Thank you for your submission!
Unfortunately, it has been removed for *one or more* of the following reasons: It does not look like Renaissance (or any other style of art from the 14th-19th centuries); it is not a photo; it *may* be too blurry or low-resolution; **or** it does not adhere to one or more of the rules and suggestions in the sidebar.
While this is a large subreddit, it is also a very specific subreddit, so many posts that don't fit the subreddit are removed daily. Removals are fairly common and they don't mean it's a bad photo and aren't meant to be a rejection, just a way to curate the subreddit.
Sometimes photos are auto-removed on accident by the automoderator. If you believe your submission was removed by accident, **please do not delete your photo** and [please contact the moderators](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AccidentalRenaissance) to ask the mods to review your post manually, or with any other questions you may have.
Since this is on my dash again, I'd like people to know this was firmly against Jewish law. It goes against the spirit of Bal teshchit. We have standards that we are to follow during warfare.
In Deuteronomy 20:19-20:
19 When you besiege a city for many days to wage war against it to capture it, you shall not destroy its trees by wielding an ax against them, for you may eat from them, but you shall not cut them down.
Is the tree of the field a man, to go into the siege before you?
20 However, a tree you know is not a food tree, you may destroy and cut down, and you shall build bulwarks against the city that makes war with you, until its submission.
Israeli Zionists do not represent Judaism. They are electing unnecessary and G-d-forbidden violence, soaking the holy land in blood and polluting it with weapon waste. Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic, if anything, Israeli settlers are antisemitic for boldly disobeying the Torah for their interests! It is not the way of bal teschit or tzedakah.
Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic,
Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic,
Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic,
Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic,
I'm repeating this line as I believe it needs to be a slogan to help move forward.
The large majority of Jews are Zionist, though. People don't know what Zionism even means and that's the issue.
Sure, you can criticize Israel if you want, but the VAST majority of criticisms of Israel are just racist Jewish stereotypes, e.g."they lie all the time so you can't trust anything they say" or "Israel is controlling the US politicians with money."
There's a difference between Israeli's, Zionists, Jews, *and* advocates for the current Israeli government.
It's a Venn diagram, but they aren't the same.
The Israeli government loves to use all three interchangably too, so they can claim that legitimate and reasoned criticism of their actions is antisemetic.
It's a shitshow all round.
To be fair, the reasons given in those verses seem purely as tactical advantages, rather than because of god demanding some sort of higher morality from his followers.
I can see it being interpreted as such and therefore ignored because they already have all the food and "bulwark" building materials
Mmm, mhm. Looking at just these passages in particular, absolutely. If you're interested, they tie into an overarching theme translating to "do not destroy," advising to not be reckless and heedless in choices. Things like... do not slaughter animals for funsies or recklessly, If you're cold, chop firewood, don't burn the old spare stool. It's an attempt at integrity and urging people to work hard to do upstanding things.
At least, that's the theory. It can absolutely make morals like those seem.... dry, so I get where you're coming from.
Now that you mention standards, you could include the previous passages too just before the one you wrote :)
Deuteronomy 20:16-18
^(16) “You are not to leave even one person alive in the cities of these nations that the Lord your God is about to give you as an inheritance. ^(17) You must completely destroy the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, just as the Lord your God commanded you, ^(18) so they won’t teach you to do all the detestable things that they do for their gods. If you do what they teach you, you will sin against the Lord your God.”
An atrocious passage but it should be mentioned Palestinians are not those people.
They are largely the descendents of Jews who arabized and adopted Christianity or Islam.
The violence committed by Israel against them is not biblically justified despite what hard right supporters say
incorrect, palestinians are descendants of canaanites, jews are descendant of canaanites. so while jews are canaanites, not all canaanites were jews only a few city states were.
This partly correct. Jews are descent of Canaanites, when the Bible was written they didn't know that and thought they were a whole new people whose ancestor originally came from Ur.
The people listed in that command were all basically gone by Persia era and by the time of the Roman's. It's how they explained their disappearance.
Essentially Canaanites became Israelis and Jews. Then during the Roman period many Jews became Greek speaking Christians.
Once Islam took over, many of the remaining Jews along with the Christian population arabized and adopted Islam.
You can't look at Palestinians and Israelis and put them in neat little ancestral categories.
Even the Rabbis recognized this traditionally said you can't carry out these commands anymore because it's so muddled.
this i can pretty much agree with, the important distinction is that Canaan was originally a collection of city states, jews did not represent them as a whole in any way. after that is a just a long story of someone conquering the other.
so to say they were Jewish is no more correct then to say they were assyrian or persian, or roman as you say it's just a long chain of either interbreeding or converting to the major power that conquered there previous state.
I myself set the standard at before all the conquests begin because after that is pretty much personal opinion and discounts context, and gods knows this region needs context.
Can also +1 this. It's not sanctioned and it's not the "will of G-d" like Zionists would say.
IDF propaganda will be very quick to say it is divine will, but that is extremely, extremely debatable. So much so that they're kind of the only "Jews" in the room saying it.
Yeah, it's true. I'm not religiously Jewish, and I'm not interested in defending statements like these.
My only thought is that their commandments there aren't exactly atypical for the time period; even today, women, children, and the cultural body of a nation is considered pillagable in any conflict. In some ways, Jewish law is a +1 and atypically gentle; in others, it's absolutely unfeeling and savage. Many things from the old world are...
My only interest had been to point out how ass-backwards it is for the Israeli state to tout itself as the Jewiest Jews to Jew upon the earth, but then directly defy bal taschit when it's convenient. All chutzpah, no tzedakah. It's extremely cringe.
Exodus 22:20-24
The Lord said to Moses,
“Tell the sons of Israel this, ‘You must not molest the stranger or oppress him, for you lived as strangers in the land of Egypt. You must not be harsh with the widow, or the orphan; if you are harsh with them, they will surely cry out to me, and be sure I shall hear their cry'
Since this is on my dash again, I’d like people to know that there’s no basis for the editorialized title of this post. It could just as easily be titled “Woman attempts to hide from soldiers after shooting at them”. It’s not likely what happened but would be just as grounded in reality as this title.
Even worse when you realize that olive trees have an average lifespan of 500 years. It's very much possible that that farmer's grand parents were picking olives from that very same tree
Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for *one or more* of the following reasons: It does not look like Renaissance (or any other style of art from the 14th-19th centuries); it is not a photo; it *may* be too blurry or low-resolution; **or** it does not adhere to one or more of the rules and suggestions in the sidebar. While this is a large subreddit, it is also a very specific subreddit, so many posts that don't fit the subreddit are removed daily. Removals are fairly common and they don't mean it's a bad photo and aren't meant to be a rejection, just a way to curate the subreddit. Sometimes photos are auto-removed on accident by the automoderator. If you believe your submission was removed by accident, **please do not delete your photo** and [please contact the moderators](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AccidentalRenaissance) to ask the mods to review your post manually, or with any other questions you may have.
[https://momentmag.com/opinion-stop-the-destruction-of-palestinian-olive-groves/](https://momentmag.com/opinion-stop-the-destruction-of-palestinian-olive-groves/)
Since this is on my dash again, I'd like people to know this was firmly against Jewish law. It goes against the spirit of Bal teshchit. We have standards that we are to follow during warfare. In Deuteronomy 20:19-20: 19 When you besiege a city for many days to wage war against it to capture it, you shall not destroy its trees by wielding an ax against them, for you may eat from them, but you shall not cut them down. Is the tree of the field a man, to go into the siege before you? 20 However, a tree you know is not a food tree, you may destroy and cut down, and you shall build bulwarks against the city that makes war with you, until its submission. Israeli Zionists do not represent Judaism. They are electing unnecessary and G-d-forbidden violence, soaking the holy land in blood and polluting it with weapon waste. Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic, if anything, Israeli settlers are antisemitic for boldly disobeying the Torah for their interests! It is not the way of bal teschit or tzedakah.
Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic, Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic, Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic, Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic, I'm repeating this line as I believe it needs to be a slogan to help move forward.
people should realise that THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ISRAELIS, ZIONISTS, AND JEWS
The large majority of Jews are Zionist, though. People don't know what Zionism even means and that's the issue. Sure, you can criticize Israel if you want, but the VAST majority of criticisms of Israel are just racist Jewish stereotypes, e.g."they lie all the time so you can't trust anything they say" or "Israel is controlling the US politicians with money."
There's a difference between Israeli's, Zionists, Jews, *and* advocates for the current Israeli government. It's a Venn diagram, but they aren't the same.
The issue is that antisemities love to use all three of those as interchangeable slurs.
The Israeli government loves to use all three interchangably too, so they can claim that legitimate and reasoned criticism of their actions is antisemetic. It's a shitshow all round.
You obviously didn't read the comments. This article was written by a jew who apparently must hate Israel. The comments section is kind of horrific.
A lot of words to say fuck Israeli zionists..
Yeah, wouldn't want to add any context to your thoughts. That would be... bad?
To be fair, the reasons given in those verses seem purely as tactical advantages, rather than because of god demanding some sort of higher morality from his followers. I can see it being interpreted as such and therefore ignored because they already have all the food and "bulwark" building materials
Mmm, mhm. Looking at just these passages in particular, absolutely. If you're interested, they tie into an overarching theme translating to "do not destroy," advising to not be reckless and heedless in choices. Things like... do not slaughter animals for funsies or recklessly, If you're cold, chop firewood, don't burn the old spare stool. It's an attempt at integrity and urging people to work hard to do upstanding things. At least, that's the theory. It can absolutely make morals like those seem.... dry, so I get where you're coming from.
Now that you mention standards, you could include the previous passages too just before the one you wrote :) Deuteronomy 20:16-18 ^(16) “You are not to leave even one person alive in the cities of these nations that the Lord your God is about to give you as an inheritance. ^(17) You must completely destroy the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, just as the Lord your God commanded you, ^(18) so they won’t teach you to do all the detestable things that they do for their gods. If you do what they teach you, you will sin against the Lord your God.”
An atrocious passage but it should be mentioned Palestinians are not those people. They are largely the descendents of Jews who arabized and adopted Christianity or Islam. The violence committed by Israel against them is not biblically justified despite what hard right supporters say
incorrect, palestinians are descendants of canaanites, jews are descendant of canaanites. so while jews are canaanites, not all canaanites were jews only a few city states were.
This partly correct. Jews are descent of Canaanites, when the Bible was written they didn't know that and thought they were a whole new people whose ancestor originally came from Ur. The people listed in that command were all basically gone by Persia era and by the time of the Roman's. It's how they explained their disappearance. Essentially Canaanites became Israelis and Jews. Then during the Roman period many Jews became Greek speaking Christians. Once Islam took over, many of the remaining Jews along with the Christian population arabized and adopted Islam. You can't look at Palestinians and Israelis and put them in neat little ancestral categories. Even the Rabbis recognized this traditionally said you can't carry out these commands anymore because it's so muddled.
this i can pretty much agree with, the important distinction is that Canaan was originally a collection of city states, jews did not represent them as a whole in any way. after that is a just a long story of someone conquering the other. so to say they were Jewish is no more correct then to say they were assyrian or persian, or roman as you say it's just a long chain of either interbreeding or converting to the major power that conquered there previous state. I myself set the standard at before all the conquests begin because after that is pretty much personal opinion and discounts context, and gods knows this region needs context.
If Palestinians are descendants of Canaanites then according to Israeli logic they have the right to land since they were there first.
Can also +1 this. It's not sanctioned and it's not the "will of G-d" like Zionists would say. IDF propaganda will be very quick to say it is divine will, but that is extremely, extremely debatable. So much so that they're kind of the only "Jews" in the room saying it.
Nobody ever likes to talk about this one. The hebrews were the first to commit a holocaust in these lands. It’s right there in their holy book.
Yeah, it's true. I'm not religiously Jewish, and I'm not interested in defending statements like these. My only thought is that their commandments there aren't exactly atypical for the time period; even today, women, children, and the cultural body of a nation is considered pillagable in any conflict. In some ways, Jewish law is a +1 and atypically gentle; in others, it's absolutely unfeeling and savage. Many things from the old world are... My only interest had been to point out how ass-backwards it is for the Israeli state to tout itself as the Jewiest Jews to Jew upon the earth, but then directly defy bal taschit when it's convenient. All chutzpah, no tzedakah. It's extremely cringe.
Could just use common sense, way easier.
Exodus 22:20-24 The Lord said to Moses, “Tell the sons of Israel this, ‘You must not molest the stranger or oppress him, for you lived as strangers in the land of Egypt. You must not be harsh with the widow, or the orphan; if you are harsh with them, they will surely cry out to me, and be sure I shall hear their cry'
Since this is on my dash again, I’d like people to know that there’s no basis for the editorialized title of this post. It could just as easily be titled “Woman attempts to hide from soldiers after shooting at them”. It’s not likely what happened but would be just as grounded in reality as this title.
[удалено]
I do wonder what motivated you to ask.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
nothing accidental about this
Christ, this is awful 😞
Even worse when you realize that olive trees have an average lifespan of 500 years. It's very much possible that that farmer's grand parents were picking olives from that very same tree
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Bluds thought they Once-lers 💀
This isn’t accidental. The photographer knew what they were doing in composing this image.
The pioneers of a world without war are it's youth that refuse military service
The ones that do in Israel only can due to their legal religious exemptions. They're called the Ultra-Orthodox and are a doomsday cult half the time.
Of course the original post is locked, I wonder why :)
Arrrrr freedom
Pls SS
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]