[Abrahamics ONLY] Who is a Jew?

[metis]

That is a very Ashkenazic position, treating ALL mitzvot as equal. Many Sephardic traditions rather do hold to a hierarchy of mitzvot, based in part on reason and the Torah specified punishments for violation. That is how I was taught. Not that one could ignore the minor ones, but the major ones were higher priority. Making all mitzvot the same priority is a concept that my very being rejects.

I wasn't aware of that, so thanks for the heads-up. By chance, do you know what the criteria for judging is based on with the Sephardim?

 

[BilliardsBall]

What is a Jew?

Who gets to decide who is a Jew?

By what standard is this decided?

Has anyone noticed that in the scriptures it's what your father is, not what your mother is? So why do many Jewish traditions say, "Mom!"

As we embrace the Bible so tightly it squeezes out Talmud, Kabbalah, Zohar and philosophy--behold! Salvation!

 

[Tumah]

Actually, SDA is nothing like Judaism, they have their own ways of doing things. Once I went to a SDA home, and found their version of a mezzuza; the Shema written up one doorpost, across the top, and down the other. I liked it, very striking. I'd do it maybe. I'd still have our mezzuza mind you, but... it did the job, the intent of the mitzva, better than our version. A reminder, indeed.

I'm not sure what you mean by, "nothing like Judaism". Do you mean, nothing like Rabbinic Judaism? That is obvious. But as you pointed out, they do appear to fulfill the Biblical requirement. Which was my point. They fulfill what they understand to be the Biblical requirement and they add in Jesus.

Let's say there was a Jew who was enthusiastically into Animal Spirit Guides. Nothing in that against the above mentioned 13 principles nor any mitzvot as far as I know. Just a harmless belief. Maybe odd, but certainly can be tolerated. Toleration, rather than seeking rejection and isolation, based on something that really matters not to one's Judaism.

Can you explain the basis of animal spirit guide belief?

 

[Tumah]

That is a very Ashkenazic position, treating ALL mitzvot as equal. Many Sephardic traditions rather do hold to a hierarchy of mitzvot, based in part on reason and the Torah specified punishments for violation. That is how I was taught. Not that one could ignore the minor ones, but the major ones were higher priority. Making all mitzvot the same priority is a concept that my very being rejects.

This is false. Priority in commandments is a universal concept that has numerous applications. Such as not blowing the shofar on Rosh Hashanah when it falls out on the Sabbath. Or the famous Mishnah that gives equates Torah study with all the other commandments. etc.

 

[Tumah]

Finally, the best answer. I would say that a Jew would have to agree at least in theory with these, and not outright reject them, even if they struggle with them.

For reference:

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/332555/jewish/Maimonides-13-Principles-of-Faith.htm

I don't think this is painting the full picture of Maimonides position. Please see here, Halacha 6 and onward.

 

[Tumah]

But the RAMBAM was highly criticized for coming up with that because our tradition felt all the Commandments were important and that all had to be followed as closely as possible. Being presumptuous enough whereas I supposedly could speak for the critics, how's this: "Mr. Maimonides, how dare you relegate the other 600 Commandments to minority status!".

Source for that criticism please.
Maimonides statement:

Importantly, Maimonides, while enumerating the above, added the following caveat "There is no difference between [the Biblical statement] 'his wife was Mehithabel' [Genesis 10,6] on the one hand [i.e. an "unimportant" verse], and 'Hear, O Israel' on the other [i.e. an "important" verse]... anyone who denies even such verses thereby denies God and shows contempt for his teachings more than any other skeptic, because he holds that the Torah can be divided into essential and non-essential parts..." The uniqueness of the 13 fundamental beliefs was that even a rejection out of ignorance placed one outside Judaism, whereas the rejection of the rest of Torah must be a conscious act to stamp one as an unbeliever.

Criticism of Maimonides:

Others, such as Rabbi Joseph Albo and the Raavad, criticized Maimonides' list as containing items that, while true, in their opinion did not place those who rejected them out of ignorance in the category of heretic. Many others criticized any such formulation as minimizing acceptance of the entire Torah (see above).

As noted, however, neither Maimonides nor his contemporaries viewed these principles as encompassing all of Jewish belief, but rather as the core theological underpinnings of the acceptance of Judaism.

Its not clear to me that Maimonides is saying that other commandments need not be followed, only whether rejection of other commandments places one in the category of heretic.

 

[metis]

Source for that criticism please.

Sure:

Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, better known as Maimonides or "The Rambam" (1135–1204 CE), lived at a time when both Christianity and Islam were developing active theologies. Jewish scholars were often asked to attest to their faith by their counterparts in other religions. The Rambam's 13 principles of faith were formulated in his commentary on the Mishnah (tractate Sanhedrin, chapter 10). They were one of several efforts by Jewish theologians in the Middle Ages to create such a list. By the time of Maimonides, centers of Jewish learning and law were dispersed geographically. Judaism no longer had a central authority that might bestow official approval on his principles of faith.

Maimonides' 13 principles were controversial when first proposed, evoking criticism by Crescas and Joseph Albo. They evoked criticism as minimizing acceptance of the entire Torah (Rabbi S. of Montpelier, Yad Rama, Y. Alfacher, Rosh Amanah). The 13 principles were ignored by much of the Jewish community for the next few centuries. (Dogma in Medieval Jewish Thought, Menachem Kellner). Over time two poetic restatements of these principles (Ani Ma'amin and Yigdal) became canonized in the Jewish prayerbook. Eventually, Maimonides' 13 principles of faith became the mostly widely accepted statement of belief... -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_principles_of_faith#Maimonides.27_13_principles_of_faith

However, my original source was from a book on Maimonides, which I probably have stuffed somewhere.

 

[metis]

Has anyone noticed that in the scriptures it's what your father is, not what your mother is? So why do many Jewish traditions say, "Mom!"

As we embrace the Bible so tightly it squeezes out Talmud, Kabbalah, Zohar and philosophy--behold! Salvation!

You're conflating different things. Jewish society was both patrilineal and largely patriarchal, but not when it came to "who is a Jew". If you were in the right forum (Same Faith Debates), which you are not, I'd press you on how is it that you supposedly know that the Bible (your Bible, I assume) supposedly squeezes out the other texts.

BTW, I really don't likely think any of us here are really interested in your concept of "salvation".

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Finally, the best answer. I would say that a Jew would have to agree at least in theory with these, and not outright reject them, even if they struggle with them.

I should note that I am not a big fan of credo litmus tests nor of Rambam's statement:

When all these foundations are perfectly understood and believed in by a person he enters the community of Israel and one is obligated to love and pity him…But if a man doubts any of these foundations, he leaves the community [of Israel], denies the fundamentals, and is called a sectarian, apikores, and one who ‘cuts among the plantings’ [a reference to the talmudic heretic Elisha ben Abuyah]. One is required to hate him and destroy him. [source]

So, for example ...

Principle 1

God exists; God is perfect in every way, eternal, and the cause of all that exists. All other beings depend upon God for their existence.​

Objections

Some medieval authorities believed that God created the world from eternal matter (see Principle 4). Thus, according to these scholars, it would not be true to say that God is the cause of all that exists.​

< ---- snip ---- >​

Principle 4

God existed prior to all else. (In a later version of the Thirteen Principles, Maimonides included the notion that God created the world from nothing [creation ex nihilo].)​

Objections

In his commentary to Genesis 1:1, Abraham Ibn Ezra suggests that the word bara (created) implies cutting or setting a boundary. Scholars such as Joseph Tov Elem and David Arama understood this to mean that Ibn Ezra believed that God sculpted the world from eternal matter. Gersonides also believed that the world was created from eternal matter. [ibid]​

And, of course, there is the whole question of the historicity of the revelation at Mt. Sinai.

In any event, I would hardly think it proper to exclude the likes of RaLBaG or Ibn Ezra from the community of Israel, much less feel obliged to hate and destroy them.

 

[Zardoz]

I wasn't aware of that, so thanks for the heads-up. By chance, do you know what the criteria for judging is based on with the Sephardim?

That would be a whole new topic of discussion, worthwhile, but off-topic for this thread.

 

[Zardoz]

I'm not sure what you mean by, "nothing like Judaism". Do you mean, nothing like Rabbinic Judaism? That is obvious. But as you pointed out, they do appear to fulfill the Biblical requirement. Which was my point. They fulfill what they understand to be the Biblical requirement and they add in Jesus.

Of course, they lack the Oral Torah, and have flawed translations of the Written Torah. However they keep the law they keep also the Xian notion of an Incarnationist Trinity so it's still an expression of Xianity that would be forbidden to a Jew. So no, a Jew could not adopt their way of faith.

Can you explain the basis of animal spirit guide belief?

It's a Shamanistic belief that involves neither a god, prayer, or idols, from what I understand.
A neutral belief of another faith that violates neither the 13 principles nor any halacha, AFAIK.
For more in-depth details, google is your friend.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Question:
Do you refer to Same Faith in this section, for this thread, as Abrahamic faith or Jewish faith?

 

[Zardoz]

I should note that I am not a big fan of credo litmus tests nor of Rambam's statement:

​

...

​

And, of course, there is the whole question of the historicity of the revelation at Mt. Sinai.

In any event, I would hardly think it proper to exclude the likes of RaLBaG or Ibn Ezra from the community of Israel, much less feel obliged to hate and destroy them.

Granted it's not perfect. I simply say that there's a difference between doubting a principle and denying.
One can doubt. It's the difference between Agnostic (don't know) and Atheist (denies with conviction).
I doubt there was a global flood. It's silly to think of polar bears migrating to the middle east to get on the ark. I think there might indeed have been a flood and ark, but maybe a local event not a global one. I have doubts, but don't deny.

 

[Zardoz]

Question:
Do you refer to Same Faith in this section, for this thread, as Abrahamic faith or Jewish faith?

Abrahamic, otherwise I can't post. All Abrahamics are welcome, but it's most relevant to Jewish faiths.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Abrahamic, otherwise I can't post. All Abrahamics are welcome, but it's most relevant to Jewish faiths.

Cool

I believe that a Jew is who follows Prophet Moses and accepts his message.

 

[Tumah]

Of course, they lack the Oral Torah, and have flawed translations of the Written Torah. However they keep the law they keep also the Xian notion of an Incarnationist Trinity so it's still an expression of Xianity that would be forbidden to a Jew. So no, a Jew could not adopt their way of faith.

From a purely Biblical perspective, the argument could be made for a trinity (which they do), and since its every man for himself (no Oral Torah), you couldn't really say that that's not Judaism from that alone.
The difference between Sadducees and Karaites versus Christianity really just comes down to belief in Jesus and the New Testament.

It's a Shamanistic belief that involves neither a god, prayer, or idols, from what I understand. Google is your friend.

I actually tried googling it, but there was nothing informational for "animal spirit guide". I thought maybe it was animism, but I wasn't sure.
I think all these types of practice fall under the "ways of the Emorites" and those types of categories, and are prohibited.

 

[metis]

I simply say that there's a difference between doubting a principle and denying.
One can doubt. It's the difference between Agnostic (don't know) and Atheist (denies with conviction).

Amen.

 

[Zardoz]

...
The difference between Sadducees and Karaites versus Christianity really just comes down to belief in Jesus and the New Testament.
....

You'd have to define 'belief in Jesus' here.

...
I actually tried googling it, but there was nothing informational for "animal spirit guide". I thought maybe it was animism, but I wasn't sure.
I think all these types of practice fall under the "ways of the Emorites" and those types of categories, and are prohibited.

I guess there's not much there after all. It's confined mostly to Native American culture, of which I'm acquainted but obviously not made it's way into the interwebs. It's not "ways of the Emorites", it has no idols, divination, worship, etc. I picked this as example because it's harmless. Knowing what your ASG is would be analogous to knowing what your Astrological sign is (and means) without the Horoscope.

 

[Tumah]

I guess there's not much there after all. It's confined mostly to Native American culture, of which I'm acquainted but obviously not made it's way into the interwebs. It's not "ways of the Emorites", it has no idols, divination, worship, etc. I picked this as example because it's harmless. Knowing what your ASG is would be analogous to knowing what your Astrological sign is (and means) without the Horoscope.

Communion with a spirit falls under "way of the Emorites". It has nothing to do with idolatry. Horoscopes may also be a transgression of Deut. 18:13.

 

[Zardoz]

Communion with a spirit falls under "way of the Emorites". It has nothing to do with idolatry. Horoscopes may also be a transgression of Deut. 18:13.

You don't communicate with your ASG, you learn about your nature from it, like some think your Astrological sign tells about your nature. Horoscopes are a problem and why I didn't pick Astrology as my example.