The origin of Judeo-Christian spirituality can be described in the following spiritually Jewish way.
- The great majority of Jews support the Rambam’s 13 principles of faith with the statement that the Torah is immutable and of divine origin.
- The Torah states that God created the humans in His image and likeness – all of them, Jews and non-Jews.
- The Torah defines the image of God as the Creator. If it is so, all the humans have to be creators in their individual (and collective) spheres of human endeavor.
- The Torah defines the way of God’s, and therefore humans, creative work – evaluating the results of a creation: if it is GOOD, it remains alive and continue developing; if it is BAD, it is demolished and replaced by something else.
- The Torah provides the Rules (spirituality, morality, rituals …) for defining GOOD and BAD to be tailored and applied to individual life circumstances.
- The Torah defines one group of the humans, the Jews, as the Chosen to be a sort of testing ground for the Rules and a helper to the others in learning and applying the Rules to their God-guided creative efforts.
- After receiving the Torah at Mount Sinai, the Jews – for over a millennium – had accumulated enough experience in applying the Rules in their own realm, and had begun – about two millenniums ago – helping the non-Jews in changing their heathen rules to the Rules of One God.
- At that time, there were no religions of Judaism or Christianity – just the Rules of One God for all the humans created by God in His own image and likeness.
- After the God’s Torah-based Rules began to be followed by all Jews and many non-Jews, some of them began to play the role of interpreters and enforcers of the Rules in their own interpretation with the goal of becoming a sort of human gods for their own peoples – that is the beginning of religions Judaism and Christianity.
- Judeo-Christian spirituality that we are discussing these days is the all-human spirituality based on the Rules of One God specified in the Torah without distortions introduced by some power-grabbing human leaders (in both Christianity and Judaism) without neglecting the unique role of the Jews as the Chosen.
Now, why some people may hate the concept of Judeo-Christian spirituality if, as is seen from the above description, this concept
- has nothing to do with the unique role of the Jews as the Chosen,
- has nothing to do with the unique distinguishing characteristics of Judaism and Christianity as different religions made for two different peoples – Jews and non-Jews,
- makes everybody spiritually equal in their individual pursue of happiness through creative work under one set of guiding rules for all, and
- what most important, spiritually arms us for defending our Judeo-Christian world from its chief spiritual enemy, the militarist Islam, bent on eliminating the Judeo-Christian world?
It looks like the answer is obvious. The haters of the concept of Judeo-Christian spirituality do not appreciate our great civilization, with two spiritual hubs in USA and Israel, and want to change it for something else. They do not understand the mission of the Jews as the Chosen and want do denigrate this mission. The Jewish haters do not believe in the Jewish spiritual strength and therefore think the concept of Judeo-Christian spirituality may encourage the Jews to leaving their faith. All of them are wrong!
Yes, that is true. The current European immigration crisis was created by European “social- justice” policies, and that is not just a traditional political crisis that can be resolved by traditional political means. The very spiritual foundation of Europe, the Judeo-Christian civilization, is under threat. That is not just a conclusion of some independent observers – many in the European Union begin to understand this threat.
European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans says the refugee and migrant crisis is nothing less than a moment of truth in European history. He said the organized solidarity of the European welfare state would be completely undermined if we simply say everybody can come in. Timmermans added though that Europe cannot survive either if we take leave of our values and our legal obligations for those seeking protection from persecution and war.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban says that his country does not want to take in large numbers of Muslims, in defense of Hungary’s response to the surge in refugees trying to enter the country. “I think we have a right to decide that we do not want a large number of Muslim people in our country,” Orban told journalists outside the EU headquarters at Brussels. “We do not like the consequences,” he said, referring to the country’s 150-year history of Ottoman rule during the 16th and 17th centuries.
Polish Foreign Minister Grzegorz Schetyna says that Europe should do all it can to stop illegal migrants from entering Europe.
Many other European politicians are of the same opinion – the Muslim immigration to Europe has to be stopped if Europe wants to preserve its spiritual Judeo-Christian spiritual realm.
However, how to address the Timmermans’ concern that “Europe cannot survive either if we take leave of our values and our legal obligations for those seeking protection from persecution and war”. Timmermans and other political leaders of Europe may address it by replacing their immigration “social-justice”-guided policies by the Bible-guided policies.
The “social-justice”-guided policies are based on the two false social-justice basics:
-*-That the immigrants from non-Judeo-Christian birthplaces are capable and willing to change their spiritual beliefs and traditions to become a sort of behavioral Judeo-Christians without joining a church, and
-*-That the anti-Bible forced redistribution of wealth can support the welfare for a great number of immigrants most of whom do not have the employable skills and therefore cannot support themselves.
The reality that Europe begins to understand is completely different:
–The immigrants do not want to become the pseudo Christians. They love their Islamic culture and traditions and would do whatever is legal, and what might be done by illegal/terrorist means, to replace the Judeo-Christian civilization by their own Islamic realm. It is possible that the Islamic world is using this crisis to deliver as many Muslims to Europe as possible to accelerate the Islamization process of Europe – just try to think about why the Muslim countries do not take care of their brothers in distress in spite of Quran’s order to do this. The world is often lectured to about the urgency of respecting Arab and Islamic brotherly love, but where is the Arab action to rescue fellow Muslims and Arabs from the claws of ISIS?
–The European Union has reached the level of wealth redistribution (of course, through the forced taxation) that has slowed the wealth generation and the ability to increase the existing gigantic welfare system even more.
Thus, what to do?
As Bible advises us to do: defend the Judeo-Christian civilization by not allowing the mass Islamic immigration into Europe, and help the Islamic population under duress in the areas where Islamic culture is dominant. In the Middle East and in Africa, many scarcely populated areas could be used for relocation and then for farming and stock raising.
One more idea. Egyptian billionaire Naguib Sawiris has offered to buy a Greek or Italian island to help house some of the refugees seeking help in Europe. “Greece or Italy sell me an island, I’ll call its independence and host the migrants and provide jobs for them building their new country,” he tweeted. “You have dozens of islands which are deserted and could accommodate hundreds of thousands of refugees,” he said. He estimated the cost of land being between $10 million and $100 million.
The attractiveness of this non-European resettlement of Islamic refugees is obvious. The European Islamic resettlement is final – nobody of the resettled Muslims would go back to their birthplaces even if ISIS is defeated there. If the refuges are resettled outside Europe, where there is no permanent “social-justice” welfare system, it might be the case.
“Prime Minister of Israel Netanyahu calls PA President Abbas with Eid greeting and says Israel wants peace. PA chief says he wants deal this year”. The problem is that both sides define the peace in a completely different way as could be seen from their Future-for-Palestine narratives.
For us the Jews our Palestinian narrative is clear and Bible-based, and the true Christians support this narrative:
- God gave the Promised Land (with the Holy Center in Jerusalem) now called Palestine, to the Jewish people and provided them with the Law, which is described in the Torah, on how to build a better world for all, Jews and non-Jews, in the Promised Land and beyond.
- The enemies of the Jews have been expelling the Jews from the Promised Land from the very beginning but the Jews were returning to the Promised Land (and Jerusalem) in spite of all threats.
- After the Holocaust, the Jews were returning to the Promised Land in large numbers to escape a murderous Europe and to build a dream-home for the Jews where the Jews themselves are capable to defend themselves from holocausts, pogroms and anti-Semitism.
- The Jews are eager to live in peace with their Arab neighbors if the neighbors agree with the security provisions designed to prevent new attempts to expel the Jews from the Promised Land.
For the Arabs, their Palestinian narrative is clear and Koran-based, and the true Muslims and true anti-Semites support this narrative:
- Allah gave all people the only true religion Islam, and finally the human world have to become Islamic.
- Palestine is the first part of the human world that had become Islamic and therefore, as the Koranic Law says, shall stay Islamic forever.
- After the Holocaust, the establishment of the Jewish State Israel made a part of Palestine de-Islamized and the true Muslims are obliged to reinstate there the Koranic law.
- The true Muslims can accept only a solution to Jewish-Arab conflict in Palestine that makes all Palestine an Islamic one.
An honest assessment of the two narratives makes it clear that there is no way to reconcile them – that is the reason why the “two-state solution” failed in spite of the great and sincere efforts of USA and European governments to find such solution.
That is why I have concluded in the post, “Palestinians have outplayed Israel – what Israel may do now” that the unilateral, one-Jewish-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict outlined by Caroline Glick many years ago is the only solution available for Israel. This Israeli one-Jewish-state solution should preserve an opportunity for the Palestinians to decide for themselves with whom to collaborate politically in the framework of Israeli secure borders – to have their own Arab-Palestinian secure future without violating the Israeli secure future.
The entire Palestine and Middle East history consists of similar one-sided solutions: a more powerful side defeats a less powerful side and imposes its own one-sided solution where a defeated side is not treated equally. The difference between what have happened in the history and what an Israeli one-sided one-state solution intends to do is that Israel is trying to find a solution where both Israelis and Arabs are treated equally.
- Jews and Arabs have lived in Palestine in relative peace until the beginning of the 20th Neither Jews or Arabs had their national states – the Jews lived in communities while the Arabs lived in tribes. The ruling Turks of Ottoman Empire allowed Jews, Christians and Muslim to live in accordance with their own, non-Turkish traditions. Both Jews and Arabs owned pieces of the land where they supported their families by farming and animal stock raising. The land used by the Arabs was owned by tradition and transferred from generation to generation while the land used by the Jews was legally purchased either from the Ottoman government or from private Arab owners.
- There were disputes and even minor military clashes but they were of the same magnitude than the others tribal disputes and clashes in the area like Persians vs. Arabs, Sunnis vs. Shiites, Kurds vs. Turks, or ISIS vs. Yazidis. The tribal/communal relationships remained the same after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, when the foreign European powers – UK, France, Germany, and Italy – became the governing powers in the Middle East.
- However, in the late 1940th and in the 1950th, the foreign governing powers realized that the cost of the Middle East governing is too high, and began creating local artificial states to transfer the governing power to them. Since those artificial states were created not in a normal historic way when – before creating a state – the people find a common ground for a peaceful coexistence, immediately local wars started to reshape the Middle-East map artificially created by the foreign powers.
- Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a part of this general reshaping. The current situation is such that everything is decided by non-peaceful means (Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Kurds, ISIS), and Israeli-Palestinian conflict is going to be resolved in the same way with various foreign powers trying to advance their own, not Israeli or Palestinian, interest.
- If it is so, and the history of the region confirms that is the case, it is much more beneficial for Israel to go ahead with own unilateral proposal for secure borders of the state of Israel, providing an option for the West-Bank Arabs to define their political future in the framework of Israel secure borders.
|The readers who prefer a more emotional presentation over a fact-based one can find it on the topic of this post in a video-talk by Pat Condell at|
Many critics of Obama are explaining the decline of domestic and foreign fortunes of the USA during the Obama presidency by his inexperience in everything – in business, in politics, in management, in diplomacy, etc. His inexperience, the critics say, leads to his strategic mistakes in domestic and foreign affairs.
Here are some of Obama’s foreign-affairs “mistakes”:
Helping, sometimes unsuccessfully, to bring Muslim Brotherhood to power in Middle East countries such as for example Egypt and Libya.
Alienating Washington’s traditional American allies in the region such as Israel or Saudi Arabia.
Not restricting Iran from obtaining nuclear weaponry in spite of Iran’s strategy of “Death to Israel and America”, and alienating anti-Persian Arab countries by not preventing Iran from becoming the hegemon of the region.
Encouraging dictatorial tendencies of Erdogan of Turkey who is reshaping Turkey from a democracy to a Muslim autocracy.
Leaving Iraq and Afghanistan prematurely, dooming the vast American investment in those two countries.
Not resisting Russian attempts to expand its autocratic sphere of dominance.
His domestic-affairs “mistakes” are impressive as well:
Increasing social polarization of American society (blacks vs. whites, females vs. males, immigrants vs. citizens, police vs. blacks, rich vs. poor, Republicans vs. Democrats, House of Representatives vs. Senate, etc.).
Sharply increasing national debt.
Using IRS and other government agencies to suppress political adversaries.
Disrespecting the US Congress as a constitutionally equal branch of government.
If one thinks the Obama’s strategic goal from the very beginning of his presidency was to preserve and strengthen the uniqueness and greatness of America in domestic and foreign affairs, then all in the above are just innocent mistakes – he honestly intended to do Good in everything in the above but due to his immaturity the result turned to be Bad.
Unfortunately, that is not the case. From the very beginning, Obama’s strategic goal, as he stated it many times in his books and speeches, of course in a double-speak language, was not to preserve and strengthen the uniqueness and greatness of America.
His strategic goal was an opposite one – to diminish the uniqueness of America since, in the Obama’s vision of the world, America is an impediment to a “better, as some may say Islamo-socialist world”.
How do we know about his strategic goal?
Immediately after the election victory, Obama proudly stated on many occasions that his goal is “to fundamentally change America”. What are “the fundamentals” of America needed to be changed? They are well known and based on the Constitution and the after-WWII dominant role of USA in world affairs. Those fundamentals are:
- The American-style democracy is a true democracy where the people, not the authoritative rulers of all kinds, govern the country.
- The governance of the country is based on Judeo-Christian principles.
- The country takes upon itself a noble mission of defending and strengthening the Judeo-Christian Western World.
What are evidences that Obama has been trying to “fundamentally change” the American-style democracy?
Just listen to his anti-democratic, autocratic language: My administration, My council, My advisers, Upon my order, I can do (whatever I want) by executive orders, and much more of the same nature.
Just remember his encouraging speeches, actions and even gestures about dictatorial countries like Turkey, Saudis, and Russia, and dictatorial ideologies of Koran and Sharia.
Just remember he is the first American president who has not been acknowledging the uniqueness and greatness of America in his speeches.
What are evidences that Obama has been trying to “fundamentally change” the Judeo-Christian principles of governing?
Just remember his spiritual mentors, advisers and friends who helped him create his spiritual vision of the world – all of them were ideological haters of Judeo-Christian America, such as Saul Alinsky, William Ayers, Frank Davis, Jeremiah Wright, and many more of the same anti-American mindset.
Just remember his admiration for Islamic tradition, religion and culture and never for anything Judeo-Christian.
Just remember his dislike of the State of Israel, miraculous rebirth of which was strengthening the Judeo-Christian foundation of our civilization.
What are evidences that Obama has been trying to “fundamentally change” the American mission of defending and strengthening the Judeo-Christian Western World?
Just remember his removal of American anti-missile defense systems from the countries of Eastern Europe, such as Check Republic or Poland, aimed at protecting the new Western Judeo-Christian democracies from Russian dictatorial threats.
Just remember he has frequently been reminding us about the real or alleged historic Christian atrocities and about the Israeli perceived sins related to “illegal settlements” while never mentioning the name of real perpetrators of the contemporary anti-Christian, ant-Jewish and anti-Israel atrocities that is Islamic terrorists and warriors of Allah who commit their crimes under the slogan “Allah Akbar”.
All in the above are the undisputable facts that support the feeling of many that the result of most of Obama’s actions that the people’s majority do not like are not the consequence of his inexperience – that is the outcome that he envisioned from the very beginning and achieved it.
In the contemporary world, two fundamentally different spiritual realms are fighting each other. One of them the realm of Judeo-Christian kingdom that should be governed by the Torah/Bible prescripts; the other one is the realm of Muslim kingdom governed by the Koran prescripts.
In the Judeo-Christian kingdom, we believe we are creating a better world for everybody where people of all beliefs and traditions can live in peace and creatively collaborate with each other.
In the Muslim kingdom, they believe they are creating a better world for the Muslim only and all non-Muslims, who are called infidels, should be spiritually or physically exterminated.
In the course of our history, we in the Judeo-Christian kingdom have created much better “civil liberties”, “human rights”, “individual wealth”, and “fair wealth distribution”. However, in spite of all that we are losing in the fight with the Muslim realm – the Muslims are not captivated by our achievements. Why? It is so since in the last century we have been demolishing the Torah/Bible-based foundation for creating a better world for everybody, and have been erecting a human-ideas-based foundation of “human liberties” and “human rights”. We have stopped to be the truly religious people (God’s people as many may say) while the Muslims continue to be.
The truly religious people, as the Muslims are, think and act in the terms of eternity. They are less concerned with the accumulation of wealth in the course of their earthy life span – they are awaiting for the eternal spiritual wealth after this life. They are not afraid of losing anything in this life.
The truly non-religious people do not believe in their own spiritual eternity and therefore are trying to preserve their life style in the earthy life span at any spiritual cost.
Many among us the people of Judeo-Christian civilization have recognized our inability to defend ourselves, to defend our core spiritual values and traditions, from Muslim conquest. However, not many among us have recognized the real reason for our surrender.
The real reason is the spiritual separation of the State from the Church/Synagogue that led to replacement of the Torah/Bible-based legal framework of the State by what is needed to be elected and obtain the power. The political-power grabbing human laws are replacing the Torah/Bible-based Law. Read the rest of this entry