For an enlarged, easier to read index click here . To "google search" this site, scroll to the bottom of this page. (This site is best viewed with "Firefox")

(Tips: F11 key enables full screen viewing & Ctrl-F to search the index)


ZIONISM / OATHS-----intro and summary

MODERATOR Posted - 05 May 2004 8:59
We are inundated with repeats of the same Zionist teachings almost daily, even though they have already been addressed all over the site. Please, before you submit any of the following positions, read the information that is already posted.

I am fully aware that in religious Zionist institutions, these teachings are taught over and over as if they are compelling. What they don't teach you is that all of the following have already been addressed - and rejected - by the Gedolim. The Zionists have compiled the hava aminas - the forethoughts - of the Gedolim, left out the conclusions and the reasons why those thoughts were dropped, and spread them around as if they thought of them as "responses" to the Torahs of the Gedolim.

So please, if you are planning on submitting any of the following discredited arguments, please be so kind as to read the material on the site first:

1) The Oaths are not binding because they are Agada not Halachah. The oaths are, in fact, Halacha, quoted by the poskim in several places, and applied by our Gedolim, including the Rambam himself, throughout our history in actual practice.

2) The Oaths are not applicable because of the Balfour declaration and /or the UN vote.

a) Not only are the Oaths binding according to the consensus of authorities, including the Ramban, even if the nations give permission, but

b) the Balfour declaration was misrepresented by the Zionists;

c) Israel was created against the will of the Arabs, who were the residents of the land at the time - the UN is not a Sanhedrin HaGadol that speaks for everyone. The fact is, Hanagnahs, Irguns, Stern Gangs and a War of Independence was waged in order to create Israel - which hardly constitutes a "peaceful ascent into the land", which is what would be needed to mitigate the Oaths even if we accept the premise;

d) even if we accept the Balfour declaration as "permission" to create a Medinah, what the Balfour declaration intended is not in fact what happened - instead of a peaceful coexistence with the Arabs, violence and bloodshed took place to create the Medinah. This covers the false accusation that Rav Meir Simcha of Dvinsk "agreed" that the creation of the State of Israel does not violate the Oaths.

3) The Oaths are no longer applicable because the Gentiles broke "their part of the deal", so we can break ours. The truth is there was no interdependent "deal" between us and the nations - all of the Oaths were made for our sake, not the sake of the nations. There was no mutual agreement, and so no reciprocity. This is the simplest Zionist falsification to dispute, since the Poskim and Gedolim who applied the Oaths throughout history, did so despite the fact that the gentiles violated theirs. The Gemora itself applies the Oaths to the Evil Empire of Bavel, which certainly violated the Oaths.

4) Our situation is comparable to Coresh's invitation of the Jews to return to Eretz Yisroel. The Ramban writes that only the Jews from Bavel returned per Coresh's invitation, because they had an explicit prophecy that the golus was ended. This constituted only about 1,500 Jews. The rest of the exiled Jews did not return, the Ramban says, because doing so would violate the Oaths.

Coresh, incidentally, was a Tzadik - that’s a quote from Chazal - as opposed to the Zionists who were heretics. The popular religious Zionist argument that "anyone can be G-d's messenger" as Coresh was, is simple sophistry.

NOTE: This forum is closed. It is here merely for "summary" and introductory purposes. If you want to respond to any of this, please see the places where they are discussed, READ THE PROOFS to these positions, and then and there, if you still have a comment, respond.

No comments: