journaalfeuilletontussenhiero&daro/toen/nu&straks!

The Christian proposes a lenient reading of the verse that prohibits the taking
of the earnings of a prostitute to the Temple
{Niets Nieuws Onder De Zon!}:
although such earnings are forbidden for holy purposes,
for mundane and even lowly purposes like the building of a toilet for the high priest,
they are permitted
...

The Christian proposes a typical midrashic justification for this conclusion, as well!

Rabbi Eli'ezer "enjoys" this utterance, perhaps, for two reasons.
First of all, there is the sheer intellectual pleasure of a clever midrashic reading, one that, I {DB} empha-size, is in method identical to "kosher" midrash [it is difficult to see why this 'halakhic midrash' is referred to as a 'sectarian saying'!], and second, the result of this midrash would be increased funding for the Temple? The Rabbi however, is punished for this enjoyment by the humiliation and fright of being arrested by the Romans for being a Christian, an outcome from which he just barely escapes.

The analogy seems clear: just as one may not take the hire of a prostitute for any purpose connected with holiness, so one may not take the "Torah" of a heretic for any purpose connected with holiness.

Although the substance of the words of Torah seem identical - just as the money itself is identical - the source in "impurity" renders them unfit for holiness and renders their acceptance punishable.

Sectarianism is homologous with prostitution - as it is also frequently enough in early Christian writings, as well!

Moreover, the seductiveness of the heretical interpretation matches formally what its content encodes, for there, also, the temptation is to make use for holy purposes of what originates in impurity, the harlot's wage.

When Rabbi Eli'ezer indicts himself for having violated the precept
"Keep her ways far away from you!"
both of these moments are comprehended.

[Vergelijk het maar met de huidige discussies tussen diverse soorten mensen die zich christenen noemen
over homo's & lesbo's in het ambt, op de preekstoel & aan het avondmaal, same sex marriages & rollen-spel in het onderwijs, pedofilie & pedosexualiteit, ongehuwd zwanger zijn, in vitro fertilisatie & euthanasie!]

There is more that can be said about this story, however, for there is evidence that the question of the use of a harlot's hire for the purpose of charity was a living question among the Christians who inhabited
the Holy Land, or at any rate, its desert hinterland.

[These were men and women who spoke Coptic and Aramaic, just like the Rabbis and their "flocks,"
NOT Greek:
"It is essential to remember, moreover, that Christianity in Byzantine Palestine,
despite its heavy Greek patina, remained a Semitic culture:
the language of the towns and villages was Aramaic!"

Concerning Porphyrius of Gaza:
it should be emphasized that
GAZA
itself was apparently the center of the collection and editing of the
Apophtegmeta Patrum
literature!
The use of the term
"ABBA"
for the desert fathers,
which surprises some, suggests early connections between Palestinian Aramaic ascetics and Copts!

There were other links between Palestinian and Egyptian monasticism at a very early date as well as contacts between the monks of gaza and of palestine: these connectiuons involved monks in Scythopolis,
within easy walking distance from the main centers of rabbinic activity in Tiberias and Sepphoris in these critical periods. It is thus entirely possible, as well as plausible, that themes found in the apothegms were
being discussed in the Christian environs of the Palestinian Rabbis, as well!

Given these definitions, the possibility of Christian origins for martyrology is, at least, intelligible: so I am
not sure that the historical claim of some for precedence can be maintained, nor am I sure that it can be refuted. Our argument with some in this case is not with respect to the historical validity of their chronolo-gical arguments, however, but with the model of historical relations between Christians and Jews, Christia-nity and Judaism, and Jews and Rome that it presupposes.

That model is based on the assumption of phenomenologically, socially, and culturally descrete communi-ties of Jews and Christians and of an absolute opposition between Judaism and Palestine on the one hand
and Christianity and the Greco-Roman world, on the other ...

Ik val in herhalingen: je kunt 't nog 't best vergelijken met de huidige Joodse, Christelijke & Islamitische
sectarische groeperingen die herkenbaar aan hun klederdrachten, kleurstellingen, hoofddeksels, dogma's & meestal nogal extreem fanatieke volgelingen her en der in 't Nabije Midden Oosten en de rest van de wereld! Zoals Joden gedurende duizenden jaren rondzwierven tussen Zwarte Zee & Perzische Golf, aan de beide overs van de rivieren Eufraat & Tigris, Yardeen & Nilus, tussen Ararat & Sinai & al die andere zeeen &
oceanen en er van alles en nog wat oppikten en achterlieten aan religie, taal, cultuur, wetenschap & shit,
zo deden de Christenen {& Moslims} het in alle daarop volgende eeuwen nog een dunnetjes [of dik] over!

Men kopieerde elkaar heilige schriften mondeling, via boekrollen, perkament, papyrus, rituelen & allerlei praktijken:
"EEN G D",
'engelen', 'hemel', 'paradijs',
heilig & onheilig, koosjer & treife, halal & haram, goed
en slecht tot in de fijnste [& grofste] details, woordspelingen,
tempels, synagogen, kerken
& moskeeen!

WAAR kwamen en komen al die martelaars, heiligen & onheiligen, vrienden & vijanden vandaan?

WIE heeft "HET GELIJK" onder z'n hoede? WAT mag wel of juist niet, wat MOET & wat is verboden ...

Het is interessant om al die figuren her en der rond te zien dazen in hun eigenaardige klederdrachten &
hoogstmerkwaardige ideeen, gevoelens, gedachten en daden over alles wat [on]menselijk is, maar je kan
ze maar beter niet navolgen, gehoorzamen, aanbidden, op voetstukken zetten, er standbeelden van gaan maken. Laat staan er je babies, peuters en kleuters mee opvoeden om
OOK
'martelaar'
te worden voor de
'Grote Goede Zaak'!
Ze hadden allen hun eigen tijden, plaatsen, diensten & leuke eigenschappen & je
kunt daarvan leren hoe het [wel en/of niet] moet, kan & 'zal zijn'?
We kunnen er lering uit trekken!

Voor de rest moeten we
'het'
zelf leren doen!

Alleen of samen?

That's
the question
...

For now:
hastalapasta &
sayonara
...