Rituals tend to have more to do with culture and/or habit and/or personal/family history than with belief, though. I mean, children dressing up in costumes and going tick-or-treating on October 31 is a ritual, as is decorating one’s home with spooky decorations for that same day, and for most people these things have nothing to do with religion.
Going to point out that when some of those ancient religions weren’t quite so ancient, belief preceded having to do those rituals. One way a religion can have lasting power is by having flexibility regarding what’s believed.
But Socrates was executed for disbelief in the state gods. And Zoroastrianism has a creed that centers belief.
And in the other direction, modern practice of religion doesn’t always put belief above ritual. Many practicing Jews consider belief/nonbelief in God to be irrelevant to Judaism.
heck, there’s Christian atheists, for whom Christianity is a tradition. cultural touchstone, and/or basis for a moral philosophy, but belief in a god existing isn’t part of it. I used to be one… a Jew-for-Krishna told me I wasn’t allowed to do that.
OH RIGHT EASTERN TIME MIDNIGHT US IT’S HALLOWEEN SOMEWHERE ALREADY
lol
I’ve got a boatload of Halloween gift and candy bags to prep, mostly. Before the plague, we didn’t have much in the way of neighbourhood trick-or-treat but now we do, which is nice, and would be incredibly nice if my wife wasn’t high risk so we don’t do it face-to-face. But I still like doing something for the neighbourhood kids.
I’m going to carve a pumpkin, listen to an audio horror play, confront some literally panic inducing work I’ve been hiding from, and (scariest of all) confront the hoards of monsters and fairy tale princess that come demanding tribute every year.
Handing out candy to anyone willing to brave what’s apparently going to be some shitty weather and answering the door with a black skull shaped goblet full of virgin (probably, unless some money falls into my lap) bloody Mary.
For some reason my thirteen year old nephew decided his grandmother needed a skull to drink the blood of her enemies from and gave her this plastic goblet shaped like a skull and I’m borrowing it for the night. I don’t really have the funds for a decent costume but I figure answering the door holding a red liquid inside a skull shaped goblet counts for something.
Changing my avatar to her in-costume version might be the closest to dressing up I’ll do. Depending on who draws door duty I may scrap together a no budget costume, we’ll see.
Planning on watching Over the Garden Wall for the first time, I heard it’s good and seasonal
I decided to go for a low-effort Kojak costume, I think it was just a way of talking myself into buying some dum-dums (tootsie pop would be canonical but I can’t have chocolate). I’ve been short-buzzcutting my hair for a year or so now, but this is the first time in my life I’ve full on razored it. Feels weird.
Of course now I can’t find my old clip-on sunglasses I could’ve sworn I saw last week. Headed to Walgreens tomorrow, I’ll see what I can find for cheap. Not going to a party or anything, but at some point in the last 20 years I realized that doing this stuff for an audience of one means I have a lot more fun than waiting for things to happen.
My partner is getting a brain scan to find out if they have a tumor or if what the last scan saw was only a shadow. Talk about being extra on the spooky…
I got a job interview in the morning, and I was gonna spend all afternoon washing totes for Walgreens, but I got fired from that job less than an hour before I set up this interview, so I guess my evening is wide open now. Probably bake some goodies with my girlfriend, watch some spooky movies, play a little Fortnite, nothing too fancy.
Fortunately Halloween is one American cultural icon we have managed largely to avoid. And for those occasions when some kid tries to introduce it into my life we have several dogs.
My kids are with their catholic grandmother and she will likely take them to boring ceremonies in cemeteries and churches (the kids aren’t taught any religion). I kinda wish they would do Halloween instead, with or without dogs.
Have you managed to avoid Halloween commercialism: pumpkins, candy and silly stupid paper decorations filling up shops? I’m all for masquerades but that’s not really a thing here, and kids run asking for candy the whole week long (as they’re not sure when the right day is). Unfortunately we still have the shop crazy, and I’d like to avoid that. The only thing with the irritating shopping mall Halloween is that it keeps the Christmas stuff out of sight a week longer..
I’m going to be either Daenerys Targaryen, Violet Parr or a pirate (blonde Asha Greyjoy? Possibly). My friend is coming over and I’m gonna show her the 1970s Carrie because the other two are godawful, The Call, and Witches in Stitches. We’ll see what else. We’re gonna make pizzas and pick up some take out sides so it should be fun.
Having finally decided that the china pumpkin candle holder is just gone, far too late to get a real one, I am going to spend it watching “How to make a traditional turnip lantern” videos and probably coming as close as I ever do to swearing.
I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but those things are solid.
Lay out a tray of candies, sit all evening listening for the door while nobody shows up, and end the evening by placing bets on how many hours it’ll take us to scarf all of the leftover candy.
Sitting at home, depressed as I have no friends who haven’t made other plans, nor a significant other to spend time with right now, nor family who even give a damn. F**k holidays.
I went to work, then to the gym, and noticed from our Ring camera that the odd person who came by our house was walking a dog or something and paid no heed of the bowl of candy/toys we left out
The Roman’s destroyed the second temple Jewish worship revolved around d the temple.and the high preisthood conducting rituals. When it was Destroyed Judaism went from a temple based worship to worship based around the TaNahKh and the Talmud the oral tradition that became written down and was studied by the Rabbis there where two talmuds the Babylonian and Palestinian Talmud named for the Schools (Yeshivas where they where written down, One in Palestine the other in Babylon)
The Temple was built, destroyed, rebuilt, and then destroyed again in 70 CE. There are certain rituals that require it and certain equipment, including the expiration of the violation of certain rules. Christians are really into this because they think they have a stand-in, but their theology is terrible. Without the temple and other requirements, teshuvah (and perhaps immersion in a mikvah, for certain cleanliness-related rules) is sufficient for violations that do not involve offense against another person (eg violation of Shabbat prohibitions).
On the Christian side of things, the Second Temple is the temple in which Jesus flipped over a bunch of tables in anger at all the buying and selling going on in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). The Gospel of Mark includes a scene where Jesus foretells the Temple’s destruction, which scholars take to mean that it was written after said event. Christianity tends to treat the destruction as a divine punishment from God for the Temple’s rejection of Jesus,* and the loss of the ritual center of Judaism was a major factor in Christianity’s evolution from a movement within Judaism to a separate entity.
It’s worth noting that the money changers get a bad rap that they really don’t deserve. Temple period Judaism revolved around ritual animal sacrifice as worship. By the second Temple, folks had figured out that instead of having to bring a live sacrifice all the way to the Temple on your pilgrimage, you could just buy an animal sacrifice once you arrived instead. The money changers exchanged the currency from your homeland for local currency that you could use to buy a sacrificial animal. It was a convenient service and Oily Josh going all (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ on them has led to the money changers being slandered for the past two thousand years ¯\_(ツ)_/¯︎
Also Judea was governed by Rome at the time so they would have been using Roman coins at the time. They would have had graven images on them which a sin in Judaism. So the money changers would trade you for coins that were kosher to use in the temple. They provided a necessary service. It’s never explicitly stated what they were doing that Jesus had a problem with.
I mean it’s gotta be the same thing that got old Martin Luther upset right? Effectively it turns sinning into an offense with a fine. And “fineable offense” just means “legal if you’re rich”.
You’re making a pretty big assumption regarding how Jews treat sin compared to how Christianity does and I don’t think the comparison really works (not the least because Martin Luther hated Jews).
1) Offerings as atonement for sin as prescribed in the Bible were explicitly financially accessible to all – see Leviticus chapters 4-5. The baseline offering is a goat or a lamb, but if you couldn’t afford that, you could bring birds (Lev. 5:7), and if you couldn’t even afford that, you could bring a few cups of flour (Lev. 5:11). Rituals and practices intended to be universal were actually pretty often established in the Bible such that finances should not be a barrier to participation.
2) Lev. 4:2, which is the preface to all of this, highlights that you can only do all of this if you commit this kind of sin unintentionally. Biblically speaking, you don’t get to sin intentionally and then pay your sacrificial fine.
Perhaps people were just blatantly ignoring the “unintentional” part, but even if so, there shouldn’t have been any concept of “legal if you’re rich” as even poor people could afford the cost of any offering they’d have needed to bring.
Furthermore, O.J. wouldn’t have made it out of there. The temple was a small city with its own police force. On top of that, the Romans kept soldiers in the area, because they knew the places where people get freaky about their religions were sources of trouble. Josh would’ve taken a short bop outside the city wall, where he would’ve met many stones. With his face. (I will never say “Jebus” again. “Oily Josh” is too good.)
Or Jesus pulled another “walk through the crowd without interference and nobody notices” like in Luke 4:30, but the gospel authors didn’t think it was important to mention that part in this instance.
Judaism used to be oriented around the Temple in Jerusalem. Priestly caste, pilgrimages for animal sacrifices, all sorts of stuff. As Diaspora stuff happened and people spread in general that was already shifting to a Rabbinic form with local religious guidance over the course of a few hundred years, the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE (first one was destroyed ~580BCE and rebuilt ~530) is considered the official-ish marker of that transition. Because if you don’t have a Temple, you can’t do the stuff that’s supposed to be done at the Temple.
And since that’s the form of Judaism emphasized in the Old Testament, which is all many Christians know about Judaism, many (especially fundamentalist) Christians think Jews are all just waiting to rebuild the temple and start the animal sacrifices again.
In biblical times, the Jewish people had a Temple in Jerusalem, built by King Solomon. It lasted for 2.5-4+ centuries, depending on your sources, before being destroyed by the Babylonians. After a period of exile, the Second Temple was built in its place. It lasted around six centuries before being destroyed by the Romans.
I think Joyce was asking how she could take a cleansing bath now that the Temple is gone. She can, says Dame Wiki, use, for most purposes, any natural body of water. As my mom used to say, “Jump in the crick,” Joyce. Except when mom said it, she meant, “Go to hell.”
It’s probably because I was raised in a Christian-dominated shithole, but I’m a little confused what you mean about religion not necessarily involving belief. Unless you’re using the word in the “faith in the existence of some higher power” kind of way, and not in the broader “We generally think in this direction” sense? I’m mostly trying to under the connotation, I think.
The Jews are a people, they have a really old religion that is called Judaism. Many Jews practice Judaism, most I’ve met don’t practice much. FTR, I personally practice some parts of it, but I’m not a person of faith in anything metaphysical at all. I see Judaism as my cultural heritage, so it’s sacred to me in that sense.
A lot of religion is about behavior and ritual more than belief, or more than explicit belief. It’s most natural to sacrifice animals to Zeus because you believe in Zeus, but in a sense the community doesn’t care what you _believe_ as long as you keep behaving the right way. (Though if you go telling kids there’s no Zeus, you’ll probably get in trouble anyway.)
Christianity and Islam put an unusual emphasis on what you _believe_. Some call it orthodoxy vs. orthopraxis. Possibly in a reaction against Hellenistic doubt, both gentile and Jewish. (Cf. _Doubt: A History_ by Jennifer Michael Hecht). E.g. the story of Doubting Thomas, and how it’s better to believe without evidence; emphasis on having faith despite doubt, or believing things _because_ they’re absurd. And even if you show up for church every Sunday, if you simply say you believe heretical things, the Church (Catholic, Puritan, other) might take a very keen interest in you, depending on time and place.
Notably, Christianity is also rather poor in formal practice requirements, compared to Jewish mitzvah, or even the Five Pillars of Islam (like prayer multiple times a day, fasting through Ramadan, obligatory (if you can afford it) pilgrimage to Mecca). Christianity’s common behavior is more “Church on Sunday”, which is fairly light-weight.
I won’t speak for traditional Judaism, but in modern times there’s been a thing of some Jews no longer really believing — e.g. that there’s a special covenant with God, or in God at all — but sticking to Jewish _practices_ out of tradition or community solidarity or something. Which is potentially a rather non-trivial commitment, if you really follow kosher and Sabbath rules.
Reconstructionist Judaism rejects the idea of the covenant or the concept of being choosen, but Reform, Conservative and Orthadox (as well as Haredi Karaites, and Hassidc Jews) all still acknowledge the covenant and the idea of Jews being the choosen, but what it means to be chosen isn’t what some folks think it is: Being chosen in Judaism implies a responsibility to uphold a higher moral standard, follow God’s commandments, and serve as a moral example to the world. It’s not about superiority but about a commitment to ethical and spiritual , being the chosen people in Judaism means having a unique covenant with God, a responsibility to uphold ethical values, and a role in sharing wisdom with the world. It doesn’t imply superiority or a predetermined destination in the afterlife.
They executed Socrates for not believing in Zeus and the other olympian gods.
“just go to church on Sunday” is a mischaracterization of Christianity’s requirements too. Off the top of my head, there’s baptism, communicants (name varies by denomination), communion, fasting for lent, advent rituals. Some denominations have confession and last unction. There’s practices and traditions that are expected to follow from belief.
Modern Reform Judaism and Reconstructionist Judaism (maybe Conservative too, idk) are a lot more accepting of openly atheist members of their community than most denominations of Christianity. But “Christianity doesn’t have any requirements except belief, which was rare in religion” is a canard.
Pilgrimage was so central to Christianity, they did the Crusades! Christians are required to tithe. Evangelizing is a religious requirement for Christians. Even if you’re not a Christian, you’re exposed to them evangelizing. “Christianity doesn’t any requirements except belief” is a fib they say as part of evangelizing.
Anyways, a lot of Pure Land Buddhism erasure going on.
Ok, so judiasm is a rules-based religion, not a faith-based religion. You’re Jewish if you’re born Jewish or convert to Judaism, and don’t go through a conversion ritual to another religion (and depending that last could be debatable). “Stopping practicing Judaism” isn’t on the list, nor is stopping believing.
Similarly, Judaism is all about following the rules and laws of Judiasm. This involves a lot of rules about how to treat people, but also ritual stuff like prayers and holy days and keeping Shabbos.
But again, not doing that stuff doesn’t make you not Jewish; it just makes you a bad Jew (and Judiasm -does- have absolution rules; you can basically get absolution for anything except a tiny set of things by doing the right things on Yom Kippur, unless you did them specifically thinking about how you were going to get forgiveness for them (oops, don’t think of pink elephants!). And even most “unforgivable” things can be traditionally forgiven if you die with the Schma (Judiasm’s most sacred prayer) on your lips.
So yeah, Dorothy can totally be an atheist or unbelieving Jew, and guilt being what it is, can even talk seriously about honoring the Sabbath even if she doesn’t usually (just like a lot of Jews who don’t usually keep kosher keep Kosher for Passover or even keep kosher only during Passover, for reasons).
Hm… then why do some (jewish) people keep telling beta israel or karaites aren’t jews?
Isn’t there a part of being jewish being a member of a community? If so, said community can “decide” not to consider some people as jews to begin with (which would differ from being a bad jew). Otherway also, how are eastern christian people not jews (if bad ones)? When did converted people ceased to be jews (not only by considering themselves as not jews, but being considered as such by jews)?
As an atheist, born in atheist core family, raised in an agnostic state by mostly atheist teachers, I don’t understand much more cultural judaism (Is judaity a term – it is in my mothertongue – or is there another?) than religious judaism – to me it’s all social constructs, which are perfectly fine to work with and have reasons to exist, and are valid for people to get together against oppression, and we know that antisemitic oppression is real.
(“sorry” for capitalization, I don’t capitalize any religious nor national adjective and noun unless it’s confusing or I mistype)
The reason why there are disagreements on whether those groups particularly count as Jewish is because, like all groups, there is internal diversity of opinions and variations grow across space and time — and part of the debate is around whether those groups variation is compatible with the wider majorities in size and power — something it’s important to remember doesn’t have consensus on either side of the debate even with some arguments being louder. There is no one Jewish community or opinion just like any other group that gets push into one community when actually consisting of dozens.
As examples, Beta Israel includes the Books of Enoch and other texts as religious texts when most other groups haven’t in millennia and the Karaites – similar to the Sadducees before them – go the opposite direction and only have the Written Torah as a divine text. It’s similar to why Samaritans have been considered a separate group since before Christianity split off — they used different texts and the groups were in just too much in conflict over central issues. This leads to the development of separate social systems and people marrying within their branch until over time they became distinct communities even with overlapping concepts and various of communities within each.
Christianity actively split off for the most part – we have writings from 1st-3rd CE of churches taking steps to remove themselves from Judaism and wanting to be considered separate in part to appeal more to Gentiles and in also because those in power within the different churches didn’t want to have to deal with those in power within different Jewish groups. How we calculate Easter now is derived from those early actions of Christian groups to become independent of Jewish authorities. Not all Christian groups agreed at the time, some remained quite connected to Judaism as these types of separations often takes centuries, but eventually they became distinct communities with a range of different communities within them.
Short answer to the first part: Because Jews can be as bigoted and close-minded as anyone else.
I’m nor sure what you mean about “eastern christian people”? Orthodox Christians, I assume. They’re not any more Jewish than any other Christian group. Christianity spread mainly among Gentiles from at least the late 1st century on.
And while in theory, Judaism is inherited even if you don’t practice, one can convert to another religion and leave Judaism and your descendants wouldn’t revert to Judaism even if they became atheists. Especially after many generations.
yeah sure for that first part, but I guess that behind bigotism, there might be some logical reason to exclude for exemple karaites (beta israel and treatment of black migrants add too many components to the equation).
By eastern christian people, I mean as well orthodox as copt christians, but if I follow your lead, some of converted jews like it happened in Spain during the inquisition time, that were coerced into raising their children as non-jews (well those who couldn’t more or less secretly keep it going as they would have done otherwise), have children that haven’t for a while any cultural nor religious difference the christian mass group (well not cultural beside the history of oppression, what is not a lesser thing) and will become then christian / atheist / whatever but not jews anymore? From the people I know in this situation, a comeback to judaism is of course possible, but the judaity of non believers, cut from the knowledge of the rites or from the community, is still a thing through a common if fragmented history (and history only), that some of them claim to recognize, some not (as being spanish or bask or catalan is already something of a struggle).
That sentence is way too long but it’s too late in the night for me to cut it properly, apologies, I hope I’m clear enough.
So if I follow through this example, it’s either as you say a quality lost by conversion, and atheism exist in flavors where it’s a conversion, or it’s a kind of community intersubjectivism (intersubjectivity? hegelian terms are hard for me translate in english) where every part mutually recognize that they belong to it (on one side the individual, on the other side a sufficient wide group that can take the name of community). In this latter case, a common heritage, even if cut by centuries, suffices to justify a claim to identity, but that would also give some weight to the thesis that it is a social construct and therefore can be deconstructed (for example a part of radical atheism fights against not only belief, but any social structure that comes out of it, be it a community, a tradition or vague sense of common belonging beyond being human). I shall go re read the jewish early anarchists (Landauer, Lazare, Buber….) on the subject.
Replying to myself: there might other examples with sovietized jews. Just read a autobiographic novel by Polina Panassenko (not in english) which is about how here grandmother was called Pessah but was forced in antisemitic USSR to change for Polina, and how she Polina was renamed Pauline by french state in the same assimilationist movement. The novel tells her story of trying to get her name Polina back, in homage to her grandmother, but not in order to claim her jewish identity but her russian identity that in her story are somehow disconnected – it felt strange that beside the names nothing about judaity is evoked while there being more things about feeling russian. Maybe there will be a second novel exploring this side.
Judaism is totally out of my scope of information, but in my neck of the woods there are two ways to teach religion: the academic / neutral way (this is what people believe in, this is what they do, here’s a text that shows this and that) and “belief” way (We believe in God, the Father almighty, it’s all true because it’s in Bible, etc). The “belief” way was previously the prevalent way to teach religion, but it is now – in my neck, that is – forbidden. The schools should teach religion as any other subject, or as any other historical or comparative contemporary religion – students need to learn the theory but do not need to believe in it or follow it. I’m under impression that they should also teach about more than one religion nowadays, too.
Still, the country I live in is a Lutheran country. Last I checked, 80% of people were members of a Lutheran congregation, but less than 10% participated in any other service than baptisms, confirmations, weddings and funerals. The traditions still live on: the language is full of sayings and idioms with background in religious writings and teachings and the people celebrate originally Christian holidays like Christmas (though now with elves) and Easter (though now with chicks).
And as for Jews I would suppose that so much more of the tradition comes from the religion that it’s very hard (if not impossible) to totally separate them. It has always been the case everywhere – for example the Islam is full of rules and traditions that come from the traditions of the people of that time and place and not from the religious teachings, now having become so tangled that they cannot be separated. People either can’t tell them apart or at least may follow some of the religious traditions and rules just like my father – because his family did, it’s a thing to do, as in: funerals are done in a church, confirmation is an important thing .. even if these things don’t really have any actual spiritual meaning to him – or maybe anyone else around, either.
Dorothy probably wouldn’t consider herself religiously Jewish, since she wasn’t raised Jewishly and she doesn’t normally participate in any Jewish practices/traditions/rituals/community/etc.
Dorothy seems to identify mainly as an Atheist with some Jewish heritage.
Technically, if Dorothy’s father’s mother was Jewish, she isn’t. Judaism descends through the female line. Thus, since my mother’s mother’s mother was Jewish (says my sister, because great-grandmother had a big nose), then I am (would be), technically a Jew.
And in Israel, religious assholes have made it impossible to get married as a Jew unless you can prove you are a Jew by this female-descent-only rule*, which can be difficult with a lot of family histories there. And secular marriage is not a thing in Israel. (The workaround is to take a day trip to Cyprus and get a secular marriage there, which is then valid in Israel.)
Islam is also pretty full-on on the “religion = belief” thing. Cultural-but-not-practicing Muslims exist, mostly because it’s a pain and a half to convert out (especially if you come from a Muslim country), but due to this most of us are kinda stealthy about it.
The emphasis on Literal Actual Belief is not even a Christian but specifically Protestant Evangelical innovation. When Muslims adhere to that, it’s because they’re mimicking the strands of Evangelicalism that were influential in colonial India. It’s a modern way of viewing the religion, period, and most Muslim institutions, whether founded before, during, or after the Indian colonial period, won’t make any sense read through it.
I’m not sure I buy that, though I don’t know that much about Islamic practice.
Colonial India is/was only a very small part of Islam, so I’d be surprised if it had much effect outside of Indian/Pakistani Muslims and I don’t think the emphasis on belief is limited to there.
Also, while Protestant Evangelicism has its own twist on the importance of belief, faith in Jesus being key to being right with God goes all the way back to the beginnings.
Colonial India laid the foundations of all modern Indian intellectualism. Only Egypt even holds a candle to it. The actual intellectual movements that are the foundation of modern Islamic thought originated there.
Also, I don’t know where you get “very small”. Aside from historically being a major intellectual centre for the Islamic world even before colonial times, over a third of the world’s Muslim population lives in India, Pakistan, or Bangladesh, all concentrated into a fairly small area. While the French areas of the Islamic world were being brutalised and tortured, colonial India had a reasonably well-off Muslim middle or even upper class that spent those centuries revolutionising Islamic intellectual tradition with the broad support of the population, which owed this to the favour that they’d curried with the British and with British Evangelicals, in part because those intellectual revolutions brought Islam into closer tandem with the British system of religiosity. Even Egypt, itself a historical religious centre, owes most its influence to the communications that existed between its own intellectuals and Indian intellectuals, which were so extensive as to constitute a milieu in themselves. From Egypt and its historic religious universities these new ideas spread throughout the Arab world.
Other countries, like Iran and Saudi, do have influence, but these influences are more due to political muscle than to intellectual tradition. Throughout Asia, countries like Afghanistan trace their most powerful Muslim movements directly to colonial India.
This isn’t just true for Muslims, either. It’s been seriously argued that the modern conception of what “a religion” even is came straight out of colonial India. Stuff like the 1893 Parliament of World Religions, where these ideas were set in stone, growing off decades and centuries of study of eastern religious systems by hucksters and academics alike. It was an extremely wide-ranging historical process with major consequences for everybody.
I do not buy for one fraction of a second that Protestant Evangelical Christians invented that literal belief is required. I think a lot of people today are raised in [broadly] secular societies, where religious communities have to choose between accepting non-believers and dwindling. And they’re projecting relatively recent developments onto the distant past.
You going to explain how Evangelical Protestants influenced the writing of the Avesta?
living in a Christian hegenomy means non-Christians echo Christian dogma while accusing me of being a crypto-Christian because I don’t believe Christian claims. You can shove your non-falsifiable nonsense where the creationists can shove theirs.
Also, whereas the main point of Christianity is seeking salvation, the main point of Islam is obeying god. You don’t get much slack, either. Disobedience can be forgiven once. After that, you’re buggered. You’ll be sitting on a hot rock while Iblis pours boiling water over you. (I put in the hot rock.)
If you read literature that comes out countries with an islamic tradition, you’ll find quite easily a whole part of it that deals with islam as a background, a tradition (and a basis for secular law) and very little belief or faith behind the obvious interjections.
Prior to the colonial-era emphasis on historical fact in understanding the past, it wasn’t even really possible to argue that “faith”, in the modern sense of accepting counterfactual claims, is a, or the most important, measure of religiosity. As an idea it’s so obviously socially corrosive anyway that I don’t think it can be charitably assumed of social groups that are understood to be in possession of the capacity to reason. It’s not only ahistorical but also racist.
I’m not sure you’re wrong, but I’m not sure you’re right. I seem to recall some things from the Ubayd Allâh al-Mahdî time (with the seventh pillar of faith), and also some poetry after that, but that may well be more political that really religious.
no it’s not. For example, Zoroastrianism has a belief based creed. I understand why Christians believe Christianity is different from other religions, I don’t understand why non-Christians believe that.
Because we understand our own religions and when a Christian foreigner (or a foreigner who understands Christianity intimately and our own traditions not at all; functionally a Christian and no less chauvanistic than the fiercest missinary) comes along and tells us our religions are the same, as they’ve been doing since the early 19th century, we know that not only is that true, but that it’s a modern conception of religion based in colonial-era hucksterism.
love it when someone accuses me of being functionally a Christian missionary because I pointed out a religion that predates Christianity by hundreds of years does something that Christians falsely claim they originated.
Someone can consider themselves both, like Joe himself is Jewish and still an atheist.
In any case, I doubt Joe really cares about keeping from working on the Sabbath, keeping kosher, etc, since he’s not really practicing, but he definitely still identifies as Jewish and has made a lot of jokes on the subject, usually at the expense of evangelical Christians.
I don’t think Joe has identified as atheist, though he’s obviously not practicing a particularly strict form of Judaism.
More like plenty of Christians who aren’t atheist, but also don’t go to church except for special occasion.
People who no longer believe in the religion they were raised in might still follow some traditions out of habit. In this case it almost sounds like a half serious explanation for just doing nothing all day.
Do you at least honor Bette Midler and Barbara Streisand those are the most important tenants. Joking aside i am agnostic Sephardic Jew but I do celebrate the festivals and spend the holidays with families and also honor Bette and Babs 😉
I don’t know who those are so no. The closest I ever get to “celebrating” is introvertedly enjoying sweet wine and food my relatives send me every passover XD
You’ve seriously never crossed paths with the iconic talents of Barbara Streisand or Bette Midler? Well, they’re not just ordinary performers; they’re singing and acting dynamos with Jewish heritage! It’s like a classic comedy sketch from the ’90s, a bit like “The Nanny,” where they playfully highlight the significance of these two incredible artists. Now, Bette Midler may have bewitched you in “Hocus Pocus,” but if you ask me, her true gems are in “The Rose” and “The First Wives Club.” As for Barbara, she’s shone brightly in “A Star is Born” (the 1978 version), mesmerized us in “Yentl,” and sprinkled a little “Hello, Dolly!” magic. So, if you’re looking for top-tier entertainment, these two leading ladies are the ones to watch! 🌟
Streisand’s cultural impact is also noteworthy in the naming of the Streisand effect, and for those on the younger millenial/older gen Z side who experienced the fever dream that was the early 2010s the name may call forth the echoes of memories of this song, which was everywhere for a hot minute and I’ve no doubt responsible for many google quests to find out who this Barbra Streisand character could be.
She is both atheist (not a religion, not a proper noun, not capitalized) and generally irreligious (which is not the same thing as atheist). She has some exposure to Jewish tradition through her father’s mother (I think). We have not been shown how much.
A person can be openly atheist and still Jewish, it’s not like Christianity, Islam, or Zoroastrianism, where if an adherent is an atheist, they keep it quiet.
I didn’t have the sense to keep it quiet. I was 14 when I became (not “chose to be,” as Christians would have it) an atheist. Soon, everyone in school knew. This was extra dumb, seeing as how I was in West Virginia. Which, actually, wasn’t the worst place. I was a well-grown man before anyone tried to get up a mob action against me. Fortunately, my big buddy Dave was there both times it happened, and a “That’s enough” settled things down immediately.
Man that was a subtle hint by Dorothy to Joyce that something’s not okay if she’s not working on a Sunday, but Joyce is too stuck in ‘oh man I have a BOYFRIEND now everything shall now be about my BOYFRIEND’ mode.
even dorothy’s taking time off before to spend time with other stuff, it’d only be a warning sign to joyce if it had been like “dorothy hasn’t shown up to the last 3 classes we have together”
If “I spent a whole day, my culture’s traditional day of rest, not working” is a sign you’re not okay, the actual sign you’re not okay was several steps ago.
Which is true, but I don’t blame Joyce for not picking up that “Dorothy took a brief break from her workaholic tendencies” is a flag.
Except it’s not really “her culture’s traditional day of rest” as far we know. One of her grandparent’s was Jewish. There’s no reason to think she was raised in a tradition of keeping the Sabbath.
She’s making a joke referencing it, that’s all.
Interesting point. I was just reading it as Dorothy hiding her mental health day/problems from Joyce, with maybe a side benefit of appealing to another “rule” to quiet the bad head voices.
I think it’s about 50% “everything must be about my boyfriend” and 50% “if something someone does seems weird it must actually be a result of my ex-Fundamentalist bias”. It’s the same attitude that made her forcefully restrain herself from questioning Booster about they/them pronouns when they first met! And in that case, it was a very good thing she did that! Here, though, it seems to be a very maladaptive trait.
Always good to get your information from people who are specifically organized around being a replacement. Judaism through the lens of Christianity is those black and white “before” segments in an infomercial.
She was. She now bases her opinions on the assumption that everything she was told in those classes is a lie. There’s a Paetron strip where she tells Agatha she googled Mormonism to learn what they actually believe. I assume she did something similar with Judaism, especially if she’s dating Joe.
There’s still going to be some bumps in the road, because you can’t clear your mind of everything you were taught that easily (the way she phrased it to Agatha was “most of the silly stuff I heard about Mormons, you guys claimed you stopped believing”) but it’s not that bad.
What second temple, what happened to the first one, why is the second one destroyed, is Dorothy the one destroying it, is it already destroyed, why does she need to be ritualistically cleansed, and why is Joyce even asking about this in the first place?
First one destroyed by the Babylonians restored under the Persian Empire second one destroyed by the Roman’s Judaism became book based religion instead of a temple cult. Jews purify themselves with mikveh baths though not really practiced much by Reform and Conservative Jews.
Had to look up what a mikveh bath is, since this is the first time I’ve ever seen that word. Seems like they’ve gotta be made under pretty specific conditions.
“The Second Temple replaced Solomon’s Temple, which is presumed to have been built at the same location before its destruction by the Babylonians c. 587 BCE.”
“In 70 CE, at the height of the First Jewish–Roman War, the Second Temple was destroyed by the Roman army led by Titus during the siege of Jerusalem. The destruction of the Second Temple was a cataclysmic and transformative point in Jewish history, and led to the development of Rabbinic Judaism as the primary form of religious practice among Jews worldwide.”
I mean, yeah. One can do a pretty plausible trace of most modern antisemitism back to Roman laws and deliberately systemic Jew-hate after they destroyed the 2nd temple (in response to, yes, numerous rebellions in Judea, which in turn were in response to the Romans banning practice or study of Judaism, which in turn was in response to, well, more rebellions. And there’s probably more details I’ve never studied; suffice to say that Rome’s rule over Judea started out with henothesticially making Israel a singular exception to “everyone has to worship the emperor” laws and ended with banning Judiasm and enslaving most Jews).
When did the Romans ban the study or practice of Judaism, before Hadrian? That was the Seleucids (which led to the Maccabean Revolt and Chanukah). There were tensions over Judea being a vassal state and the religious issues that came with being a monotheistic religion in a polytheistic empire, but no outright bans on Jewish religious practice. Not till after Bar Kokhba in 135.
Romans destroyed it, as part of Nero’s persecution. the first temple, if it existed, was destroyed by some iron age civilization, Babylonians probably, but I forget exactly.
Joyce is asking because of Christian fanfic understanding of Judaism.
The emperor at the time of the destruction was Vespasian and it was destroyed by is som future emperor Titus, both of the Flavian Dynasty but the war started during reign of Nero who died before the destruction of the second temple. Also the war took place during g the collapse of Julio-Claudian Dynasty and the chaotic year of the four emperors.
I was being brief. Nero’s the one who initiated it, and the most recognizable name.
Incidentally, a lot of the Christian doomsday nonsense is because the Christians at that time thought Nero was going to come back to life and so a John made up Revelation to criticize Nero, the Empire, and fantasize overthrowing them. And since it didn’t happen, it must be about to happen today, because the Bible containing bunk is unthinkable.
The fascinating thing to me is that my religious denomination growing up taught us that Revelation was CLEARLY using a lot metaphorical apocalyptical language, and all the people interpreting it to try to get actual information about a rapture or millennialism were clearly misled. But then they insisted it definitely was still about the actual end of the world, and never once mentioned any of the obvious metaphorical language clearly put in criticizing Rome. Guess some of things it is saying then are too close to the Bible being wrong for inerrantists to accept that interpretation?
First temple: Solomon’s temple. Destroyed by the Babylonians in 587 BCE.
Second temple: Herod’s temple, built about 70ish years after the first one was destroyed. Destroyed in 70 CE by the Romans and its destruction is generally considered the start of both the Jewish diaspora and rabbinic Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism is how Judaism is practiced today, in contrast to how it was practiced during the time of the temples.
Since Joe did work on Shabbat (i.e. Saturday), which is one of the things you’re forbidden to do on the day of rest, Joyce is course correcting a bit too hard to take Joe’s potential beliefs into consideration. Which is both sweet and silly, as Joe is highly secular and has probably never kept the Sabbath in his life.
Ok to answer the question how Jews purify themselves is Mikveh baths. On the other hand Joyce’s reaction seems to be the reaction of alot of Fundmentalist who assume that Judaism has not evolved since the 1st century CE even the evolution from the temple based cult to a book based religion of Rabbanic Judaism has evolved there are even seperate Jewish beliefs that reject Rabbanic Judaism such Karraitism. It annoys me when fundamentalist are suprised that Judaism has changed since the destruction of the second temple or that the largest Jewish denomination is reform Judaism and that it’s one of the most progressive religions.
Even some who understand the basic concept of Rabbinic Judaism think that it’s only kind of a workaround for the lack of a temple and that now that Jews control Israel again they’ll obviously rebuild the Temple and go back being proper Jews.
Conveniently setting the stage to fulfill a bunch of misinterpretations of apocalyptic passages in the Bible and bring about the end of the world.
The Old Testament is not Judaism because calling it the Old Testament requires a Christian viewpoint of there being a New Testament. Also things are in a different order (for example all those psalms about the Messiah are much more important in Christianity so they’re given better placement, while in the Tanakh they’re just a “has to go somewhere” afterthought) and translations can really twist some things around. And it presupposes that Judaism just stopped, when we’ve got all sorts of Talmud and Talmud-adjacent stuff as well.
Ironically, sorting through some old papers isn’t forbidden on Shabbat (unless you get paid to do it). Buuuuut boiling macaroni is, so Dotty is the one who isn’t actually observing the Sabbath in the strictly traditional sense, not Joe.
(Its still a good idea for to pick one day to stop working, the ritual gives it enough weight and rhythmic consistency to actually stick to it)
But the technical definitions of “work” with regard to the Sabbath are something even most Orthodox Jews don’t know without having made a special study of the subject.
i think that’s only if a tool is involved? I think sorting through papers is still fine, but I’m not orthodox or a rabbi so idk, definitely in “Ask Your Rabbi” territory
Hmm this reminds me an anecdote I heard as a kid. About some Jewish guy who wanted to bypass the Sabbath by driving a car while keeping his feet in a bowl of water? I don’t know how much… water this story holds though.
A day off working is a good idea. The extents to which some of the more traditional bans go is not though. And getting into the hair-splitting arguments like Da Boy describes is just absurd.
Some of the steps the more traditional jewish people go through to avoid “working” on the Sabbath is really quite remarkable… Things like:
– using a push-button telephone is somehow disallowed, but someone invented a special phone that cycles through the 10-digits and you ‘dial’ by somehow interrupting the pattern to dial a number
– Pushing someone on a wheelchair or using an electric-powered wheelchair is somehow forbidden, so they invented one that works on compressed air
There’s a lamp you can effectively “turn on and off” in that its encased in a swiveling cylinder with a window that’s only exposed in the on position, just remember to actually turn it on before sundown.
Doesn’t the boiling of macaroni depend on whether electricity is fire? Assuming they’re using a hot plate.
(From an anecdote related by Richard Feynman, who was delighted when orthodox Jews whose convention was in the same convention as the one he was attending, asked him physics questions. Then he found out the reason for the questions)
Not necessarily. There are actually two formal Sabbath prohibitions getting conflated here: one a prohibition on “kindling fire”, and a separate prohibition on “cooking”. They’re obviously connected, as cooking is often done with fire, but they are separate – like, you can obviously light a fire without cooking (e.g., lighting a candle for light).
Whether electricity is fire might be a factor in whether using electricity itself (including using, like, an electric fan) is a violation of the Sabbath prohibition on “kindling fire”, but even if you decide electricity does not violate the prohibition on “kindling fire”, there’s still a separate prohibition on “cooking” that can be violated, even with something that may not be quite technical fire.
The best resolution for this, I think, is the same way my old girlfriend (who also practiced Judaism) described herself. She told me once, “I am Jew-ish.” As a kinda-Catholic, I could accept that.
Wait, I thought Dorothy was raised in a catholic family and was herself atheist. Why is Joyce assuming that Dorothy as par of the “folks”? Sure it’s less frequent for Christian to use the word sabbath than Jewish people, but that term still come in handy when you have to refer to a reason to do nothing for religious reason in a single word…
Well, it is Saturday and she has talked about being part Jewish, so it makes sense that Joyce’s mind goes there.
IIRC, one of her grandparents was Jewish and the other 3 were Catholic, so she was exposed to both, but her parents raised her without any religion. Gave her the choice when she was old enough, but didn’t practice either as a family.
Joyce would be a great girlfriend to basically anyone.
sure she has some things to get over and some habits to break, but she really cares about joe, like, Really cares.
One of the best advice regarding dating and partners my mother ever gave me was “If you’re important to them, they will MAKE time for you.” Obviously you don’t abuse this, but I’ve found that advice to be a really, really good marker for whether somebody truly cares about you or not.
Per her father’s words, she was raised a religiously. I can only imagine her parents practiced in private and only talked about it to her when she asked.
Honestly, I assume her parents were pretty areligious themselves. She describes it a little more at one point and it’s in terms of her grandparents being a mix of Jewish and Catholic, not her parents.
She’s definitely not orthodox Jewish because she was just drinking alcohol the other night. I know that’s forbidden. Also I don’t think most college campuses have a Kosher menu option
No Orthodox Jews definitely drink wine. There’s an entire blessing that’s really important called Kiddush that involves blessing and then drinking wine. Orthodox Jews will, however, not drink wine made by non-Jews cause of Halacha (Jewish Law). There’s a blessing for every day as well that translates to “Blessed are you G-d, King of the world/universe, who creates fruit of the vine” that’s said before drinking wine or grape juice
Yeah, I guess I should’ve said “gentiles’ wine.” By “that sickly sweet stuff” I meant kosher wine – I don’t know if it’s all sweet, but the two brands I know, Manischewitz and Mad Dog, are. Although I am a gentile.
There are kosher wines that taste much better than Manischewitz (although I don’t personally think they’re the ABSOLUTE best, which makes sense seeing as there’s far fewer kosher wines made than the non-kosher stuff). Manischewitz wine is the relatively inexpensive and convenient way to meet the letter of the law, especially if you live somewhere where the good stuff is harder to come by. Also EVERY Jewish holiday and ritual involves wine, including every single sabbath, so being able to use a big bottle of Manischewitz (or Kedem grape juice) for that makes practical sense.
Hmm interesting. Because I lived in an orthodox Jewish community growing up (my family was not among them) and I once asked one of my closest friends who happened to be Orthodox Jewish if his family ever drank during Yom Kippur, and he said it was against his particular sect to drink on that date.
I mean you don’t drink anything on Yom Kippur, including water. I’m not familiar with any Jewish sect that keeps the fast while considering drinking fluids as not breaking said fast.
She’s 1/4 Jewish, non-prafticing but knows the shape of it. It was silly in the same way that non-prafticing people from a Catholic background might talk about giving things up for Lent.
Yeah, it’s all pretty neat to read about from individual people, even if it’s confusing and alien-sounding a lot of the time. As an outsider to basically every religious culture, it’s easy to dismiss it all out of hand sometimes, but knowing that little bit more about the people we’re sharing a planet with, it can’t be a bad thing.
Panel 5 Joyce asks the most intelligent-sounding question she has ever asked about someone else’s culture…but I’m having trouble believing that she both knows that there were ritualistic ramifications to the 2nd Temple’s destruction, and also doesn’t know what they are.
As a prior fundamentalist, I can say that was about exactly my level of understanding of the topic. The 2nd Temple’s destruction is important to Christianity since it happened around Jesus time, you know about the fact that it has ritualistic implications because you learn about the old “correct” form of Judaism and the fact Jews can’t do that any more proves they are obviously wrong about God, and therefore no more information is required beyond that.
There’s no way to deal with corpse impurity without a temple sacrifice of a red heifer, so we basically all have this kind of impurity. Very observant (“frum”) Koens avoid corpses and cemeteries and museums with dead bodies in them, and some London Underground entrances that are built into museums containing corpses, etc.
This is not because there’s an idea that they would somehow remain free of this impurity, but because the Torah commanded that they minimize exposure to it.
Evangelical Christians are obsessed with red heifers for reasons that are unclear to me, but I suspect stems from their idea that they wish to end all human life on earth as a religious imperative. This is probably why Joyce asked about it. There are apparently Christian Texans trying to breed unblemished ref heifers in order to rebuild the temple. I, uh, wish they wouldn’t.
Judaism is a practice than can optionally include belief. There are atheists who are very religious because they find value in the practice. And, of course, the inverse also exists. I think keeping the sabbath is a very good practice for avoiding burnout. Especially for people like students, artists, and academics who might otherwise work every day of the week.
I don’t know about actual dating, but euphemistic dating is called the “Sabbath blessing” and encouraged as long as everyone’s properly married and such.
i used to live in an area with a large orthodox jewish community. when i would go grocery shopping on fridays i would see them all there also shopping and think to myself “ooh, big party this weekend?” and then i’d get home and put my groceries away and go “oh yea.”
Yes. She’s not saying the emoji, she’s answering Joyce’s question. It’s the answer to what do atheists (“you people”) do to cleanse themselves. Does Joyce think Dorothy is jewish? *Is* Dorothy of jewish descent?
As for cleansing for the destruction of the second temple, a shrug works. Or not noticing.
Panel one Dorothy is too committed to it not mattering to just give in to temptation and say “If you need to know that badly put your hand in there and check.”
Loading ...
the best part of atheism is no self-flaggelating rituals (except the ones you invent yourself, I guess, if you’re into that)
or really any rituals, unless you wanna
I self-flagellate for oversleeping on Sundays. “Oh, dang! I could’ve been gaming instead!”
Rituals tend to have more to do with culture and/or habit and/or personal/family history than with belief, though. I mean, children dressing up in costumes and going tick-or-treating on October 31 is a ritual, as is decorating one’s home with spooky decorations for that same day, and for most people these things have nothing to do with religion.
In many cases, particularly ancient religions, rituals have more to do with religion than belief does.
Going to point out that when some of those ancient religions weren’t quite so ancient, belief preceded having to do those rituals. One way a religion can have lasting power is by having flexibility regarding what’s believed.
But Socrates was executed for disbelief in the state gods. And Zoroastrianism has a creed that centers belief.
And in the other direction, modern practice of religion doesn’t always put belief above ritual. Many practicing Jews consider belief/nonbelief in God to be irrelevant to Judaism.
And in modern Unitarianism, Quakers, and Heathenry, belief that a god or the gods are literal beings is optional.
heck, there’s Christian atheists, for whom Christianity is a tradition. cultural touchstone, and/or basis for a moral philosophy, but belief in a god existing isn’t part of it. I used to be one… a Jew-for-Krishna told me I wasn’t allowed to do that.
to be fair “No Rituals unless you wanna” also applies to Reform Judaism to some extent
Do y’all need rituals for that one?
Frankly I thought the point of the rituals was to channel a universal human drive
I’m not sure Joyce is ready to try to cope without self-flagellating rituals… :/
Weekends are a ritual 😉
Sure makes life a lot easier.
That’s totally true. MY self-flagellating rituals are artisanal!
is it self-flagellation if you forget to eat for two hours?
i find that self-flagellation (in the form of judgy thoughts about me being a bad person) are incredibly ingrained and extremely hard to shake off. :/
LOL XD
Happy Halloween Everyone!!! 😋 🎃 👻 🕸️ 🍭 🍫🌕 🌌
Please tell of your plans for spooky day, if any!
Doing crossplay and going to a big big party!
what are you
OH RIGHT EASTERN TIME MIDNIGHT US IT’S HALLOWEEN SOMEWHERE ALREADY
lol
I’ve got a boatload of Halloween gift and candy bags to prep, mostly. Before the plague, we didn’t have much in the way of neighbourhood trick-or-treat but now we do, which is nice, and would be incredibly nice if my wife wasn’t high risk so we don’t do it face-to-face. But I still like doing something for the neighbourhood kids.
It’s always Halloween somewhere.
We must know the same people.
Like in my heart
That’s the spirit! ^_^
Probably just gonna join my folks in handing out candy. Might watch some Doctor Who.
I’m going to carve a pumpkin, listen to an audio horror play, confront some literally panic inducing work I’ve been hiding from, and (scariest of all) confront the hoards of monsters and fairy tale princess that come demanding tribute every year.
Good luck with your terror pile!
I may put on my wizard robe, get my crooked staff, and sit out by the road with a bowl on mini-chocolates. If there seems to be any traffic.
OK, got decent crop of trick or treaters. Best costumes: Fire and Ice ballerinas, little green fairy, boy being carried by alien.
Handing out candy to anyone willing to brave what’s apparently going to be some shitty weather and answering the door with a black skull shaped goblet full of virgin (probably, unless some money falls into my lap) bloody Mary.
For some reason my thirteen year old nephew decided his grandmother needed a skull to drink the blood of her enemies from and gave her this plastic goblet shaped like a skull and I’m borrowing it for the night. I don’t really have the funds for a decent costume but I figure answering the door holding a red liquid inside a skull shaped goblet counts for something.
Changing my avatar to her in-costume version might be the closest to dressing up I’ll do. Depending on who draws door duty I may scrap together a no budget costume, we’ll see.
Planning on watching Over the Garden Wall for the first time, I heard it’s good and seasonal
Ah, I will also keep my celebrations minimalist but satisfying.
No point to dressing up given I already practically live in my alien hoodie! XD
Candy + Edibles = Great Halloween, done. 😋🎃
Oh and maybe also watching YouTubers play horror games and maybe longplays of Brain Dead 13 and perhaps finish off with the Darkrai movie
I’m planning on disguising myself as a productive member of society.
I decided to go for a low-effort Kojak costume, I think it was just a way of talking myself into buying some dum-dums (tootsie pop would be canonical but I can’t have chocolate). I’ve been short-buzzcutting my hair for a year or so now, but this is the first time in my life I’ve full on razored it. Feels weird.
Of course now I can’t find my old clip-on sunglasses I could’ve sworn I saw last week. Headed to Walgreens tomorrow, I’ll see what I can find for cheap. Not going to a party or anything, but at some point in the last 20 years I realized that doing this stuff for an audience of one means I have a lot more fun than waiting for things to happen.
Turned out pretty good, though apparently “cheap sunglasses” are 15 bucks these days which was too steep for one photo.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/285208317070934017/1169051714318520341/kojak.jpg
My partner is getting a brain scan to find out if they have a tumor or if what the last scan saw was only a shadow. Talk about being extra on the spooky…
Hope everything turns out well and it was just an unneeded Halloween scare.
Thanks much, keeping my fingers crossed
As someone with a potentially scary doctor’s visit of my own today, I wish us both well.
I got a job interview in the morning, and I was gonna spend all afternoon washing totes for Walgreens, but I got fired from that job less than an hour before I set up this interview, so I guess my evening is wide open now. Probably bake some goodies with my girlfriend, watch some spooky movies, play a little Fortnite, nothing too fancy.
Fortunately Halloween is one American cultural icon we have managed largely to avoid. And for those occasions when some kid tries to introduce it into my life we have several dogs.
My kids are with their catholic grandmother and she will likely take them to boring ceremonies in cemeteries and churches (the kids aren’t taught any religion). I kinda wish they would do Halloween instead, with or without dogs.
Have you managed to avoid Halloween commercialism: pumpkins, candy and silly stupid paper decorations filling up shops? I’m all for masquerades but that’s not really a thing here, and kids run asking for candy the whole week long (as they’re not sure when the right day is). Unfortunately we still have the shop crazy, and I’d like to avoid that. The only thing with the irritating shopping mall Halloween is that it keeps the Christmas stuff out of sight a week longer..
The War on Christmas begins together with September. It is briefly interrupted for Halloween, or was before the pandemic, and then continues apace.
I’m going to be either Daenerys Targaryen, Violet Parr or a pirate (blonde Asha Greyjoy? Possibly). My friend is coming over and I’m gonna show her the 1970s Carrie because the other two are godawful, The Call, and Witches in Stitches. We’ll see what else. We’re gonna make pizzas and pick up some take out sides so it should be fun.
You could combine them all and become Piolet Parrgaryen.
My goto Costume is to put on a fedora hat and a bathrobe and go as Indiana Lebowski.
“Like, it belongs in a museum, man.”
Finishing the Kinktober and drawing some nudes
Having finally decided that the china pumpkin candle holder is just gone, far too late to get a real one, I am going to spend it watching “How to make a traditional turnip lantern” videos and probably coming as close as I ever do to swearing.
I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but those things are solid.
Just as well make lanterns. God knows they aren’t fit to eat.
I have to work.
Go to work, buy groceries, sleep.
Same as any other Tuesday, except I’ve got to remember to turn the porch light off.
Lay out a tray of candies, sit all evening listening for the door while nobody shows up, and end the evening by placing bets on how many hours it’ll take us to scarf all of the leftover candy.
I’ll be dressing as a grizzled senior software developer.
I’m putting out the pumpkin I carved on Sunday and going to a friend’s place to hand out candy while wearing a plague doctor costume!
have mixed feelings about other religions co-opting a holiday from a religion I don’t even follow.
Do you have those same feelings about the Olympics? Because those originated as a religious celebration as well.
no. I’m not Hellenist adjacent.
Sitting at home, depressed as I have no friends who haven’t made other plans, nor a significant other to spend time with right now, nor family who even give a damn. F**k holidays.
I also made Jack O Lanterns out of pumpkins I grew, even though I don’t get trick or treaters.
I went to work, then to the gym, and noticed from our Ring camera that the odd person who came by our house was walking a dog or something and paid no heed of the bowl of candy/toys we left out
as per usual
mixed bag being the house tucked away in the back
i had my friends over and dressed up as the Death of Rats (disc world). My costume had a small pocket for the Death of Fleas.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Uhhh, “the destruction of the second temple?” I did grow up Christian, but I have no idea what that means. Can someone explain?
I’m still looking for Sal, but I’ll take note of Joe as a consolation avatar if needed.
No Jason.
No Danny.
Wrong sibling, but closer.
Nope.
Ooo, that’s not bad. This will do for the evening.
The Destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem is a major event in Jewish history as a Very Bad Thing.
The Roman’s destroyed the second temple Jewish worship revolved around d the temple.and the high preisthood conducting rituals. When it was Destroyed Judaism went from a temple based worship to worship based around the TaNahKh and the Talmud the oral tradition that became written down and was studied by the Rabbis there where two talmuds the Babylonian and Palestinian Talmud named for the Schools (Yeshivas where they where written down, One in Palestine the other in Babylon)
The Temple was built, destroyed, rebuilt, and then destroyed again in 70 CE. There are certain rituals that require it and certain equipment, including the expiration of the violation of certain rules. Christians are really into this because they think they have a stand-in, but their theology is terrible. Without the temple and other requirements, teshuvah (and perhaps immersion in a mikvah, for certain cleanliness-related rules) is sufficient for violations that do not involve offense against another person (eg violation of Shabbat prohibitions).
On the Christian side of things, the Second Temple is the temple in which Jesus flipped over a bunch of tables in anger at all the buying and selling going on in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). The Gospel of Mark includes a scene where Jesus foretells the Temple’s destruction, which scholars take to mean that it was written after said event. Christianity tends to treat the destruction as a divine punishment from God for the Temple’s rejection of Jesus,* and the loss of the ritual center of Judaism was a major factor in Christianity’s evolution from a movement within Judaism to a separate entity.
*Christianity loves itself some victim-blamin’
It’s worth noting that the money changers get a bad rap that they really don’t deserve. Temple period Judaism revolved around ritual animal sacrifice as worship. By the second Temple, folks had figured out that instead of having to bring a live sacrifice all the way to the Temple on your pilgrimage, you could just buy an animal sacrifice once you arrived instead. The money changers exchanged the currency from your homeland for local currency that you could use to buy a sacrificial animal. It was a convenient service and Oily Josh going all (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ on them has led to the money changers being slandered for the past two thousand years ¯\_(ツ)_/¯︎
Also Judea was governed by Rome at the time so they would have been using Roman coins at the time. They would have had graven images on them which a sin in Judaism. So the money changers would trade you for coins that were kosher to use in the temple. They provided a necessary service. It’s never explicitly stated what they were doing that Jesus had a problem with.
I mean it’s gotta be the same thing that got old Martin Luther upset right? Effectively it turns sinning into an offense with a fine. And “fineable offense” just means “legal if you’re rich”.
You’re making a pretty big assumption regarding how Jews treat sin compared to how Christianity does and I don’t think the comparison really works (not the least because Martin Luther hated Jews).
Not quite, for two reasons:
1) Offerings as atonement for sin as prescribed in the Bible were explicitly financially accessible to all – see Leviticus chapters 4-5. The baseline offering is a goat or a lamb, but if you couldn’t afford that, you could bring birds (Lev. 5:7), and if you couldn’t even afford that, you could bring a few cups of flour (Lev. 5:11). Rituals and practices intended to be universal were actually pretty often established in the Bible such that finances should not be a barrier to participation.
2) Lev. 4:2, which is the preface to all of this, highlights that you can only do all of this if you commit this kind of sin unintentionally. Biblically speaking, you don’t get to sin intentionally and then pay your sacrificial fine.
Perhaps people were just blatantly ignoring the “unintentional” part, but even if so, there shouldn’t have been any concept of “legal if you’re rich” as even poor people could afford the cost of any offering they’d have needed to bring.
Furthermore, O.J. wouldn’t have made it out of there. The temple was a small city with its own police force. On top of that, the Romans kept soldiers in the area, because they knew the places where people get freaky about their religions were sources of trouble. Josh would’ve taken a short bop outside the city wall, where he would’ve met many stones. With his face. (I will never say “Jebus” again. “Oily Josh” is too good.)
Or Jesus pulled another “walk through the crowd without interference and nobody notices” like in Luke 4:30, but the gospel authors didn’t think it was important to mention that part in this instance.
I am now imagining Jesus running from the Jerusalem police in a white Ford Bronco.
Judaism used to be oriented around the Temple in Jerusalem. Priestly caste, pilgrimages for animal sacrifices, all sorts of stuff. As Diaspora stuff happened and people spread in general that was already shifting to a Rabbinic form with local religious guidance over the course of a few hundred years, the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE (first one was destroyed ~580BCE and rebuilt ~530) is considered the official-ish marker of that transition. Because if you don’t have a Temple, you can’t do the stuff that’s supposed to be done at the Temple.
And since that’s the form of Judaism emphasized in the Old Testament, which is all many Christians know about Judaism, many (especially fundamentalist) Christians think Jews are all just waiting to rebuild the temple and start the animal sacrifices again.
In biblical times, the Jewish people had a Temple in Jerusalem, built by King Solomon. It lasted for 2.5-4+ centuries, depending on your sources, before being destroyed by the Babylonians. After a period of exile, the Second Temple was built in its place. It lasted around six centuries before being destroyed by the Romans.
I think Joyce was asking how she could take a cleansing bath now that the Temple is gone. She can, says Dame Wiki, use, for most purposes, any natural body of water. As my mom used to say, “Jump in the crick,” Joyce. Except when mom said it, she meant, “Go to hell.”
the romans (?) blew up a Jewish temple
Well, explosives weren’t invented yet.
Dorothy is Jewish?
Or is she being ironic?
Canonically, she is ethnically 1/4 Jewish, apparently.
As for whether she practices any Jewish culture, we don’t know that much?
I thought she was Atheist. Wasn’t that a storyline at the start of this comic?
It is possible to be both Jewish and Atheist. Actually very common among millennial-and-later Jewish people.
There was a debate about this you can be culturally Jewish but still be an atheist or agnostic.
Yes and: you can be religiously Jewish and also be an atheist or agnostic.
Christianity is actually really unusual in introducing that religion = belief.
It’s probably because I was raised in a Christian-dominated shithole, but I’m a little confused what you mean about religion not necessarily involving belief. Unless you’re using the word in the “faith in the existence of some higher power” kind of way, and not in the broader “We generally think in this direction” sense? I’m mostly trying to under the connotation, I think.
The Jews are a people, they have a really old religion that is called Judaism. Many Jews practice Judaism, most I’ve met don’t practice much. FTR, I personally practice some parts of it, but I’m not a person of faith in anything metaphysical at all. I see Judaism as my cultural heritage, so it’s sacred to me in that sense.
Yes, I’m aware of what a Jew is. We don’t need to dial it that far back.
@taffy Good question, too sleepy to answer it, hope to remember to answer you tomorrow
A lot of religion is about behavior and ritual more than belief, or more than explicit belief. It’s most natural to sacrifice animals to Zeus because you believe in Zeus, but in a sense the community doesn’t care what you _believe_ as long as you keep behaving the right way. (Though if you go telling kids there’s no Zeus, you’ll probably get in trouble anyway.)
Christianity and Islam put an unusual emphasis on what you _believe_. Some call it orthodoxy vs. orthopraxis. Possibly in a reaction against Hellenistic doubt, both gentile and Jewish. (Cf. _Doubt: A History_ by Jennifer Michael Hecht). E.g. the story of Doubting Thomas, and how it’s better to believe without evidence; emphasis on having faith despite doubt, or believing things _because_ they’re absurd. And even if you show up for church every Sunday, if you simply say you believe heretical things, the Church (Catholic, Puritan, other) might take a very keen interest in you, depending on time and place.
Notably, Christianity is also rather poor in formal practice requirements, compared to Jewish mitzvah, or even the Five Pillars of Islam (like prayer multiple times a day, fasting through Ramadan, obligatory (if you can afford it) pilgrimage to Mecca). Christianity’s common behavior is more “Church on Sunday”, which is fairly light-weight.
I won’t speak for traditional Judaism, but in modern times there’s been a thing of some Jews no longer really believing — e.g. that there’s a special covenant with God, or in God at all — but sticking to Jewish _practices_ out of tradition or community solidarity or something. Which is potentially a rather non-trivial commitment, if you really follow kosher and Sabbath rules.
There’s a lot of vocabulary words in there I don’t understand, but I think I get the general gist? The vague whisp of the general gist, anyway.
A really good read on this is “The Heathen in his Blindness” by B.N. Balagangadhara.
Reconstructionist Judaism rejects the idea of the covenant or the concept of being choosen, but Reform, Conservative and Orthadox (as well as Haredi Karaites, and Hassidc Jews) all still acknowledge the covenant and the idea of Jews being the choosen, but what it means to be chosen isn’t what some folks think it is: Being chosen in Judaism implies a responsibility to uphold a higher moral standard, follow God’s commandments, and serve as a moral example to the world. It’s not about superiority but about a commitment to ethical and spiritual , being the chosen people in Judaism means having a unique covenant with God, a responsibility to uphold ethical values, and a role in sharing wisdom with the world. It doesn’t imply superiority or a predetermined destination in the afterlife.
They executed Socrates for not believing in Zeus and the other olympian gods.
“just go to church on Sunday” is a mischaracterization of Christianity’s requirements too. Off the top of my head, there’s baptism, communicants (name varies by denomination), communion, fasting for lent, advent rituals. Some denominations have confession and last unction. There’s practices and traditions that are expected to follow from belief.
Modern Reform Judaism and Reconstructionist Judaism (maybe Conservative too, idk) are a lot more accepting of openly atheist members of their community than most denominations of Christianity. But “Christianity doesn’t have any requirements except belief, which was rare in religion” is a canard.
Pilgrimage was so central to Christianity, they did the Crusades! Christians are required to tithe. Evangelizing is a religious requirement for Christians. Even if you’re not a Christian, you’re exposed to them evangelizing. “Christianity doesn’t any requirements except belief” is a fib they say as part of evangelizing.
Anyways, a lot of Pure Land Buddhism erasure going on.
Ok, so judiasm is a rules-based religion, not a faith-based religion. You’re Jewish if you’re born Jewish or convert to Judaism, and don’t go through a conversion ritual to another religion (and depending that last could be debatable). “Stopping practicing Judaism” isn’t on the list, nor is stopping believing.
Similarly, Judaism is all about following the rules and laws of Judiasm. This involves a lot of rules about how to treat people, but also ritual stuff like prayers and holy days and keeping Shabbos.
But again, not doing that stuff doesn’t make you not Jewish; it just makes you a bad Jew (and Judiasm -does- have absolution rules; you can basically get absolution for anything except a tiny set of things by doing the right things on Yom Kippur, unless you did them specifically thinking about how you were going to get forgiveness for them (oops, don’t think of pink elephants!). And even most “unforgivable” things can be traditionally forgiven if you die with the Schma (Judiasm’s most sacred prayer) on your lips.
So yeah, Dorothy can totally be an atheist or unbelieving Jew, and guilt being what it is, can even talk seriously about honoring the Sabbath even if she doesn’t usually (just like a lot of Jews who don’t usually keep kosher keep Kosher for Passover or even keep kosher only during Passover, for reasons).
Hm… then why do some (jewish) people keep telling beta israel or karaites aren’t jews?
Isn’t there a part of being jewish being a member of a community? If so, said community can “decide” not to consider some people as jews to begin with (which would differ from being a bad jew). Otherway also, how are eastern christian people not jews (if bad ones)? When did converted people ceased to be jews (not only by considering themselves as not jews, but being considered as such by jews)?
As an atheist, born in atheist core family, raised in an agnostic state by mostly atheist teachers, I don’t understand much more cultural judaism (Is judaity a term – it is in my mothertongue – or is there another?) than religious judaism – to me it’s all social constructs, which are perfectly fine to work with and have reasons to exist, and are valid for people to get together against oppression, and we know that antisemitic oppression is real.
(“sorry” for capitalization, I don’t capitalize any religious nor national adjective and noun unless it’s confusing or I mistype)
The reason why there are disagreements on whether those groups particularly count as Jewish is because, like all groups, there is internal diversity of opinions and variations grow across space and time — and part of the debate is around whether those groups variation is compatible with the wider majorities in size and power — something it’s important to remember doesn’t have consensus on either side of the debate even with some arguments being louder. There is no one Jewish community or opinion just like any other group that gets push into one community when actually consisting of dozens.
As examples, Beta Israel includes the Books of Enoch and other texts as religious texts when most other groups haven’t in millennia and the Karaites – similar to the Sadducees before them – go the opposite direction and only have the Written Torah as a divine text. It’s similar to why Samaritans have been considered a separate group since before Christianity split off — they used different texts and the groups were in just too much in conflict over central issues. This leads to the development of separate social systems and people marrying within their branch until over time they became distinct communities even with overlapping concepts and various of communities within each.
Christianity actively split off for the most part – we have writings from 1st-3rd CE of churches taking steps to remove themselves from Judaism and wanting to be considered separate in part to appeal more to Gentiles and in also because those in power within the different churches didn’t want to have to deal with those in power within different Jewish groups. How we calculate Easter now is derived from those early actions of Christian groups to become independent of Jewish authorities. Not all Christian groups agreed at the time, some remained quite connected to Judaism as these types of separations often takes centuries, but eventually they became distinct communities with a range of different communities within them.
Short answer to the first part: Because Jews can be as bigoted and close-minded as anyone else.
I’m nor sure what you mean about “eastern christian people”? Orthodox Christians, I assume. They’re not any more Jewish than any other Christian group. Christianity spread mainly among Gentiles from at least the late 1st century on.
And while in theory, Judaism is inherited even if you don’t practice, one can convert to another religion and leave Judaism and your descendants wouldn’t revert to Judaism even if they became atheists. Especially after many generations.
yeah sure for that first part, but I guess that behind bigotism, there might be some logical reason to exclude for exemple karaites (beta israel and treatment of black migrants add too many components to the equation).
By eastern christian people, I mean as well orthodox as copt christians, but if I follow your lead, some of converted jews like it happened in Spain during the inquisition time, that were coerced into raising their children as non-jews (well those who couldn’t more or less secretly keep it going as they would have done otherwise), have children that haven’t for a while any cultural nor religious difference the christian mass group (well not cultural beside the history of oppression, what is not a lesser thing) and will become then christian / atheist / whatever but not jews anymore? From the people I know in this situation, a comeback to judaism is of course possible, but the judaity of non believers, cut from the knowledge of the rites or from the community, is still a thing through a common if fragmented history (and history only), that some of them claim to recognize, some not (as being spanish or bask or catalan is already something of a struggle).
That sentence is way too long but it’s too late in the night for me to cut it properly, apologies, I hope I’m clear enough.
So if I follow through this example, it’s either as you say a quality lost by conversion, and atheism exist in flavors where it’s a conversion, or it’s a kind of community intersubjectivism (intersubjectivity? hegelian terms are hard for me translate in english) where every part mutually recognize that they belong to it (on one side the individual, on the other side a sufficient wide group that can take the name of community). In this latter case, a common heritage, even if cut by centuries, suffices to justify a claim to identity, but that would also give some weight to the thesis that it is a social construct and therefore can be deconstructed (for example a part of radical atheism fights against not only belief, but any social structure that comes out of it, be it a community, a tradition or vague sense of common belonging beyond being human). I shall go re read the jewish early anarchists (Landauer, Lazare, Buber….) on the subject.
Replying to myself: there might other examples with sovietized jews. Just read a autobiographic novel by Polina Panassenko (not in english) which is about how here grandmother was called Pessah but was forced in antisemitic USSR to change for Polina, and how she Polina was renamed Pauline by french state in the same assimilationist movement. The novel tells her story of trying to get her name Polina back, in homage to her grandmother, but not in order to claim her jewish identity but her russian identity that in her story are somehow disconnected – it felt strange that beside the names nothing about judaity is evoked while there being more things about feeling russian. Maybe there will be a second novel exploring this side.
Judaism is totally out of my scope of information, but in my neck of the woods there are two ways to teach religion: the academic / neutral way (this is what people believe in, this is what they do, here’s a text that shows this and that) and “belief” way (We believe in God, the Father almighty, it’s all true because it’s in Bible, etc). The “belief” way was previously the prevalent way to teach religion, but it is now – in my neck, that is – forbidden. The schools should teach religion as any other subject, or as any other historical or comparative contemporary religion – students need to learn the theory but do not need to believe in it or follow it. I’m under impression that they should also teach about more than one religion nowadays, too.
Still, the country I live in is a Lutheran country. Last I checked, 80% of people were members of a Lutheran congregation, but less than 10% participated in any other service than baptisms, confirmations, weddings and funerals. The traditions still live on: the language is full of sayings and idioms with background in religious writings and teachings and the people celebrate originally Christian holidays like Christmas (though now with elves) and Easter (though now with chicks).
And as for Jews I would suppose that so much more of the tradition comes from the religion that it’s very hard (if not impossible) to totally separate them. It has always been the case everywhere – for example the Islam is full of rules and traditions that come from the traditions of the people of that time and place and not from the religious teachings, now having become so tangled that they cannot be separated. People either can’t tell them apart or at least may follow some of the religious traditions and rules just like my father – because his family did, it’s a thing to do, as in: funerals are done in a church, confirmation is an important thing .. even if these things don’t really have any actual spiritual meaning to him – or maybe anyone else around, either.
Dorothy probably wouldn’t consider herself religiously Jewish, since she wasn’t raised Jewishly and she doesn’t normally participate in any Jewish practices/traditions/rituals/community/etc.
Dorothy seems to identify mainly as an Atheist with some Jewish heritage.
Technically, if Dorothy’s father’s mother was Jewish, she isn’t. Judaism descends through the female line. Thus, since my mother’s mother’s mother was Jewish (says my sister, because great-grandmother had a big nose), then I am (would be), technically a Jew.
And in Israel, religious assholes have made it impossible to get married as a Jew unless you can prove you are a Jew by this female-descent-only rule*, which can be difficult with a lot of family histories there. And secular marriage is not a thing in Israel. (The workaround is to take a day trip to Cyprus and get a secular marriage there, which is then valid in Israel.)
* Or have converted to a strict Orthodox Jew.
Islam is also pretty full-on on the “religion = belief” thing. Cultural-but-not-practicing Muslims exist, mostly because it’s a pain and a half to convert out (especially if you come from a Muslim country), but due to this most of us are kinda stealthy about it.
The emphasis on Literal Actual Belief is not even a Christian but specifically Protestant Evangelical innovation. When Muslims adhere to that, it’s because they’re mimicking the strands of Evangelicalism that were influential in colonial India. It’s a modern way of viewing the religion, period, and most Muslim institutions, whether founded before, during, or after the Indian colonial period, won’t make any sense read through it.
I’m not sure I buy that, though I don’t know that much about Islamic practice.
Colonial India is/was only a very small part of Islam, so I’d be surprised if it had much effect outside of Indian/Pakistani Muslims and I don’t think the emphasis on belief is limited to there.
Also, while Protestant Evangelicism has its own twist on the importance of belief, faith in Jesus being key to being right with God goes all the way back to the beginnings.
Colonial India laid the foundations of all modern Indian intellectualism. Only Egypt even holds a candle to it. The actual intellectual movements that are the foundation of modern Islamic thought originated there.
Also, I don’t know where you get “very small”. Aside from historically being a major intellectual centre for the Islamic world even before colonial times, over a third of the world’s Muslim population lives in India, Pakistan, or Bangladesh, all concentrated into a fairly small area. While the French areas of the Islamic world were being brutalised and tortured, colonial India had a reasonably well-off Muslim middle or even upper class that spent those centuries revolutionising Islamic intellectual tradition with the broad support of the population, which owed this to the favour that they’d curried with the British and with British Evangelicals, in part because those intellectual revolutions brought Islam into closer tandem with the British system of religiosity. Even Egypt, itself a historical religious centre, owes most its influence to the communications that existed between its own intellectuals and Indian intellectuals, which were so extensive as to constitute a milieu in themselves. From Egypt and its historic religious universities these new ideas spread throughout the Arab world.
Other countries, like Iran and Saudi, do have influence, but these influences are more due to political muscle than to intellectual tradition. Throughout Asia, countries like Afghanistan trace their most powerful Muslim movements directly to colonial India.
This isn’t just true for Muslims, either. It’s been seriously argued that the modern conception of what “a religion” even is came straight out of colonial India. Stuff like the 1893 Parliament of World Religions, where these ideas were set in stone, growing off decades and centuries of study of eastern religious systems by hucksters and academics alike. It was an extremely wide-ranging historical process with major consequences for everybody.
I do not buy for one fraction of a second that Protestant Evangelical Christians invented that literal belief is required. I think a lot of people today are raised in [broadly] secular societies, where religious communities have to choose between accepting non-believers and dwindling. And they’re projecting relatively recent developments onto the distant past.
You going to explain how Evangelical Protestants influenced the writing of the Avesta?
I can write how they influenced your interpretation of it, certainly.
Even your recourse to (your interpretation of) the literal (translation of) scripture is about the most Protestant words ever put to page.
living in a Christian hegenomy means non-Christians echo Christian dogma while accusing me of being a crypto-Christian because I don’t believe Christian claims. You can shove your non-falsifiable nonsense where the creationists can shove theirs.
Also, whereas the main point of Christianity is seeking salvation, the main point of Islam is obeying god. You don’t get much slack, either. Disobedience can be forgiven once. After that, you’re buggered. You’ll be sitting on a hot rock while Iblis pours boiling water over you. (I put in the hot rock.)
If you’re worried about Iblis, I’m pretty sure a prophecy states that he’ll be defeated by three golden Erinaceus europaeus.
I certainly don’t worry about entities I don’t believe exist.
If you read literature that comes out countries with an islamic tradition, you’ll find quite easily a whole part of it that deals with islam as a background, a tradition (and a basis for secular law) and very little belief or faith behind the obvious interjections.
Prior to the colonial-era emphasis on historical fact in understanding the past, it wasn’t even really possible to argue that “faith”, in the modern sense of accepting counterfactual claims, is a, or the most important, measure of religiosity. As an idea it’s so obviously socially corrosive anyway that I don’t think it can be charitably assumed of social groups that are understood to be in possession of the capacity to reason. It’s not only ahistorical but also racist.
I’m not sure you’re wrong, but I’m not sure you’re right. I seem to recall some things from the Ubayd Allâh al-Mahdî time (with the seventh pillar of faith), and also some poetry after that, but that may well be more political that really religious.
no it’s not. For example, Zoroastrianism has a belief based creed. I understand why Christians believe Christianity is different from other religions, I don’t understand why non-Christians believe that.
Because we understand our own religions and when a Christian foreigner (or a foreigner who understands Christianity intimately and our own traditions not at all; functionally a Christian and no less chauvanistic than the fiercest missinary) comes along and tells us our religions are the same, as they’ve been doing since the early 19th century, we know that not only is that true, but that it’s a modern conception of religion based in colonial-era hucksterism.
not only is that not true*
love it when someone accuses me of being functionally a Christian missionary because I pointed out a religion that predates Christianity by hundreds of years does something that Christians falsely claim they originated.
Someone can consider themselves both, like Joe himself is Jewish and still an atheist.
In any case, I doubt Joe really cares about keeping from working on the Sabbath, keeping kosher, etc, since he’s not really practicing, but he definitely still identifies as Jewish and has made a lot of jokes on the subject, usually at the expense of evangelical Christians.
I was just reading one of the books today and Joe says he eats bacon.
I don’t think Joe has identified as atheist, though he’s obviously not practicing a particularly strict form of Judaism.
More like plenty of Christians who aren’t atheist, but also don’t go to church except for special occasion.
People who no longer believe in the religion they were raised in might still follow some traditions out of habit. In this case it almost sounds like a half serious explanation for just doing nothing all day.
(Oh, did new avatar day happen? I guess I haven’t commented in a while.)
Or because traditional rituals are cool.
One can be ethnically/culturally Jewish without believing in the religion.
Ethnically I’m mostly Mizrahi myself, but I’m an agnostic atheist who partake very little of Jewish culture, if any.
Do you at least honor Bette Midler and Barbara Streisand those are the most important tenants. Joking aside i am agnostic Sephardic Jew but I do celebrate the festivals and spend the holidays with families and also honor Bette and Babs 😉
I don’t know who those are so no. The closest I ever get to “celebrating” is introvertedly enjoying sweet wine and food my relatives send me every passover XD
You’ve seriously never crossed paths with the iconic talents of Barbara Streisand or Bette Midler? Well, they’re not just ordinary performers; they’re singing and acting dynamos with Jewish heritage! It’s like a classic comedy sketch from the ’90s, a bit like “The Nanny,” where they playfully highlight the significance of these two incredible artists. Now, Bette Midler may have bewitched you in “Hocus Pocus,” but if you ask me, her true gems are in “The Rose” and “The First Wives Club.” As for Barbara, she’s shone brightly in “A Star is Born” (the 1978 version), mesmerized us in “Yentl,” and sprinkled a little “Hello, Dolly!” magic. So, if you’re looking for top-tier entertainment, these two leading ladies are the ones to watch! 🌟
Oh yeah!!! Thanks for reminding me, might as well watch Hocus Pocus tonight too, love that film!!!
But yeah I usually don’t keep track of actress names and what in popular media, mostly code and stuff in my brain these days XD
Streisand’s cultural impact is also noteworthy in the naming of the Streisand effect, and for those on the younger millenial/older gen Z side who experienced the fever dream that was the early 2010s the name may call forth the echoes of memories of this song, which was everywhere for a hot minute and I’ve no doubt responsible for many google quests to find out who this Barbra Streisand character could be.
“Like buttah!”
Well today I learned that there are Mizrahi Jews. I’m Ashkenazi Jewish myself but I only knew about Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews.
The only thing I remember is that her parents wanted her to make her own decisions without dogma, and they took the option of atheism.
She is both atheist (not a religion, not a proper noun, not capitalized) and generally irreligious (which is not the same thing as atheist). She has some exposure to Jewish tradition through her father’s mother (I think). We have not been shown how much.
A person can be openly atheist and still Jewish, it’s not like Christianity, Islam, or Zoroastrianism, where if an adherent is an atheist, they keep it quiet.
I didn’t have the sense to keep it quiet. I was 14 when I became (not “chose to be,” as Christians would have it) an atheist. Soon, everyone in school knew. This was extra dumb, seeing as how I was in West Virginia. Which, actually, wasn’t the worst place. I was a well-grown man before anyone tried to get up a mob action against me. Fortunately, my big buddy Dave was there both times it happened, and a “That’s enough” settled things down immediately.
Jewish is both a religion and an ethnicity, and it is possible to be one without being the other.
Man that was a subtle hint by Dorothy to Joyce that something’s not okay if she’s not working on a Sunday, but Joyce is too stuck in ‘oh man I have a BOYFRIEND now everything shall now be about my BOYFRIEND’ mode.
It’s Saturday!
even dorothy’s taking time off before to spend time with other stuff, it’d only be a warning sign to joyce if it had been like “dorothy hasn’t shown up to the last 3 classes we have together”
If “I spent a whole day, my culture’s traditional day of rest, not working” is a sign you’re not okay, the actual sign you’re not okay was several steps ago.
Which is true, but I don’t blame Joyce for not picking up that “Dorothy took a brief break from her workaholic tendencies” is a flag.
Except it’s not really “her culture’s traditional day of rest” as far we know. One of her grandparent’s was Jewish. There’s no reason to think she was raised in a tradition of keeping the Sabbath.
She’s making a joke referencing it, that’s all.
Interesting point. I was just reading it as Dorothy hiding her mental health day/problems from Joyce, with maybe a side benefit of appealing to another “rule” to quiet the bad head voices.
I think it’s about 50% “everything must be about my boyfriend” and 50% “if something someone does seems weird it must actually be a result of my ex-Fundamentalist bias”. It’s the same attitude that made her forcefully restrain herself from questioning Booster about they/them pronouns when they first met! And in that case, it was a very good thing she did that! Here, though, it seems to be a very maladaptive trait.
I mean, this is expressly why Yom Kippur exists.
And mikvahs (mikvot? I was never terribly good at knowing how to make Hebrew nouns plural), now that I think about it.
Mikva-ot, it turns out!
ot if it’s femine, im if masculine
Let they who are with sin cast all the stones. (Into the water.)
“Shrug” is about the most Jewish thing Dorothy has said on screen.
Yeah, David nailed it in those last two panels.
oh
oh no
Joyce is absolutely the sort of person who learned everything she “knows” about Judaism from fundie Sunday School classes about Old Testament Judaism
Yeah tends to be a trend among certain Christan denominations that Judaism hasn’t changed since the 1st century.
Everything I know about Judaism comes from Rugrats and a How to Train Your Dragon fanfic.
Same, except replace “a How to Train Your Dragon fanfic” with “the days B&H Photo and Video is closed”. (They observe all the holidays.)
For me it was mostly Harry Kemelman’s _[Day of Week] the Rabbi [Did Something]_ novels.
Tuesday, the Rabbi Graced Your Village
It’s actually Tuesday the Rabbi Saw Red but you’ve got the idea. Good mysteries, I should re-read them.
Always good to get your information from people who are specifically organized around being a replacement. Judaism through the lens of Christianity is those black and white “before” segments in an infomercial.
She was. She now bases her opinions on the assumption that everything she was told in those classes is a lie. There’s a Paetron strip where she tells Agatha she googled Mormonism to learn what they actually believe. I assume she did something similar with Judaism, especially if she’s dating Joe.
There’s still going to be some bumps in the road, because you can’t clear your mind of everything you were taught that easily (the way she phrased it to Agatha was “most of the silly stuff I heard about Mormons, you guys claimed you stopped believing”) but it’s not that bad.
What second temple, what happened to the first one, why is the second one destroyed, is Dorothy the one destroying it, is it already destroyed, why does she need to be ritualistically cleansed, and why is Joyce even asking about this in the first place?
First one destroyed by the Babylonians restored under the Persian Empire second one destroyed by the Roman’s Judaism became book based religion instead of a temple cult. Jews purify themselves with mikveh baths though not really practiced much by Reform and Conservative Jews.
Had to look up what a mikveh bath is, since this is the first time I’ve ever seen that word. Seems like they’ve gotta be made under pretty specific conditions.
“Judaism became book based religion”
Hardly. We are a *scroll* based religion, thank you very much.
“The Second Temple replaced Solomon’s Temple, which is presumed to have been built at the same location before its destruction by the Babylonians c. 587 BCE.”
“In 70 CE, at the height of the First Jewish–Roman War, the Second Temple was destroyed by the Roman army led by Titus during the siege of Jerusalem. The destruction of the Second Temple was a cataclysmic and transformative point in Jewish history, and led to the development of Rabbinic Judaism as the primary form of religious practice among Jews worldwide.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Temple
Not to be insensitive, but that’s a pretty fucked up thing for the Romans to do.
The Roman’s have done alot of fucked up things if where being honest.
A state doesn’t become an empire without doing some deeply fucked up evil shit.
I’m from Illinois, ya don’t gotta tell me that.
The Romans weren’t big on rebellion. And they were big on ‘capturing’ or ‘enticing’ other people’s gods to defect to them.
The surviving population of Jerusalem was probably sold off into slavery.
I mean, yeah. One can do a pretty plausible trace of most modern antisemitism back to Roman laws and deliberately systemic Jew-hate after they destroyed the 2nd temple (in response to, yes, numerous rebellions in Judea, which in turn were in response to the Romans banning practice or study of Judaism, which in turn was in response to, well, more rebellions. And there’s probably more details I’ve never studied; suffice to say that Rome’s rule over Judea started out with henothesticially making Israel a singular exception to “everyone has to worship the emperor” laws and ended with banning Judiasm and enslaving most Jews).
Which is why, much as I love the Pythons, I cannot sit through That Scene in Life of Brian any more. And yet it’s the favourite scene of clip shows.
When did the Romans ban the study or practice of Judaism, before Hadrian? That was the Seleucids (which led to the Maccabean Revolt and Chanukah). There were tensions over Judea being a vassal state and the religious issues that came with being a monotheistic religion in a polytheistic empire, but no outright bans on Jewish religious practice. Not till after Bar Kokhba in 135.
Romans destroyed it, as part of Nero’s persecution. the first temple, if it existed, was destroyed by some iron age civilization, Babylonians probably, but I forget exactly.
Joyce is asking because of Christian fanfic understanding of Judaism.
The emperor at the time of the destruction was Vespasian and it was destroyed by is som future emperor Titus, both of the Flavian Dynasty but the war started during reign of Nero who died before the destruction of the second temple. Also the war took place during g the collapse of Julio-Claudian Dynasty and the chaotic year of the four emperors.
I was being brief. Nero’s the one who initiated it, and the most recognizable name.
Incidentally, a lot of the Christian doomsday nonsense is because the Christians at that time thought Nero was going to come back to life and so a John made up Revelation to criticize Nero, the Empire, and fantasize overthrowing them. And since it didn’t happen, it must be about to happen today, because the Bible containing bunk is unthinkable.
The fascinating thing to me is that my religious denomination growing up taught us that Revelation was CLEARLY using a lot metaphorical apocalyptical language, and all the people interpreting it to try to get actual information about a rapture or millennialism were clearly misled. But then they insisted it definitely was still about the actual end of the world, and never once mentioned any of the obvious metaphorical language clearly put in criticizing Rome. Guess some of things it is saying then are too close to the Bible being wrong for inerrantists to accept that interpretation?
First temple: Solomon’s temple. Destroyed by the Babylonians in 587 BCE.
Second temple: Herod’s temple, built about 70ish years after the first one was destroyed. Destroyed in 70 CE by the Romans and its destruction is generally considered the start of both the Jewish diaspora and rabbinic Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism is how Judaism is practiced today, in contrast to how it was practiced during the time of the temples.
Since Joe did work on Shabbat (i.e. Saturday), which is one of the things you’re forbidden to do on the day of rest, Joyce is course correcting a bit too hard to take Joe’s potential beliefs into consideration. Which is both sweet and silly, as Joe is highly secular and has probably never kept the Sabbath in his life.
Alright, I guess that’s all my questions answered. I got no useful knowledge about religion, so a lot of this crap goes over my head.
Ok to answer the question how Jews purify themselves is Mikveh baths. On the other hand Joyce’s reaction seems to be the reaction of alot of Fundmentalist who assume that Judaism has not evolved since the 1st century CE even the evolution from the temple based cult to a book based religion of Rabbanic Judaism has evolved there are even seperate Jewish beliefs that reject Rabbanic Judaism such Karraitism. It annoys me when fundamentalist are suprised that Judaism has changed since the destruction of the second temple or that the largest Jewish denomination is reform Judaism and that it’s one of the most progressive religions.
Even some who understand the basic concept of Rabbinic Judaism think that it’s only kind of a workaround for the lack of a temple and that now that Jews control Israel again they’ll obviously rebuild the Temple and go back being proper Jews.
Conveniently setting the stage to fulfill a bunch of misinterpretations of apocalyptic passages in the Bible and bring about the end of the world.
i have the weirdest sense now that Joyce’s dad was Jewish at some point.
It’s absolutely not true but kind of interesting that the rituals she most knows about are not the Protestant Christian ones.
Remember, Joyce has essentially memorized the bible front to back. That includes the old testament which is what Judaism is.
The Old Testament is not Judaism because calling it the Old Testament requires a Christian viewpoint of there being a New Testament. Also things are in a different order (for example all those psalms about the Messiah are much more important in Christianity so they’re given better placement, while in the Tanakh they’re just a “has to go somewhere” afterthought) and translations can really twist some things around. And it presupposes that Judaism just stopped, when we’ve got all sorts of Talmud and Talmud-adjacent stuff as well.
Did you know the Bible is actually a trilogy and the Book of Mormon is Return of the Jedi? So awesome!
Actually, as a late addition of dubious quality it’s more like The Rise of Skywalker.
I mean there’s a lot of sequels people have done but plenty of reboots.
And as expected, the “Purists” are the most annoying obnoxious fans.
“War God Of Israel”
and
“The Thing With Three Souls”
Ironically, sorting through some old papers isn’t forbidden on Shabbat (unless you get paid to do it). Buuuuut boiling macaroni is, so Dotty is the one who isn’t actually observing the Sabbath in the strictly traditional sense, not Joe.
(Its still a good idea for to pick one day to stop working, the ritual gives it enough weight and rhythmic consistency to actually stick to it)
Meant to type “a good idea for her”
Sorting papers is forbidden on Shabbos. (https://halachipedia.com/index.php?title=Borer#cite_ref-81)
But the technical definitions of “work” with regard to the Sabbath are something even most Orthodox Jews don’t know without having made a special study of the subject.
Sorting is definitely forbidden for Jews on Shabbos. Borer (sorting) is one of the 39 categories of work prohibited on Shabbos.
I’m pretty sure sorting is prohibited. Not that Joe cares, obviously.
i think that’s only if a tool is involved? I think sorting through papers is still fine, but I’m not orthodox or a rabbi so idk, definitely in “Ask Your Rabbi” territory
That’s a good point, I’m not sure. In that case, we’d be talking about a verrry strict interpretation, too arcane for me
Hmm this reminds me an anecdote I heard as a kid. About some Jewish guy who wanted to bypass the Sabbath by driving a car while keeping his feet in a bowl of water? I don’t know how much… water this story holds though.
A day off working is a good idea. The extents to which some of the more traditional bans go is not though. And getting into the hair-splitting arguments like Da Boy describes is just absurd.
Some of the steps the more traditional jewish people go through to avoid “working” on the Sabbath is really quite remarkable… Things like:
– using a push-button telephone is somehow disallowed, but someone invented a special phone that cycles through the 10-digits and you ‘dial’ by somehow interrupting the pattern to dial a number
– Pushing someone on a wheelchair or using an electric-powered wheelchair is somehow forbidden, so they invented one that works on compressed air
My favorite one is the Shabbat elevator that automatically go up and down, from floor to floor, so that you don’t have to press a button.
There’s a lamp you can effectively “turn on and off” in that its encased in a swiveling cylinder with a window that’s only exposed in the on position, just remember to actually turn it on before sundown.
Doesn’t the boiling of macaroni depend on whether electricity is fire? Assuming they’re using a hot plate.
(From an anecdote related by Richard Feynman, who was delighted when orthodox Jews whose convention was in the same convention as the one he was attending, asked him physics questions. Then he found out the reason for the questions)
Not necessarily. There are actually two formal Sabbath prohibitions getting conflated here: one a prohibition on “kindling fire”, and a separate prohibition on “cooking”. They’re obviously connected, as cooking is often done with fire, but they are separate – like, you can obviously light a fire without cooking (e.g., lighting a candle for light).
Whether electricity is fire might be a factor in whether using electricity itself (including using, like, an electric fan) is a violation of the Sabbath prohibition on “kindling fire”, but even if you decide electricity does not violate the prohibition on “kindling fire”, there’s still a separate prohibition on “cooking” that can be violated, even with something that may not be quite technical fire.
Fun fact: while a lot of cultures have developed slow-cooking in some form or another, the electric Crockpot was invented because of this.
That tracks with a lot of the Jewish people I follow, yeah. That or the mikveh but that’s probably too religious for Dorothy.
Shit, right, forgot to do the search for Sal.
following the destruction of the 2nd temple… err.. is… that what you kids call it these days ?
I’m gonna enter your Arch of Titus
I’m makin this oil last 8 DAYS baby
*slow clap*
“We’ve had one temple, yes. What about second temple?”
If anyone is curious as to how Jews repent, I present “The Laws of Repentance”, from Maimonides’ Code of Jewish Law.
https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Repentance.1?lang=en
I kind of wish I could see Joyce’s reaction to reading it.
Take a drink every time somebody has to correct somebody else about Judaism.
I mean it is Halloween, valid a time as any for a drinking game for those who wanna :p
You mean Irish Purim?
No we will all die.
The best resolution for this, I think, is the same way my old girlfriend (who also practiced Judaism) described herself. She told me once, “I am Jew-ish.” As a kinda-Catholic, I could accept that.
Darned page wrap!
It was suppose to read “Jew – ish”, as in “sorta like devout Jew at times”.
You have your significant other(s) lick you clean.
“What do you mean, my temples are still fine”
How long did Joyce look down, that immediate smile gave me the heebies AND the jeebies
Pick the lock of your friends room to watch them sleep?
Wait, I thought Dorothy was raised in a catholic family and was herself atheist. Why is Joyce assuming that Dorothy as par of the “folks”? Sure it’s less frequent for Christian to use the word sabbath than Jewish people, but that term still come in handy when you have to refer to a reason to do nothing for religious reason in a single word…
Well, it is Saturday and she has talked about being part Jewish, so it makes sense that Joyce’s mind goes there.
IIRC, one of her grandparents was Jewish and the other 3 were Catholic, so she was exposed to both, but her parents raised her without any religion. Gave her the choice when she was old enough, but didn’t practice either as a family.
Thanks, I had forgotten that one of her grandparents was Jewish.
I think it involves beating a chicken to death? I’m not too sure about the details
Joyce would be a great girlfriend to basically anyone.
sure she has some things to get over and some habits to break, but she really cares about joe, like, Really cares.
One of the best advice regarding dating and partners my mother ever gave me was “If you’re important to them, they will MAKE time for you.” Obviously you don’t abuse this, but I’ve found that advice to be a really, really good marker for whether somebody truly cares about you or not.
Joyce, Dotty is an Atheist, remember?
huh, this might Dotty’s way of cleansing herself right now. Just hanging out with Joyce after having a downward spiral.
Friendship Is Magic
Dorothy forgot Yom Kippur?
i’m guessing her parents never had her interact with Judaism at all tbh cause otherwise yeah that’s a big forget
Per her father’s words, she was raised a religiously. I can only imagine her parents practiced in private and only talked about it to her when she asked.
https://www.dumbingofage.com/2013/comic/book-3/04-just-hangin-out-with-my-family/areligious/
Did I really put a space there? I’ve got autocorrect turned off. *areligiously
Honestly, I assume her parents were pretty areligious themselves. She describes it a little more at one point and it’s in terms of her grandparents being a mix of Jewish and Catholic, not her parents.
So wait, she *is* Jewish. I thought she was just being silly about the Sabbath the other day.
She’s definitely not orthodox Jewish because she was just drinking alcohol the other night. I know that’s forbidden. Also I don’t think most college campuses have a Kosher menu option
Orthodox Jews absolutely drink alcohol, who said they don’t?
I didn’t think Orthodox Jews minded alcohol, except wine?
(Except that sickly sweet stuff.)
No Orthodox Jews definitely drink wine. There’s an entire blessing that’s really important called Kiddush that involves blessing and then drinking wine. Orthodox Jews will, however, not drink wine made by non-Jews cause of Halacha (Jewish Law). There’s a blessing for every day as well that translates to “Blessed are you G-d, King of the world/universe, who creates fruit of the vine” that’s said before drinking wine or grape juice
Yeah, I guess I should’ve said “gentiles’ wine.” By “that sickly sweet stuff” I meant kosher wine – I don’t know if it’s all sweet, but the two brands I know, Manischewitz and Mad Dog, are. Although I am a gentile.
There are kosher wines that taste much better than Manischewitz (although I don’t personally think they’re the ABSOLUTE best, which makes sense seeing as there’s far fewer kosher wines made than the non-kosher stuff). Manischewitz wine is the relatively inexpensive and convenient way to meet the letter of the law, especially if you live somewhere where the good stuff is harder to come by. Also EVERY Jewish holiday and ritual involves wine, including every single sabbath, so being able to use a big bottle of Manischewitz (or Kedem grape juice) for that makes practical sense.
Hmm interesting. Because I lived in an orthodox Jewish community growing up (my family was not among them) and I once asked one of my closest friends who happened to be Orthodox Jewish if his family ever drank during Yom Kippur, and he said it was against his particular sect to drink on that date.
I mean you don’t drink anything on Yom Kippur, including water. I’m not familiar with any Jewish sect that keeps the fast while considering drinking fluids as not breaking said fast.
She’s 1/4 Jewish, non-prafticing but knows the shape of it. It was silly in the same way that non-prafticing people from a Catholic background might talk about giving things up for Lent.
(Also, to Hell with the so-called “Good Emperor.”)
the only good emperor 🐧
it’s amazing how important some of these things are to some people
Yeah, it’s all pretty neat to read about from individual people, even if it’s confusing and alien-sounding a lot of the time. As an outsider to basically every religious culture, it’s easy to dismiss it all out of hand sometimes, but knowing that little bit more about the people we’re sharing a planet with, it can’t be a bad thing.
Panel 5 Joyce asks the most intelligent-sounding question she has ever asked about someone else’s culture…but I’m having trouble believing that she both knows that there were ritualistic ramifications to the 2nd Temple’s destruction, and also doesn’t know what they are.
Knowledge of Jewish culture is only important insofar as it pertains to prophecies about Jesus, don’cha know
That part feels autobiographical. It’s a very Christian level of knowledge.
As a prior fundamentalist, I can say that was about exactly my level of understanding of the topic. The 2nd Temple’s destruction is important to Christianity since it happened around Jesus time, you know about the fact that it has ritualistic implications because you learn about the old “correct” form of Judaism and the fact Jews can’t do that any more proves they are obviously wrong about God, and therefore no more information is required beyond that.
There’s no way to deal with corpse impurity without a temple sacrifice of a red heifer, so we basically all have this kind of impurity. Very observant (“frum”) Koens avoid corpses and cemeteries and museums with dead bodies in them, and some London Underground entrances that are built into museums containing corpses, etc.
This is not because there’s an idea that they would somehow remain free of this impurity, but because the Torah commanded that they minimize exposure to it.
Evangelical Christians are obsessed with red heifers for reasons that are unclear to me, but I suspect stems from their idea that they wish to end all human life on earth as a religious imperative. This is probably why Joyce asked about it. There are apparently Christian Texans trying to breed unblemished ref heifers in order to rebuild the temple. I, uh, wish they wouldn’t.
Judaism is a practice than can optionally include belief. There are atheists who are very religious because they find value in the practice. And, of course, the inverse also exists. I think keeping the sabbath is a very good practice for avoiding burnout. Especially for people like students, artists, and academics who might otherwise work every day of the week.
I wonder if, inside Judaism, dating is considered a kind of job in Shabbat…
If so, Joyce is screwed, because christians rest on Sundays. ahahah
I don’t know about actual dating, but euphemistic dating is called the “Sabbath blessing” and encouraged as long as everyone’s properly married and such.
She isn’t Christian anymore.
No way!
well, considering the fact that hanky-panky on the sabbath is a mitzvah, i don’t think that g-d considers dating work ;p
i used to live in an area with a large orthodox jewish community. when i would go grocery shopping on fridays i would see them all there also shopping and think to myself “ooh, big party this weekend?” and then i’d get home and put my groceries away and go “oh yea.”
jewish orthodox community ?
Did she just say the word shrug? Lol!
Yes. She’s not saying the emoji, she’s answering Joyce’s question. It’s the answer to what do atheists (“you people”) do to cleanse themselves. Does Joyce think Dorothy is jewish? *Is* Dorothy of jewish descent?
As for cleansing for the destruction of the second temple, a shrug works. Or not noticing.
Panel one Dorothy is too committed to it not mattering to just give in to temptation and say “If you need to know that badly put your hand in there and check.”
Yeah, that’s the same reason I never get any.
HAPPY HALLOWEEN EVERYONE!
😋 🎃 👻 🕸️ 🍭 🍫🌕 🌌
That’s the spirit!!! ^_^
*plays “Bonetrousle” by Toby Fox on hacked muzak*
Followed by:
“Outside Merlee’s Mansion” by Naoko Mitome (Super Paper Mario),
“Moongrains” by Laura Shigihara (PVZ),
“Swamp-Lands” by WaterFlame (Castle Crashers),
“Thriller” by Michael Jackson,
And last but not least…
“This Is Halloween” by Tim Burton (The Nightmare Before Christmas)
Followed by:
“Outside Merlee’s Mansion” by Naoko Mitome (Super Paper Mario),
“Moongrains” by Laura Shigihara (PVZ),
“Swamp-Lands” by WaterFlame (Castle Crashers),
And last but not least…
“This Is Halloween” by Tim Burton (The Nightmare Before Christmas)