Exclusivity, Russian Antisemitism, and the New Hatred To Come

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Shimon says:

    “I told him that I would have no problem reading the report to a room full of non-Jews. Moreover again, I told him that I had pretty much done the same in the past, without pain or untoward embarrassment.”

    Can you go into this bit with greater detail?

  2. mb says:

    Interesting point of view by Rav Adlerstein, but alas I do not share his optimism. That such a thing as this could exist in a democratc country is frightening, and a return, at least figuratively to book burning/banning.Eerily, I’m reminded that in our own community we recently went down that path( Slifkin,Sacks,Kamanetsky), that brings back not so pleasant memories of actions and reactions in our history.

    I agree with Rav A that supercession is also worrisome, but not altogether unrelated to the Russian censors.
    The oldest ism, never dies.

  3. joel rich says:

    I’d be interested to hear how you dealt with the issue of violating the Sabbath to save a life.
    KT
    Joel Rich

  4. Hanan says:

    I don’t know much about mormons, but not allowing outsiders “in”, is not the same as some of the bad things that our text “says” about outsiders. You said that the Catholic professor “explored the historical context in which they were made, especially the intense rivalry between Jews and early Christians.” Can it not be said that the Jews said those things for the exact same reason? If so than whats the point of saying “We see those closer to Sinai as having greater authority, not less.” It has nothing to do with them being closer to Sinai, its just probably due to their experiences in those days with the non-jews.

  5. SeriousSassy says:

    I collected a few responses from self-identified Christians who ar not academics but are activists.

    Rabbi Adlerstein wrote:
    Supersession is back. The belief, seemingly spurned by Protestant denominations since World War II, that G-d
    rejected the “old” Jews and replaced them with believing Christians, is making a comeback in mainline
    Protestant denominations. It spells major trouble for us.

    Response #1:
    The Rabbi is using the term “supercession” imprecisely. The dying liberal fringe churches who are turning their backs on Israel are not doing so because they believe that the Gospel replaces and invalidates the Torah. They are doing so because they believe that neither the Gospel nor the Torah are normative and that neither are true.

    Response #2:
    However, I think the author is in error if he imagines that the leadership of “liberal” Protestant deonominations have
    religious motivations. (I personally doubt they even believe in God.) This “divestment” isn’t about Judaism – these people are just mindless, knee-jerk leftists who prefer any dictatorship to any democracy. They supported Saddam Hussein and Yasser
    Arafat; they support Fidel Castro and Robert Mugabe.

    Response #3:
    A supercessionist believes that God made promises to Israel and that the promises made to Israel have now been taken away
    from Israel and given to others. These churches believe that there was never any promise made to Israel in the first place and that it’s all just a myth. The two viewpoints are distinct.

Pin It on Pinterest