When Legalism Sprouts Up The Most

I notice that Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Easter are the times when legalism sprouts up the most; all because of what each originally historically coincided with and were in fact meant to be alternatives to-- the Celtic Pagan Fall Harvest, the believed-to-be Sukkot celebration of the Puritans gone wrong and long left un-recelebrated, the Greco-Roman Winter Solstice, and the likewise Spring Solstice.

The Early Church created Christmas as 'Am Yisra'el created Hanukah, both to counter the Winter Solstice. The Early Church also created Halloween and Easter to counter the Celtic Pagan Fall Harvest and Greco-Roman Pagan Spring Solstice.

Thanksgiving is another discussion.

Don't let P'rushim and other legalists streal your freedom to observe alternative-to-paganism, Christ-centered mo'edim v'chagim.

Are Christmas and Hanukkah Pagan? The Answer Is, Based On History and Other Factors...

Christmas and Hanukkah are both not pagan, and were actually created as alternatives to (respectively) the Winter Solstice and a Greek Pagan holiday. Google "Is Hanukkah pagan?", by the way. I once did after someone asserted that it may be or is. I was shocked.

Anyway, Christmas was originally "Christ-mass" or Chag Mashiach, created as an alternative by the Early Church to the pagan Winter Solstice and coinciding pagan holidays. Similarly, Hanukkah-- thought by some to be a late celebration of Sukkot-- was created to replace the celebration of the desecration of the Temple and a dedication to a pagan god. Some Hellinized and other Jews would only go so far in terms of Hellenization and toleration thereof, and would certainly not accept the Temple being destroyed.

Therefore, we have two Winter mo'edim v'chagim which are alternatives to Greco-Roman Pagan holidays.

I Want Dad, Pop-Pop, and Certain Others To Know That They're Dead To Me Until...

They do teshuvah for the pain, hurt, etc. that they've caused themselves and others by denying and/or defending Great-Grandma Gaydos' kapoesque behavior; Great-Grandma Czarnecki's second-degree, murder-malice murder at the hands of Pop-Pop, the pain that they've caused me, Aunt Mary, etc.. To let Dad know that I said the Kaddish for him is the right thing to do. I've only gone not so far as to mark him as deceased on the family tree on Ancestry-- and any other Jew who was in my position may well have done that after saying Kaddish.

So, Dad, Pop-Pop, Janet Rozzi, Grandma, and others (You know who you are.), you are dead to me and in the same company as Great-Grandma Gaydos; as well as viewed by me as Great-Great-Granddad Rusnak's parents were viewed by Yoshua Rusnak-- dead, gone, metim.

I'm Going To Rest the Family Matters With This Much...

If you'd prefer kisses of an enemy over faithful wounds of a friend, you'll have to deal with continuing the inquity of past generations down to the next generation; and when the pieces fall, who knows if I'll be there to help pick them up?

I might be dead; I might be there but not want to help you; I may've wiped you all together out of my concious memory. You don't know what tomorrow, even the next yoctosecond, holds -- look what happened to Patrice O'Neal.

If and when you're ready to talk like Great-Grandma Czarnecki was, I can't guarantee that I'll be there; but G-d will be there.

David Mamet vs. The Anonymous Reform Jew: Who's Right?

David Mamet asserts:


"Any conflict may be stilled by surrender. Reform Judaism, for reasons good or bad, but which, I am sure, seemed good to its various practitioners at the time of implementation, abandoned Yiddish, Hebrew, the Talmud, kashrut, ritual, the Eastern European Jews and currently toys with condemnation of its co-religionaries in Israel. In order to defend what?


"After all the compromises have been made, and the conflict persists, and the will of the people has been broken by a lazy reversion to “the truth must lie somewhere in between,” what remains but the destruction of the Jews?"


The anonymous Reform Jew responds:


"David Mamet’s recent, meandering tirade demands a response, even if cogency permits only a partial rejoinder. So, I will limit myself to where he begins and I where I “live,” with the Reform Movement.


"He accuses Reform Judaism of categorically surrendering “Hebrew, the Talmud, kashrut, ritual, the Eastern European Jews, and currently toys with condemnation of its co-religionaries in Israel.” Thence, Mr. Mamet connects the Reform Movement to anti-Israel sentiment located on a spectrum that spans naïveté and, implicitly, self-hatred.


"In the end, his condemnation avoids facts and invokes, in their stead, inapposite truisms. If “Napoleon taught us the logical end of purely defensive warfare is surrender,” Mamet has yet to demonstrate that Reform Judaism does indeed surrender. He omits the evidence, because it contradicts his argument."


Who's right? The answer is: David Mamet. The anonymous Reform Jew concedes:


"In ritual and halakhic terms, Mr. Mamet offers nothing more than an anachronistic caricature, and in so doing, debases the Jewish communal conversation. Hebrew is a staple in Reform services, as is the millennial tradition of mutual aid. In theory, we are more flexible on matters of halakha than other non-Orthodox movements, but it’s not clear to me that our practice differs all that much. Shabbat services in Reform synagogues are lively affairs. Torah study for adults and religious schools for children flourish, and Reform Jews’ connectedness to Judaism—traditional and progressive—thickens day by day.

"As for our condemnation of fellow Jews in Israel: It is true that we will condemn someone for gratuitous violence, as we did in response to the recent arson attack on an Israeli mosque. And it is true that we will argue with fellow Jews for much less. But Mr. Mamet chooses to overlook the crucial fact that we argue with our coreligionists and, I trust, they requite le-shem shamayim, for the sake of heaven. We struggle with God Himself for the same purpose, namely, to work out the relationship between the sanctity of our Covenant, on the one hand, and the messy frailty of our worldly experience, on the other. Reform Judaism will not apologize for willingly, zealously engaging in that struggle, including both its traditional and modern aspects.

"For the sake of that argument, allow me to concede that it is true that in the nineteenth century, the Reform Movement did begin to take major steps in distancing itself from traditional forms of Judaism. It is also true that a large part of the American Reform Movement was non- or anti-Zionist leading up to 1948. For that very reason, Stephen S. Wise created a Reform alternative, known as the Jewish Institute of Religion, an avowedly Zionist academy. Following Israeli independence, the Hebrew Union College merged with the Jewish Institute of Religion, embracing its Zionism."

In conclusion, David Mamet pegged Reform Judaism well. David Mamet well concludes:

"We are enjoined, “Justice, justice shall you pursue.”

"The question, “What is justice,” is the eternal question of the Jew. The answer, “It is what my group tells me,” is not the Jewish answer."

Reform Judaism goes with URJ, CCAR, and other helping-to-serve-self thinking instead of with Tanakh. Tanakh gives three options-- all 613 mitzvot, Yeshua, or a whole host of tsuris. And Reform Judaism, being Non Messianic, does not have the option to skip any of the 613 mitzvot -- including supporting Yisra'el.

From A Lot of What's on Geraldo Rivera's Facebook Page....

That many people don't respect him is quite clear. Since I can't seem to get engagement on my Blogger polls, I want to try a Facebook poll and ask, "Do you respect Geraldo Rivera? " Go vote on the poll, and please "Like" my Facebook page; follow me @Nickidewbear on Twitter, and view my videos on YouTube (You don't have to subscribe!).

What Women’s Prison Taught Me— Why the Death Penalty and Vigilante Justice Should Return

A woman sees a family friend molest her nephew, walks away to obtain a gun, and shoot her nephew’s molester. She sits in the Maryland Corrections Institution for Women in Jessup to serve a life sentence for first-degree murder. Another woman sits there for another offense; and at 27 years of age with three children of her own, she remembers when she was a child of 11 years of age. She remembers her 11^th year particularly well because that’s when her mother began prostituting her off, injecting her with heroin, and sending her down a bad path.

What keeps a vigilante aunt who tried to protect her sister’s son and a pimped-by-her-mother junkie at the MCIJ in Jessup? Coker v. Georgia (1977) and Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008). A family and child defender becomes a murderer, and a pimp and drugging-her-child druggie gets left unprosecuted— and her daughter has to take the brunt of what her mother actually effected (not affected in this case, but effected) her to do.

As I stated on Geraldo Rivera’s Facebook page regarding Bernie Fine, the fired Syracuse coach, “We have a wonderful Supreme Court, don't we? (Sarcasm) "Coker" (1977) and "Kennedy" (2008) ruined any chance to put child rapists and general rapists to death, which is why our country's in huge trouble. There were actually morals— or so morals seemed to exist— once.”

Coker and Kennedy need to be overturned immediately. A woman needs to be able to protect her molested nephew and other potential one-time— as well as repeat— molestation victims. As for any mother who pimps off and drugs any child for any reason, she needs to meet the same fate as I and others say that Bernie Fine— and Bernie Fine’s wife, and not to mention Jerry Sandusky— should meet.

“Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes,  And prudent in their own sight! Woe to men mighty at drinking wine, Woe to men valiant for mixing intoxicating drink, Who justify the wicked for a bribe, And take away justice from the righteous man!”[1]

The Supreme Court will be judged for putting a loving aunt and a victimized girl in prison by way of implementation and sustainment of Coker and Kennedy— but sadly, so will Maryland and the rest of the United States, the “One Nation Under G-d”:

“Therefore you shall say to them, ‘Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: “Drink, be drunk, and vomit! Fall and rise no more, because of the sword which I will send among you.”’ And it shall be, if they refuse to take the cup from your hand to drink, then you shall say to them, ‘Thus says the LORD of hosts: “You shall certainly drink! For behold, I begin to bring calamity on the city which is called by My name, and should you be utterly unpunished? You shall not be unpunished, for I will call for a sword on all the inhabitants of the earth,” says the LORD of hosts.’

“Therefore prophesy against them all these words, and say to them: ‘ The LORD will roar from on high, And utter His voice from His holy habitation; He will roar mightily against His fold.  He will give a shout, as those who tread the grapes, Against all the inhabitants of the earth.  A noise will come to the ends of the earth— For the LORD has a controversy with the nations; He will plead His case with all flesh. He will give those who are wicked to the sword,’ says the LORD.”[2]

---

[1] Isaiah 5:20-24 (New King James Version)

[2] Jeremiah 25:27-31 (NKJV)