Active Users:1100 Time:22/11/2024 07:52:39 AM
Then why are they canon? Joel Send a noteboard - 08/06/2010 06:25:09 PM
It's not like a holy writing becomes illegitimate just by being apocalyptic. It's either accepted or it's not. The deeper question is why such passages would be written in the first place. Of course, the promise to give Abrahams descendants Canaan is no more unique to Judaism than God telling Abraham to sacrifice his son to see if he trusts God to come through for him. There's a BIT more to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict than just kicking people off their dads land, though that certainly plays a role.

Not illegitimate, irrelevant. It's very hard to take Revelations seriously, and the parts about the "shoes made of hair" and "faces like shields" and all that makes the Muslim apocalyptic predictions almost as silly.

The language of Revelation is frequently very figurative, and I'd be surprised if that weren't true of Islamic apocalypses also, but with that understanding I see no reason they should be ignored. And, let's be honest here, if someone from the time of Tiberius Caesar was called upon to write a description of events from today (or 1000 years from now) how would you EXPECT it to read? We went to the freaking MOON! And we didn't exactly walk. ;)
It's undeniable that large amounts of Muslims now are anti-semitic and claim religious reasons for that, including that verse, and they completely ignore the apocalyptic aspect of it, or the verse right next to it saying they'll wage war on the Turks. And obviously they're not going to change that just because I say so, or Tom says so. But at the very least we can keep pointing out that it's fake, it's propaganda.

Yeah, I'm still not getting the whole "because it's apocalyptic it should be ignored" thing. That might be convenient, at least for now, but I see no other reason for it. Yes, the language can be jarring and bizarre, but unless you insist on taking it literally I don't think that means it should automatically discounted.
Oh, I realize all of that, but the stories of conflict between Jew and Arab didn't happen in a vacuum. They may not have been universally accepted (and after the Exile that's more likely than not, since the Jews were scattered to the four winds on at least three separate occasions) but there's SOME basis there even if it was just some Jewish guy who really hated Arabs and wrote nasty things about them to disseminate to his fellow Jews.

The point is that at the time the Israeli-Palestinian conflict originated - to a certain extent in the first decades of the previous century, and full-blown in the twenties - there was no real reason why Jews and Arabs should hate each other. And if there wasn't then, there's no reason why there should be now, not anything other than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict itself. Both religions have enough ambiguous or interpretation-dependent material in their religious books that they could've produced propaganda of a similar nature against various other nations or ethnicities if the need arose.

Both religions assign ownership of Canaan to different groups, and state that deep and bitter resentments exist as far back as the childhood of the two men they consider progenitors of each group. Of course, that gets a little dicey for the Palestinians themselves, since there's real reason to believe they're predominantly Hebrew rather than Arab, but then, it's a particular group of Palestinians that are having trouble with the IDF, and it's not really convenient for them to present themselves as Hebrew (for SOME reason that SURELY has nothing to do with either religion. ;)) I've never heard anything about adherents to the Samaritan Torah being run off their land, or suicide bombing Israeli busses, but they're as "Palestinian" as anyone. Unlike the other Palestinians, however, they refer to themselves as "Israelites" and I doubt Israel finds them too alarming. ;)

There's a little more going on here than simply present day land rights. Issues like whether Israel has the right to exist--anywhere--and whether a Palestinian state not as dedicated to Israels annihilation as to their own survival is possible. Sure, the modern legal claims play a huge role in that. But the whole reason those conflicting claims exist is because of a BELIEF in the Covenant with Abraham, whether or not others thing any such covenant was ever made. I still think the below link is HIGHLY relevant, both because it predates nearly every modern European state, and what it claims about the people living in Canaan before and after the Diaspora:
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Samaritans
Reply to message
Jacqueline Rose on the Dreyfus affair and related problems, in the LRB - 06/06/2010 11:28:14 AM 1069 Views
What she has to say about Dreyfus is very interesting. - 06/06/2010 04:48:16 PM 859 Views
Re: What she has to say about Dreyfus is very interesting. - 06/06/2010 04:56:32 PM 785 Views
*remains amused at the suggestion of the Dreyfus Affairs "pertinence" to "current" events* - 06/06/2010 05:14:23 PM 787 Views
I agree in part and (strongly) disagree in part. - 06/06/2010 05:40:26 PM 764 Views
"If it's an eternal struggle, how could there ever be a solution or a peace?" - 06/06/2010 06:20:39 PM 825 Views
Purim may or may not refer to a historic event. Even if it does, Haman was not likely an Arab. - 07/06/2010 12:00:05 AM 677 Views
I second your main point. - 07/06/2010 12:09:42 AM 686 Views
I don't discount that there is Arab blood in many or even most "Arabs". - 07/06/2010 12:18:32 AM 677 Views
Okay, fair enough then. *NM* - 07/06/2010 08:45:19 AM 300 Views
The holiday is centuries old and real, regardless. - 07/06/2010 12:28:59 AM 765 Views
You're still missing the major point here. - 07/06/2010 12:44:08 AM 674 Views
That seems a rather limited view of history. - 07/06/2010 01:10:11 AM 777 Views
What the Hell are you going on about? - 07/06/2010 04:08:19 AM 730 Views
Oooh - 07/06/2010 11:07:43 AM 597 Views
Yeah, to whom was the claim on that land given? - 07/06/2010 10:35:42 PM 726 Views
jeez Joel... - 07/06/2010 04:24:47 AM 714 Views
No, the Persians are not Arabs. - 07/06/2010 10:09:47 PM 843 Views
I (coincidentally) stumbled across those infamous hadith passages about Jews the other day. - 07/06/2010 09:41:39 AM 759 Views
So? - 07/06/2010 10:50:49 PM 747 Views
So the relevance of apocalyptic passages is close to zero. - 07/06/2010 11:55:05 PM 707 Views
Not to mention - 08/06/2010 09:09:27 AM 644 Views
Then why are they canon? - 08/06/2010 06:25:09 PM 896 Views
are you claiming that people would pull some things out of holy text and ignore the rest? - 08/06/2010 12:16:41 PM 777 Views
*NM* - 08/06/2010 01:16:13 PM 294 Views
well, for me this just proves why we are not supposed to live among non-Jews - 06/06/2010 11:39:45 PM 858 Views
how so? - 06/06/2010 11:41:18 PM 636 Views
It reminds me of what I kept thinking as I read it. - 07/06/2010 12:51:36 AM 660 Views
couldn't get past the part where anyone who opposes Obama is a racist *NM* - 08/06/2010 01:40:07 AM 470 Views
You hallucinated? *NM* - 08/06/2010 08:39:37 AM 346 Views
No, that would've been one of the places where she should've shut up. *NM* - 08/06/2010 08:58:11 AM 283 Views
No - 08/06/2010 09:08:04 AM 641 Views
I think he's not talking about that bit, but about the very first paragraph. - 08/06/2010 09:30:21 AM 767 Views
If there was more I didn't get far enough to hear it - 08/06/2010 12:09:47 PM 627 Views
That's the problem with the speech - the large majority of what she had to say was worthwhile. - 08/06/2010 01:15:39 PM 691 Views
The problem is blatant bias - 08/06/2010 02:24:57 PM 669 Views

Reply to Message