March 2, 2004

• I get news articles delivered to my email. They get plucked from the internet by google’s nimble electro-golems based on keywords I have chosen. It’s kind of a useless process because usually the keywords are used rather randomly in the text.

  
  

  For instance, I set google to deliver news articles with the keywords “giant squid.” So I get articles from restaurant critics and gourmet menus. Not at all what I’m looking for, but then, giant squid are a rarity. I can’t expect articles on the subject to appear with any frequency.

  
  

  Some of the other keywords I use are Pagan, Paganism, Witchcraft, etc. You’d think that I’d get a lot more articles on these topics, yes? Oh no… For instance, Pagan keeps bringing up articles about some athlete. He could be famous… I don’t know. The closest I get to liking any sport is occasionally watching gymnastics if I’m surfing the channels and I can’t find anything else. All that flipping and jumping and twisting is amazing. I wish I could do that. You don’t even want to know what occult brings up. Ewwww

  
  

  But anyway, I digress. Keyword Pagan also brought up an article which has little to do with Paganism.

  
  

  How many plan on seeing The Passion? I won’t. I’m not really curious about it. The only Christian movie I ever got into was Jesus Christ Superstar. heh That is a great movie.

  
  

  I go more for sci-fi, fantasy, horror, comedy movies. I really don’t care for these docu-dramas, though it is kind of cool that “The Passion” is done in all the original languages with subtitles.

  
  

  But anyway, I digress again. The subject of the article really has no bearing on my beef with its content. And not even all the content, just a few generalizations which irk me.

  
  

  The article was written by a Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, mostly in defense of what he refered to has “gross defamation.” I can see that. Media has a dual purpose of entertainment and education. If it’s not one, it’s the other. Since I cannot see such graphic “historical” depiction to be entertainment, especially when every Christian under the sun idolizes the main character, it must therefore be educational in nature. If the movie is meant to be educational, it really can’t be a good thing for the jews who he says are depicted as having ”demonically demanded the death of Christ.” I can completely understand where critics of the movie are coming from in regards to its ability to incite anti-semetic feelings. I agree with the critics. In my opinion, it should not have been made. There are too many people who will take it as fact and not an artistic interpretation of a psuedo-historic event.

  
  

  But still, it was the wording of the first page of the article itself which caught my attention. For instance, Rabbi Boteach said the movie depicted Christianity as “a religion of blood, gore, and death.” I’m sorry… but isn’t it? Historically speaking that is, since this is an “historical” movie… Then he said that Christianity should be depicted as a religion of “blessing, love, and life.” Yeah, well, shoulda, coulda, woulda. Best case scenerio, it’s supposed be those things. In my experience though, it seldom is. Most Christians view life as a chore to be performed before they earn enough creds to get into Heaven.
  

  The part that really caught my attention however was this…”The pagan religious cults of the ancient world were focused almost entirely on death. Ancient Egypt, with its pyramids as Temples of death, its worship of the god Hades, and its mass embalming of mummies, saw the purpose of life as gaining entry into the afterlife.” Now that was a gross generalization. Very few were focused on death, but rather on Life after death. The Rabbi can’t even keep his gods straight. Hades is a Greek god. Osiris would be the Egyptian god of the underworld. Blah! Grrr!

  
  

  And he goes on to talk about Islam and Shintoism and Hinduism: “In Hinduism, death is so central a facet that up until about 100 years ago when a man died they put his living widow on the funeral pyre with him.” Yeah, bad practice that, glad they don’t do that any more… but he fails to mention that Hindis believe in reincarnation. Therefore it is still not a “death cult” as he seems to want to make any religion which is not of the Judeo-Christian persuasion.

  
  

  I guess my gut reaction to this article is that the author was trying deflect criticism of Judaism and Christianity by criticizing other religions with half-truths and outright ignorance. Really I have no problem with either branch of monotheism, nor with their sibling Islam either, but I really feel the writer should have done his research before (unintentionally?) attacking other religions to put his own in a better light. What should I expect of someone whose scholarship lies in his own and related religions. Far be it for him to actually study religions not related to his own in some way.

  
  

  Rabbi Shmuley Boteach ends on page one by saying “Judaism and Christianity must therefore be supremely careful not to emulate their pagan predecessors and become religions that put the focus on death rather than on life.” I’d have to say it’s too late. Really, that’s all Christianity is about… getting to go to the big party at the end of the game. It’s been that way since before the middle ages, but was cemented by men like Martin Luther (not King! lol) among others. Really, Christianity and (dare I make a blanket statement) Judaism have been anti-flesh since Adam and Eve. In their religion, the flesh and blood world is unclean and death is to be favored over the filth and degradation of life (though suicide is a big no-no if you want the grandprize). Howso are they not religions of death then, when they reject life so vehemently? Perhaps I have misunderstood their stance on the afterlife, but it seems to be favored far above their existence in this world.

  
  

  He goes on to talk about the movie and the difference between Christianity and Judaism… none of which I have problem with. It was really only the generalizations he made on the first page that infuriated me for some reason. I guess you can all go back up to the top of this rant and click on the article link (if you haven’t done so already) and read it for yourself. I have a real problem with ignorance, especially in those who assume a mantel of authority.

  
  

  About the only useful thing he said was this… “They [Jewish children] often learn far more about how Jews were burned at the stake for their faith rather than how Abraham’s faith in G-d burned with a fiery intensity.” If there was anything of value in the entire article, this was it. Though it was aimed at how many modern Jews define themselves based on the Holocaust rather than by their religious faith, I think it can also be applied to how Pagans (& witches) view themselves based on the “burning times” and the Inquisition.

  
  

  We (all people of all religions) need to give up the past. The past is not who we are. While it is true that those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it, it is also true that we cannot live in the past. These things that happened to our ancestors cannot be undone. We should not let the distant past control us or flavor our opinions of people who may share the same religions as those who persecuted our predecesors but who could not possibly have been alive in those times. Letting ourselves be defined by events that happen to us rather than the choices we make in life makes us into things rather than people. In terms of how I interact with the world, I’d rather be a who than a what.

  • 7:08 pm
  • 9 Comments