Jewish views of religious pluralism

Classical Jewish views

The Jewish belief in the exclusivity of their religion's truth did not preclude a belief that God entered into relationships with other peoples. Judaism held that although only Judaism was true, God had entered into a covenant with all mankind, and that any person had the ability to have a relationship with God, even if they were not a Jew. The Tanach (Hebrew Bible, Old Testament) speaks of prophets that existed outside the community of Israel.

Jews believe that God chose the Jewish people to be in a unique covenant with God; the description of this covenant is the Torah itself. Contrary to popular belief, Jewish people never simply say that "God chose the Jews." This claim exists nowhere in the Tanach (the Jewish Bible) or the Siddur (the Jewish prayerbook). Such a claim would imply that God loves only the Jewish people, that only Jews can be close to God, and that only Jews can have a heaavenly reward (if one exists at all.) The actual claim made is that the Jews were chosen for a specific mission; to be a light unto the nations, and to have a covenant with God as described in the Torah.

The religious works of the Jewish faith contain many statements illustrating the belief that God is God of all peoples, and not just the Jews. Moses calls God "God of the spirits of all flesh" (Numbers 27:16). The Mishnah teaches that "Humanity was produced from one man, Adam, to show God's greatness. When a man mints a coin in a press, each coin is identical. But when the King of Kings, the Holy One, blessed be He, creates people in the form of Adam not one is similar to any other." (Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 4:5)

Some rabbis in the Talmud view Christianity as a form of idolatry prohibited not only to Jews, but to gentiles as well. Rabbis with these views did not claim that it was idolatry in the same literal sense as pagan idolaters in Biblical times, but that it relied on idolatrous forms of worship (i.e. to a Trinity of gods and to statues and saints.) (Babylonian Talmud, Hullin, 13b) Other rabbis disagreed, and did not hold it to be idolatry. By the middle ages a new consensus was reached in the Jewish community in which Christianity was generally not held to be idolatry. ("Exclusiveness and Tolerance", Jacob Katz, Oxford Univ. Press, 1961, Ch.10)

The Talmud contains a list of seven commandments that Jews believe God to hold incumbent upon the children of Noah, i.e. all humanity. These laws are: (1) to establish laws, (2) prohibition against idolatry, (3) blasphemy, (4) prohibition against sexual immorality[?], (5) prohibition against bloodshed (violence, murder), (6) prohibition against theft, and (7) the prohibition against tearing a limb from a living animal. Jewish law holds that only these laws are necessary for gentiles to live by in order to be considered moral. There is no demand for others to convert to Judaism; they implicitly allow non-Jews to have their own religions. Many Orthodox rabbis teach that the second law implicitly is a positive commandment to believe in God, but some historians counter that this is not the original meaning of the verse. The rabbis spent more time defining and prohibiting idolatry than they did describing God and demanding belief in a specific theology. In a surprisingly liberal and pluralistic view for the third century, one sage in the Talmud states "Whoever denies idolatry is called a Yehudi (Jew)." (Babylonian Talmud, Megilla, 13a). Even earlier, in the second century the Tosefta declared "the righteous of all nations have a share in the world to come." (Tosefta, Sanhedrin 13)

Maimonides, held by Jews to be the most important theologian and halakhist (legal expert) of his age, explained in detail the theological reasons why Jesus was wrong to create Christianity and why Mohammed was wrong to create Islam; he laments the pains that have to Jews as a result of persecution from followers of these new faiths that attempted to surplant Judaism. However, Maimonides then goes on to say that both faiths help God redeem the world.

Jesus was instrumental in changing the Torah and causing the world to err and serve another beside God. But it is beyond the human mind to fathom the designs of our Creator, for our ways are not God's ways, neither are our thoughts His. All these matters relating to Jesus of Nazareth, and the Ishmaelite (Mohammed) who came after him, only served to clear the way for the King Messiah to prepare the whole world to worship God with one accord, as it is written 'For then will I turn to the peoples a pure language, that they all call upon the name of the Lord to serve Him with one consent.' (Zephaniah 3:9). Thus the messianic hope, and the Torah, and the commandments have become familiar topics of conversation among those evn on far isles, and among many people, uncircumcized of flesh and heart.

Source - "Mishneh Torah", Maimonides, XI.4. This paragraph used to be censored from many printed versions of the Mishneh Torah because it contained verses explicitly critical of Jesus.

Based on the Tanach's statements that gentiles can be prophets, some rabbis theorized that "God permitted to every people something he forbade to others...God sends a prophet to every people according to their own language." This is the view of Nethanel ibn Fayyumi, a Yemenite Jewish theologian (12th century). ("The Garden of Wisdom", translated D. Levene, Columbia Univ. Press, 1907/1966.)

Rabbi Profressor Norman Solomon points out that three basic concepts underlie the Tanach (Hebrew Bible, Old Testament).

Universality - The book of Genesis stresses the unity of all humanity. King Solomon's dedication of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem stresses that it is to be a religious center for all mankind. The Pslams (especially Pslam 117) extol all the nations of the world to join in the worship of God, without demanding that others convert to Judaism.

Non-exclusiveness - The Tanach teaches that gentiles (non-Jews). Non-Israelite Biblical characters such as Melchizedek, Jethro and Na'aman recognize the God of the Bible, without being members of the Israelite faith or community.

Demarcation, or Distinction - While God cares for all humanity, that does not mean that God considers all forms of worship acceptable. The Tanach repeatedly states that the practice of idolatry is abhorrent to God, whether practiced by Jew or gentile. The Tanach gives multiple examples of the abominable acts committed by the idolaters of the time, and shows how some of them worshipped stone or wood idols in a literal sense; the Tanach describes pagans who believed that the idols themselves were gods.

Modern (post-Enlightenment era) Jewish views

Views on Jewish-Christian dialogue

Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist rabbis engage in inter-faith theological dialogue; a small number of Modern Orthodox rabbis engage in such dialogue as well. Most Orthodox rabbis do not engage in such dialogue.

In practice, the predominant position of Orthodoxy on this issue is based on the position of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik; he held that Judaism and Christianity are "two faith communities (which are) intrinsically antithetic". In his view "the language of faith of a particular community is totally incomprehensible to the man of a different faith community. Hence the confrontation should occur not at a theological, but at a mundane human level... the great encounter between man and God is a holy, personal and private affair, incomprehensible to the outsider..." As such, he ruled that theological dialogue between Judaism and Christianity was not possible. However, Rabbi Soloveitchik advocated closer ties between the Jewish and Christian communities. He held that communication between Jews and Christians was not merely permissible, but "desirable and even essential" on non-theological issues such as war and peace, the war on poverty, the struggle for people to gain freedom, issues of morality and civil rights, and to work together against the perceived threat of secularism. As a result of his ruling, Orthodox Jewish groups did not ooperate in interfaith discussions between the Catholic Church and Judaism, nor did they participate in the later interfaith dialogues between Protestant Christian groups and the Jewish community. In later years, Solovetichik's qualified permission was interpreted in a progressivley more restrictive fashion. (Source: Tradition:A Journal of Orthodox Thought, Vol. 6, 1964)

The basis for Soloveitchik's ruling was not strictly legal, but sociological and historical. He described the traditional Jewish-Chistian relationship as one of "the few and weak vis-à-vis the many and the strong", one in which the Christian community historically denied the right of the Jewish community believe and live in their own way. His responsa was written in the light of past Jewish-Christian religious disputations, which traditionally had been forced upon the Jewish community. Those had as their express goal the conversion of Jews to Christianity. As recently as the 1960s many traditional Jews still looked upon all interfaith dialogue with suspicion, fearing that conversion may be an ulterior motive. This was a reasonable belief, given that many Catholics and most Protestants at the time in fact held this position. Reflecting this stance, Rabbi Soloveitchik asked the Christian community to respect "the right of the community of the few to live, create and worship in its own way, in freedom and with dignity."

Many traditional rabbis agree; they hold that while cooperation with the Christian community is of importance, theological dialogue is unnecessary, or even misguided. Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits writes that "Judaism is Judaism because it rejects Christianity, and Christianity is Christianity because it rejects Judaism." (Disputation and Dialogue: Readings in the Jewish Christian Encounter, Ed. F.E. Talmage, Ktav, 1975, p. 291.)

Most non-Orthodox rabbis (and a few Orthodox rabbis) disagree. They hold that such a view is pessimistic, and that the relationship between Judaism and Christianity has reached a point where Jews can trust Christian groups which offer to respect them as equals. Further, in most nations it is not possible for Jews to be forced or pressured to convert, and many major Christian groups no longer teach that the Jews are damned to hell. As such, most rabbis hold that Jews have nothing to fear from engaging in theological dialogue, and in factmay have much to gain. Others further point out that in practice Soloveitchik's distinctions are not viable, for any group that has sustained discussion and participation on moral issues will implicitly involve theological discourse. Thus, since informal implicit theological dialogue will occur, one might as well admit it and publicly work on formal theological dialogue.

Conservative Rabbi Robert Gordis wrote an essay on "Ground Rules for a Christian Jewish Dialogue"; through his writings and the writings of other rabbis, in all Jewish denominations, one form or another of these rules eventually became more or less accepted by parties engaging in Jewish-Christian theological dialogue.

Robert Gordis held that "a rational dialogue conducted on the basis of knowledge and mutual respect between the two components of the religio-ethical tradition of the Western world can prove a blessing to our age." His proposed groundrules for fair discussion are these:

(1) People should not label Jews as worshipping an inferior "the Old Testament God of Justice" while saying that Christians worship q superior "God of Love of the New Testament." Gordis brings forth quotes from the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) which shows that this view is a misleading caricature of both religions that was created by selective quotation.

(2) He holds that Christians should stop "the widespread practice of contrasting the primitivism, tribalism and formalism of the Old Testament with the spirituality, universalism, and freedom of the New, to the manifest disadvantage of the former." Gordis again brings forth quotes from the Tanakh which shows that this view is a misleading caricature of both religions that was created by selective quotation.

(3) "Another practice which should be surrendered is that of referring to Old Testament verses quoted in the New as original New Testament passages. Many years ago, Bertrand Russell, whose religious orthodoxy is something less than total, described the Golden Rule 'Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself' as New Testament teaching. When the Old Testament source (Leviticus 19:18) was called to his attention, he blandly refused to recognize his error."

(4) Christians need to understand that while Judaism is based in the Hebrew Bible, it is not identical to the religion described in it. Rather, Judaism is based on the Bible as understood through the classical works of rabbinic literature, such as the Mishnah and Talmud. Gordis writes "To describe Judaism within the framework of the Old Testament is as misleading as constructing a picture of American life in terms of the Constitution, which is, to be sure, the basic law of the land but far from coextensive with our present legal and social system."

(5) Jews must "rise above the heavy burden of historical memories which have made it difficult for them to achieve any real understanding, let alone an appreciation, of Christianity. It is not easy to wipe out the memories of centuries of persecution and massacre, all too often dedicated to the advancement of the cause of the Prince of Peace.....[It is] no easy task for Jews to divest themselves of the heavy burden of group memories from the past, which are unfortunately reinforced all too often by personal experiences in the present. Nevertheless, the effort must be made, if men are to emerge from the dark heritage of religious hatred which has embittered their mutual relationships for twenty centuries. There is need for Jews to surrender the stereotype of Christianity as being monolithic and unchanging and to recognize the ramifications of viewpoint and emphasis that constitute the multicolored spectrum of contemporary Christianity."

Gordis calls on Jews to "see in Christian doctrine an effort to apprehend the nature of the divine that is worthy of respect and understanding" and that "the dogmas of the Christian church have expressed this vision of God in terms that have proved meaningful to Christian believers through the centuries." Gordis calls on Jews to understand with tolerance and respect the historical and religious context which led Christians to develop the concepts of the Virgin Birth, the Incarnation, the Passion, and the Resurrection, even if Jews themselves do not accept these ideas as correct. Similarly, Gordis calls on Christians to understand with tolerance and respect that Jews do not accept these beliefs, since they are in contradiction to the Jewish understanding of the unity of God. (Source: "The Root and the Branch", Chapter 4, Robert Gordis, Univ. of Chicago Press, 1962)

Relationship to non-Jews

Rabbi Lord Immanuel Jakobovits, former Chief Rabbi of the United Synagogue of Great Britain, describes a commonly held Jewish view on this issue: "Yes, I do believe that the Chosen people concept as affirmed by Judaism in its holy writ, its prayers, and its milennial tradition. In fact, I believe that every people - and indeed, in a more limited way, every individual - is "chosen" or destined for some distinct purpose in advancing the designs of Providence. Only, some fulfill their mission and others do not. Maybe the Greeks were chosen for their unique contributions to art and philosophy, the Romans for their pioneering services in law and government, the British for bringing parlimentary rule into the world, and the Americans for piloting democracy in a pluralistic society. The Jews were chosen by God to be 'peculiar unto Me' as the pioneers of religion and morality; that was and is their national purpose."

The German-Jewish philosopher Moses Mendelssohn (1729-1786) taught that "According to the basic principles of my religion I am not to seek to convert anyone not born into our laws....We believe that the other nations of the Earth are directed by God to observe only the law of nature and the religion of the Patriarchs...I fancy that whosoever leads men to virtue in this life cannot be damned in the next."

Recently, over 120 rabbis have signed Dabru Emet ("Speak the Truth"). While affirming that there are substantial theological differences between these two religions, the purpose of Dabru Emet is to point out common ground. It is not an official document of any of the Jewish denominations per se, but it is representative of what many Jews feel. Dabru Emet sparked a controversy in segments of the Jewish community. Many Jews disagree with parts of it for a variety of reasons.

A small number of modern Jewish theologians such as Yehezkel Kaufman and Rabbi Joseph H. Hertz have suggested that perhaps only the Israelites were forbidden to worship idols, but perhaps such worship was permissible for members of other religions. (Yehezkel Kaufman, "The Religion of Israel", Univ. of Chicago Press, 1960; J. H. Hertz, "Pentateuch and Haftorahs" Soncino Press, 1960, p.759). Most Jewish theologians disagree, saying that the original meaning of the text was to condemn idolatry in toto. However, a growing number of Jewish theologians question whether Hindus and Buddhists today should be considered idolaters in the Biblical sense of the term. Their reasons are that modern day Buddhists, Hindus and others (a) do not literally worship "sticks and stones", as the idolaters in the Tanach were described doing. Their beliefs have far more theological depth than ancient pagans, and they are well aware that icons they worship are only symbols of a deeper level of reality, (b) they do not practice child sacrifice, (c) they are of high moral character, and (d) they are not anti-Semitic. As such, some Jews argue that not only does God have a relationship with all gentile monotheists, but that God also maintains a relationship with Hindus, Buddhists and other polytheists.

The viewpoint of Conservative Judaism is summarized in Emet Ve-Emunah: Statement of Principles of Conservative Judaism. This official statement holds that

"As Conservative Jews, we acknowledge without apology the many debts which Jewish religion and civilization owe to the nations of the world. We eschew triumphalism with respect to other ways of serving God. Maimonides believed that other monotheistic faiths, Christianity and Islam, serve to spread knowledge of, and devotion to, the God and the Torah of Israel throughout the world. Many modern thinkers, both Jewish and gentile, have noted that God may well have seen fit to enter covenants with many nations. Either outlook, when relating to others, is perfectly compatible with a commitment to one's own faith and pattern of religious life. If we criticize triumphalism in our own community, then real dialogue with other faith groups requires that we criticize triumphalism and other failings in those quarters as well. In the second half of the twentieth century, no relationship between Jews and Christians can be dignified or honest without facing up frankly to the centuries of prejudice, theological anathema, and persecution that have been thrust upon Jewish communities, culminating in the horrors of the Shoah (Holocaust). No relationship can be nurtured between Jews and Muslims unless it acknowledges explicity and seeks to combat the terrible social and political effects of Muslim hostility, as well as the disturbing but growing reaction of Jewish anti-Arabism in the Land of Israel. But all of these relationships, properly pursued, can bring great blessing to the Jewish community and to the world. As the late Professor Abraham Joshua Heschel put it, "no religion is an island."

Relations between Jewish and Israeli, and Muslim and Arab groups

Many Jewish groups and individuals have created projects working for peace among Israelis and Arabs, most of which have as one of their goals overcoming religious prejudice.

Intra-religious pluralism

Intrareligious pluralism refers to relationships between different denominations within the same religion.

Most of Orthodox Judaism views all forms of non-Orthodox Judaism to be misguided, not authentic, and even heretical. Ultra-Orthodox Jewish groups such as Agudat Yisrael, the National Council of Young Israel, and the Satmar Hasidim teach that no cooperation or religious dialogue is permitted with non-Orthodox Jewish organizations for any purposes. No religious dialogue is allowed with non-Orthodox Jewish individuals except for the sole purpose of converting a person to Orthodoxy.

Many Modern Orthodox rabbis, including a few in the Rabbinical Council of America and in the United Kingdom's United Synagogue, hold that in certain instances it is permissible for Orthodox Jewish groups to cooperate with non-Orthodox Jewish groups, and that there is no problem with Jews of any denomination engaging in honest religious dialogue.

All of the non-Orthodox denominations, including Conservative Judaism, Reform Judaism and Reconstructionist Judaism teach that all Jewish denominations, including Orthodox, should work together, and that there is no problem with Jews of any denomination engaging in honest religious dialogue.

References

Orthodox Jewish views on dialogue with Christianity (http://www.huc.edu/aja/00-4.htm)

The Context of Jewish-Christian Dialogue, by Rabbi Normon Solomon (http://www.jcrelations.net/articl1/solomon.htm)

The Center for Jewish-Christian Learning at Boston College (http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/research/cjl/)

American Jewish Committee links to articles on pluralism (http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/RelatedArticles.asp?did=653)

See also: Religious pluralism, Judaism