Avi's Spiritual and Religious Journey - Part 2

[Avi1001]

OMG, you are a fundy. I thought you were a CJ (Conservative), but you are quoting G-d as though s/he is a man.

A core Covenent is something the community agrees on. If we use a data based approach, based on medical considerations, Circumscism needs to be looked at carefully. I believe as we better understand it, it will disappear.

Too bad Hashem thinks otherwise. See Berei**** 17:14

Seems to be quite a big deal to him to make a statement like that.

The circumcision on the 8th day is a sign of the convenant. True dat.
At the same time its the root and therefore beginning of the convenant long before Moshe first made poopoo.
It precedes the Torah by quite some time and is still the very first duty a male Jew has to follow otherwise he wont be part of the Nation.

Why yes of course that doesnt sound like a core covenant at all.

 

[Avi1001]

No. We are not in agreement here. The conditions you propose are all hocus-pocus. "Tradition has a vote, not a veto", means we follow tradition when it makes sense to do so. We do not blindly follow tradition when it vetoes positive change.

I agree with you here; the tradition has to be followed:
1. If it has proven continuity beyond doubt from the original law-giver prophet-messenger
2. and it has been commanded in the original Word of Revelation in the original language
3. and the law-giving prophet/messenger has demonstrated in action to fulfill the law.
4. The Word Revealed has also given the reason or wisdom of the commandment.

Regards

 

[Brickjectivity]

I'm sure Avi knows that isn't the whole picture, and the entire can't be put into a short phrase or be boiled down to a club. I get three facepalms? Three seems like a lot I think.

...Circumscism needs to be looked at carefully...

Some are trying to make it illegal, but I think that is not the right thing to do. Also, if you are going to reconsider circumcision then you need to first consider what it is that circumcision is for. The moment you start speculating about what it is for, instantly the answer is that 'Its a rule'. So, you can't consider removing the practice. Never happen.

 

[RabbiO]

You are just describing the signs of the covenant; where is the covenant?
Please quote for the claim/covenant from the revealed scripture you believe in and the gist of reason/wisdom provided by the scripture.

Regards

Why not just cut to the chase and make your case for Jewish scripture being unreliable and corrupt and then make your case for Islam being the true religion and the Qu'ran being the true uncorrupted scripture?

It would save a lot time.

 

[RabbiO]

I get three facepalms? Three seems like a lot I think.

I downgraded it to one.

 

[Flankerl]

You are just describing the signs of the covenant; where is the covenant?
Please quote for the claim/covenant from the revealed scripture you believe in and the gist of reason/wisdom provided by the scripture.

Regards

Berei**** 17.
The word covenant is even in the 2nd verse. Its quite hidden actually so i do understand that this might be confusing.

OMG, you are a fundy. I thought you were a CJ (Conservative), but you are quoting G-d as though s/he is a man.

A core Covenent is something the community agrees on. If we use a data based approach, based on medical considerations, Circumscism needs to be looked at carefully. I believe as we better understand it, it will disappear.

Iam a fundy for quoting Torah? Good to know.

You make it sound as if its my fault that its written there. To quote Berei**** 17:14
14. And an uncircumcised male, who will not circumcise the flesh of his foreskin-that soul will be cut off from its people; he has broken My covenant."

Its quite easy to understand.

 

[RabbiO]

[A]nother interpretation of non-anthropomorphic that I appreciate, it is panentheistic, i.e., G-d is everywhere and everything.

Are you talking panentheism or pantheism?

 

[RabbiO]

OMG, you are a fundy. I thought you were a CJ (Conservative), but you are quoting G-d as though s/he is a man.

Boy, you certainly have found a way to make Shabbat services a whole lot shorter.

First, we get rid of the Torah reading. Wouldn't want to have anyone chanting that "fundy" text. Next, we get rid of the haftarah, after all it's just more of the same.

Actually, there is no point in having any service at all - Whether you're talking the original Union Prayer Book, the Gates of Prayer, Mishkan T'filah - all Reform- or Sim Shalom or any of the other siddurim used in the Conservative movement, or Kol HaNeshama, the Reconstructionist siddur, or any of the many siddurim used within Orthodoxy, they're all filled with that fundy language.

A rabbi could just speak for 20 minutes and then everybody could go directly to the kiddush luncheon - except of course, nobody would actually say kiddush or say ha-motzi because that would just poison the air with more fundy thoughts and language.

 

[Desert Snake]

Circumcision.
Although the Torah commands, like anything else is open to value testing, as Avi is doing.


It is interesting to note, I have brought up the issue of tattoos and Judaism approach to such, and there seems to be an allowance of what might possibly be 'magic' tattoos, now, this is obviously incorrect action, the verse associated with forbiddance of heathen marks should, I think, have a broad enough interpretation to include 'magic' type tattoos. Incidentally, magic type tattoos are not always readily apparent for what they are.

 

[RabbiO]

Reconstructionists (in my view, another group of reformers with a small r) say:"Tradition has a vote, but not a veto". What does this mean to you?

And what does the Reconstructionist movement say about itself?

"Reconstructionist Judaism is a progressive, contemporary approach to Jewish life which integrates a deep respect for traditional Judaism with the insights and ideas of contemporary social, intellectual and spiritual life.

We find meaning in rediscovering the richness of traditional ritual and creating new observances which respond to our contemporary communal and personal cycles.
"Torah" means "teaching." In Jewish tradition, talmud Torah, the study of Torah, is a life-long obligation and opportunity. Reconstructionists are committed to a serious engagement with the texts and teachings… But we are not passive recipients; we are instead challenged to enter the conversation of the generations and to hear voices other than our own, but to add our own voices as well. Reconstructionist Judaism is respectful of traditional Jewish observances but also open to new interpretations and forms of religious expression." (emphasis added by me)

The Reconstructionist movement is progressive and liberal, but I don't think it exactly fits what you believe is reform (with a small "r").

 

[Brickjectivity]

You've been watching "Fiddler On the Roof"

No, that one's straight from the maw of chaos, although I did see that years ago. I've seen several flicks about Jewish culture, some better than others. Fiddler is one of the sad stories about the cost of upholding traditions.

Reconstructionists (in my view, another group of reformers with a small r) say:"Tradition has a vote, but not a veto". What does this mean to you?

Wow. As you have pointed out my background is not traditional. Man, you ask some tough questions of someone with very little to share. I think that commitment both unites and divides. Commitment to 'Tikkun' is the stream (the mainstream) and where it touches obstacles it is diverted into little eddies, naturally pooling and eroding those obstacles. Those diversions and eddies are the splinter groups of Judaism from orthodoxy. Some have trouble waiting for the world to change and see people suffering, and they break off to try and fix it. They invest themselves, losing themselves, but in the process gain themselves. Both the traditional committed and the revisionist committed make a positive difference by sticking to their morals. I cannot view this as a tragedy.

 

[Avi1001]

You are not a fundy because you quote Torah, you are a fundy because you speak of G-d in anthropomorphic terms, and because you read the Torah in a literal sense.

Berei**** 17.
The word covenant is even in the 2nd verse. Its quite hidden actually so i do understand that this might be confusing.

Iam a fundy for quoting Torah? Good to know.

You make it sound as if its my fault that its written there. To quote Berei**** 17:14
14. And an uncircumcised male, who will not circumcise the flesh of his foreskin-that soul will be cut off from its people; he has broken My covenant."

Its quite easy to understand.

 

[Avi1001]

I can envision a day when circumcision is assessed for its medical value. It could even be continued in another, less drastic form, perhaps as a "ritual circumcision".

Some are trying to make it illegal, but I think that is not the right thing to do. Also, if you are going to reconsider circumcision then you need to first consider what it is that circumcision is for. The moment you start speculating about what it is for, instantly the answer is that 'Its a rule'. So, you can't consider removing the practice. Never happen.

 

[Avi1001]

Rabbio, why are you being so mean to this poster, Paar? Perhaps he never knew a Jew before and is just starting interfaith dialogue. Why not treat him like a brother?

Why not just cut to the chase and make your case for Jewish scripture being unreliable and corrupt and then make your case for Islam being the true religion and the Qu'ran being the true uncorrupted scripture?

It would save a lot time.

 

[Avi1001]

Are you talking panentheism or pantheism?

Panentheism. What about you?

 

[Avi1001]

Allow me to correct your misconceptions....I am a student of Torah, Haftorah and Talmud.

Skipping the Rabbi's sermon is ok in most cases, but some of them are nearly tolerable.

And finally, going to the Kiddush is the best part, indeed, after all, we then get to eat.

Boy, you certainly have found a way to make Shabbat services a whole lot shorter.

First, we get rid of the Torah reading. Wouldn't want to have anyone chanting that "fundy" text. Next, we get rid of the haftarah, after all it's just more of the same.

Actually, there is no point in having any service at all - Whether you're talking the original Union Prayer Book, the Gates of Prayer, Mishkan T'filah - all Reform- or Sim Shalom or any of the other siddurim used in the Conservative movement, or Kol HaNeshama, the Reconstructionist siddur, or any of the many siddurim used within Orthodoxy, they're all filled with that fundy language.

A rabbi could just speak for 20 minutes and then everybody could go directly to the kiddush luncheon - except of course, nobody would actually say kiddush or say ha-motzi because that would just poison the air with more fundy thoughts and language.

 

[Avi1001]

Circumcision.
Although the Torah commands, like anything else is open to value testing, as Avi is doing.....

Thank you very much, disciple, I think we are warming up to each other

 

[Avi1001]

......The Reconstructionist movement is progressive and liberal, but I don't think it exactly fits what you believe is reform (with a small "r").

It fits exactly what I believe is reform (with a small r). I think Mordeci Kaplan was a genius. I love his ideas about: chosenness, miracles and Judaism as a Civilization. I know Kaplan was ritually somewhat conservative, but I don't hold that against him. Can you and Levite tell us some good Mordeci Kaplan stories?

 

[Avi1001]

Thanks for giving it a shot. To me the quote :"Tradition gets a vote, but not a veto"...means there are times we stick to the ideas and principles of the past....and other times, when we need to reject them. The key is knowing which time is which.

Wow. As you have pointed out my background is not traditional. Man, you ask some tough questions of someone with very little to share. I think that commitment both unites and divides. Commitment to 'Tikkun' is the stream (the mainstream) and where it touches obstacles it is diverted into little eddies, naturally pooling and eroding those obstacles. Those diversions and eddies are the splinter groups of Judaism from orthodoxy. Some have trouble waiting for the world to change and see people suffering, and they break off to try and fix it. They invest themselves, losing themselves, but in the process gain themselves. Both the traditional committed and the revisionist committed make a positive difference by sticking to their morals. I cannot view this as a tragedy.

 

[Desert Snake]

Thank you very much, disciple, I think we are warming up to each other

We're almost practicing the same religion.