Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: the age of the tannaim.

• ——— (1927). Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: the age of the tannaim. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674487505. OCLC 377315. - original published in 3 vols between 1927 and 1930

Life[edit]

Moore was born in West Chester, Pennsylvania, the son of Rev. William Eves Moore and Harriet Foot Moore. He was educated at private schools, West Chester Academy and Wyer's School, entered Yale College as a junior in 1870, then graduated from Yale in 1872,^[1] as a Phi Beta Kappa and member of the Skull and Bones society.^[2] After teaching at Hopkins Grammar School from 1872–73, he engaged in study and private teaching in Columbus, Ohio, 1873–74, then served as principal of Lancaster (Ohio) High School 1874-75. He studied theology in Columbus 1875-76 and graduated from Union Theological Seminary (New York) in 1877.^[1] He was ordained to the Presbyterian ministry at Columbus February 8, 1878 and became pastor of Putnam Presbyterian Church in Zanesville, Ohio from 1878 to 1883. He Married Mary Soper, daughter of Albert Gallatin and Mary Ann (Chester) Hanford on April 25, 1878, in Chicago. They had two sons, William Eves, who died in infancy, and Albert Hanford.^[2]

In 1883 he was appointed to the chair of Hebrew at Andover Theological Seminary where he taught until 1902, serving as president of the seminary from 1899 to 1901 and lectured on the history of religion from 1893 to 1901. During his service to Andover, he received the degree of Doctor of Divinity in 1885 from Marietta College, Ohio and 12 years later, from Yale University in 1897. In 1902, he became a professor at the Harvard Divinity School, where he was appointed Frothingham Professor of the History of Religion in 1905, and Cabot Fellow for three years beginning in 1906. During his service at Harvard he obtained a degree of Legum Doctor in 1903 from Western Reserve University. He was a member of Harvard faculty from 1902 until retirement in 1928 and a preacher to the University from 1900 to 1903.^[2]

Moore was a member of the Deutsche Morgenlandische Gesellschaft, American Philological Association, Archaeological Institute of America, Society of Biblical Literature, among others,^[1] In addition, he was a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, serving as its president from 1921–24, and was a member of the American Oriental Society.^[3] Besides contributing many articles on Biblical and Oriental subjects in learned journals, he wrote extensively for the "Encyclopaedia Biblica"^[4] and served as editor of the Harvard Theological Review.^[3] Among his books, History of Religions (1914, 1919) and Judaism (two volumes, 1927) stand out as especially praiseworthy. Mrs. Mary Soper Moore died April 16, 1924. Moore died 7 years later due to general arteriosclerosis and chronic myocarditis, in Cambridge, Massachusetts, May 16, 1931.^[2]

Books[edit]

• Moore, George Foot (1895). A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Judges. International critical commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. 7. Edinburgh: T & T Clark. ISBN 978-0-567-05004-5. OCLC 860107.
• ——— (1898). The Book of Judges: a new English translation printed in colors exhibiting the composite structure of the book. Sacred Books of the Old and New Testaments, part 7.; Pohychrome Bible. London ; New York: J. Clark ; Dodd, Mead, and Co. OCLC 3343798.
• ———; Harper, Robert Francis; Brown, Francis, eds. (1908). Old Testament and Semitic studies in Memory of William Rainey Harper. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. OCLC 3220423.
• ——— (1911). The Covenanters of Damascus: a hitherto unknown Jewish sect. Cambridge, MA. OCLC 12094453.
• ———; Lyon, David Gordon, eds. (1912). Studies in the History of Religions. New York: Macmillan. OCLC 2303663.
• ——— (1913). The Literature of the Old Testament. Home University Library of Modern Knowledge. 65. New York ; London: H. Holt and Co. ; Williams and Norgate. OCLC 9430863.^[5]
• ——— (1913). History of religions, Volume 1: China, Japan, Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, India, Persia, Greece, Rome. The International Theological Library. Edinburgh: T & T Clark. OCLC 314138945.
• ——— (1914). Metempsychosis. Ingersoll Lecture, 1914. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. OCLC 2490057.^[6]
• ——— (1923). The Birth and Growth of Religion: Being the Morse Lectures of 1922. Morse Lectures, 1922. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. OCLC 322865.
• ———; Gray, Louis Herbert, eds. (1916). The Mythology of All Races. Marshall Jones Co. - a 13 volume series published between 1916 and 1923.
• History of Religions (Vol. I, 1913; Vol. II, 1919)
• ——— (1919). History of Religions, Volume 2: Judaism, Christianity, Mohammedanism. The International Theological Library. Edinburgh: T & T Clark. OCLC 174399216.^[7]
• ——— (1927). Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: the age of the tannaim. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674487505. OCLC 377315. - original published in 3 vols between 1927 and 1930
• Editor (unfinished work), Albert Pike, Materials For The history of Freemasonry In France and Elsewhere on The Continent of Europe From 1718 To 1859, circa 1905, detached from "The New Age" magazine.
• ——— (2007). Christian Writers on Judaism: nineteen centuries of apologetics and polemics. Analecta Gorgiana. 7. Piscataway: Gorgias Press. ISBN 978-1-593-33864-0. OCLC 171130703. - reprint of journal article

A Hope More Powerful Than the Sea: One Refugee's Incredible Story of Love, Loss, and Survival Hardcover – January 24, 2017 by Melissa Fleming (Author)

The stunning story of a young woman, an international crisis, and the triumph of the human spirit.

Adrift in a frigid sea, no land in sight―just debris from the ship's wreckage and floating corpses all around―nineteen-year-old Doaa Al Zamel floats with a small inflatable water ring around her waist and clutches two children, barely toddlers, to her body. The children had been thrust into Doaa's arms by their drowning relatives, all refugees who boarded a dangerously overcrowded ship bound for Sweden and a new life. For days, Doaa floats, prays, and sings to the babies in her arms. She must stay alive for these children. She must not lose hope.

Doaa Al Zamel was once an average Syrian girl growing up in a crowded house in a bustling city near the Jordanian border. But in 2011, her life was upended. Inspired by the events of the Arab Spring, Syrians began to stand up against their own oppressive regime. When the army was sent to take control of Doaa's hometown, strict curfews, power outages, water shortages, air raids, and violence disrupted everyday life. After Doaa's father's barbershop was destroyed and rumors of women being abducted spread through the community, her family decided to leave Syria for Egypt, where they hoped to stay in peace until they could return home. Only months after their arrival, the Egyptian government was overthrown and the environment turned hostile for refugees.

In the midst of this chaos, Doaa falls in love with a young opposition fighter who proposes marriage and convinces her to flee to the promise of safety and a better future in Europe. Terrified and unable to swim, Doaa and her young fiance hand their life savings to smugglers and board a dilapidated fishing vessel with five hundred other refugees, including a hundred children. After four horrifying days at sea, another ship, filled with angry men shouting insults, rams into Doaa's boat, sinking it and leaving the passengers to drown.

That is where Doaa's struggle for survival really begins.

A Hope More Powerful Than the Sea is an emotionally charged, eye-opening true story that represents the millions of unheard voices of refugees who risk everything in a desperate search for the promise of a safe future. Melissa Fleming sheds light on the most pressing humanitarian crisis of our time and paints a vivid, unforgettable portrait of the triumph of the human spirit.

Local and State Government Can Protect the Constitution From Trump

Corey Brettschneider

Nov 30, 2016

IDEAS

Corey Brettschneider is a professor of political science at Brown University and the author of When the State Speaks, What Should it Say?

A man who threatened to create a deportation force that would invade private homes without due process, shut down mosques, torture the families of suspected terrorists, "open up" the libel laws and revoke the citizenship of people exercising their right to free speech has been elected president of the United States. He will take an oath to uphold the same Constitution that he repeatedly pledged to violate.

For those committed to resisting his policies, a rethinking of federalism — the idea that the states and other localities retain sovereign powers and that the federal government, including Congress and the president, is limited in what it can do — might be the most effective tool, especially if other constitutional checks fail.

The separation of powers at the federal level might be of help if a few Republican Senators stand up for constitutional rights, but it is also likely that the Republican Congress will support him.

The federal courts might strike down presidential actions as unconstitutional, but court cases often take time, and eventually, with a potential record number of vacancies to fill, President Trump will have a role in reshaping the judiciary. It's possible that all three branches of the federal government could be populated with Trump supporters. The system of checks and balances that were designed to be a safeguard against government abuse would be neutralized.

What can be done to resist unconstitutional policies enacted into law by President Trump and his Congress, and upheld by his Supreme Court?

RELATED

VIRALAll the Countries Trolling President Trump's 'America First' With Viral Parody Videos

Constitutional resistance can and should come at the state level. California has already signaled its readiness to resist unconstitutional federal action. Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon and Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de Leon stated recently: “We will lead the resistance to any effort that would shred our social fabric or our Constitution.” The governor, Jerry Brown, reiterated this commitment to fight unconstitutional actions.

Cities have also taken up the mantle of local resistance to unconstitutional federal action. The mayors of New York City and Providence have suggested that they will refuse to implement or cooperate with the federal government in unconstitutional policy.

These statements of constitutional resistance speak to a new strategy of federalism in which localities seek to revive a lost constitutional role in undoing federal violations of fundamental rights. State officials have a role to play. Democrats and independents hold at least 19 governors’ offices and about one-third of state legislatures, as vote counting is still underway. Moreover, some Republican state officials are part of the never-Trump movement that sought to protect the Constitution against potential tyranny. They should take up the mantle of states' rights to resist tyrannical policies and to protect individual liberty.

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads

The resistance would not just be symbolic. The federal government relies on cooperation by the states in enforcing federal policy. If states and localities exercise their right to not cooperate with unconstitutional policies, this will very much impede the capacity of the federal government. Without local law enforcement, the federal government could still use the FBI for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but the numbers of officers in these agencies are limited and so state and local resistance would be quite effective.

Of course, there is an ugly history to the phrase “states’ rights.” In the era of segregation, states' rights were used to resist civil rights laws. But earlier in our history there existed a nobler tradition for states’ rights, one in which the state governments of the 18th and 19th Centuries fought to defend individual rights.

During the John Adams Administration, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson sought to invalidate the Alien and Sedition acts, which imposed limits on free speech. Those laws were aimed at suppressing the political opponents of the reigning party, the Federalists, who controlled all three branches of the federal government. As president, Adams signed these laws that were passed by his own party. The opposition party, Democrat-Republicans, could not go to the Supreme Court to strike it down because there was no developed First Amendment case law. That branch too was also dominated by Federalist appointments.

Denied any possibility of “checks and balances” at the federal level, Madison and Jefferson argued that laws punishing criticism of the President were unconstitutional. In the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, they called on states to refuse to participate in the prosecution of dissidents called for by these laws.

Their strategy of constitutional resistance at the state level was later co-opted by John C. Calhoun in his fight to preserve slavery, but it has also been used to combat slavery. In the 19th Century, the federal government relied on the Fugitive Slave Act to aid slave owners to capture fugitive slaves who found refuge in free territories and states. The citizens of Wisconsin—led by a newspaper editor, Sherman Booth, and with the aid of local public officials—resisted the law. They believed the Fugitive Slave Act violated higher constitutional ideals. Booth outwitted a slave-catcher hired by the federal government, freed the slave, and aided him in escaping to Canada. The Wisconsin Supreme Court sided with the Booth and the escaped slave, ruling the Fugitive Slave Act unconstitutional.

Perhaps Trump may abandon his unconstitutional policies, but if he does not, citizens should leverage the sovereign authority of the states to resist him. We must call on our state officials to resist. Governors should not cooperate in any unconstitutional executive actions. If Trump does form a deportation force, state officials should refuse to turn over documents and other records. If Trump threatens to limit press freedoms, state officials and citizens must speak out against him. If he threatens to shut down mosques or creates a registry of Muslims, violating the Free Exercise Clause, state officials should refuse to allow local law enforcement to cooperate or to aid them.

The 10th Amendment reserves to the states those powers not given to the federal government. States and cities are equally empowered by the 10th Amendment to assert their reserved authority to resist federal transgressions of constitutional limits. The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that the federal government cannot “commandeer” state and local officials to do its bidding. Even if the Supreme Court refuses to confront Trump’s unconstitutional policies by asserting the importance of civil liberties, it could still recognize the right of states and localities to exercise their powers.

I'm not advocating a radical “states' rights” movement. Instead, focusing on features core to our constitution’s system, my proposal is the antithesis of the call for secession by advocates of the so-called “calexit” movement who want to see California leave the union.

My aim is not to give states a procedural veto power over federal legislation. Instead, I rely on the idea that state officials have a constitutional duty to uphold the constitution, as stated in Article VI, and to resist any attempt to get them to comply in a violation of constitutional rights. These rights are independent of the federal government’s interpretation of them. When they are violated state officials might be a final resort in their defense. This spirit is captured in the Virginia resolution, suggesting that states "have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose, for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining, within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties, appertaining to them.”

Moreover, as Yale Law Professor Heather Gerken and University of Virginia Law Professor Richard Schragger have both argued in the context of gay rights, local protections of rights do not reject a role of the federal government. Instead, they enforce the federal Constitution—rightly aiming at eventual vindication at the federal level.

The idea of states' rights federalism was once used by segregationists to resist civil rights, but it is the key to protecting our liberties against unconstitutional federal policy. The 10th Amendment must be restored to its earlier and nobler tradition. It is a gift the Founders left us to fight potential federal tyranny.