Okay, actually I will explicitly refute just one of these, because it's one that I haven't seen before and therefore haven't already explained a million times.
First off, background that HAS been explained ad nauseum:
The sin of Sodom had nothing to do with homosexuality. It was mistreating the poor and needy, particularly when the means to help them was plentiful. This is explicit in Ezekiel 16:49 and extremely common Jewish exegesis
And we're talking *extraordinary* selfishness. There's midrash that a woman was caught feeding a beggar, and her punishment was being covered in honey and placed before a hive of bees. It was her screams as she was being stung to death that caught God's attention.
Lot and his family are not exempt from this sin of selfishness. Genesis 19:17 Rashi explains that Lot is delaying because he cannot give up his possessions, and explicitly states that Lot's family sinned with Sodom but are saved on behalf of Abraham
Chizkuni elaborates in the same way, commenting on Lot's materialism. He *also* makes clear that "do not look behind you is not literal, it's metaphrical. It's not about what one sees with one's eyes, but what one sees with one's mind's eye.
So Lot's wife isn't pillarized because she was being punished by a cruel God for literally looking over her shoulder. She was turned to salt because she *rejected God's mercy* - she turned back to Sodom in her mind and her heart, refusing to leave the selfishness and cruelty.
Why salt? Rashi and Chizkuni, again, explain this as relating directly to her own participation in the sin of refusing to share resources and wealth with strangers and the needy. She refused to violate the laws of Sodom by giving salt to her guests.
In conclusion:
"OT God is cruel and sadistic" is a lie told by people specifically trying to villainize Jews. When we read it, we read a story about how deeply serious God is about the importance of caring for the stranger, the poor and the hungry.
(addendum: reading that last tweet I don't like my own phrasing. I don't think everyone who says these things today is a liar, I think that the initial framing of a cruel God was an intentional lie and at this point it's become zeitgeist and is absorbed unconsciously)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If there is any other people who know what it is like to be a nation of refugees, it's Jews. 75 years ago European Imperialists did what they do best - pitted two peoples that they had themselves driven to desperation against each other. We don't have to play that game.
I believe this, fully. I believe that inevitably, eventually, we will see that we have more in common than we have dividing us. That we can sit together as brothers. That there is literally nothing to do but just stop.
There's a lot in this thread that I think is true, but the parts that cut me are the acknowledgement that none of the decisions being made, none of the reporting on events is objective. There is no objectivity possible when everyone is reacting from trauma.
Jewish joy:
When it's time to leave Simchat Torah and your toddler begs to stay a little longer, and then says "I miss synagogue" from the back seat on the way home.
Jewish joy:
Watching a gaggle of kids in the middle of an unrolled scroll rush around finding where each book starts, and recognizing a word here and there, and trying to convince each other they found an imperfect letter.
Jewish joy:
Making a friend at Erev Rosh Hashanah dinner and running into them again on the way into Simchat Torah.
I love @LizShayne's piece on a neurodivergent Jonah - an understanding of his character that seems obvious to me - and I want to share a bit of Yom Kippur learning I received this year that harmonizes with her article:
We don't get much in the book of Jonah itself about who Jonah is, but one thing we do get is his name - Yona ben Amitai. Literally translated, "Jonah, child of my truth". The obvious meaning, of course, is that Jonah's dad was named Amitai, no big deal.
But because this is Jewish scripture, and we can always dig deeper, what if it's also a statement of who Jonah is, the essence of his nature? Truth is, after all, what Jonah is most fixated on. What has actually happened. What will actually happen. The facts on the ground.
Augustine of Hippo codified as doctrine that mankind is *innately* evil because of inherited sin, and there's not a single damn thing we can do about it. That idea wasn't normative even with Christianity until around the 4th century CE, and isn't normative in other cultures.
It persists as normative in Christian cultures, though, even when those cultures reject theology and define themselves as secular, post-religiously rational thinkers. You can see this in the rejection of evidence to preserve the normative idea.
There's been a lot of noise in my mentions recently around a couple of comments from people saying that Christianity is all about love and Judaism isn't, and it's got me thinking that sometimes we undermine some great things about Judaism in the process of countering anti-Judaism
Like, the gut level response is to counter things like "Christianity is all about love and Judaism is not" by saying "nuh uh, OF COURSE we're all about love" And that's not wrong, love of your neighbor/fellow humans is *very* central to Judaism. But also ...
There *are* specific mitzvot around *not* loving the oppressor, the enticer to idolatry, the pursuer-with-harmful-intent. Judaism very much does *not* say that loving *everyone*, equally and unconditionally, is a value. And that's a good thing.
The reason Poe's Law works is that for most Americans, "Nazi", and by extension "Hitler", just means "enemy". The actual ideology of nazism and the social context in which it arose as a reactionary movement are of less importance, or inconsequential altogether.
It's a direct result of the way 20th century history is taught - the focus is on the US winning WWII against the Bad Guys - the Nazis. The Holocaust is certainly taught, but primarily as a sort of hyperbolized "they were SO MEAN, like bad guys are" way.
The economic and social context in which Nazism arose and the power dynamics of ethnic/social groups in Germany isn't taught at all. The specific racialized hatred of Nazism is taught as "they hated freedom", or a generic "they didn't like people who were Different"