Lessons on Cultural Sensitivity and Exaggerated Metaphors
Rabbi Shmuley Boteach and his new book "Kosher Jesus" recently came under attack by Rabbi Yitzchok Wolf, an Orthodox Rabbi based in Chicago. Rabbi Wolf accused Rabbi Boteach of attempting to proselytize Jews to Christianity and promulgating heretical views. Rabbi Boteach retorted that if Rabbi Wolf read his book he would see that in it he explicitly renounces Jesus' divinity and claims of messiahship, and rather embraces the Jesus that was Torah observant. Rabbi Boteach then lobbed an attack on two Orthodox Jewish blogs and its editors for not posting his response in full with quotes from the New Testament. My point is not to discuss the merits or demerits of Rabbi Boteach's scholarship or my personal viewpoint on the book, but to reflect on lessons of cultural insensitivity and the misuse of the hyperbolic religious extremist metaphor in the debate. Orthodox Jews have throughout history shunned the acceptance of Jesus and it should be no surprise that an Orthodox Jewish blog would refuse to publish quotes from the New Testament and refuse to entertain a discussion on the historical Jesus.
Should Rabbi Boteach be offended that certain members of the Orthodox-Jewish community are renouncing a book titled "Kosher Jesus" and not giving him a platform to promote it? Of course not. Should Tim Tebow be offended if he was not invited to speak at a reproductive rights forum or an atheist convention? Of course not, because Tebow knows that he espouses the pro-life viewpoint evident in his anti-abortion Super Bowl ad. Praying to Jesus on national television would not bode well at the atheist convention. With this in mind, would it be appropriate for Tim Tebow to publicly proclaim his exclusion from these events as a sign of radical extremism?
Likewise, consider the Jews reacting to Boteach's book on Jesus. In their minds, whether right or wrong, the book is calling for a radical change in traditional Judaism. It calls for embracing a figure who has historically been a symbol of Jewish oppression. Although the book disclaims Jesus' divinity and messiahship, it also calls for the true Jesus to be embraced by Jews. Most Jews would find that notion radical and highly controversial to say the least, so is it appropriate for Rabbi Boteach to label the Jews who renounce his book as mindless religious extremists?
The vast majority of anonymous comments on the privately run Jewish blogs COLlive and CrownHeights.info are disclaiming the view that Jesus should be embraced and using harsh, albeit mean-spirited and counterproductive words to criticize Rabbi Boteach for even suggesting it. Close-minded? Yes. Mean-spirited? Definitely. Contemptible? Absolutely. Religious extremism? No. Of course the cherry-picked comments that Rabbi Boteach cited are extremist and borderline criminal but the vast majority of comments were renouncing the concept of the book in no uncertain terms, not calling for the authors lynching. The reaction should have been expected (albeit not excused). Rabbi Boteach also incorrectly asserts that COLlive and CrownHeights.info are "Chabad website[s]" seeking to crucify him when in realty both websites are Orthodox community news blogs, not websites endorsed or sponsored by the Chabad movement. The comments on these independent blogs do not represent the viewpoints of the Chabad movement, whose official website is Chabad.org. Also Rabbi Wolf is admittedly not speaking on behalf of the Chabad movement.
When Rabbi Boteach uses language like "religious Jewish extremists" to describe Jews that reject a book about Jesus, it trivialize true religious extremism and ignores the deep-rooted cultural sensitivity that Jews have about the subject. It trivializes real religious extremism like forced female genital mutilation, stoning of suspected adulterers in certain Muslim countries, blowing up of abortion clinics, committing hate crimes against gays and other terrorist and criminal acts in the name of religion. The phrase "religious Jewish extremist" is a crude and inappropriate descriptor to label Jews that shun a particular interpretation of Jesus.
PETA's "Holocaust On Your Plate campaign" was also a crude and inappropriate metaphor to represent the viewpoint that chickens are wrongly being slaughtered and factory farming is cruel. Using images of the Holocaust in this context trivializes the barbarity perpetuated by the Nazis. Likewise, the haredi in Israel donning concentration camp garb to symbolize a perceived cultural hegemony was also an inappropriate use of the Holocaust metaphor. In similar vein, Rabbi Boteach's religious extremist metaphor is inappropriate and inaccurate and serves to trivialize the concept of true religious extremism.
We should seek cultural sensitivity with those who have a different view than us, whether they are the insular Amish society, the Muslim community or the Orthodox Jews rejecting Jesus in Crown Heights. We should use accurate metaphors so as not to trivialize true suffering and oppression taking place in the name of religion. Let us disagree and voice dissent in the spirit of the Jewish traditions emphasis on debate, but we should be respectful about it.
CORRECTION: The author added the following sentences to the fourth paragraph following its publication: "Contemptible? Absolutely. Religious extremism? No. Of course the cherry-picked comments that Rabbi Boteach cited are extremist and borderline criminal but the vast majority of comments were renouncing the concept of the book in no uncertain terms, not calling for the authors lynching. The reaction should have been expected (albeit not excused)."
See Jesus doesn’t claim he is the messiah or son of God, Jesus claims he is the prophet about whom Moses wrote . This seems to be truth and right. All other views about Jesus are wrong. The days are not far away that Jews and Christians will realize their folly.
Daniel
Nuff said!
Best
Jan
See Jesus had foretold :- “Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but he who endures to the end will be saved” (Mt.24:9-13) He who endures to the end will be saved means who remain Jews in spite of the sufferings, persecution, killings etc.
You admit that Jews were hated and persecuted by all nations in the name of Jesus. Still you deny Jesus was not a prophet, is not an irony?
What is the audience to whom the book is being marketed?
While most religiously literate people are well aware that Jesus was Jewish and basically acting as a Rebbe to his followers, there is an understandable hypersensitivity to phrases like Jewish Jesus and Kosher Jesus as this is a very common marketing ploy the "messianic Jews" (Jews for Jesus) use to convert people to their brand of Christianity by saying you can accept all of the fundamental tenets of evangelical Christianity and still be a Jew. This is something the Conservative, Reform & Reconstructionist movements have great difficulty with so I'm surprised the ultra-Orthodox/Chasidic community would react to the book. I can only assume they're reacting so strongly because Boteach is Orthodox (one of the more conservative streams of the Orthodox movements)?
It's kind of ironic that the ultra-Orthodox often align themselves politically with religious right political candidates while attacking Boteach over this.
I was glad to read that as being your focus, as I think hyperbolic rhetoric is where attention should be centered. I also appreciate your correcting the record about the websites that are not Chabad, and who is or isn't speaking as a representative of Chabad.
All that said, I think it would also be appropriate to extend focus from being specifically and only about the "religious extremist metaphor" to all the extreme rhetoric that's flying, including the vicious things said and threats made against Rabbi Boteach on the non-Chabad websites.
I have a lot of disagreements with Rabbi Boteach--misrepresentation of his critics being among them. Nonetheless, it takes courage to move forward in the face of such personally violent rhetoric as he has been subjected to. If he's over-reacting in his use of the religious extremist metaphor, it's fairly understandable given the extreme language directed at him. And yes, I'm aware it can be a chicken and egg question, as far as who used the extreme rhetoric first, and some will see his language as having been the first provocation. But who's first is pretty much beside the point. Getting as many people as possible to forsake extreme rhetoric is much more to the point.
The book is not a call to convert Jews to Christianity, or even a call to Jews who practice Judaism to consider Jesus at all. It is a call to Jews who practice Christianity to reconsider the guy they are calling the messiah to understand that the man, himself, as recorded in the books that purport to tell about him, never considered himself to be the messiah, never intended to start a new religion, and never himself counseled people to abandon the Law as set forth in the Torah.
If the community newspaper that published the vilification of SB has not permitted him to respond to clear his good name, then SB's complaint is sound and that paper may have some some lashon hara (לשון הרע; evil speech) issues that it ought to be concerned about.
There is something off about a community newspaper allowing a member of its community to be vilified without allowing a response. This may not count as religious extremism, but it does not reflect well on the community newspaper.
I do not see Boteach using the term "religious extremism" to describe anyone but the commentators who made the vile threats (and the Haredi in Israel who would spit on a little girl or force women to the back of the bus, but that has nothing to do with Boteach's book.)