pm by MR James: Ghost Writer, a documentary about the revered master of discomfiture, which Gatiss will front...[Sacha] Dhawan, meanwhile, appears...[i]n The Tractate Middoth, he plays a young library assistant drawn into the supernatural world surrounding an obscure Hebrew text, 

A Talmudic text on Christmas?

The scenario is simple. A rich, diabolically misanthropic clergyman has surrounded himself with ancient books. He has a “soul like a corkscrew”. He has two possible heirs – one, John, he hates; the other, a harmless widow with a daughter, he despises. As he dies, he resorts to mortmain (“the hand of the dead”), the will that outlasts the body. His vast property he leaves, by one will, to his male heir. A later will leaves everything to the heiress. Yet he has secreted the revised will in an ancient and particularly sinister [???] book: The Tractate Middoth. He has donated this to a rare book library – but which one? And, if it is found (which, 20 years later, it is), what dark forces will theTractate release?Gatiss makes confident changes to his source text. He moves the main action from the Edwardian period to the 1950s. He introduces characters, a deathbed scene (which James might have thought a trifle heavy-handed) and Doctor Who-style visual effects. He makes the young hero a jaunty Cambridge undergraduate, not a beaten-down assistant librarian. It all works, although for those who love the story it jolts a bit.Two things combine to make the M R James story as perfect in its “movement” as a Swiss watch: brevity and a feather-light touch.

Just two comments.

1.  Tractate Middoth is not all that obscure or sinister. 

2.  On Christmas, there is a custom not to learn Torah.  And Christmas Eve is called 'Nittel' Nacht.  More here.

^

Bob "Hatchet Job" Simon and His Christians

Bob Simon was surprised that Israel's US Ambassador Michael Oren presumed that he would do a 'hatchet job' on a story on Israel. (and see at end)

{I am updating so go to the end where I am adding material if you've been here previously}
_____________

But, of course, it was a hatchet job.

Here are portions of the text from the transcript of Bob Simon's April 22 '60 Minutes' piece, "Christians of the Holy Land", Harry Radliffe, producer, - with my comments in square brackets in italics (and the video clip is here):-

The lead-in sets the tone:

(CBS News) The exodus from the Holy Land of Palestinian Christians could eventually leave holy cities like Jerusalem and Bethlehem without a local Christian population, Bob Simon reports. Why are they leaving? For some, life in the middle of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has become too difficult.

[wait, what 'exodus'? what 'Holy Land'? are Christians leaving...Israel? or what? and, by the way, aren't Jews a people who have holy cities? should that not figure in? do Muslims have holy cities? So, where is this "Holy Land"? Is it only "Occupied Palestine"? Jordan is not part of the "Holy Land"? They'd be disappointed as their tourism (see below) depends on that characterization. Simons never develops for the listener/viewer the reality, in all its proportions and complexity. he 'smoothes over' all the politics, the history - flattening it out so the viewer is putty in his hands]

Christianity may have been born in the Middle East, but Arab Christians have never had it easy there, especially not today. In Iraq and Egypt, scores of churches have been attacked, hundreds murdered. In Syria, revolution seriously threatens Christian communities. The one place where Christians are not suffering from violence is the Holy Land

[but they are, at the hands of fundamentalist Islamists who punish them as part of their fight with Israel in Gaza, and all throughout the Palestinian Authority but as you'll see later on, Simon allows that to slip away, too]: but Palestinian Christians have been leaving in large numbers for years. So many, the Christian population there is down to less than two percent, and the prospect of holy sites, like Jerusalem and Bethlehem, without local Christians is looming as a real possibility.

[Sounds ominous, does it not? And who is at fault?]

This is what the Holy Land looks like today. Bethlehem, where Jesus was born. [Jesus was born in "Bethlehem of Judea" - that is, Judea, not "Palestine"]. Nazareth, where he grew up. Jerusalem, where he died and where Christians believe he was resurrected. Nazareth is inside the state of Israel. Bethlehem is on the Israeli-occupied West Bank. The Christian section of Jerusalem is also under Israeli control. [actually, the neighborhood is termed the "Christian Quarter' but Christians live all throughout]

Bob Simon: When you first came here in 1964 [when Jordan occupied the area], what was the percentage of Christians in the old city?
Theophilos: There were around 30,000 of-- Christians living in the Old City.
Bob Simon: And now how many are there?
Theophilos: Very few.
So few, some 11,000 Christians out of a population of almost 800,000 -- just one and a half percent.

[wait, but what was the previous percentage?  UPDATE: k/t=DG: - Keith Roderick wrote in December 2006: "Midway through this century, Christians comprised about 80 percent of the population of Bethlehem. Christians now make up less than 15 percent of the town. This is a trend that mirrors the Christian flight throughout the Palestinian Authority. However, this exodus began long before Israeli checkpoints and the security wall. It is estimated that nearly two-thirds of the Christian population fled during the time when Jordan occupied the West Bank. The Christian population under the Palestinian Authority has suffered from a negative growth-rate and now number less than 50,000, or about 2.4 percent of the population".]

Religious leaders are afraid Jerusalem could become a museum, a spiritual theme park, a great place for tourists and pilgrims, but not for the Arab Christians whose roots date back to the church's very beginnings.

[but were there Arabs in Jerusalem when Christianity began?]

Mitri Raheb: Christianity started here. The only thing that Palestine

[don't forget: "Palestine" is a post-135 CE geopolitical concept; don't allow Simons to mix you up with today's "Palestine".]

was able to export so successfully was Christianity. Mitri Raheb is a Palestinian, a Christian and a Lutheran minister from Bethlehem. He runs schools, cultural centers and health clinics.

[and Israel considers him a 'racist' and an 'anti-Semite']

Mitri Raheb: Christianity has actually on the back a stamp saying, "Made in Palestine."

[it does? by whom? is that correct? no, it isn't. it's a propaganda ploy]

Palestinian Christians, once a powerful minority, are becoming the invisible people, squeezed between a growing Muslim majority and burgeoning Israeli settlements

[we in the Jewish communities in Yesha have nothing to do and surely are not squeezing Christians].

Israel has occupied the West Bank for 45 years.

[and the figures are: in Israel,it was reported in December 2011 that Christians constitute roughly 2 percent of the country’s citizens, or 153,000 people out of the 7.5 million population, according to figures released by the Central Bureau of Statistics. According to the figures, 80.4% of the Christians in Israel are Arabs and the rest are immigrants who arrived under the Law of Return, since they had Jewish relatives. The majority of those in the second category of Christians arrived during the large waves of aliya from the former Soviet Union. Nazareth has the largest Christian community with some 22,000 people; Haifa follows with 14,000, Jerusalem with 11,000 and Shfaram has 9,200 Christian residents. The CBS statistics also show the makeup of Christian families in Israel. The average family has two children, slightly fewer than the 2.2 for Jewish families and the 3 for Muslim citizens. so maybe Christians also have their own demographic problem? Moreover: Israel is the only Middle East nation where the Christian population has grown in the last half century (from 34,000 in 1948 to 140,000 today), in large measure because of the freedom to practice their religion. And It was during Jordan's control of the Old City from 1948 until 1967 that Christian rights were infringed and Israeli Christians were barred from their holy places. The Christian population declined by nearly half, from 25,000 to 12,646. Since then, the population has slowly been growing. Some Christians have been among those inconvenienced by Israel's construction of the security fence, but they have not been harmed because of their religious beliefs. They simply live in areas where the fence is being built. The proportion of Christians in the Palestinian territories has dropped from 15 percent of the Arab population in 1950 to less than 1 percent today. Three-fourths of all Bethlehem Christians now live abroad, and the majority of the city’s population is Muslim. The Christian population declined 29 percent in the West Bank and 20 percent in the Gaza Strip from 1997 to 2002. By contrast, in the period 1995–2003, Israel’s Arab Christian population grew 14.1 percent (CAMERA, December 24, 2004).]

Israel built the wall over the last 10 years, which completely separates Israel from the occupied West Bank. The wall was built to stop Palestinian terrorists from getting into Israel. And it's worked. Terrorism has gone down 90 percent. At the same time, the wall completely surrounds Bethlehem, turning the "little town" where Christ was born into what its residents call "an open air prison."

[you do not see those quotation marks on the screen, do you?]

...The Anastas family lives on the third floor. This is the view from the kitchen, from the master bedroom and bathroom. The children's room has a good view of this Israeli guard tower. The family runs a souvenir shop on the ground floor, sells Christian artifacts on what used to be the busiest commercial street in town. Now, it's a dead end...Claire Anastas: I tell them, we have to stay. We need to stay and struggle and fight. This is our cross.

[too bad Simons doesn't clarify exactly which wall he is referring to: the security barrier of the wall Israel has to erect after Arabs firebombed and shot at peaceful religious pilgrims trying to safely reach Rachel's Tomb]

...Michael Oren, who used to be Israel's director of Interreligious Affairs, is Israel's ambassador to the United States...according to Ambassador Oren, they're thriving. The reason Christians are leaving the West Bank, he says, is Islamic extremism.

[why doesn't Simons interview Christians who, as I know, have a different opinion that the Christians he has allowed to appear? btw, I think Oren made a poor showing and he could - or did he and it was edited out - supplied better information]]

...I think that the major problem in the West Bank as in elsewhere in the Middle East is that the Christian communities are living under duress.
Bob Simon: And this duress is coming from Muslims, not from the Israel occupation?
Ambassador Michael Oren: I believe that the major duress is coming from that.

[that's it, Mr. Ambassador?]

[And what is this doing in the transcript? A producer's note of excitement for his anti-Israel angle?]

[Zahi Khouri: Great selling point. Easy to sell to the American public.]

Zahi Khouri: I'll tell you I don't know of anybody and I probably have 12,000 customers here. I've never heard that someone is leaving because of Islamic persecution. [he's lying]

[and Bob adds here: In 2009, this group of Christian activists did something unprecedented. They published a document called Kairos, the original 1985 one was against South African apartheid, criticizing Islamic extremism and advocating non-violent resistance to the Israeli occupation which they called a sin against God.  That "document" was roundly criticized by many Christians and Jews.]

Ari Shavit: Israel is not persecuting Christians as Christians. The Christians in the Holy Land suffer from Israeli policies that are a result of the overall tragic situation. And this, of course, has consequences for everybody.

[they don't suffer from Islamists?]

Bob Simon: For Israel, there could be serious economic consequences. According to Israeli government figures, tourism is a multi billion dollar business there. Most tourists are Christian. Many of them are American. That's one reason why Israelis are very sensitive about their image in the United States.

[Jews are such money-grubbers.  heavens that Israel should simply be concerned about things like truth, facts, lack of bias, etc.]

And that could be why Ambassador Oren phoned Jeff Fager, the head of CBS News and executive producer of 60 Minutes, while we were still reporting the story, long before tonight's broadcast. He said he had information our story was quote: "a hatchet job."

Michael Oren: It seemed to me outrageous. Completely incomprehensible that at a time when these communities, Christian communities throughout the Middle East are being oppressed and massacred, when churches are being burnt, when one of the great stories in history is unfolding? I think it's-- I think it's-- I think you got me a little bit mystified.
Bob Simon: And it was a reason to call the president of-- chairman of CBS News? ...Nothing's been confirmed by the interview, Mr. Ambassador, because you don't know what's going to be put on air.
Michael Oren: Okay. I don't. True.

[but he's no dummy. when has Simon or "60 Minutes" ever done a fair piece on Israel?]

Bob Simon: Mr. Ambassador, I've been doing this a long time. And I've received lots of reactions from just about everyone I've done stories about. But I've never gotten a reaction before from a story that hasn't been broadcast yet.

Michael Oren: Well, there's a first time for everything, Bob.

Bob Simons:  Pilgrims have been coming here since 1106 AD [why only from then?] to wash themselves in the holy fire, to celebrate the founding miracle of Christianity. They will certainly continue to do so. But how many will be coming from the neighborhood? That's not a religious question anymore. It's political.

[and one in the court of the Arab Muslims. Israel permits religious freedom and Christian residency]

Simon feeds this view:

... for many of the Palestinian Christian clergy and their activist sympathizers, “the Palestinian church is the real church. Jesus, on this reading, was an underdog, who came to champion the underdog. He was oppressed by the Romans, so if you are Christ-like, you are also oppressed, like the Palestinians. This increasingly includes the idea that Jesus was a Palestinian. It’s an adopted narrative that is believed to have started with Yasser Arafat, but to some people it’s become a gospel fact.” In other words, it’s a narrative that denies Jesus’ Jewish identity. “It is a very ugly expression of Christian anti-Semitism,” Neal said.

__________

EoZ has pre-blogged.
____________

P.S. Received from LBD:

DENIAL OF RELIGIOUS RIGHTS BY THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY

According to the U.S. State Department's Annual Report on Religious Freedom: "Periodically, there are incidents of Christian-Muslim tension in the occupied territories. Tensions have arisen over Christian- Muslim romantic relationships or when Christians have erected large crosses in the public domain. Christians in the Bethlehem area also have complained about Muslims settling there and constructing homes illegally on land not zoned for building. "During the period covered by this report, there were periodic reports that some Christian converts from Islam who publicize their religious beliefs have been harassed. Converts complained that they were mistreated and threatened. The draft Palestinian Basic Law specifically forbids discrimination against individuals based on their religion; however, the PA did not take any action against persons accused of harassment."

HISTORY OF PALESTINIAN ASSAULTS ON HOLY SITES

Abraham's Oak Russian "Holy Trinity" Monastery Located in the Palestinian-controlled part of Hebron, the monastery belonged to the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. On July 5, 1997, Palestinian policemen arrived at the monastery, physically removed the monks and nuns, and took over the site. Several of the monks and nuns required hospitalization.

Joseph's Tomb During the September 1996 riots, a Palestinian mob led by Palestinian policemen assaulted the Tomb. Palestinian security agents opened fire on Israeli …

Church of St. Nicholas, Beit Jalla During the October and November 2000 hostilities, Fatah gunmen -- members of the "Tansim"-- fired on the Jewish neighborhood of Gilo from areas adjacent to churches in Beit Jalla, most notably the Church of St. Nicholas, hoping that Israel's return fire will hit a church," reported a Christian cleric. "Then it will be front-page news for the "Christian West,' that Israel is now destroying churches."

Jericho Monastery In January 2000, Palestinian police evicted five "White Russian" monks from their 19th-century monastery in the West Bank town of Jericho, handing the property over to the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Church of the Nativity In May 2002, 13 Palestinian terrorists forcibly took over the Church of Nativity in Bethlehem. They stole gold objects from the monks, ate their scarce food, and urinated on the church floor. Tanzim commander Abdullah Abu-Hadid told Yediot Achronot that the seizure of the Church was premeditated. He said: "The idea was to enter the church in order to create international pressure on Israel ... We knew beforehand that there was two years worth of food for 50 monks, oil, beans, rice, olives. Good bathrooms and the largest wells in old Bethlehem…”

________________

Oh, and from DG:


Recently the IDF named its outstanding soldiers of the year. I've seen items about two of them. One, (via Daily Alert Blog) comes from Israel Hayom.

“S,” an Arab from eastern Jerusalem, is one of the outstanding IDF soldiers who will be recognized at this year’s Israel Independence Day ceremony at the President’s residence. “First of all, I’m an Israeli,” he says. “For me, to continue to serve in the IDF is a dream.”

Is "S" a Christian or a Muslim?

_________________

P.P.S.

Haaretz blogger adds:

At the Israeli Embassy, the final report was seen as sort of diplomatic victory, and the ambassador's attempt to intervene was presented as a fine example of a pro-active approach to Israeli diplomacy. "The relationship between Israel and the Christian world is our strategic interest and when we received information about this report several months ago and plans for broadcasting without any reaction by Israeli officials, Ambassador Oren did what a diplomat is supposed to do to prevent serious damage to the country he represents," a senior Israeli diplomat told Haaretz.
"What we asked to do is to comment on it, and also recommended they talk to other Christian officials. As far as we know, they didn't talk to them, but the result is still not as bad as it could have been without any Israeli reaction," said the official. "The final result was just a biased report touching on several familiar issues that should be resolved between Israel and the Palestinians...

______________


And here is that idiot, MJ Rosenberg, who (a) inserts a bit of anti-Semitic conspiracy theory -Jews can get media people fired; and (b) while getting the story line wrong, proves how biased Bob Simon's report was:

How long will Bob Simon keep his job with 60 Minutes?  On Sunday, the Jewish American CBS correspondent, exposed the exodus of Christians from Israel (a once dominant community is now a shell) and laid it at the door of Israel’s policies toward all Palestinians, Christians and Muslims.

The story was the supposed Christian exodus from the "Holy Land", by which Simon meant East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria, aka the 'West Bank'. Not Israel.

If MJ got it wrong, Simon was, alas, too good.

___________

From a The Tablet writer:

I thought Oren came off lamely, almost deliberately so, as though he feared appearing impotent less than he did all-powerful. I don’t see why the Israeli ambassador should be embarrassed about fighting stories that make Israel look bad; I’m sure U.S. diplomats around the world do it all the time. It’s past time we stopped calling run-of-the-mill government public-relations efforts by its Hebrew name, hasbara, and automatically assuming it is clumsy, sinister, or both (it sometimes is, but it isn’t by definition). Instead of dissembling, I wish Oren had responded to the effect of, “You’re damn right I called your boss, because your story sounds like it’s going to be B.S.”  Because here’s the thing: the story is kind of B.S...

Jennifer Rubin in the WashPost and CBS reaction.

Natan Guttman in The Forward.

JTA.

Mondoweiss was applauding, though.

StandWithUs urges action.

JE Dwyer.

And here is, finally, CAMERA's review.  Summary:

Simon deceived viewers in a number of ways. For example:

He described the Palestinian population as dwindling when the Christian population in Bethlehem and the surrounding communities has actually increased since Israel took control of the West Bank in 1967. It's declined as a percentage of the total because of the growing number of Muslims.

Simon sharply downplayed Islamist hostility toward Christians in Palestinian society when it's a highly negative and often menacing factor in the lives of many.

Although profiling the village of Taybeh, "60 Minutes" completely ignored the terrorizing of Taybeh's Christians by Palestinian Muslims in 2005.

He falsely portrayed anti-Israel propaganda issued by Palestinian Christians in the form of the Kairos Document as an honest attempt to bring peace between Israel and the Palestinians, omitting mention that the Central Conference of American Rabbis denounced the document as "supersessionist and anti-Semitic."

He falsely claimed Israel's security barrier "completely surrounds Bethlehem, turning the 'little town' where Christ was born into what its residents call an open air prison." The barrier does not encircle the city but curves around its northern and western sides.

Although mentioning Nazareth, "where [Jesus] grew up," the segment completely ignores the Christians who live there now. In fact, it completely ignores all Israeli Christians, who live in safety and whose numbers are growing.

"60 Minutes" could not find time in the story for a statement by Ambassador Oren detailing how Israeli Christians are thriving but only posted a brief video on its website. Why couldn't "60 Minutes" include mention of the fact that Israeli Christians serve on the Supreme Court, in the Knesset, and volunteer to serve in the IDF by the thousands?

Simon completely ignored the fact that:

200,000 Christians have fled Egypt in the past year since the "Arab Spring"

80% of Iraqi Christians have fled and 200 churches have been burned there in the past few years

Recently the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia declared that all churches in the region should be destroyed

These errors, distortions and omissions need to be fully corrected on-air in a segment that tells the truth about the assault on Christians in the Middle East.

There's a lot more detail, follow the link.

And here is the expose on Bob Simon's perfidy refarding Oren's appearance:

...Simon’s apparent shock — and high dudgeon — at Oren’s conduct were nowhere to be found in a letter he wrote the ambassador before the taping, and which was provided to BuzzFeed by a political operative not party to the dispute who said he shared it because he thought it illustrated CBS doubletalk.


“Fortunately, we are still in the process of reporting the story, so [CBS News Chairman Jeff] Fager and I want to give you an opportunity to express your views and correct any misrepresentations or omissions which you apparently believe might have occurred,” Simon wrote, in a courteous missive on personalized “60 Minutes” letterhead, dated January 4. “Thank you and best wishes.”
 
...It’s not unusual for reporters to seek difficult interviews with innocuous correspondence. Less common is the theatrical outrage Simon expressed on air, but not in the letter, at Oren’s interest in shaping a story about his country...Oren dropped any hope that he could shape the segment in a February 13 letter CBS, also provided to BuzzFeed, written after the confrontational interview but before the episode aired.


“The interview not only confirmed my concerns about the segment but deepened them,” he wrote, calling Simon’s approach “a feebly disguised attempt to exploit Christians—and inflame religious tensions” without any “historical or diplomatic context."

Oren blasted “Mr. Simon’s lack of understanding of – or genuine interest in – the basic facts regarding Christians in the Holy Land,” and anticipated the segment “would be irresponsible, unfair, and beneath the standards of your program.”...

In connection with the theme, here is Raja Shehadeh, writing in the New York Times on April 19, about "Easter in Ramallah",

For the small minority of us Palestinians who are Christian — meaning, mostly, Greek Orthodox— Easter is the holiest of festivals. There used to be other big festivals in Jerusalem, like the ones commemorating the Way of the Cross along the Via Dolorosa or the Annunciation, for which Christians and Muslims would camp out on the hill outside the Lion Gate. But since Israel’s occupation of Jerusalem, either these celebrations have been canceled or Palestinian Christians from outside Jerusalem have not been able to participate because they can no longer freely enter the Holy City.

Of course, that is a misrepresentation.  Entry depends on the security situation and the level of Arab incitement.  And this is so passe:

It was so normal back then for Christians, Muslims and Jews to partake in each other’s religious celebrations.

 

More resource material on the situation of Christians.

-_______________________

Good point from Daniel Laufer:

The construction of the segment is such that it is based around a solitary element of data: the demographics of Christians in the Holy Land...What’s more is that he never really attempts to prove a specific thesis. He just sort of implies, against a backdrop of pictures and some interviews that at best speak in general terms about the conflict, that the responsibility for the drop in Christian population is directly tied to Israel.

How is it tied to Israel? Well, he only utilizes a coherent argument for “why.” That is, he elaborates at length about “why” Israel’s ambassador to the US, Michael Oren, might want to stop the segment, and how airing it could damage support for Israel. Then Simon frames the ambassador’s actions in conspiratorial terms and actually tries to chastise him. The detailed explanations stop there...Simon doesn’t actually explain the mechanics of why Christians are leaving the Holy Land, or how Israel’s actions affect Christians specifically.

That’s because such an explanation would require facts. And Simon and his team haven’t got many of those...

amd

Which raises another question: How far has the journalistic standard fallen that 10-odd minutes of tired Middle-East clichés qualify as an “investigative report?”  Where are the academic experts on history, demographics, sociology and religion? Where are the charts of facts and figures? Where is any research at all?

If there is only one complaint allowed of this episode, it isn’t an accusation of bias or misreporting of facts — it is the non-reporting. The sheer laziness of 60 Minutes apparent in the segment should be appalling not just to its viewers, but should be cause for anger upstairs at CBS’s management. What is it, after all, that Bob Simon and his team are paid for? It cannot be to simply repeat an interviewee’s claims as fact and go home, job done.

^

She's All Wrapped Up - and Bamboozled

Paula White fooled by a "Rabbi" Messer:-

Find more videos like this on Jewish Israel

Someone needs to alert Christians to this charlatan.

^

"He must be ostracized" - Must He?

That's from an attack on Shmuely Boteach for his new book, Kosher Jesus, based on what Haaretz (!) published to which I was alerted by listening to the latest program of Judean Eve (and here's Sybil Kaufman's interview).

Here's the news:

Chicago Shliach and educator Rabbi Yitzchok Wolf [Dean of SJ Abrams Cheder Lubavitch Hebrew Day School in Chicago] blasts Rabbi Shmuely Boteach's new book, saying the subject and recent interviews "are apikorsus."

With utter contempt I have read the title of Shmuel Boteach's new book "Kosher [Yoshke]."...Boteach's latest book is apikorsus and must be treated as such.

This book poses great danger to the thousands of unsuspecting Jews who are approached daily by Jews for J...[the book urges] embracing Yoshke as an authentic Jew, urging us to be inspired by him, G-d forbid.

...It's not the derech of Chabad to eject their fellow Jew, yet there are those rare times when it appears as an obligation to do just that...

See a follow-up there and his response here - and Klein's counter-response including "I urge you dear readers to decide if Shmueli’s embrace of his true newly found J… is part of Jewish tradition or is it the good old fashioned Christian attempt to proselytize Jews with new wrapings? [sic]".

When I was in high school, I read Joseph Klausner's books on Jesus and on Paul (and see this MA thesis).  And as I am usually adverse to long posts so let me make this point:

the theological danger, i.e., Jews converting, is one that must be combated by learning about Christianity not ignoring it.  We do have all the answers and it behooves the Rabbis and educators to instruct and teach rather than drawing a curtain.

It's as simple as that.

^

Arabs and Christians - The Beginning

I caught a book and reading its description, a thought came to me.

It's called Arabic Christianity in the Monasteries of Ninth-Century Palestine, published by Ashgate Variorum in 1992. The author is Sidney H. Griffith of the Catholic University of America, USA.

This is the description:

The history of Christian literature took a new turn in the 8th century when monks in the monasteries of Palestine began to write theology and saints’ lives in Arabic; they also instituted a veritable programme for translating the Bible and other Christian texts from Greek (and Syriac) into the language of the Qur’an, the lingua franca of the Islamic caliphate. This is the subject of the present volume. Two key factors leading to this change, as Professor Griffith indicates, were that the confrontation with the developing theology of Islam created a direct need for apologetics to face this new religious challenge in its own language; and, second, simply that as the memory of Byzantine power waned, so too did the knowledge of Greek. Issues of particular interest in this apologetic literature are those of the freedom of the will, a key topic in the controversies between Melkites and Muslims, and of the legitimacy of icon veneration, a subject of great contemporary concern at the time of Iconoclasm in the Byzantine Empire.

Admittedly, I am not a scholar of that period but, in a logical approach, one could ask this question:

if Arabs were "always resident in Palestine", as the propaganda claim is made, why did a need for all this appear only in the 8th century, some 150 years after the appearance of Islam?  Was Arabic a 'foreign language' in that geographical area even if Islam was relatively new?

True, the Byzantine empire disappeared and with it the main lingua franca but that was already as early as 614. Moreover, Christianity had been around for centuries and if Arabs lived in the country in any number, they would have known all the theology by now. They were pagans until Muhammed and so were even a better 'target' for Christianity.  Even the rise of Islam in the early 7th century would have provided enough previous time and a need for such translations.

Could it be that in the Land of Israel the presence of Arabs was minimal? And that there was no need for the local monks to engage them theologically?

^

New Silly Story (Not Really)

Top Gear stars cause religious row after dressing up in burkas on Boxing Day special

Jeremy Clarkson and his Top Gear co-stars have sparked religious outrage after dressing up in burkas on the Boxing Day special.  Clarkson and Richard Hammond decided to dress in niqabs, a form of the burka where everything but the eyes are covered, in order to disguise themselves on the road.  They also got James May in on the act when they greeted him from hospital after he fell and hit his head on rocks in the Syrian desert.
But their joke backfired after they were slammed by Muslims for mocking their religion.

Islamic activist Anjem Choudary, said: 'The burka is a symbol of our religion and people should not make jokes about it in any way.  It would have been equally bad even if they’d not been in a country mainly populated by Muslims.'

On the Boxing Day episode of the show, the trio were driving across the Middle East to follow the path of the Three Wise Men.

But you can mock the Christian religion?
^

Riskin Crucified, Well, At Least Pinned to the Wall

Jewish Israel has a damaging report out on him, on his aide and on Pope Pius's canonization.

Read it.

An Ad Advantage of a Church Over a Synagogue

This is an ad for increasing church attendance for Norval in Canada:-




Somehow, I don't think it will go over well in a Jewish House of Worship.

Well, at least not since Genesis 3:5.

New Killing Ground of Christians

Recently, Christians have it tough in Gaza. Bombing the YMCA library. And other unsavory events.

And in Egypt. (And here, too.)

And let's not skip the "disputed territories" of Judea and Samaria wherein reside the Arabs-who-call-themselves-"Palestinians" (=Pals.) where the situation is not good.

Now, India is a new killing ground for Christians:-

Those who came to attack Christians here early last week set their trap well, residents say.

First, they built makeshift barricades of trees and small boulders along the roads leading into this village, apparently to stop the police from intervening.

Then, villagers say, the attackers went on a rampage. Chanting “Kill these pigs” and “All Hindus are brothers,” the mob began breaking into homes that displayed posters of Jesus, stealing valuables and eventually burning the buildings. When they found residents who had not fled to the nearby jungle, they beat them with sticks or maimed them with axes and left them to die.

A local official said three people died as a result of the attack on Aug. 25. The carefully placed roadblocks accomplished their purpose; residents say a full day passed before help arrived.

One villager, Asha Lata Nayak, said, “I saw the mob carrying sticks, axes, swords, knives and small guns. They first demolished the village church and later Christian houses. Nobody came forward to help us.”

Religious violence. First the Jews, now the Christians.

Angry at Coulter? Well, Boil at Condi

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice prayed at the Biblical birthplace of Jesus Christ on Wednesday, promoting religion in the quest for Middle East peace during intense diplomacy. "Being here at the birthplace of my lord and saviour Jesus Christ has been a very special and moving experience," said the top US diplomat, a devout Christian whose father and grandfather were Presbyterian ministers.

And read this:

"What these great holy sites remind us of is that the three great religions indeed share a common vision of peace and a common vision of our humanity. That is what I will ultimately take away from this visit," she said.

Well, I hope that's the other thing she takes away.

Jewish-Christian Dialogue

While googling around for the name Shiloh, I came across a Christian site that discussed the events of Shiloh and I sent out this message:-

As I live in Shiloh, the original Shiloh in Israel, I am happy to see you discussing spiritual concepts related to the site of the Tabernacle.

And I received a reply:-

It's amazing how deep the Scriptures are with all these references and types foreshadowing Christ.

To which I answered:-

or another

Which elicited this reaction:-

None can compare to Christ

So, I wrote back:-

well, if you mean that as a generic term or as a translation for Messiah, I'm in agreement.

And then Troy insisted:-

No it is not a generic term. Jesus is a real person and God as proven.

The moment had come. I had to be blunt:-

As I am Jewish, I respect your religious beliefs but they are not mine.
As Hannah already prayed here at Shiloh, "There is none holy as the LORD, for there is none beside Thee; neither is there any rock like our God." I Samuel 2:2.

That didn't sit too well with Troy who responded:-

Then you are going to hell. The LORD in 1 Sam. 2.2 therefore, effectively is not the one you worship, for you reject Him who is your sacrifice to atone for your sins (Is. 53). God gave Himself for you, and you reject this mercy through His only begotten Son-the suffering servant!

I attempted to be moderate:-

I really thought we were having a decent theological conversation. Please, don't threaten me with hell. After all that has been done in the name of a nice Jewish boy from Judea to the Jewish people over the past two millenia, I don't think any Christian today has any right to threaten a Jew with hell.
You need not reply.

It didn't help:-

I am not threatening you with hell but imparting to you the fact of the Scriptures what is going to happen to you. If you are a Jew or from any other nation that calls Jesus a liar, you are going to hell. That is why I am convinced you're going to hell. I am just being honest with you by the evidence God has provided. You don't have to reply. Just give your life to Christ to be saved. There is no other way to the Father except through Christ. My prayers go out to you.

I stopped the "dialogue" at that point.

Creepy Anti-semitism Creeping into Mainstream Publications

The Washington Jewish Week has a story about a problematic ad that appeared, for another time, in the Washington Times.

Washington Times again prints anti-Israel ad

The vice president and general manager of The Washington Times says he will review how an advertisement describing Israel as "an official anti-Christianity nation" was printed in the newspaper last week.

After being read portions of the ad text over the phone on Friday, Richard Amberg Jr. said that language from the March 28 advertisement "gets real close to the line" of violating the paper's advertising policy, which does not allow ads that are false or that denigrate religions.

...The controversial full-page advertisement, which was also printed in the Times on March 8 (a similar one appeared at least one other time in December), comes more than two years after Amberg wrote a letter to the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington apologizing for the printing of an advertisement that stated that "Israel and her Zionists are not a friend to Christianity, Christians or Christ!"

...The 2005 ad was signed by Stan Rittenhouse. A Vienna-based group called The Exhorters, Inc., placed December's and last month's ads. An Anti-Defamation League publication on far-right extremism says The Exhorters was founded by Rittenhouse. The Northern Virginia resident, according to the ADL, is a longtime anti-Semitic propagandist who has promoted Holocaust denial. His book, For Fear of the Jews, "spells out the anti-Christian forces that are rising up in power ... in our land. Out of Zionism will come the greatest force of anti-Christianity this Age will ever experience."

...The advertisements also call Israel a country "which lacks religious freedom" and claims that "Israel's goal since 1948 has been to wipe Palestine off the map."

...In recent months, the paper's top editorial leaders - particularly managing editor Frances Coombs - have been accused of fostering a racist and sexist atmosphere, both in an October article in The Nation magazine quoting current and former Times staffers and in a lengthy posting on the Huffington Post blog by former Times reporter George Archibald.

(Kippah tip: Wonkette)

Ah, Those Inflecities

There's a new book out, SACRED CAUSES: The Clash of Religion and Politics, From the Great War to the War on Terror by Michael Burleigh and here's an excerpt from the NYTimes' review:-

After the war, according to Burleigh, the ambiguities disappear. In Poland, for example, “the process of distancing churches from anti-Judaism ... which had commenced in the interwar period, became absolute after the Nazis’ charnel houses were fully exposed.” That is utter nonsense. In the wake of the July 1946 Kielce pogrom, Cardinal Augustus Hlond, Primate of Poland, declared, as Burleigh acknowledges, that “the Jews occupying leading positions in Poland in state life are to a large extent responsible for the deterioration of these good relations” between Jews and Catholics. His colleague Bishop Bieniek of Upper Silesia stated that Jews really had taken blood from a Christian child, the ostensible reason for the massacre. In the wake of these events, Victor Cavendish-Bentinck, the British ambassador to Poland, cabled to London: “I fear that the Polish clergy are fundamentally anti-Semitic.” Burleigh, briefly alluding to Hlond’s views, calls them “infelicities.”

My source for these citations is the work of Jan Gross, whose studies are absent from Burleigh’s bibliography but very well known in Poland and beyond. Lech Walesa (one of Burleigh’s heroes) dismissed “Neighbors,” Gross’s influential study, published in 2001, of a wartime massacre of Jews by their Polish neighbors: “Gross,” Walesa told a radio audience in Poland, “is a mediocre writer ... a Jew who tries to make money.” That a founder of Solidarity might harbor such prejudices is the sort of complexity that finds no place in this book. In Burleigh’s universe, everything is either black or white (or, as it were, red). Historians with whom he disagrees — from Saul Friedländer to “people like Deak” (Istvan Deak, the Central European historian) — are guilty of “inadequacies,” are “tendentious” or “fashionable”; their arguments “Soviet-inspired” or worse. Overwhelmingly they are “tenured radicals” indulging in “academic left-liberal nostalgia” for past illusions.

To Be A Christian in the "Palestinian" Holy Land

Finally, a look at the issue of "Palestine without Jews or Israelis.

And it isn't pretty.

...In the year since Hamas came to power, some of the fears of a newly Islamist cast to Palestinian society are being borne out. Christians have begun quietly complaining that local disagreements quickly take on a sectarian flavor. And reports of beatings and property damage by Muslims have grown.

In one of the most serious cases, Palestinian gunmen in September set the Y.M.C.A. building on fire in the West Bank city of Qalqilya, where Hamas members hold all 15 local council seats. Muslim figures in the city had previously accused the Y.M.C.A. of engaging in missionary activity and warned it to close down.

...Other factors make Christians particularly vulnerable. In the Palestinian Authority areas of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, their numbers are now down to 55,000 or 60,000, or 1.7 percent of the Palestinian population. Those who remain must struggle to preserve their weakened communities and lands from encroachment by stronger parties. And Christians lack the protection other Palestinians claim from large clans or their own militias.

The Christians’ problems are writ large in Bethlehem, where most Palestinian Christians live. Fifty years ago, its population was 90 percent Christian; that has fallen, because of emigration and relatively low birth rates, to just 35 percent.

There, land theft — a problem in many parts of Palestinian territory — is particularly rife, in part because there is no proper registration of land. Many land owners have lived abroad for decades, and some are now selling off plots against the will of relatives who stayed behind, or vice versa.

...Other Bethlehem Palestinians say the problem with land theft has been going on since 1994, when the Palestinian Authority was established. They say it involves local figures closely connected with Fatah. A spokesman for the Palestinian Authority police in Bethlehem said that three Muslims were under investigation on suspicion of land theft, and dismissed talk of Fatah involvement as “just rumors.”

Land has become an issue in Taybeh, too. Up to three-quarters of the village lands are owned by exiles, said the Rev .Raed Abusahlia, an energetic parish priest for the Latin Patriarchate, an arm of the Latin Rite Roman Catholic Church in the Holy Land. No one is left to look after it, and the exiles’ descendents want to sell.

...“We are not fanatic, but this is the only entirely Christian village left,” he said, adding, “Those who leave weaken those who stay.”

...Nevertheless, he revealed a degree of ambivalence about the Palestinian Christians’ long-term prospects in the area. “Their children call us atheists,” he said. “The illiterates who support Hamas look at us as foreigners, not Palestinians. Many of them look at us this way.”

Bishop Hiccup

Here's one response to that German Bishop's "Ramallah ghetto" remark (*) from Brian Lux of Llandudno, Ireland:-

It is crass of the German Bishops (report March 7th) to compare Israel to the Nazis when they are facing a resurgence of that movement in their own country. Comparing the Israel wall to one that surrounded Berlin ignores the reasons for each. Berlin was trying to stop their citizens escaping to freedom, Israel's wall is trying,with success, to stop suicide bombers spreading carnage among its citizens. The Bishops would be advisedto use their influence to try and stop the sinister ethnic cleansing of Christians in the West Bank, with mosques in Bethlehem now over 90, compared with 5 in 1967, yet Christian presence in Israel has risen by 270% since the inception of the Jewish State.

-------------

(*)

Bishop of the southern city of Eichstaett, Gregor Maria Hanke, was quoted by German media Monday as deploring the conditions imposed on Palestinians in the occupied territories, after a visit to the Holocaust memorial Yad Vashem at the end of a one-week tour of the Holy Land with 26 other German Roman Catholic bishops.

"In the morning we saw photographs from the inhumane Warsaw ghetto, in the evening we drove through the ghetto in Ramallah," he said. "It is infuriating."

I Didn't Know That

I vaguely remember this painting:-



But I didn't know this:-

There is a famous depiction of the Last Supper by the thirteenth-century Sienese artist Pietro Lorenzetti in the lower church in Assisi. Christ and the Apostles are gathered in a circular chamber, defined by elegant pillars, but what is striking is Lorenzetti’s expansion of the scene. To the left, by the door, two men converse, probably the master of the house, elegantly dressed, and his head servant. The door seems to lead to a kitchen, depicted within a high narrow oblong. Here, next to a roaring fire where presumably the food has been cooked, a cat is warming itself, while a dog is licking a dirty plate, and a scullion is bending forward as he wipes another plate and empties its contents into the dog’s plate; another, better-dressed servant, leans over him, apparently engaging him in conversation. Earlier art historians enthused about Lorenzetti’s way with perspective and domesticity, but recently scholars have begun to explore the symbolic content of the scene. The fire, they say, shows the Old Testament sacrifice, a lamb killed and eaten for Passover, while next door we see the new sacrifice anticipated by Christ, himself the Passover Lamb, in order that Christians may come to a new and purely spiritual sacrifice, ritually re-enacted in the Mass.

A closer look brings a shock to our liberal sensibilities: we may be happy to go along with the abstractions described so far, but baulk, perhaps, at certain aspects of the medieval imagination. For what is this dishcloth with which the scullion is wiping the plate? It is nothing other than the tallith, the Jewish ritual shawl. This domestic kitchen, then, with its cosy cat and dog, is the stinking physical world of the Old Testament, for St Bonaventure tells us that those who want real flesh as opposed to the spiritualized flesh of the Lamb of God are dogs who must be excluded from the Eucharistic banquet. This is strong stuff to emanate from so noble a painting, but it is indubitably there. Or is it – quite? For what is the other servant, the one who bends over the scullion, pointing to, if not to his own prayer shawl, this time correctly covering his shoulders? Does not the emphatic gesture of his left hand suggest that he is reprimanding the scullion for desecrating this piece of ritual clothing, asking that it be reinstated in some sense, reminding us, the viewers, that it stands for the very world out of which Jesus emerged? After all, is it not this very same shawl that we see worn with pride by the Virgin’s father in another painting by Pietro Lorenzetti, of the Nativity, now in the cathedral museum in Siena?

This come from a book review by Gabriel Josipovici on Steven F. Kruger's THE SPECTRAL JEW: Conversion and embodiment in medieval Europe and here's a bit more:-

Steven F. Kruger does not mention these paintings by Lorenzetti in The Spectral Jew, but their complex arguments and ambiguities are precisely what his fascinating new book explores. For the Christians of the Middle Ages the Jews represented a problem: the Jew was the Old Man of St Paul, who had been overcome and transcended by the New Man ushered in by Christ. The Jews were defined by their blindness in refusing to see that Christ was the Son of God, and this blindness was a sign of their carnality, their irredeemable physicality. In this they were like women, an Other against whom many medieval Christian men defined themselves. But there was a paradox, the seed of an anxiety: for Jesus himself was a Jew and it was out of Judaism that Christianity had come. Hence the desperate need to make Jews see the light, to convert them, to make them confess that they had been wrong and the followers of Jesus right all along.

Their refusal to be converted was, of course, a sign of their blindness, their stubbornness, but it left just the trace of a suspicion that perhaps they knew something that was hidden to Christians. Kruger shows that this paradox, already present in John’s Gospel and the Pauline Epistles, deepened after 1096 and the First Crusade, as Christians became more aware of the Jews in their midst (and the Muslims at their borders), their scholars began to learn about Jewish traditions, and, as in Spain, Jews came to prominence in many professions. For not only were individual Jews clearly intelligent and thoughtful men, hardly the stereotypes of the Gospels, but it turned out that Judaism itself was not a single monolithic religion, stuck in its stubborn denial of Christianity, but a continuously evolving entity.

In the great disputations which took place, mainly in Spain, in the later Middle Ages, it was most often Jewish converts who were selected to make the Christian case, and they did so now by arguing not just with the Old Testament, but with the Talmud. These disputations were, however, always rigged, for the power lay with the Christians who had organized them and dictated the rules by which both parties had to abide. The outcome was in effect decided beforehand, and the argument of the Christians was often contradictory, to the point (for us, with hindsight) of absurdity: the Talmud, the Christians argued, was a pack of lies from beginning to end; but it also, amazingly, recognized the divinity of Christ, even though the Jews refused to see this.

In response, as Kruger shows, the Jews, constrained to appear under threat of death, for themselves and their communities, retreated into silence, refusing to damn themselves out of their own mouths, maintaining the final freedom of the oppressed; but, of course, by this token giving the Christians the impression that they had no answer to their probing questions. At least in John 8 both sides are given equal weight: the Jews find it absurd that anyone should think any man the Son of God, the Christians think the Jews are being wilfully blind in refusing to see that Jesus is precisely that.

In the Catalonian city of Tortosa, in 1413, by contrast, Pope Benedict XIII opened the proceedings by saying, “It is a known thing with me that my religion and faith is true, and that your Torah was once true but was abolished”. The frightening thing about this is not only that he believes it but that he has to believe it or he could no longer call himself a Christian. And surely Christians will have to go on believing it, however much they call for interfaith dialogue. At a time like the present, when another Benedict sits on the papal throne and the secret Other is no longer primarily the Jew but the Muslim, Steven Kruger’s book should be of interest not only to scholars of medieval culture and theology but to every thinking person, whatever his or her own faith or lack of it.