****ing context please

[Koldo]

Because they wouldn't become accepted had they not reached a certain degree in erudition and spiritual accomplishment.

Which doesn't mean that everything they say is true. So, once again, are you accepting everything they say as true simply because of the status they have achieved ?

Other accepted rabbis are the ones who determine which books have good information and which are not to be accepted. If it contradicts what they know to be true, they're not going to accept it, give it an approbation or whatever.

Accepted by whom ? Why would such a determination entail that the information presented in the book is completely accurate ?

 

[Tumah]

You understand this how? I actually identify the Christian religion in a very progressive form, which if I'm not mistaken is part of that lineage. No?

It may be, but I notice you also didn't say, "No, I do believe in the G-d of Abraham". You've clearly demonstrated that you don't believe in prophetic revelation.

I don't take the mythologies as literal facts. I take them as symbolic truths. And that, is the salient point.

But the reason that you do that, is because you don't believe in prophetic revelation. If you believed that G-d would speak to an individual or nation and reveal to them His will, then you would not have a reason to relegate these stories to mythological status and by extension have to interpret them as symbolism.
So belief in G-d and Divine revelation is what it ultimately comes down to.

Because it may hopefully provoke other points of view about the same things, as opposed to you monopolizing the conversation with your interpretations of it as the sole truth about them.

I am monopolizing the conversation? I don't think I've initiated a single post past the first one on this thread and I've been completely on the defensive from multiple posters for the majority of this thread. How is that monopolizing?

Speak only for yourself. I certainly am taking your perspectives into account, whereas it appears you simply reject another's who doesn't align with your own. Have you attempted to understand this from a modernist religious perspective?

That's no what I meant. I meant you aren't going to start believing in the G-d of Abraham and I am not going to stop believing in Him. Those are the two bases on which the difference of opinion of how we interpret the Tanach stories are based on.

I simply took what you described as the state of true prophecy and compared the description you offered with that of a psychotic, which would be a fact. I do have an understanding of these things, on both sides of it, understanding mystical states. What you described it not that of a mystical state, but a psychological dissociation.

I haven't described any state of being in prophecy. I only spoke about someone who has attained a state of prophecy. I also don't think that you have an understanding of Judaism's view of how prophecy works, regardless of your understanding of mystical states.

I do see how you what I said could have made it sound like psychosis were one inclined to interpret what I said that way. But my intent was to say that the prophet who can see the bigger picture wouldn't give his personal feelings of loss towards a loved one greater significance than his desire to see his loved one's soul be rectified.

Sure, and I provided the context from a modernist religious perspective, which I feel has a greater explanatory power.

Ok. So then how did I get involved in your explanation to the OP of the context?

I believe God exists. I don't believe that how any one group claims to understand that God is the final word on the subject, by any means.

Of course.

 

[Tumah]

Which doesn't mean that everything they say is true. So, once again, are you accepting everything they say as true simply because of the status they have achieved ?

Yes. Becoming accomplished in Torah study and spiritual achievement grants them credibility until such times as they do something to lose that.

Accepted by whom ? Why would such a determination entail that the information presented in the book is completely accurate ?

Accepted by other rabbis who are established as being accomplished in erudition and spiritual accomplishment. Because that means that we can rely on the information that is provided.

 

[Windwalker]

So belief in G-d and Divine revelation is what it ultimately comes down to.

I believe in God. I do not believe in prophetic revelation in the sense you do. I believe in revelation, but I do not believe in magic. I do not believe those who speak from a place of inspiration are magical mouthpiece for God speaking human words through them. I believe it's considerably more subtle than that. I believe that belief is just that, a belief.

I am monopolizing the conversation? I don't think I've initiated a single post past the first one on this thread and I've been completely on the defensive from multiple posters for the majority of this thread. How is that monopolizing?

I wasn't speaking about you in this thread. I meant you state your point of view, and that's the only one you will entertain. To not consider another's point of view shows a monopoly of opinion.

That's no what I meant. I meant you aren't going to start believing in the G-d of Abraham and I am not going to stop believing in Him. Those are the two bases on which the difference of opinion of how we interpret the Tanach stories are based on.

I do not believe that shifting how we think about God means we disbelieve in God!! Surely, you must understand this?

I haven't described any state of being in prophecy. I only spoke about someone who has attained a state of prophecy. I also don't think that you have an understanding of Judaism's view of how prophecy works, regardless of your understanding of mystical states.

Perhaps not. Each group has their own mythologies. But I do understand mystical states from experience.

I do see how you what I said could have made it sound like psychosis were one inclined to interpret what I said that way.

I'm inclined to weigh your description against what I know of dissociative pathologies because that was the thing that immediately came to mind reading your description. It certainly didn't fit anything I know of mystical states.

But my intent was to say that the prophet who can see the bigger picture wouldn't give his personal feelings of loss towards a loved one greater significance than his desire to see his loved one's soul be rectified.

And this is a dissociation in that in the context you initially describe it was killing them in order to save them. I call that psychotic, and for damned good reason. It is.

Ok. So then how did I get involved in your explanation to the OP of the context?

I simply responded to one of your comments to spark converstaion. This is a debate thread, is it not? If you object to this, then why are you here?

Of course.

Then you see validity to my points of view?

 

[Aštra’el]

I believe in God. I do not believe in prophetic revelation in the sense you do. I believe in revelation, but I do not believe in magic. I do not believe those who speak from a place of inspiration are magical mouthpiece for God speaking human words through them. I believe it's considerably more subtle than that. I believe that belief is just that, a belief.


I wasn't speaking about you in this thread. I meant you state your point of view, and that's the only one you will entertain. To not consider another's point of view shows a monopoly of opinion.


I do not believe that shifting how we think about God means we disbelieve in God!! Surely, you must understand this?


Perhaps not. Each group has their own mythologies. But I do understand mystical states from experience.


I'm inclined to weigh your description against what I know of dissociative pathologies because that was the thing that immediately came to mind reading your description. It certainly didn't fit anything I know of mystical states.


And this is a dissociation in that in the context you initially describe it was killing them in order to save them. I call that psychotic, and for damned good reason. It is.


I simply responded to one of your comments to spark converstaion. This is a debate thread, is it not? If you object to this, then why are you here?


Then you see validity to my points of view?

This topic appeared to be about enlightening ourselves to the original context of the verses mentioned in the OP. Tumah presented to us the most relevant and insightful information out of anyone thus far, whereas you and Shadow Wolf's personal philosophies and feelings about these verses appear to be rather irrelevant to the OP.

 

[Tumah]

I believe in God. I do not believe in prophetic revelation in the sense you do. I believe in revelation, but I do not believe in magic. I do not believe those who speak from a place of inspiration are magical mouthpiece for God speaking human words through them. I believe it's considerably more subtle than that. I believe that belief is just that, a belief.

And I don't. I believe in prophetic revelation. I believe that although prophetic revelation is currently suspended, there are still minor prophetic revelations for those capable of advancing themselves to a significant degree.

I wasn't speaking about you in this thread. I meant you state your point of view, and that's the only one you will entertain. To not consider another's point of view shows a monopoly of opinion.

I guess my English is not as good as it used to be, because that doesn't sound like the correct usage of the word. Regardless, I don't feel like its important for me to entertain your opinion, except in a case where I might need to understand what you are trying to say for the purpose of the conversation.
I'm not a seeker, I'm as thoroughly convinced of Jewish theology as I am that trees don't grow on the clouds. I don't see any value in entertaining the notion that trees do grow on clouds, or that other people have other concepts about existence. I'm happy your comfortable in your beliefs and I don't particularly care to know them.

I do not believe that shifting how we think about God means we disbelieve in God!! Surely, you must understand this?

I didn't say G-d, I said G-d of Abraham. I didn't mean that you don't have some G-d concept, but that you don't believe in a G-d that engages in personal revelation as mainstream Abrahamic religions believe He did with Abraham.
Changing from a god who engages in personal revelation to one that doesn't represents a fundamental shift in theological stance. Within my dogmatic system, it represents a shift into heresy. And within my personal experience, it represents a shift out of what I have evaluated to be true.

Perhaps not. Each group has their own mythologies. But I do understand mystical states from experience.

I'm not sure mystical states are strictly relevant to prophecy.

I'm inclined to weigh your description against what I know of dissociative pathologies because that was the thing that immediately came to mind reading your description. It certainly didn't fit anything I know of mystical states.

I wasn't describing a mystical state.

And this is a dissociation in that in the context you initially describe it was killing them in order to save them. I call that psychotic, and for damned good reason. It is.

Its only a dissociation in the context of your belief that there is no divine revelation and there is nothing to see. In the context of my belief where a prophet can perceive heaven there is no dissociation.

I simply responded to one of your comments to spark converstaion. This is a debate thread, is it not? If you object to this, then why are you here?

Fine. Then excuse my simple-mindedness and kindly go back to your first post and clarify to me the point that you intended to debate.

Then you see validity to my points of view?

No. I was being sarcastic. I see your freedom to maintain and express your views. And I fundamentally disagree with them.

 

[Windwalker]

This topic appeared to be about enlightening ourselves to the original context of the verses mentioned in the OP. Tumah presented to us the most relevant and insightful information out of anyone thus far, whereas you and Shadow Wolf's personal philosophies and feelings about these verses appear to be rather irrelevant to the OP.

My initial post was specifically about the context, and it has nothing to do with a "personal philosophy", whatever that is supposed to mean. To quote myself from post 11,

The context is a tribal society in ancient human history. These are the sorts of things they did back then and rationalized it by attributing it to the will of their tribal deity, as opposed to the will of the society itself (which is the truth of the matter). Is this psychotic to you and I in this day and age where we are rather far removed from ancient tribal societies? Yes, of course. We live in a modern society where we relate to one another and everything we know and understand about society and the world in vastly more nuanced and compassionate ways. I believe we are far less violent today in modern societies than tribal societies.
​

If you would like the research this is based upon, I would be happy to provide it. All my subsequent posts are in support of this, not just talking about my "soft" feelings as you seem quick to dismiss for whatever reason.