Forming a Anti-Zionist Denomination of Judaism

[u/NAHTHEHNRFS850]

Seeing the stickied post regarding people seeking out progressive (particularly anti-Zionist) Jewish services, I wanted to talk about the formation of a progressive anti-Zionist Jewish denomination.

While there are progressive denominations of Judaism (e.g. Humanistic), these denominations don’t explicitly render themselves as anti-Zionist in the fact that they don’t declare “that there should not be a Jewish state”.

A new denomination such as this would need to remove practices phrases, statements and literature making overtures to the Holy Land and focus on community and belief in God. I see this as parallel to how some branches of Humanistic Judaism avoid using theonyms (names associated with God e.g. Joshua).

Thoughts?

[u/specialistsets]

I think you're confusing terminologies. It is indeed a mitzvah to dwell in the Land of Israel, but that isn't Zionism. Which explains why there are hundreds of thousands of non-Zionist Haredi Jews who live in Israel and the West Bank.

[u/NAHTHEHNRFS850 → u/specialistsets]

I understand, but by declaring it a Mitzvah is is preferring it over other land which is in part the problem. It lends itself to Zionism, as Zionism is built off of Jewish Tradition.

Praise to Hashem should not be anymore meritorious if it is in China or Israel.

[u/Greatsayain → u/NAHTHEHNRFS850]

You're missing the point. It can be good for jews to live there and good for jews to talk about the land and reference it in our scripture and prayers without being in control of the land. To live there we don't have to form the government. We don't have to make the rules. It doesn't need to be an ethnostate. It can be a pluralistic society like most western countries are now.

Abraham didn't control the state when he moved there, nor would we. Now if the the modern state of Israel were to collapse I wouldn't blame the next government if they didn't want jews living there based on how Israel has acted. However before 1948 there could have been a way for jews to live there without taking over.

[u/NAHTHEHNRFS850 → u/Greatsayain]

You're missing the point. It can be good for jews to live there and good for jews to talk about the land and reference it in our scripture and prayers without being in control of the land. To live there we don't have to form the government. We don't have to make the rules. It doesn't need to be an ethnostate. It can be a pluralistic society like most western countries are now.

I agree with all of this, but the problem that arises is that people will naturally become more entitled to the land. The way Israel behaves is literally a testament to this.

As such I think it is better to just have a clean break from all of it, especially as worshipping HaShem is not contingent on being in Eretz Israel.

Abraham didn't control the state when he moved there, nor would we. Now if the the modern state of Israel were to collapse I wouldn't blame the next government if they didn't want jews living there based on how Israel has acted. However before 1948 there could have been a way for jews to live there without taking over.

Yes, but Joshua did conquer it