>It would be easy enough to take all this to deny the legitimacy and even reality of the “Jewish people,” and denounce the Jewish tradition as a pack of lies, etc. My reading is exactly the opposite—there is a tenaciousness and willingness to undergo trials in the preservation of this legacy in the “selfishness” of its very “materialist” claims that legitimates far more than simple father to son property and monarchical transmissions (none of which have ever lasted anywhere near this long, and all of which have required a bit of “stretching” along the way). This is an interesting way of framing the matter and defining identity. I'm not a scholar of the Bible so I was only able to loosely follow along with the prior statements, but when you get to this point what you are conceptually saying becomes clearer to me. You're saying Jews' attempt to preserve themselves even in the face of material contradictions (let's say, whatever inheritance from other cults) proves a type of reality tr
I agree with your reading. Regarding mysticism, Jewish in particular, I've never gotten that interested in it and always thought it was played up by literary critics. Some of it is a way of talking about psychology without a secular vocabulary for it. Some of it is esotericism--a way of speaking in coded language about things it's dangerous for the masses to hear. But it seems that understanding the little quasi-Messianic cult that developed around the late Rabbi Schneerson would require some familiarity with mysticism. Then the question would be how important it is to understand that.
But the passage you quote there is more about logic, reason and theology than mysticism. There are Jewish attempts at a theology, but I don't think any of them work. Judaism can't have an authoritative theology and it doesn't need one.
An idea I've had for a while is to make a film based on the medieval "disputations" organized by Christian kings--they're very interesting, from a range of perspectives--and I've discovered that a lot of the contemporary "accusations" against Jews have their origins in the Christian side of those disputations. I'm no filmmaker, but if you ever come into contact with any, this might be a challenging, rather risky project.
>Judaism can't have an authoritative theology and it doesn't need one. This is a very interesting statement. >An idea I've had for a while is to make a film based on the medieval "disputations" organized by Christian kings--they're very interesting That would be very interesting. What logistics do you think would go into it? Time, expertise, manpower? I can get started on looking into it. Obviously we can contribute significant money, but I imagine the bottleneck is number of people and enough of the right and different expertises. If you can give me a skeleton and flow chart, that'd be great. Not that you care a super amount, but this is how you would pull Joel back and either re-enfranchise him or come to even better closure. Would this also bring back Chris? I know Tyler gets deeply interested in all things theological. This can also be my best segue into these matters and I just do the debating for you.
I've got an unlikely idea, which might prove to be very productive for purposes if you were able to pull it off. I have noticed, very recently, some guys on Twitter taking on the JQers--writing substacks challenging their claims, going on podcasts with them, going back and forth on twitter, etc. There's an account called "History Speaks," whose owner says he is not Jewish, and who has been refuting Holocaust denial--pretty ably, it seems to me. There's a guy named Will Vivere (Will V on Twitter)--who knows if that's a real name, of course--who has been writing sophisticated and well documented substacks addressing the various JQ talking points (Jews in the media, etc.). And someone who goes by Lucian Wolf, who does youtube videos. (Vivere and Wolf describe themselves as "Mischlings") There are a few others--they seem to have sprung up like mushrooms--but I mention these three because they have been not only willing, but eager, to engage the WNS in any media--and have been. So, how about getting these guys to collaborate with a few of the (Christian) WNs on this project--each side has their position built in (even if the Jewish side doesn't seem so interested in the religious issue itself, they might find the politics of it interesting). I'd be happy to help as a "script consultant" or something, but I couldn't take an organizing role--I've got too much to do.
By the way, a movie has already been made on this, from 1990, I think. It's good, but short, and I suspect it stays on a very general level in selecting which arguments to include:
https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=AB5stBipWLSoCQ7Kzn8GZXAoGhWdRUsHVQ:1689280984052&q=the+disputation+1996&tbm=vid&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjEo-uHxoyAAxXCGFkFHUrmB-oQ0pQJegQICxAB&biw=1429&bih=697&dpr=2#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:3c7643ab,vid:-p3WlesJgaI