How would you define secular Jew?

[Rachel Rugelach]

Thank you for your response.Ok well here's the thing, although not really the question from the beginning...what is the outcome of a person if one mitzvah is observed? I mean what happens to a person if he doesn't observe even one mitzvah?

I believe I already responded to that here. Please click on link.

 

[YoursTrue]

I believe I already responded to that here. Please click on link.

Thank you.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

What a thread -- so many people trying to define so many other people: what it means to be them, what it means to be "us."

My preference is to let everybody define themselves. Then I can try to figure out how I can relate to them. It's even better, actually, if they've made the same choice about me -- let me define myself, and then see if you can like me.

What, in the end, is the real goal in trying to label and define other people? Is it so hard just to be open to getting to know them, and seeing if you like them?

 

[YoursTrue]

What a thread -- so many people trying to define so many other people: what it means to be them, what it means to be "us."

My preference is to let everybody define themselves. Then I can try to figure out how I can relate to them. It's even better, actually, if they've made the same choice about me -- let me define myself, and then see if you can like me.

What, in the end, is the real goal in trying to label and define other people? Is it so hard just to be open to getting to know them, and seeing if you like them?

You're right but I read it about a rather well known author and wondered what that meant.

 

[YoursTrue]

@Snow White,

Remember the thread where you asked about thread titles? It's happening... Moth to the flame.



Honestly, that's a toughie for me.

I think I would go with non-practicing as a good basic meaning for secular. But we need a person who identifies as secular to confirm it.

Ok and since it was used in reference to a description of an author, I was wondering how it applied to his personna. Or anyone's personna.

 

[YoursTrue]

Technically, all Jews are ethnic Jews, either by birth or conversion. But the expression "ethnic Jew" is often used to refer to secular Jews, in contrast to religious Jew, or observant Jew.

Here is the question -- an ethnic Jew may be an atheist, right? Which may border on secular Jew?

 

[LuisDantas]

Why do you say that?

Because secularism as a concept exists to separate collective stances from individual beliefs.

Individuals are believers or disbelievers, theists or atheists, observant or not. But they can't very well be distanced from their own personal stances.

 

[YoursTrue]

Because secularism as a concept exists to separate collective stances from individual beliefs.

Individuals are believers or disbelievers, theists or atheists, observant or not. But they can't very well be distanced from their own personal stances.

Sounds reasonable. And of course, not everyone wants to reveal themselves.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The obvious example would be Reform Judaism.

I have very little solid information and all of it is second-hand at best, but my best guess would be that Orthodox Judaism and perhaps Conservative as well doesn't always feel that it is "quite" or "truly" Judaism - probably with significant exceptions and provisos.

By a slightly less obvious perspective, being secular or religious isn't always a clear, binary status. I assume that a secular Jew may pass unnoticed if he is not vocal. Even being an outsider can in itself be a relative perception with some nuance and even seemingly random variation.

Then there are those Christian groups that for some reason or another want to claim to be Judaism. I don't really consider them Judaism at all, but if you want to comment on those, I am very willing to listen.

I would mention syncretism and quasi-syncretism as well, if I knew of any examples. Which I do not. To the best of my knowledge Judaism is remarkably resistant to syncretisms.

Reform Judaism is not a borderline case. It is a branch of Judaism, not some other religion. Even the Orthodox, who often disparage Reform Judaism and say it is illegitimate, do not consider the Jews in it to have converted to some other religion. On the flip side, I have heard tales that some of the Ultra Orthodox in Israel want to say that Reform Jews are not real Jews. They are extremely nasty towards anyone not ultra orthodox -- they even persecute the Modern Orthodox. They will throw stones at innocent little Modern Orthodox girls, claiming that they are immodest. It's outrageous, and is driving a wedge between Israeli Jews and Jews in the diaspora. But since I don't live in Israel and am not well versed in the situation, I should perhaps stop there.

Messianic "Judaism" is also not a borderline case. It very clearly is a denomination of Christianity. Those Jews who get involved in it are considered apostates. There are necessarily elements of Judaism that are lacking, such as an esteemed position of the Talmud. Further, the whole point of MJ is belief in Jesus. Both of the major denominations of MJ teach that Jesus is God -- an idea that is absolutely contrary to the teaching of Judaism that God is not a man. Remember also, that MJ is absolutely flooded with non-Jews. In some congregations, the only Jew there is the pastor. Kind of hard to have a Judaism if there aren't Jews.

There was a time in our history that we Jews were very prone to practice avodah zarah (strange worship/idolatry). However the Babylonian captivity burned that out of our hearts forever. Since then, you are correct, we are very resilient against sycretism.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Here is the question -- an ethnic Jew may be an atheist, right? Which may border on secular Jew?

Yes, a Jew can be an atheist. Some secular Jews are atheists, others are not.

As an aside, I do know atheist Jews who are religious, not secular. I have met many atheist Jews who sing psalms and pray prayers in Reform synagogues. I even have an atheist friend who is an Orthodox Jew -- he says he is a Jew first and an atheist second.

 

[dybmh]

I'm sure there are those who disagree (and apparently this thread's OP does) but I tend to think of secular as a quality that groups and organizations can have, while individual persons are instead non-religious, disbelievers, skeptics, atheists or something else a bit more specific.

Mainly because secularism is a directive to guide policies. It is arguably unnecessary or even impossible to be secular at the individual level.

I think, @Jayhawker Soule had the best answer. Applying it: first list the combined attributes which define the category 'religious', then negate them and create a category defined by those combined negated attributes..

The challenge, I think, is defining the initial set of atttributes, the ones which positively identify religious and nothing else. After that, it should be a 'simple' matter of distributing the negation through the definition.

 

[dybmh]

Ok and since it was used in reference to a description of an author, I was wondering how it applied to his personna. Or anyone's personna.

Which author? Maybe we can look them up and learn a little bit about them?

 

[YoursTrue]

Which author? Maybe we can look them up and learn a little bit about them?

That's ok I prefer it remain undisclosed right now. There's nothing really to learn except to say from these definitions and my own knowledge that a secular Jew is probably someone who was born a Jew, likes the ethnicity of his culture but does not have a firmly rooted religious belief about God to say or think that God exists.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

That's ok I prefer it remain undisclosed right now. There's nothing really to learn except to say from these definitions and my own knowledge that a secular Jew is probably someone who was born a Jew, likes the ethnicity of his culture but does not have a firmly rooted religious belief about God to say or think that God exists.

There are secular Jews who are firm believers in God. But they simply do not practice Judaism.

 

[YoursTrue]

There are secular Jews who are firm believers in God. But they simply do not practice Judaism.

Ok.

 

[LuisDantas]

I think, @Jayhawker Soule had the best answer. Applying it: first list the combined attributes which define the category 'religious', then negate them and create a category defined by those combined negated attributes..

The challenge, I think, is defining the initial set of atttributes, the ones which positively identify religious and nothing else. After that, it should be a 'simple' matter of distributing the negation through the definition.

That would be a good idea, except that it does not work at all.

We neither have a working definition of "religious" nor that proposal addresses partial absence of whatever attributes define that. Sorry, but that just doesn't work.

 

[LuisDantas]

Yes, a Jew can be an atheist. Some secular Jews are atheists, others are not.

As an aside, I do know atheist Jews who are religious, not secular. I have met many atheist Jews who sing psalms and pray prayers in Reform synagogues. I even have an atheist friend who is an Orthodox Jew -- he says he is a Jew first and an atheist second.

That's ok I prefer it remain undisclosed right now. There's nothing really to learn except to say from these definitions and my own knowledge that a secular Jew is probably someone who was born a Jew, likes the ethnicity of his culture but does not have a firmly rooted religious belief about God to say or think that God exists.

Belief in (the existence of a) god is simply not helpful for religion. Even for the Abrahamics creeds, which may have invented the notion that it would be the prime requirement of religion.

Ultimately, belief is just belief. It may appeal for people for various reasons, but all the same it is just belief.

Religion, if we want to define it as something that people may participate in for positive results, simply does not benefit from belief, particularly monotheistic belief. Instead, it deals with and requires some measure of acceptance, mutual attention, and efforts at establishing a shared understanding of valid goals, virtues and ideas.

It is not only possible to be an atheistic religious person, but it can be the optimal situation as well. Even in the Abrahamics that disdain atheism.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

That would be a good idea, except that it does not work at all.

We neither have a working definition of "religious" nor that proposal addresses partial absence of whatever attributes define that. Sorry, but that just doesn't work.

When it comes to Judaism, we certainly do have an understanding of "religious." It means doing mitzvot, saying prayers, singing psalms, keeping the holy days... It's not at all hard to understand.

 

[dybmh]

That would be a good idea, except that it does not work at all.

Hee-hee. That's the story of my life.

We neither have a working definition of "religious" nor that proposal addresses partial absence of whatever attributes define that. Sorry, but that just doesn't work.

Agreed. But, it could work IF we had that working defintion. What I proposed was developing the working definition as the first step.

Would the direct route would be better? Make a list of the combined attributes which positively define 'secular' and nothing else?

The problem is, without that comprehensive list of attributes, only bringing one, individual vs. group, it's too easy for what-about-this-and-that to spoil the conversation. And I'd rather not do that. Unless you really-really want me to do that.

 

[LuisDantas]

Hee-hee. That's the story of my life.



Agreed. But, it could work IF we had that working defintion. What I proposed was developing the working definition as the first step.

Would the direct route would be better? Make a list of the combined attributes which positively define 'secular' and nothing else?

The problem is, without that comprehensive list of attributes, only bringing one, individual vs. group, it's too easy for what-about-this-and-that to spoil the conversation. And I'd rather not do that. Unless you really-really want me to do that.

That first step is definitely and drammatically on the bold side. I just don't see how you could meaningfully achieve it without promoting quite a bit of change in society. I'm talking of the sort of change that will be taught in scholls for decades at least.

A very large part of current social expectations relies on religion remaining contradictorily defined and understood and misunderstood.