Ann Coulter: A friend of the Jews?
Since I'm new to the blogging world, about a year ago I was voicing my opinion about Ann Coulter and her 'perfecting Jews' comment the old-fashioned way: offline. Nonetheless, I think this is something that should be addressed here, also.
Here's an excerpt from this now infamous interview from CNBC's The Big Idea:
DONNY DEUTSCH: That isn't what I said, but you said I should not -- we should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians, then, or --
ANN COULTER: Yeah.
DEUTSCH: Really?
COULTER: Yeah, well it's a lot easier. It's kind of a fast track.
Click here for a complete transcript.
A lot easier than what? A fast track to what?
Is this something that should trouble Jews in America? The Christians are supposed to be our friends, right? Certainly more than the Muslims are, especially in this, our "Judeo-Christian" society, right? Comments and responses to these questions are welcome.
Although Coulter "[doesn't] think most Jews are as stupid as Donny Deutsch" (click here for that fantastic interview), I think Deutsch's concern and the concern of many in our community were genuine during the weeks that followed the interview. Are the similarities between Judaism and Christianity really as obvious as Ann Coulter says they are? And is Ann Coulter, known, rightly or wrongly, as the face of Christian conservatives, to be trusted as an authority on religious matters?
Let's take a look at some other statements she has made regarding religious doctrine.
The truth is that "Judeo-Christian values" are neither solely Jewish nor solely Christian (though I would admit, largely Christian). It is hard for somebody to argue logically that Christians are "perfected Jews," since, if Jews try to follow mitzvot, it seems logical that a "perfected Jew" would follow... more mitzvot (and, of course, also be Jewish). Well, maybe no religious claims are logical; maybe all are based on faith. In that case, we must ask if Ann Coulter speaks for all Christians. Do all Christians think Jews go to heaven, and, an even more basic question, do all Christians recognize Supersessionism (a belief that the Christian covenant with God is a replacement or a perfected form of the Jewish one)? No, to both counts.
I think Ann Coulter should stick to being a political pundit rather than a religious one.
___________________________
To close up this post, here are two comments made by Townhall contributors, Mary Katharine Ham and Ann Coulter herself, related to this and other Coulter interviews. Apparently, there's even a few misunderstandings on the conservative side of the spectrum.
"Well, my first reaction was, 'Oh, what did Ann say again?' I'm not a reflective Ann defender when it comes to some of the things she's said in the past. In this case, I think that she and Donny Deutsch had what appears to be a very clumsy, indelicate and sort of Coulteresque discussion of religious doctrine that between a normal American Jew and a normal American Christian could have gone fine, but in this case, it's Coulter and it's a guy who's interviewing her who's waiting to be offended and everybody -- it turns into a big political storm." -- Mary Katharine Ham, on CNN (transcript)
"No. I do that on my own." -- Ann Coulter's response to the question by Time Magazine interviewer, "Do interviewers try to provoke you into saying outrageous things just because you're Ann Coulter?" (text)
Here's an excerpt from this now infamous interview from CNBC's The Big Idea:
DONNY DEUTSCH: That isn't what I said, but you said I should not -- we should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians, then, or --
ANN COULTER: Yeah.
DEUTSCH: Really?
COULTER: Yeah, well it's a lot easier. It's kind of a fast track.
Click here for a complete transcript.
A lot easier than what? A fast track to what?
Is this something that should trouble Jews in America? The Christians are supposed to be our friends, right? Certainly more than the Muslims are, especially in this, our "Judeo-Christian" society, right? Comments and responses to these questions are welcome.
Although Coulter "[doesn't] think most Jews are as stupid as Donny Deutsch" (click here for that fantastic interview), I think Deutsch's concern and the concern of many in our community were genuine during the weeks that followed the interview. Are the similarities between Judaism and Christianity really as obvious as Ann Coulter says they are? And is Ann Coulter, known, rightly or wrongly, as the face of Christian conservatives, to be trusted as an authority on religious matters?
Let's take a look at some other statements she has made regarding religious doctrine.
"... if anyone's going to be offended by anyone else's religion, the Jews believe that my savior, a Jew, was a raving lunatic, and you don't see me sniffling and crying." (transcript)
FACT: Generally speaking, today's Jews believe that Jesus was probably a practicing Jew who was executed and then given divine status by his followers."God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.' " From Hannity & Colmes, 06/2001
FACT: The verse actually says, "And G-d blessed them; and G-d said unto them: 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that creepeth upon the earth' " (Bereshis 1:28). Do trees creep? Nevermind. Many see this verse as the basis behind the Jewish concept of tikkun olam (and baby-making, of course), and we are supposed to take care of the earth and its inhabitants rather than merely exploit them. We are to rule over the earth, indeed, but responsibly.The truth is that "Judeo-Christian values" are neither solely Jewish nor solely Christian (though I would admit, largely Christian). It is hard for somebody to argue logically that Christians are "perfected Jews," since, if Jews try to follow mitzvot, it seems logical that a "perfected Jew" would follow... more mitzvot (and, of course, also be Jewish). Well, maybe no religious claims are logical; maybe all are based on faith. In that case, we must ask if Ann Coulter speaks for all Christians. Do all Christians think Jews go to heaven, and, an even more basic question, do all Christians recognize Supersessionism (a belief that the Christian covenant with God is a replacement or a perfected form of the Jewish one)? No, to both counts.
I think Ann Coulter should stick to being a political pundit rather than a religious one.
___________________________
To close up this post, here are two comments made by Townhall contributors, Mary Katharine Ham and Ann Coulter herself, related to this and other Coulter interviews. Apparently, there's even a few misunderstandings on the conservative side of the spectrum.
"Well, my first reaction was, 'Oh, what did Ann say again?' I'm not a reflective Ann defender when it comes to some of the things she's said in the past. In this case, I think that she and Donny Deutsch had what appears to be a very clumsy, indelicate and sort of Coulteresque discussion of religious doctrine that between a normal American Jew and a normal American Christian could have gone fine, but in this case, it's Coulter and it's a guy who's interviewing her who's waiting to be offended and everybody -- it turns into a big political storm." -- Mary Katharine Ham, on CNN (transcript)
"No. I do that on my own." -- Ann Coulter's response to the question by Time Magazine interviewer, "Do interviewers try to provoke you into saying outrageous things just because you're Ann Coulter?" (text)
posted by I, the Progressive Jew at
4:49 PM
6 Comments:
I agree with Ham. Coulter goes out of her way to be friendly to Donny, but it's clear he wants to be offended. Every Jew knows Coulter is just speaking the simple truth of Christian beliefs. Which is why Prager, Hewitt, Medved, Shapiro, and other commenters yawned about the "controversy". Oh course Christians think they're perfected Jews. Christ perfected the flaws in Jewish teaching (divorce for one), and to Jews, Christians are heretics.
Her two other quotes are:
"Jews think Christ was a lunatic"
Any self respecting Jew would, as Christ took the authority of G-d upon himself to rewrite the rules. If Christ was not the son of God, he was a filthy blasphemer who elevated himself to the level of YHWH with statements like "Before Abraham was I am." EVERY Jew (minus the Jews for Jesus) believes Christ was not divine, and therefore (though most don't make the connection) a bad Jew and a false prophet.
"The Earth is yours. Rape it."
Hyperbole. But basically true. The Earth is our gift from God to use how we will. While we feel we must use God's gift responsibly, it is ours to use.
Not all Christians think of themselves as perfected Jews. You cannot argue with that fact unless you want to call them "bad Christians" for not believing in the same tenets that you observe.
What are the flaws in Jewish teaching? Honestly, I want you to enlighten me, I'm not trying to be contentious.
In response to your responses to Coulter's quotes, I guess I would not be considered a "self respecting Jew" based on your opinion expressed here. There's a difference between being a lunatic and being a Jew with highly questionable views of the world and God.
And I certainly don't view Christians as heretics, because doing so would imply that they're actually Jewish, which they aren't. You cannot be a heretic within a religion unless you are a member of that religion. Judaism espouses adherence to the Noahide Laws for non-Jews, including Christians, and if they don't follow those laws, then perhaps they can be viewed as heretics. But Christianity is mostlty in keeping with these laws (some debate exists on the subject of the Trinity, however), so Jews accept Christians as our allies in this world.
Don't assume you know what all Jews believe regarding Christians. You've proven here that you really don't understand how we perceive non-Jews and the validity of their religious beliefs and practices. See my very first post for more information about what Jews consider valid beliefs for non-Jews. We're cool with Christianity, so long as nobody tries to convert us or kill us, and so long as Christian doctrine continues to adhere to the Noahide Laws.
And nobody should use hyperbolic diction when describing what God tells us to do. That usually leads to a misinterpretation of textual evidence, if not violent disagreement within a religious community.
Itsiki,
With all due respect, I don't think you quite get my argument. Unless you are a Jew for Jesus, you reject Christ. Why? Because he conflicts with what you believe. Rejecting Christ as divine is to reject him as a heretic. Maybe you don't think in those terms, but it is indeed what you're doing.
Furthermore, the early Christians WERE Jews. Tell me Itsikl, what is it, if not heresy, to worship a man as God who was not God? What is it to be a man and CLAIM to be God.
Jesus was either the son of God and had teh authority to make his claims, or he was a blaspheming heretic who pretended to be your God. You have no other choices.
As for flaws in Jewish teaching: the use of capital punishment for sexual deviancy is one, divorce, etc.
Of course I reject Christ. Anybody who claims to be God to any degree is not adhering to mainstream Jewish belief. Simply put, he was a heretical Jew. Does that make today's Christians heretics? Nope. They're just Christians. In order to be heretics, they would have to go against the foundations and teachings of Judaism publicly and be within our community. Since they are not part of our Jewish community, they cannot be heretics. They are simply not Jews.
Note: I never said Christ was not a heretic. I said he was not a lunatic. "Raving," yes, but "lunatic," no.
Don't twist my words.
And don't assume our religion has major flaws in its practices based on a limited knowledge of facts. A "Jewish" belief in capital punishment for sexual deviancy was never adopted within Judaism as a standard practice. In fact, Jewish law makes it very difficult to convict somebody of sexual deviancy in a beys din, especially to the point where capital punishment would be appropriate. You can count on one hand the number of times capital punishment has been mandated historically by rabbis for sexual deviancy.
You should familiarize yourself with rabbinic/Talmudic history and doctrine in practice before you make such wild assumptions about our religion. And what's your problem with our method of divorce? Look up "Rabeynu Gershom" and his rulings before you respond.
Rabeynu Gershom isn't terribly relevant to the discussion. If the question is "How did Christ perfect the Jewish teachings?" then someone who came around roughly a millenia later is kinda an afterthought. I am aware of some of today's divorce tradition in the Jewish community, but again, this is 2000 years later. Like so many other things, you guys have changed where you stand since Christ came around.
And I never said death for deviancy was widespread. I said it was mandated, and you yourself have to admit that it did, in fact, take place, though rarely. So what is your point? I'm right...but it was rare? You're just reinforcing my point.
And here we play the word games again..."he wasn't a lunatic, just raving"! Whatever bud, you're parsing words. It's nonsense.
I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm condescending, but you're being ridiculous. You're talking to a Christian, remember? Of course I think your religion is flawed...that was the central point of what Christ cam to do, fulfill and perfect the law. If it wasn't broken somehow, he wouldn't have needed to come and fix it. And you think Christians were following a heretic, a madman who pretended to be God, or honestly thought he was God. If you'd stop with the semantics, you'd be a hell of a debater, but when I simplify your arguments, you need to stop complaining about my paraphrasing, or my reading between the lines.
Do you even know who Rabeynu Gershom was or what he said? His view on a woman’s consent to a divorce has been in place in Judaism for 1,000 years, and even after his ruling was set to expire, Jews have kept it in place as valid and appropriate Jewish law.
My point in bringing him up, even though he came much later than Jesus, was that he helped to “perfect” and standardize the Jewish belief in divorce… just as others, like Ezra, helped to standardize communal gatherings and prayer to replace animal sacrifices that existed at the time of the 1st and 2nd Temple. It’s possible, as R. Gershom and Ezra demonstrate, to “perfect” a religion without forming a new one and without making their followers “throw away” the religious beliefs that came prior (as Coulter says Christians should do with Judaism). And if Christ worked out the kinks in Jewish divorce law, why do the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church disagree so sharply on the issue to this day? And how do you explain the formation of the Church of England? The fact of the matter is that all Christians, just like all Jews, don’t agree on a single issue (except maybe that Jesus was pretty great), so saying that all Christians believe themselves to be like Jews but more perfect is extremely naïve. Many like Coulter do believe that, but all do not. Coulter should not claim to speak for all Christians, who vary so greatly in belief and practice, and she has even less business trying to speak for all Jews.
And you still haven’t told me the flaws of Jewish divorce. I imagine the bulk of the “flaws” have either been worked out in modern (or even thousand-year old) practice or are simply flawed in your view because you disagree with them from a Christian standpoint.
But why do I believe that what Coulter said about Jews needing to be “perfected” is wrong, even from a Christian point of view? You said it yourself: Jesus perfected Jewish law. What Jewish law? The Jewish law of the time. Most of “Judaism” as Jesus knew it has changed quite dramatically. During his time, there were no Hasidim, no Orthodox or Conservative or Reform Jews, no real Ashkenazic or Sephardic delineation or interaction, and a belief in animal sacrifices. I fail to see how Jesus’ beliefs could be seen as perfected forms of today’s Jewish belief, which is what Coulter implied when she said she wants today’s American Jews to be perfected by accepting Jesus’ perfect-ations. We’ve gradually worked out the perfecting on our own, thanks. We have halachic ways of changing our views, and such changes are seen as valid even if they disagree with previous opinions. Jews changing their minds over time and in majorities isn’t heretical, but natural and even a Jewish way of getting things done.
You’re telling me Christians haven’t changed where they stand since Christ came around? Oh, then that must explain why we have Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist, Pentecostal, Adventist, Amish, Quaker, French Calvinist, Mormon, etc., etc., Christians today. They must all agree on every basic and fundamental issue: the Trinity, the divinity of Jesus, communion, and, relevant to this discussion, whether Jews should be converted. They can’t even agree that Christians are perfected Jews, which was my fundamental point here.
Discussing what you believe to be “historically Jewish” practices is pretty irrelevant here—definitely more irrelevant than Rabeynu Gershom. Capital punishment was mandated by a few rabbis, but like I said, it was never a part of mainstream Judaism. Saying this principle is a fault of Judaism is as absurd as saying that Christians condone sexual molestation because Catholic priests have practiced it with their own altar boys, or covered it up. Both understandings are extremely faulty, on many levels. 99.9% of rabbis have not made any ruling, let alone statements, that would indicate they’re in favor of capital punishment for sexual deviancy. And it’s these more modern rabbis, not the ones that predate the foundations of Talmudic thought, that have the most direct influence on Jewish belief.
And believing in a religion whose founder was a heretical Jew does not make you a “heretic” in the eyes of Jews (see definition from Dictionary.com at the end of this comment). I certainly don’t believe Christ was a madman; on the contrary, he was an incredibly gifted marketer and a very effective public speaker, all the while sensibly consistent and steadfast in his religious views (although they were not particularly Jewish). He was emotionally stable, and he voiced his opinions with clarity of thought and, what he considered, sound reason. By “raving,” I meant that he was extraordinarily enthusiastic when he publicly announced his views; I apologize for the misunderstanding of which definition I was using. If you have a fault with my contention that he wasn’t a “raving lunatic,” I’ll just call him a “vocal free-thinker.” “Lunatic” implies that he was insane, and I haven’t heard any Jews saying that he had brain damage or anything of the like. He was simply a practicing Jew who abandoned many of Judaism’s tenets.
My contention is that you’re taking too many liberties in simplifying my arguments. And just so you don’t misconstrue even this statement, I’ll rephrase it: You’re lying when you incorrectly assume what I believe.
And sorry for writing so much; if you said less absurd things about what you think I believe, maybe I wouldn’t need to take up so much of your time. I have to spit out the words you put in my mouth.
“heretic”: a professed believer who maintains religious opinions contrary to those accepted by his or her church or rejects doctrines prescribed by that church.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home