Skip to comments.When 'Anti-Semitism' Is Abused: Disagreeing With Israel Doesn't Make One a Bigot
Posted on 01/09/2012 9:10:42 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
We were raised to be vigilant. We were taught to fight oppression, admonished to be New Jews strong, muscular, defiant.
We were told to look for the signs, the slogans and the double-speak. We learned at the knee of those with tattooed forearms; knelt at the feet of those who lost brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles, parents, grandparents, lovers, spouses, children.
We have cried, we have wailed, we have lit thousands upon thousands of memorial candles. And we have sworn, again and again, that we would never forget.
That is why when anti-Semitism is falsely applied, we must also stand up and decry it as defamation, as character assault, as unjust. That is why when we debase the term by using it as a rhetorical conceit against those with whom we disagree on policy matters, we have sullied our own promises to our grandparents. For if we dilute the term, if we render the label meaningless, defanged, we have failed ourselves, our legacy, our ancestors, our children.
I am speaking of the recent rise of the bogeyman of anti-Semitism wielded to criticize everyone, from the American ambassador to Belgium (himself the Jewish son of a Holocaust survivor), who was trying to negotiate the uncomfortable lines of Muslim-Jewish conflict in modern Europe, to foreign policy bloggers at Media Matters for America and ThinkProgress, the online magazine housed at the left-leaning Center for American Progress. Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post, responding to a story about divisions on Israel policy in the Democratic Party, freely called these blogs anti-Semitic. Commentary took up her lead, and The Jerusalem Post than found a historian to ruminate over word choices on the blogs, likening their use to classic anti-Semitism. In the meantime, Elliott Abrams of The Weekly Standard took on Thomas Friedman, beginning his piece, If you were an anti-Semite dedicated to spreading your hatred of Jews .
We should know by now that supporting the State of Israel does not mean uncritical support by all, that Jewish identity is not always under attack when a government of Israel faces criticism. Love for the Jewish state does not, by definition, mean a love for all things the state undertakes. For some that may mean fighting the segregation of women in Beit Shemesh; for others that means pushing for Israel to get out of the territories.
We can we must write about these things. We can argue over borders and refugees, democracy and lack of democracy, worry over the increasingly uncomfortable tension between the ultra-Orthodox and the secular in the state to which so many of us in the Diaspora feel connected.
We can do so because such criticism is not, by definition, anti-Zionism. We can do so because such criticism is not, by definition, anti-Semitism.
There comes a time when we must insist on common sense. We must reject the absurd. There comes a time when we must say, Enough. Real anti-Semitism exists. Real, ugly, hatred of the Jewish people is all too easy to find.
But when we are forced to sift through the thousands of posts of an organization affiliated with the Democratic Party in order to come up with six or seven sentences that may, taken out of context, feel uncomfortable to the community with regard to Israel, that should not lead to pointing fingers, libeling writers and screaming about hate speech. We cannot jump up and shout that these think tanks are harboring anti-Semites or brewing hatred because we disagree with something they have written. We cannot call that anti-Semitism. We can call it policy disagreement.
When we take apart a speech about anti-Semitism by one of our ambassadors who has, through observation and analysis, come to the reasoned conclusion that the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, and the failure of the peace process, has an impact on Jewish communities abroad, we should not call for his resignation. Instead, we must acknowledge that when Israel takes an action against the Palestinians whether we agree with that action or not the action may, and often does, reverberate elsewhere. But we cannot call those who acknowledge these things anti-Semitic. We can call that an uncomfortable truth.
And when Haredi men and women put their children in striped pajamas and place a yellow star emblazoned with the word Jude on their chests and parade in the streets of Jerusalem to protest the secular world, we can call that spitting on the graves of our ancestors.
And we can weep that we have lost all perspective.
Sarah Wildman is a columnist for the International Herald Tribune and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and is a contributing editor to the Forward.
Being against Israel does not necessarily make one anti-Semitic but this woman is a liberal who objects to LIBERALS being called anti-Semitic.
Self-hating Jew fights to defend Soros' Empire of Lies: Media Matters and ThinkProgress. Who needs Hamas when you have Jews like Sarah Wildman?
Self-hating Jew fights to defend Soros' Empire of Lies: Media Matters and ThinkProgress. Who needs Hamas when you have 'Jews' like Sarah Wildman?
What does one expect out of a SPUSA publication anyhow . . . ?
Call it hatred, or “Policy disagreement”, it does not matter.
If you are against Israel, then you are indeed an AntiSemite. Israel is the home land and spiritual center of Am Israel -the Jewish People- the Jewish Nation. It has been for thousands of years- since the time of Avraham, when Hashem made HIS sacred covenant and bequeath to the Jewish people. HasHem has kept HIS promise - the Jews have survived, thrive, and Israel was reborn.
And, exactly as it was written, HaShem has begun the gathering of the Jewish people in the Diaspora to bring them back to Israel.
If you are a self-hating Jew, such as this writer, then you are Erev Rav and should open your eyes, change your thinking, or simply remain among the 70 wolves and become a part of them.
If you are against Israel, you are not only an Anti-Semite, you are also against the will of G-D.
The editors of the Forward (the English language successor to the socialist Yiddish Daily Forvitz) romanticize all things Yiddish and all things “shtetel,” including the dead 6,000,000 Jews, but the editors of the Forward never have a good word for the living millions of proud Israelis (many children of Holocaust survivors) whose language is Hebrew.
Michael Savage would include them under his satiric rubric, Red Diaper Doper Babies. Their parents were the Red Diaper Babies, referring to the color of their parents’ political leanings.
How curious. When the religious Jews had far fewer numbers, nobody ever complained about the abuse heaped upon them from their not-so-religious brethren.
“We cannot jump up and shout that these think tanks are harboring anti-Semites or brewing hatred because we disagree with something they have written. We cannot call that anti-Semitism. We can call it policy disagreement.”
Why do I have this feeling that this author would be among the first to call pro-lifers “anti-woman” and folks who agree with Jesus’ teaching on marriage in Matthew 19:4-6 “homophobic”? It’s interesting to see one of these libs getting somewhat of a taste of their own medicine.
Amen! Excellent point!
And they[the Left]love to glory in diversity, and inclusiveness,[as in one worlders] yet they never understand the message of “Salvation in Christ” is the most inclusive message ever given to mankind!
And if you are against Obama you are "indeed" a racist. If you are against Palistine you hate all muslims. If you don't condone homosexuality you hate all gay people. etc. etc. You've learned the liberal game well.
Right. Only conservatives who criticize Israel should be called anti-Semitic. /s
Christianity has taught from day 1 that the Church is the New Israel. You're saying that makes Christianity "evil" and anti-semitic? I'd have to disagree.
While Israel is surrounded by new, Muslim Brotherhood
Islamic governments that would love to finish off what Hitler began, I don’t think this is the time to play around with liberal silly putty at the Leftist State Department and UN over women’s seating on the buses in Israel. They are trying to do to the Israeli government what they did to Egypt’s. They want an Israeli Spring to install a weak leftist govenment in Israel who will sign onto Barry’s “peace” demands.
It’s deadly to join Hillary and the UN in fretting over Orthodox Jews as they silently watch Muslims call for pushing Israel into the sea, and set about mass murdering Christians and gang raping and beating women in the Arab streets. It’s not the time to weaken Israel and play genocide games of false peace with Barry.
We have Rev. Wright’s contingent in the White House cheering the Muslim Brotherhood’s rise to power while always condemning Israel. American Jews don’t remember Al Sharpton’s NOI inspired hate mobs in Crown Heights? They have it in the White House and State Department, community organizing the territory of Isarel and armies of the Arabs in Middle East!
Liberalism is destructive on it’s best day and deadly on it’s worst. In my opinion, it is the vehicle of evil in the world today. It’s not time for Jews to play political correctness in the Middle East. I assume this woman is a useful idiot rather than evil.
It may be too late to halt Hillary’s and Obama’s “progress.” This woman is going to progress to be horrified by what she sees unfold. Yeah, lets all follow the PBS dummy over Barry’s cliff.
Alright, answer this Freepers. Given who Barry is and what he has done in the Middle East to weaken Israel and given what he’s done to economically weaken the US and our military, why do you think he is placing US troops in Israel? Appearances would say he is doing it in preparation for war with Iran over their oil blockade. But, I think he has other plans for his enemies - the US and Israel. What do you think he’s doing?
Christianity has taught from day one that the Church is the New Israel. It has not ceased to teach this, even if since Vatican II it has chosen not to emphasize this teaching.
This does not make the Church anti-semitic.
And neither is modern evangelicalism correct in its views on the New Israel.
Here's an Eastern Orthodox explanation:
I don’t know who this Sarah Wildman is, but I’ll trust the opinions of others here who say that she is a liberal idiot.
On the other hand, people who wail falsely about anti-semitism and racism are like the boy who cried wolf. It’s especially dangerous, since the wolf is so vicious in the case of anti-semitism.
No, just Torah.....and I will say it again. If you are against Israel, you ARE an Anti-Semite.
And I will say again, you have learned well from Obama and your liberal victimology brethren.
“New Israel”???? Israel IS Israel- The spiritual and national homeland of AM Yisrael- the Jewish people.
HaShem specifically said “forever”..... The Land of Israel is HIS sacred bequeath and covenant to the Jewish people - forever lasting, never changing. That is HIS word. Are you suggesting that HaShem breaks HIS Holy word?
It is obvious to anyone who studies world events and the Torah that HaShem keeps HIS word.
To those who hold the view that to criticize the modern secular state in the middle east with that name, Israel, in any way represents de facto anti-semitism, one can only shrug and repeat Sobran's observation:
An anti-Semite used to mean a man who hated Jews. Now it means a man who is hated by Jews. ― Joseph Sobran
Sara, here is the answer to your question: It is a Trojan Horse.
The warnings of this are found in The Torah, The Gematria (hidden codes) of the Torah, The Holy Neviim, The Zohar, Gemora, Midrashim.
Below are a just few links to those ancient warnings. They are by highly knowledgeable, respected, Rabbinic scholars, properly translated into English. Their stunning accuracy will shock you, and you will also find that, Obama’s name, and others, are actually given in a number of places:
Gematria of the Torah: http://www.redemption5768.com/html/articles.html
IDENTIFYING THE EVIL AT THE END OF DAYS-
GLOBAL FINANCIAL EARTHQUAKES SHAKING THE WORLD
THE SECRET OF MASHIACH IS HALF OR PART OF THE
Videos: Rabbi Matityahu Glazerson: Torah Codes
End of Days - Where are we? (parts 1, 2 and 3)
The Holy Neviim: http://www.ishwar.com/judaism/holy_neviim/
Sefer Obadiah1: http://www.ishwar.com/judaism/holy_neviim/book13/
Sefer Joel 4: http://www.ishwar.com/judaism/holy_neviim/book11/book11_004.html
ADL to Rick Santorum: Keep Emphasis on Religion Out of Campaign
New York, NY, January 6, 2012 In response to his comment on a radio show that "we always need a Jesus candidate," the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today called on Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum to refrain from overt expressions of religious preferences and beliefs on the campaign trail, stating that "religious appeals to voters are simply unacceptable and un-American."
"Senator Santorum's remark comparing himself to a 'Jesus candidate' was inappropriate and exclusionary. It essentially says that those of other faiths or of no faith whether Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, non-believers or others do not belong," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "Religious appeals to voters are simply unacceptable and un-American. Voters should be encouraged to make their decisions based upon their assessment of the qualifications, integrity and political positions of candidates, not the intensity of their religious beliefs."
The League has long maintained that candidates should feel comfortable explaining their religious convictions to voters, but that there is a point at which an emphasis on religion in a political campaign becomes inappropriate and even unsettling.
Sen. Santorum said Thursday in response to a question from a caller on a radio show that he disagreed the economy was the essential issue of the campaign. The caller commented, "We don't need a Jesus candidate; we need an economic candidate," to which Sen. Santorum replied: "My answer to that was, we always need a Jesus candidate. We need someone who believes in something more than themselves and not just the economy. When we say, "God bless America," do we mean it or do we just say it?"
As a 501c3 non-profit corporation, ADL takes no position on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for office.
The Anti-Defamation League, founded in 1913, is the world's leading organization fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry.
Hello everyone and welcome to The Vortex where lies and falsehoods are trapped and exposed. Im Michael Voris.
Republican presidential hopeful Senator Rick Santorum has ruffled the feathers of the liberal religious establishment .. in this case .. the Jewish anti-defamation league .. also known as the ADL.
In one of the purest pieces of hypocrisy you are likely to read in the arena where politics and religion cross over .. the ADL has issued a press release telling Santorum to shut up about his religion .. which by the way is Roman Catholicism.
The statement says in part .. "religious appeals to voters are simply unacceptable and un-American." First of all, says who? Abe Foxman of the ADL? Who appointed him the arbiter of what can be said by political candidates?
Secondly .. he never seemed to get all upset when candidate Obama was tromping across the country and speaking in every protestant church who would let him in.
He never seemed to get upset when the Clintons were barnstorming across the United States and speaking to every inner-city black Church congregation who would welcome them.
In fact .. Clinton spent soooo much time speaking before church crowds in the inner city, that he was nicknamed the first black president.
So where Foxman comes off saying its un-American and unacceptable is quite the mystery. Perhaps he means its un-American and unacceptable when an actual BELIEVING traditional Christian .. in this case .. Catholic says it.
BTW Am I allowed to say catholic? Just sayin!
Anyway .. this is the default position of the liberal political class .. of which the Jewish Anti-Defamation League is a prominent cheerleader and card-carrying member .. despite their claims to be .. um .. non-partisan.
Just a 5 second scroll through their homepage will reveal that they have come down squarely on the side of every liberal political position known to man .. from partial birth abortion .. to regular abortion to individuals of the same gender engaging in sex with one another and demanding it be called marriage.
Yep ..nary a cause célèbre of the perverted political agenda goes by without the ADL right there with their smug self-righteous pronunciations on whats allowed to be said and whats not.
And of course .. if someone challenges their stance on something .. the liberal elite PR machine kicks into high gear and the dreaded .. conversation ending .. charge of anti-Semitism is leveled against all opposition .. much the same as the charge of racism is leveled against opponents of Obamas.
Well .. while we are on the topic of all these isms .. sure seems to me that the ADL is guilty of propagating the foul social illness of anti-Catholicism. After all .. Rick Santorum is Catholic .. loud and proud about it as a matter of fact .. and he committed the political heresy of using the name Jesus NOT in connection with the liberal agenda.
After years of having quite successfully hijacked Jesus for their own political purposes .. liberals simply cannot stand to see Him spoken about in actual TRUTHFUL terms .. such as his calling out of sin and evil and the consequences of a political and cultural order not conformed to His Divine Will.
Expect more of this condescending bluster as the campaign rolls along. Weve attached a link to their press release on this page.
GOD Love You. Im Michael Voris. http://www.adl.org/PresRele/RelChStSep_90/6212_90.htm
Dear Mr. Foxman,
Get over yourself.
You too are entitled to your opinion.
But in this day, I see far more evidence of anti-Catholicism (often from overt Jewish sources like the ADL nonsense above) than I see evidence of legitimate anti-semitism.
In fact, I see rampant anti-Catholicism masked in a "crusade against anti-semitism."
And there is much Christian truth in the ante Nicean fathers you bemoan as worthy of a neo-Nazi smile.
In fact, I'm beginning to understand the ante Nicean fathers better every time I cross paths with the ADL propagandists, not to mention certain zionists and certain Jewish apologists on this forum.
And there’s the matter of Jesus in the New Testament celebrating ‘Feast of Dedication’ - Chanukah, an exclusively rabbinic holiday.
Did Jesus say, “Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, Who has sanctified us with His commandments, and has commanded us to light the Chanukah lamps,” when there’s no Scripture ‘commanding’ it?
Thank you Brian, that was excellent. The ADL chooses to forget the phrase “freedom of religion” doesn’t apply only to them, and those they are fond of. No pity will be given to them. This is as Michael called it: anti-Catholicism.
Yes, please do. I would like to read them in their entirety in context. Please post them from Catholic sources to make sure the problem isn't simply a faulty translation - with links to their context on the Catholic site from which they are excerpted. Thank you for the offer. This will be very helpful.
The Orthodox research center did a good job explaining this in the correct context...
Calling any Church Father anti-Semitic on the basis of ostensibly denigrating references to Jews, therefore, is to fall to intellectual and historiographical simple-mindedness. Applying modern sensitivities and terms regarding race to ancient times, as though there were a direct parallel between modern and ancient circumstances, is inane. This abuse of history is usually advocated by unthinking observers who simply cannot function outside the cognitive dimensions of modernity. My remarks in this regard apply not only to those who find literal anti-Semitism in the Fathers, but also to women, in our times, who, deviating from a true vision of femininity and a Christian understanding of the lofty place of the female in the Church, are quick to characterize statements in the Fathers about the FALLEN nature of women (which are often quite harsh) as symptomatic of a general denigration of females (as though fallen males are not also brutally portrayed in the Fathers). Post-Lapsarian and unrestored nature, whatever the gender of the individual, is corrupt and cannot be described in positive ways. (Restored men and women are another matter, and here equality in Christ prevails, whether as regards race or gender.) A clinical diagnosis of human spiritual ills is not the same thing as prescriptive racism or intolerance. To suggest this is unfair. It is not so much that the Fathers were misogynists or racists as it that those who find misogyny and racism in their writings are possessed by small minds, perplexed spirits, and the whimsical concerns of our age. I am loath to loathe anything; however, such smallness is something that I abhor!
Anybody who pledges loyalty to a senile German monarch shouldn’t talk. Jefferson was right (see my tag line).
Perhaps you would not be so harsh if you understood that the Church teaching is an unbroken continuation of Israel through the New Covenant and Salvation is open to all mankind by the law of love, including Jews.
Catholic Orthodox rightly recognize the Sainthood of Moses and Abraham as Saint Moses and Saint Abraham as well
And from the Catechism..
Catechism 877... "In fact, from the beginning of his ministry, the Lord Jesus instituted the Twelve as "the seeds of the new Israel and the beginning of the sacred hierarchy." Chosen together, they were also sent out together, and their fraternal unity would be at the service of the fraternal communion of all the faithful: they would reflect and witness to the communion of the divine persons."
Who pledges loyalty to a senile German monarch? And Jefferson wasn’t infallible. Christ is High Priest, and we all partake of the priesthood of believers.
Excellent contribution, thank you!
Thank You, Brian, for posting this thread and explaining the Church is not anti Semitic in any way.
Show us any Catholic teaching that approves of any of this,dear friend?
You're pointing fingers that can be pointed at Jews during certain time periods that don't reflect Judaism either
Your arguments are with sinful people and not with the teachings of Catholicism
I dont read Typho” that way. The Jews in Justins time were different from those of Jesus time. They were also different from the Jews in the time of Constantine, after man years of rabbinical influence , The Talmud of the east gradually extended west to the Roman Empire from its base in Iraq. But they had become anti-Christian, not only rejecting Jesus but other expectations of a messianic kingdom. What Justin was rejecting was a Judaism, which no longer reached out to the nations as before, but withdrew into itself. This could not last, as the centuries would show. But anti-semiticism is the wrong word to use against Justin. Anti-judaism is better, if only because anti-semitism is an anachronism, a product of the 19th century and its anthropological notions of racism.
Dont know why you write Christian. It was Christians who did the dirty deeds. But the pogroms were not countless, else there would have been no Jews to beat up on. Jews have got the idea that things were better for them in Muslim counties, but only because there was a regular system of tribute. Jews and Christians hated one another in Europe because Jews were outside the feudal order. Where baptism was the entry into citizenship, there Jews were never more than resident aliens. I dare say that the hatred between Jews and Christians was far more intense because they fought over a common treasure, the Sacred Scriptures. The Moslems cared not a fig for those same Scriptures. For them there was nothing to debate. Here is the Koran, take it or leave it.
“And theres the matter of Jesus in the New Testament celebrating Feast of Dedication - Chanukah, an exclusively rabbinic holiday.”
That is because Jesus was JEWISH. He was born a Jew, became a Rabbi and died a Jew....he was not a Christian. He did not change his religion. He was a renegade in many respects, but if you read his teachings, they were the teachings of Rabbi Hillel, who lived before him.
.....but go try to tell that to others......
If you actually KNEW what you are talking about, you would realize that I am an Orthodox Jew, and, as I am Torah Observant- that makes me VERY much a Conservative........
And, you are bandying about the typical, anti-semitic’s “victimology” line. Get an education, already.
“The traditional Christian teaching is that the CHURCH is Israel, not the modern secular state in the middle east with that name. And modern Talmudic Judaism is NOT the Judaism of the time of Christ. Yes, in 1BC, Judaism was the only true Faith on Earth. But after 33AD, it is no longer the True Faith. And modern Judaism is not in any way the Judaism of 33AD.”
1.) “Yisrael” is the name HaShem gave to Yaakov ( Jacob) and his descendants-the JEWS. The children of Yisrael are the JEWISH people-AM Yisrael. The name means to wrestle with HaShem- not against, but WITH. You are not Jews, you are not descendants from the Jews, therefore, you are not Yisrael. You are just another revisionist.......
2.) “Modern Talmudic Judaism” IS EXACTLY the same as the Judaism at the time of Jesus. Why don’t you educate yourself as to what the Talmud is -a collection of Rabbinic commentaries and discussions based upon the Mishnah.
3.) Judaism is no longer the true faith? HaShem commanded the Jewish people to follow the Torah “FOREVER” and to NEVER change it, or be swayed from it. HaShem stated and promised that His Covenant was “LASTING and FOREVER”.
Are you saying that HaShem, the ONE who put into works all creation in HIS plan since the beginning of time, changed his mind? That HE broke HIS word and promise?
You would be incorrect, as the proof of HIS word and HIS promise to the Jewish people is taking place right before everyone’s eyes- EXACTLY as written and like clockwork.
You can try to revise, but you can never change the truth, and proof of HaShem’s word. That is why HE provided the proof for all eyes. HIS name is “I AM”- meaning ONE, not “We Are....” Thy Shalt not have any gods before ME”....not “Us”........
As for Joseph Sobran- You will recall that Sobran was fired from the National Review because Buckely found his work to be “contextually Anti-Semitic”. That you would quote such a hate monger to defend your point of view, reflects what evil is in your own heart. But, that will be between you and HaShem at the time you are to answer for it.
But please allow me, an Orthodox Jewish rabbinical student to give you a little tip: HaShem is angered by anti-semites, and denial ain’t gonna cut it.
“I will make of you a great nation,
And I will bless you;
I will make your name great,
And you shall be a blessing.
I will bless those who bless you
And curse him that curses you;
And all the families of the earth
Shall bless themselves by you.”
The Jewish people are no different from Avraham to Moshe Rabbienu ( Moses) to now. Our beliefs have never changed. Judaism has not changed. The Torah has not changed. In fact, it is written the same way, in the same manner, with the same tools, created in the same way, as it was when Moshe Rabbienu instructed us how to do it:
The Talmud, both Jerusalm and Babylonian Talmuds are various Rabbinic discussions and commentaries based upon the Torah Mishnah- the Oral Torah and law.
But it is NOT a change of the Torah, or of the Torah Mishnah. I can tell you this faithfully, as I study it day in and day out as all Orthodox Jews do.
Moshe Rabbeinu (Moses) was the first to teach the Torah Mishnah, as he received it from HaShem on Mt. Sinai , after which, he then transcribed a Torah for each of the 12 tribes. The Torah has never changed. Neither has the Oral Torah and Halacha.
Jews do not accept Jesus as Moshiach. There are numerous reasons for this. But primarily because the many prophecies of the Holy Neviim had not taken place.
They are, however, taking place now. Jews do believe in a Messianic kingdom. It is part of Judaism, that’s where you folks got it from. But Jews do NOT believe that the Moshiach is a deity. He is a Rabbi, and a very holy one who is descended from the line of Dovid HaMelech. He will lead the world into the Redemption.
Jews did not fight over the sacred scriptures. They were given to us. So what was there to fight about? We were persecuted and killed because we would not convert to Christianity or Islam, and simply because of hatred.
Here is a historical listing of the pograms and persecution against the Jewish people. Yes, we survived. HaShem promised us that we always would.
Here are a few links that list these events :
The historical cincumstances of the Jews certainly changed. It is guessed that at one time, the Jews constituted one-tenth of the population of the empire. Under Trajan there was a great uprising that forced the emperor to abandon his pacification of Iraq and turn west to put down a rising of the Disapora that taxed his power to the limitbefore it was quashed. The rising of Bar korqba, and its suppression by Hadrian, and the obliteration of the Jewish character of Jerusalem, marked the end of a political phase that began with the Maccabees. There after, the Jews became reconciled to Roman mastery and were recognized offically by the Romans. A status. not allowed the Christians until the 3rd Century. With the disappearnce of the Jewish state, Jews took a different look at their religious tradition, one that was suited to their dispersed situation. Naturally as a Christian I accept the Torah but not the tradition known as Judaism, except in part.