The leader of Reform Judaism takes his place among the "religious left."
The leader of the largest branch of American Judaism blasted conservative religious activists in a speech Saturday, calling them "zealots" who claim a "monopoly on God" while promoting anti-gay policies akin to Adolf Hitler's.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - The Fifth Dentist
Gonzo:
I thought you're post was brilliant. I think I'm trying to make the same point which is that you can't be both (1) a literal adherent to a 5000 year old book and (2) civilized. You've got to pick. The Wahabbist picks the book. You and me pick civilization. Orthodox jews would rather pretend that it can do both by claiming to literally interpret the torah while mitigate the unpalatable parts with complicated rules and tortured logic. The reason they do this, is because literal interpretation of the torah is their sole source of legitimacy. Judaism, you'll note doesn't have a Pope.
27 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Two quick answers.
First Gonzo and David,
I'll need a litle time to find the sources for the interference of the "reform" movement in the politics of the country to its detriment. There's plenty there - but I haven't had time to pull it up just yet.
I need time to chew on some of your other comments, Gonzo. But this much I will say immediately. I would love it if the world allowed us to stew in our own mess and solve our own problems, and if the US government pulled out its money, soldiers, bases, influence peddlers and constant, unneeded interference. You could add the EU and Vatican to the list of persona non grata in my book.
Talking about the influence of American Jews here is a complicated and unpleasant discussion. It gets real close to home.
Fifth Dentist:
It's not quite the three point argument you make it out to be. There are the Seven Laws of Noah and there is Jewish Law. The two differ in their possible interpretation. But the Holiness Code is designed to make sure that Jews and righteous strangers living in Israel remain as holy as the land, with the threat that if we don't, we get kicked out.
Given this goal, IF Torah law is in force and the event occurs in ISRAEL between two consenting adults with verifiable witnesses - or if the the two doing it admitted the act on their own, then if the court ordered an execution, I'd support it. I wouldn't like it, but I'd support it.
28 - The Fifth Dentist
Ruvy:
Thank you for admitting that. I take back my claim that you are intellectually dishonest. It no longer applies. I figured that you would never advocate executing homosexuals and that you'd back down on your claim that you believed in literally interpreting the torah when you realized the implications of it. Boy was I wrong. Well, all I can say is that's absolutely monsterous. That's not a brand of judaism with which I'm familiar.
29 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Fifth Dentist,
Good times have spoiled a lot of folks and made it hard for them to realize just how monstrous history can be. This is particularly true of Americans. Until 1975, the only part of the United States that had some understanding of how hard it can be to lose a war, for example, was the American south, which suffered invasion and foreign occupation for over a dozen years. For most Americans, history, a sad, frustrating and painful story for most, happens to others.
For Jews, it is not quite like that.
30 - The Fifth Dentist
Remind me, was Israel attacked by homosexuals in 1967 or in 1973?
31 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Fifth Dentist,
Just a quick comment more. I went through what is written in Torah and applied it as best as I knew how. That doesn't mean that I liked what I read. I could never live with being a judge on a Sanhedrin. But if I'm serious about my beliefs, I have to accept what is written in Torah. I don't have the right to abrogate the Word of the Creator. No man does.
I can only hope that those who eventually serve on the courts in this land will apply the law as humanely as possible.
32 - The Fifth Dentist
So then I guess you're "just following orders."
33 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Neither.
But a large part of the Egyptian officer corps in 1947 was homosexual. That was not the issue, though. The officers were so involved in pleasuring themselves that they did not pay attention to the business at hand and lost what should have been an easy conquest of southern Israel. I do not imply that homosexuals can't or don't make excellent soldiers. Israel's experience proves just the opposite.
But it was serious commanders like Abdel Gamal Nasser who pulled the Egyptian coals out of the fire and who successfully negotiated a withdrawal from the Faluja pocket in 1949. Were it not for the interference of the United States, the international border would have been drawn from El Arish in the Sinai.
34 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
I see that your trying hard to pull a "Nuremburg" out of this. The point of the Nuremburg Trials was that there was a higher morality to be appealed to than following orders.
Do you have a higher moral source than G-d? The latest issue of Political Correctness Magazine perhaps? Are you running an "Enlightenment Seminar for Not Up To Speed Divine Beings." Has anyone signed up yet?
35 - The Fifth Dentist
So Israel actually was invaded by homosexuals in 1947? I guess they're more of a threat than I thought.
36 - steve
yea dentist...you didnt hear? Israel was attact by Gay Islamic Jihadists. (just kidding)
37 - The Fifth Dentist
Good question Ruvy:
If you'll recall, Rabbi Yoffe's point was that the anti-gay policies advocated by the religious right are similar to Hitler's. The Nazi policy on homosexuals, as you'll recall, was to execute them. While they may not have followed the "two witness rule" it seems that from your perspective they tried to follow the spirit of the torah with regard to homosexuals.
In answer to your question, no, I don't claim to know of a higher moral authority than God. I don't believe that the torah is the literal word of God. I believe it was written by men a long time ago based on their primitive conception of God. I agree with Rabbi Yoffe. When the torah contradicts what you know to be right (e.g., killing innocent people) then you should disregard it or at least interpret it in light of civilized notions of morality.
38 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
You style yourself Fifth Dentist. Stick with dentistry and stay away from law. It will profit you. You have trouble distinguishing between people and behavior. In law, that is important.
The Nazis executed people who were homosexuals. They executed people who were Jews. The executed people who were socialists. The people were labelled and killed. Their behavior was irrelevant. Only the label on the people mattered.
If you think Torah operates in this fashion, especially after reading all that I wrote, don't bother discussing it. You haven't got a clue.
39 - The Fifth Dentist
"Fifth Dentist" refers to a well-known series of Trident Chewing Gum commercials which claimed that 4 out of 5 dentists recommended Trident. The fifth dentist refers to the one that didn't recommend Trident. In other words, the non-conformist. But in fact Ruvy, I am a lawyer by training. I graduated from Cornell Law School, which is considered a pretty good law school around these parts. So I think I'm at least qualified to continue this discussion. But I digress.
The point is that I don't believe and I am incapable of believing that the Torah advocates killing homosexuals. You apparently do. I didn't put those words in your mouth. I've said that assuming the torah did advocate killing homosexuals, it should be disregarded. You said you can't disregard any part of the torah, no matter how reprehensible, because it's the literal word of God. Is this an unfair characterization of our positions? What is it specifically that I "don't have a clue" of?
The Nazis killed homosexuals. Homosexuals, unlike most of the other groups the Nazis killed, were defined by their behavior. You advocate killing homosexuals. Therefore, your policy toward homosexuals is similar to the Nazi policy toward homosexuals, as Rabbi Yoffe correctly noted. The only difference I can see is the "two witness" rule. So I grant you, your policy is more careful in differentiating real homosexuals from those that are falsely accused. Once again, please correct me if I have mistated the facts or your position.
The Nazis who killed those homosexuals acted legally under the law of Nazi Germany. In fact, many of them were ordered to do it by superiors. At the Nuremburg trials this defense was rejected because these crimes were found to violate a higher law. What was this higher law? Obviously, according to you, it wasn't the torah which in your view actually commands this kind of thing (at least within Israel.) In my opinion as a lawyer it violated every system of law ever devised that's worth a shit including the torah.
If you're finding this discussion uncomfortable let me suggest that it's not because I'm misstating your position, applying faulty logic, or behaving rudely. Instead, please consider the possibility that your discomfort stems from your untenable position. It rejects everything that's worthwhile about judaism in favor of a literal interpetation of the torah which violates the spirit and history of the jewish people so profoundly that it's shocking to me that a jew living in Israel wouldn't realize it.
40 - Silas Kain
yea dentist...you didnt hear? Israel was attact (sic) by Gay Islamic Jihadists. (just kidding)
Gay Islamic Jihadists. All I can think of is sequin decorated burkas with fringe.
41 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
I also studied law - and if you were a judge where I lived, I'd pack up and move to a different jurisdiction.
Your interpretation of the criminal code, judging by the way you have chosen to interpret Torah, is that you kill (or jail if not a death penalty jurisdiction) murderers.
Trial, proof, evidence, appeal - all garbage, eyewash. The criminal code kills murderers - end of discussion.
Your position simply is that the Torah kills homosexuals - Nazis killed homosexuals - therefore the Torah is a code for Nazis and their ilk and should be ignored, if not discarded. End of discussion.
Slick. Great propaganda. Gotta love it.
People with no legal training tend to think this way. People with legal training and an axe to grind express themselves this way. I see both all the time. One expects such lazy thinking from a person with no legal training. One presumes that a person with legal training knows better.
Live and learn.
The Torah condemns BEHAVIOR, not people. It sets up processes for trial and due process, and, particularly in capital cases, insists on fulfilling a burden of proof. It demands that judges not respect people but law, and not pervert their judgment. It demands one law for all residents of the land, applied equally. That sounds a lot like the civil procedure I learned years ago.
As for my own opinions, the Torah seeks to guard against public depravity as being unfit for a nation whose role it is to be a holy nation. This includes gang rapes, worshipping idols using sex (a common practice in the ancient world, and if you think about commercials and what and how they hustle things, a common practice today as well) or child sacrifice. It states in unequivocal terms that the land is holy and the people living on it are expected to be as holy or get kicked the hell out. History demonstrates that my ancestors were unable to maintain this level of holiness - and got kicked out.
Sexual depravity was illustrated by what went on in Sodom, but you can also look to ancient Greece and Rome if you desire and see plenty of the same.
But let's not level accusations at people too dead to answer back. Let's look at the enlightened society we both come from, the United States. You would overrule Torah with your perception of enlighted and civilized behavior from this "leader" of the "free" world and its culture.
In my lifetime I have seen the rates of illegitimate births rise from neglible to immense. I have seen abortion legalized - a good move initially - and then turn into a method of birth control for inconvenient pregnancies. I've seen efforts to create secure environments for children sacrificed to corporate bottom lines with millions of homes where there are two parents working because they HAVE to and kids given a latch key and told "raise yourself, sonny". I've seen the rise of single parent households with frazzled parents trying to do it all - bring home the bacon, care for the kids, provide a future and retirement - and making serious and costly sacrifices along the way. I've seen the level of education dumbed down, the level of the print media dumbed down, and the sexualizing of American society to the point that seven year old girls are worried about the kind of lip-stick they should use on "dates."
From this sick culture, I am to seek my values and reject those of Torah as barbaric? Hmmm.
One hell of a perspective. Truth of the matter is that it wouldn't bother me that much - 'Am Reiká' means "empty nation" in Hebrew and America is a nation being emptied of its spiritual values daily - except that the sick élite ru(i)nning this country looks to yours for moral guidance.
"Rabbi" Eric Yoffie marches to the tune of this culture in a most conformist way, shooting his hand out in salute to the values of political correctness and calling anyone who disagrees a Nazi. The movement he heads, in addition to watering down the wine of American Judaism with Evian water (plain water is not good enough for the upper crust), wants to import his crap here.
It's not hard to see how the road of depravity that Eric Yoffie wants to lead your country down will lead to another version of Sodom. I can only hope that I can get my relatives out before the "cup of Sodom is filled."
42 - The Fifth Dentist
Ruvy:
Good idea, maybe I should move to Israel and become a judge. So where are you planning on moving to? I hear that Yemen has some laws you might approve of.
I'm not condemning the torah, Israel, or judaism. I merely reject your literalist interpretation of the torah. Because your position is indefensible you feel the need to obfusucate as in your previous post which is long and rambling but says absolutely nothing. I don't know what they teach in Israeli law schools, but in the English/American legal system we have two concepts called relevance and materiality. You might want to consider looking them up.
43 - gonzo marx
well Ruvy...
i see you still have not dealt with my two anecdotes from the Old Testament and whether you think they are literal or allegorical
how about an easy one...
according to the Jewish Tradition...Moses was given the Ten Commandments as written by the "finger of god" upon some stone tablets...
now...if memory serves, the english translation of the First Commandment...which one woudl think is THE most important of them, cuz it came first...is...
"Thou shalt have no other god before me"
we still on the same page so far?
good...
my Question for you then, is one i asked a Hassidic Rabbi once....which elicited some very warming laughter from a dear old man...
by the very wording of the first commandment, does this not mean that the gd who wrote the commandment is acknowledging that there ARE other gods, but that he requires his followers to be the First among any gods followed?
just curious...
Excelsior!
44 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
For Gonzo and David,
I went on line and pulled up a few links to the times that Eric Yoffie has opened his trap about Israel. There will be three of these, witrh three URL's per.
He has done what I said he has. the one item I could not substantiate on line was about Kibbutz Lotan (if it is still a kibbutz).
Kibbutz Lotan is in the south of the country in the Arava valley. It has a store on the road across from itrs entrance. If you happen to go by on Saturday, you'll sede it is open. So much for respecting the Sabbath in the Holy Land.
1. On Yoffie's stand supporting expelling Jews from their homes in Gaza
At least that's the consensus of many observers after a surprising commentary in which the president of the Union for Reform Judaism -- an outspoken liberal -- called Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon "my hero" for Sharon's plan for an Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.
2. ARZA faithful show Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon:
Reform Movement stands behind the Israeli gov't and the Disengagement
3. Writing on problems with conversions (a major problem in Israel)
"Still, as my Orthodox friends remind me, without an expression of kabbalat mitzvot (acceptance of the Law as defined by Orthodox authorities), Reform conversions cannot be recognized by the Orthodox world."
[RUVY: I guess you're so excited being on the site that you haven't yet had a chance to read the BlogCritics Writers Guidelines, particularly the parts about how to format active html links and not to use MS Word type smart quotes. Right? Comments Editor.]
45 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Continued from the previous comment.
4. Lashing out at "extremist settlers"
In a major policy address here last week, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the newly renamed Union for Reform Judaism, criticized President Bush's tax policies and the Republican push to curb abortion rights. But the Reform leader reserved his harshest remarks for Jewish settlers in Gaza and the West Bank.
"Not all settlers are extremists. But their leaders are trying to impose an endless war on Israel and the Jewish people," Yoffie told delegates to his organization's biennial convention. "For these zealots, their right to live anywhere in the historic Land of Israel takes precedence over Israel's democracy and, indeed, over her very existence. But I do not believe now, and I have never believed, that they speak for the Israeli majority."
5. About cancelling trips to Israel in the wake of terror
6. Reform leader calls on U.S. to pressure Israel, Jews to pressure U.S. By Nathan Guttman, Ha'aretz Correspondent
"Continuing to build settlements is to threaten the Jewish character of the state and is to undermine the Zionist dream,"
he argues fervently and adds that the goal of the settlement effort is to create a reality that is irreversible.
"That's what scares me most of all," says Yoffie.
[RUVY: coughhtmlcoughformating PLEASE! Comments Editor.]
46 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
My apologies guys.
Someone is refusing to publish my comments with the remaining URL's. So you'll have to do with the six that I have posted so far.
[RUVY: You can only put three per comment. Even if they're active, which yours haven't been yet. You have taken the time to read the BC Writers Guidelines, haven't you? Of course you have... Comments Editor.]
47 - The Fifth Dentist
I read link #3 regarding orthodox rabbis' policy of not accepting reform and conservative conversion. It has nothing specifically to do with Israel. It's just as big an issue in the United States. I don't even think he mentions Israel. Is this your idea of evidence of Rabbi Yoffe poking his nose into Israeli business? In your opinion U.S. rabbis shouldn't discuss conversion policies?
48 - gonzo marx
Ruvy....again, you seem to be confusing my points with those of others...no worries, just attempting clarification...
as to your points about Rabbi Yoffie...i've looked over the articles you have linked to....and i don't see exactly what your problem is here
i can understand your disagreement with his political or even theological positions, but the vehement vitriol you seem to aim in his direction does not appear commensurate with either his speech or actions
he appears to be setting out his own thoughts about Issues here in the US as well as in Israel...and according to your own quoted sources, he had been quiet when it came to criticizing the Israeli government for years...and broke said silence to cheer Sharon on for getting rid of the stumbling blocks of the settlements in order to further the peace process
did i miss something there?
or are you on the side of the settlements and have no desire to work out a solution with the Palestinians so both Tribes can live together peacefully?
no one, least of all me, would ever say it will be easy...but it does appear to be the main point of this Rabbi's quoted speeches
so, could you explain what your exact problem with him is?
thanx
Excelsior!
49 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Gonzo,
I read through both Books of Kings where the story of Elijah's life if found. I found nothing about bears or virgin daughters being handed over to a crowd to protect guests. I also loooked over the Chronicles - both books - and found nothing of the sort. Could you be kind enough to scribble down where in the Hebrew Bible you found these? I'd like to look for myself and see the text before commenting further on their content.
Generally, this much I'll say off the top of my head.
Torah, the first five books were dictated to Moses letter by letter by G-d - excepting that portion at the end dealing with his death.
The other portions of the Hebrew Bible were written by men.
Thus, Torah is the word of G-d. Does this mean that it is the "literal truth" the way Christians seem to understand that phrase?
No.
There are many "errors" in the Hebrew - mispellings, grammatical irregularities and so forth. Did G-d need a spell-checker? Did He need a secretary or an editor?
No.
The mistakes are flags for those reading the Torah to look further and contemplate. In other words, there is more to the text than meets the eye.
50 - Bliffle
All this controversy, quarelling and uncertainty about god! Could it be that the very concept is hopelessly flawed?
51 - gonzo marx
2 Kings 2:23-25 is the bears Story...with Elijah
and pardon this senile olde Narrator...the angels Story was Lot and can be found at (Genesis 14:1-2)
hope those help...just an Example of Parable rather than Literal..in my way of Thinking at least...
i am still curious as to your reaction to my comments on the First Commandment in comment #43
just to assure...please do not take my discussion for any kind of disrespect towards anything, theological curiosity and the desire for a high level of discussion and exchange of Ideas alone motivate my commentary here....
Excelsior!
52 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Just a quick comment for Bliffle before turning in. In a human centered universe, we would assume that because we cannot uderstand something, the concept must be flawed. In a G-d centered universe, we should assume that if we cannot understand something, it is because our understanding is flawed.
53 - The Fifth Dentist
Indeed there is no doubt that the first five books of the torah are God's exact words. Nevertheless, God left iit to men to determine in which parts he was being serious and in which parts he was joking. I personally believe that most of the parts where God sets forth ridiculous punishments for harmless transgressions were meant to be ironic. For example, Moses may have inquired of God "what should we do about these homosexuals" and God may have responded sarcastically "that's a really serious problem why don't you put them to death" but what he really meant was " I don't care about stuff like that, worry about yourselves and leave your neighbors alone." That's the God I believe in.
54 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Gonzo,
If you read closely you'll notice that Elijah never had run ins with nasty hoodlums or with with bears. His successor, Elisha, did. I googled up Elijah and bears and, lo and behold, found the story where a pack of "na'arím k'taním," small youths in the Hebrew, told Elisha, "go up old man, go up" meaning that he should be taken away by a chariot of fire the way Elijah had been a few days before. Elisha apparently discerned that they wanted him to die and cursed them. Along came ursus to finish the job. She injured the youths, not killed them.
Note that it did not say in the text "yeladim," the common word for children. Na'ár is the word for a youth. The thirty seven year old Isaac is referred to as a youth when G-d tests Abraham.
So let's draw the lesson - even a man of G-d - that is how Elisha is referred to repeatedly in the stories about him in the book of Kings - can be a bad tempered fellow. When a gang of young toughs threaten him, he curses them.
Lesson? Don't mess with a man of G-d?
No.
The lesson is that the folks you learn about in the Tana"kh are very human. Moses, the greatest prophet of Judaism, was a murderer with a bad temper. But he had enough merit in him that G-d considered him a friend and knew him "face to face."
There are some rabbis who engage in hagiographia, trying to sanitize anything they don't like in the Torah or the Tana"kh. Christians engage in this too, concentrating on their own book.
I'm just reading what I see. No halos, no excuses, no nothing.
Now, what did Elisha do most of the time? He multiplied jars of oil and bread for starving and poor people, and brought dead kids back to life.
55 - Christopher Rose
RUVY: The flaw in all this faithist reasoning still remains the total and utter lack of any evidence that this creature you call god actually exists, now or then. All that exists is stories and empty demands for faith in, well, nothing really.
Jewish, Muslim, Christian, whatever; you've all far more in common than the details of dogma that divide you and it all troubles me greatly.
56 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Gonzo,
Comment on the "first" commandment. Leaving aside the minor fact that it is not the first commandment in the Torah - the first commandment is "be fruitful and multiply" - in Genesis; it is the first commandment delivered at Horev - leaving all that aside, I'm not in the business of defending G-d's wording in His commands.
But, the text does say "there shall not be other gods" before me. The ancient Hebrews had come from a world where the Egyptian king was a god. The word used here is often considered the title for G-d himself and is often translated that way. That is why I've not transliterated it, like I do so many others. But consider psalm 82 - "you are gods, but you will die like men". The word there is the same word as used in Exodus, and in reality may mean something very different from what we are used to translating it to mean.
The Hassid laughed because THAT possibility was way off his radar, and you gave him a poser. I have theories about this word and what it really means that I'd rather not go into right now. I don't follow blindly. Had I done so, I would have been happy to accept the offer of a roof over my head and a place to study offered me by a Haba"d rabbi when I was homeless, 23 years ago. The price was giving up my intellectual independence. This I didn't do. This I do not do now.
57 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Christopher,
You wrote, "Jewish, Muslim, Christian, whatever; you've all far more in common than the details of dogma that divide you and it all troubles me greatly."
If you're a red-head and you have two kids who are red-heads and who look like you, would it trouble you? About 90% of Islam is Judaism as it existed 1,300 years ago - Talmudic and rabbinic rulings included. Most of Christianity is a reworking of Jewish ritual to fit some slightly different ideas about redemption. Paul was a Jew - a typical self hating Jew of his own day. The twelve disciples were all Jews. Jesus was a Jew. When I look at Christianity, what I see is Jewish chicken soup made all wrong, but Jewish chicken soup, nonetheless.
What has you so disturbed that daughters should look like the mother, even though they might hate her?
58 - Christopher Rose
Hi RUVY: I think you misunderstood me, though you might have just been taking a mental breath before responding to my main point.
To respond to yours, what troubles me is not the similarities amongst "redheads" but the persistence of the phenomenon of faithism through different formats.
59 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Chris,
Do bear in mind here that I started out as an atheist as a child, moved slowly to being an agnostic (you don't have to prove what you don't know), and bit by bit to being a believer. And the move was not based on a "leap of faith." It was based on being shown proofs, scientific proofs, that I could respect.
I guess "faithist" means someone demanding that you have faith in something without providing reasonable proof. I'm not sure. It's your term - you may want to provide a working definition so that I don't misconstrue your words.
However, if I get the gist of what you say, you're saying that all of this - Torah, Qur'an, etc., are just stories without archaeological backing to give it any solidity in fact. Therefore, at best, it is a series of stories designed to provide a guide to good behavior, and can be ignored when it doesn't pass someone's definition of humaneness, or whatever standard he chooses to apply to it. This echoes somewhat the arguments of the Fifth Dentist.
That would bring you to Eric Yoffie's argument and the basic claim of "reform" Judaism - that there is no "'ol", no yoke of accepting G-d's laws. It's all just a suggestion for good behavior, and anything that strikes you as barbaric or outmoded, just drop. If there is a G-d, He won't mind. Put simply, "reform" Judaism is just agnosticism with chicken soup and matzah balls thrown in to make it tasty to a Jew.
That is not what a "reform" or "liberal" Jew will tell you, but six pence and a half shilling equals the same thing, whether you count it out in farthings, half pence, pence, or three pence coins.
Proof of G-d does exist, as do archaeological proofs of a number of events in Torah and Tana"kh.
But that is another article - preferably one that I get paid for.
60 - Christopher Rose
RUVY: Yes, I recently coined the word faithist (though I'm not saying nobody else ever did) as I find the word atheist to be unacceptable, being couched in the language of religion.
My position is that normal, intelligent people can not go round believing in these quaint old religions literally, any more than we can go round running the planet based on astrology. Although the very existence of yourself and other people who are both intelligent and faithist does present a particular challenge!
I'm not saying that some of the stories found in these old writings didn't happen, some did, some didn't. There is a lot of evidence for a massive flood many years ago in many different places around the world, along with a host of stories to explain it. Therefore, there may well be archeological evidence of many of these old stories.
I am simply saying that there is zero evidence of the existence of more highly evolved beings than humankind. So far.
In principle, I am perfectly prepared to accept the existence of beings that have evolved differently, or more, than us. However, short of meeting one myself, I am going to have to have a whole lot more proof than the whole planet has yet produced to accept the existence of any gods at all. I wrote a simple little piece questioning the nature of this alien being for Blogcritics a while ago but got little in the way of credible response.
I think a universe full of gods (there can't be just one) would be a more vivid and unpredictable place and if they were proactive, a lot of the people who go round sucking up their own presumed moral superiority would be in for a rather rude awakening. But that's another story.
So, proof of god; got any?
61 - Bliffle
Reading here what is written about the Torah and other holy writings and their escape clauses and riders and ambiguities has convinced me that those writings are quite mad. Or perhaps they were written by US congressmen. Surely god would speak more clearly?
62 - The Fifth Dentist
There is an inevitable conflict between trying to follow some strict set of ethical rules and doing what you intuitively know is right. The real world is so complex that it's almost impossible to formulate a simple set of rules to define right and wrong. It is particularly hard to write a set of rules that can be valid for thousands of years without significant "interpretation." Of course fundamentalist sects can never admit the need to interpret scripture because it would undercut both their legitimacy and their claims that non-fundamentalists are heretics. It is equally difficult to not have any rules governing ethical behavior. If you read "The God That Failed" you'll find that part of the reason socialism went haywire was the ditching of rule based guides to ethical conduct in favor of an "end justifies the means" approach. I don't advocate either approach. I suggest that when your set of defined ethical rules conflicts with your intuitive sense of justice you need to decide for yourself what is right. That's a responsibility you can't abdicate to some holy text or religious leader or even to God himself. I've always felt that History's worst crmes have been committed by people who failed to do this.
63 - Bliffle
Ruvy: "In a human centered universe, we would assume that because we cannot uderstand something, the concept must be flawed. In a G-d centered universe, we should assume that if we cannot understand something, it is because our understanding is flawed."
Ah, but there may be some third alternative, because nothing proves that those are the only choices.
64 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
I can do two more posts on this topic, then I have to move on.
First of all Chris,
I read your piece on G-d. It was very interesting and intelligently written, and spurred a host of intelligent comments, but it seemed to me to be, if you will pardon the phrase, to be a bit provincial, presuming that G-d had to be within the universe that He had created. One of the commenters, in writing extensively, seemed to fall into that very trap himself.
A rabbi might call me a blasphemer for writing this (one is not supposed to imagine G-d), but imagine a small boy, taking a part of himself and creating a rock collection. There would be no evidence in the collection of the boy's toilet or of his refrigerator where he stored food. Creatures evolving within that collection might imagine such things, but would find no evidence of them.
I do no know enough of Christian or Moslem philosophy to speak intelligently to what they say, but I can attempt a few brief points frrom what little that I know of Judaism.
1. According to m'kubalim (those who receive messages from the Divine, called "kabbalót"), G-d exists outside of time and space and the universe, all of which are His creations. The universe is created from a tiny portion of G-d.
Thus, whatever G-d eats is beyond our imagination. This means, among other thngs that He has no sex. If the entire universe is made from G-d, then He is hanging out with us all the time, though we may not be aware of this. It means that He doesn't have some HQ within the universe, as He is outside of it. We are given no clues as to G-d's size. We are basically told that he is unimaginable to the human mind.
2. Is G-d lonely? That is an excellent question, related to the one my youngest son threw at me once: what's in it for Him? How does He profit from the whole deal?
I attempted a piece on this, based on the answer I gave him. Suffice it to say, it is longer than a mere comment would do justice to. Something I'll have to post on Blog Critics.
3. Is G-d really an advanced race of beings?
Go to Baalbek in Lebanon. Examine the stones there. They are huge. They are hewn. They are older than any civilization known to Man. How did they get there?
Now let me throw a question at you. Could there have been a race of advanced beings running around our planet a few thousand years ago and earlier? A "yes" answer does not necessarily foreclose the existence of the G-d I described to you above, but could answer the issue of where all the gods of the ancient world had come from. It could even provide answers to some of the questions that seem so hard to deal with in the text of the Tana"kh.
There is a similarity to the tales of the Sumerian, Hurrian, Babylonian and Greek "god" "myths" that is awful suspicious.
65 - Christopher Rose
Hi Ruvy: I don't see that it matters whether this "god" is within our universe or not. The questions remain valid.
But now you've got me thinking about the nature of the border between our universe and s/he/its. Maybe it's in one of those wacky n-dimensional universes that may or may not exist?
66 - Christopher Rose
Oh, and your scenario, Ruvy?
It's entirely possible that there "Could there have been a race of advanced beings running around our planet a few thousand years ago and earlier?".
Are you suggesting these as the source of these persistent god stories all around the world or do you tend towards the "primitive metaphor" view as an explanation?
67 - Lee Richards
Ruvy,
Your posts are interesting, articulate and sincere. But faith, belief, and unsupported opinion should not be mistaken for facts, knowledge and evidence.
Most scholars--Jewish, Protestant and Catholic--have accepted for nearly a hundred years that the 5 Books of Moses were actually written over several centuries by at least 4 different authors, and then cut and pasted into present form by an unknown ancient editor, so that sometimes the divergent thoughts of all four authors can be found on a single page. This widely accepted view is based on much research, study, examination and debate among scholars who have training and demonstrated expertise in languages, biblical archeology, and literary and historical analysis.
The authors called J and E produced the earliest documents reflecting the way of life during the nature/fertility stage of the religion of Israel.
The stories and laws of Deuteronomy ( by the author known as D)recounted the spiritual/ethical stage of Judaism's development. And the source known as P wrote later on and reflected the priestly/legal stage.
I recommend an excellent and authoritative book to you and any who would like to enhance their knowledge on this topic. It's "Who Wrote The Bible?" by Richard Elliott Friedman.
Unexamined and uncritical acceptance of various
world "scriptures" as literally true has been and continues to be a source of fear, ignorance and superstition and a cause of much inhumanity, suffering and trouble.
Carpe Diem!
68 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
OK guys, my last post on this thread.
Chris,
The answer to your question in comment #66 is yes.
Lee, thanks for the kind words. I learned all this stuff in college. When they take apart the New Testament the way they've taken apart the Old, I'll pay attention and consider. Till then, my answer to all and sundry is this. Yhe Torah Codes tie together the Torah and prove that there is one Author. "Higher Criticism", which is what you were writing about, is the puerile attempt of humans to make sense of a document written by a Divine Entity, and to attempt to bring it down to their own level. "Yir'át Hashém hareishít hokhmá" - the awe (or fear) of G-d is the beginning of wisdom.
Finally, to the author, who had defended Eric Yoffie, and to Gonzo.
From where you write, the problems of Israel must seem distant and small. I understand.
This is a very small country, the size of the American states of New Jersey and Delaware combined, if you need a comparison. Certainly a place that could easily fit into the provinces of New Brunswick or Nova Scotia for another.
In 1966, the eastern border of the city of Jerusalem was the Hebron Road in the south. A road extended east from it to the UN HQ and this road was in what was known as "no man's land" under the 1949 Cease Fire Agreements. The distance from the Hebron Road to the Hill of Evil Counsel (a fitting place for the UN) is about a mile. The neighborhood I live in Jerusalem, Armon haNetziv, is south of the Hill of Evil Counsel in what was "no man's land." Technically, according to the United States and the United Nations, I am a settler - one of those "obstacles to peace" you mention.
The folks who live in the neighborhoods of Pisgat Ze'ev and Ramot, in the north, as well those who live in Gilo and Har Homa in the south, are also settlers - obstacles to peace. Terrible people.
I'm one of those Brooklyn Jews who ought to be shot, according to one enlightened prof in the States.
So are Moshe and Rachel Saperstein, presently residing in a hotel in Jerusalem on the Jaffa Road because they were expelled from their home in N'vei Dekalím.
Settlers. Terrible people. They are extremists! Fanatics! They actually take seriously that G-d meant for them to live in any part of Israel they chose. What idiocy! They worship G-d! They think the messiah will come. They're crazy!
Can't they understand the facts of life? There is no G-d! There is money, there is America, there is the UN! Progressive people marching together hand in hand, Arabs, Europeans, enlightened Americans, Chinese, Indians, men and women, all trying to build a better world based on free trade and growth of capital, with protection for the very poorest and for the labooring class. That's what is important, not obeisance to some savage pensioned off Deity that demands obedience to outmoded laws.
That is the "secular humanist" narrative.
Sorry. It ain't my narrative. I live here, and I hope to die here, later rather than sooner. I believe in G-d. I believe He gave us this country as a base, so that we might learn to be holy and be a light unto the nations. We have a mission and a responsibility to the rest of mankind that we are expected to pay in return for receiving this land as a gift from the Almighty. And so far as I'm concerned, there are twelve tribes, not two and they are the twelve tribes of Israel.
This land is ours, form the Jordan to the sea, from the Litani to Eilat. That is a claim that comes from Torah, not some trash scribbled up by overpaid politicians at the UN.
It may have occurred to you that I'll fight for all that I've said, and lay down my life for the Sanctification of the Name, if that is what it takes. But I'll take my enemies with me before I do.
When some rich Jew from America tries to ruin my hoime and the security of my home, and nullify the covenant that was made between Abraham, G-d and Abraham's descendents threough Isaac, he gets only my contempt. That is what Eric Yoffie is.
The "reform" movement of Judaism has a lot of blood on its hands; it did what it could to make sure that the United states wouldn't take in Jewish refugees in WWII. That is a fact, whether you like it or not. After WWII, the AJC did what it could to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state here.
So between trying to water down Judaism into an agnosticism with bagel and lox on the side, stopping refugees from fleeing Europe to America, and of trying to endanger the lives of Israelis here, the "reform" movement provides plenty of reason for me to toss the most acidic vitriol at it and at its leaders.
Granted, that the instant statement of the Meddler-in-Chief, Yoffie did not concern Israel. The man is still the worst kind of hypocrite there is.
69 - Christopher Rose
So bleak tonight Ruvy, that patrolling you do must be getting to you.
Hope you will keep posting here and on BC. Look forward to hearing more...
70 - The Fifth Dentist
Well, Ruvy's gone, so let me get in the last word. Everything he just said is bullshit. Goodnight everybody.
71 - The Fifth Dentist
... And if Reform Judaism is "agnosticism with a bagel and lox on the side" then his brand of judaism is Wahabbism with matoh ball up your ass.
72 - Bill B
Just got finished reading this thread. To the Fifth, good job fighting the good fight with an assist from Gonzo.
I knew there was trouble the first time I saw Ruvy un - able/willing to get that "o" in between that "G" and "d". Red flag that was.
Must be a violation of one of those 613.
As uncomfortable as he seems, he does truly embrace execution for homosexual behavior, once you sift through all the bs - Providing we have two witnesses of course.
He could of saved me a bunch of reading if he just skipped the attempt to convince himself that the powers that be do all they can to keep from killin' those gays.
Let them escape, but tell them not to come back? Lol.
It's just plain sad. (Shaking head in frustrated disbelief)
73 - gonzo marx
well now, some revelations from Ruvy's latest commentary....
Ruvy sez..
*They actually take seriously that G-d meant for them to live in any part of Israel they chose.*
this is his take on the Settlers rationale for staying where they are...he then goes on to say...
*I believe in G-d. I believe He gave us this country as a base, so that we might learn to be holy and be a light unto the nations. We have a mission and a responsibility to the rest of mankind that we are expected to pay in return for receiving this land as a gift from the Almighty.*
sooOOOoooOOOooo, if i am to follow this line of Reasoning, then i could go to Jerusalem, bulldoze down someone's house and then say it is ok for me to do so and build my new house here because JuJu the elephant God, may his tusks glow with the Light of Reason, said that this was MY land and fuck any convention of property Rights, titles, deeds or the fact that the crying family whose home i just destroyed has been living there for a few hundred years....
my Opinion?....ludicrous
i'm NOT saying EITHER side in this Israeli/Palestinian conflict is all Right or all Wrong...just that SOME kind of co-existence MUST be worked out
and whomever starts with the presumption of "god said so" has a tough row to hoe
as for the sarcastic "secular humanist narrative" ...i Reject the obvious spin on that as deeply as i Reject the idea you can Rationalize or Justify actions that cause Harm to others or their Property because "god said so"
just my one sixth billionths of the World's opinion...
your mileage may vary
Excelsior!
74 - Nancy
It's interesting that the O.T. actually reveals the Israelites to have been enthusiastic genocides & property thieves for at least a millennia because they could, on their say-so that "God gave it to us", because they were the biggest, meanest SOBs in the area, before the tides were turned and other peoples then began kicking Israeli ass in turn - which the Israelites & their descendants have been whining about ever since. If you dish something out, you'd better be able to take it, because what goes around comes around, without fail. By their own O.T. records the ancient Israelites stand condemned, their patriarchs never having earned a lick as long as they could steal, murder, or bully it from someone else - and then claim it was the will of God - even as modern Israelis found it perfectly kosher to murder & steal Palestinian people & lands, but now raise an awful fuss about how persecuted they are now the Palestinians are taking their own back. Much as I enjoyed Ruvy's enlightening cultural comments, I do consider the belligerent, proprietary religious justification to be sheerest crap. A huge percentage of modern, current residents/citizens/settlers of Israel never lived there, and neither did the vast majority of their ancestors. The only ones 'entitled' are those, IMO, who've been living there all along, not long-lost returnees in search of ancient & long-dead tribal religious myths they've been using to justify whatever actions they care to take against others.
75 - Silas Kain
Gonzo and Nancy bring up some interesting points. I'm conflicted about the whole thing. I've felt that Jerusalem, being a sacred place for three of the major religions, should have been under U.N. control or some type of tri-lateral administration. I'm also thinking back to what my Grandmother said about Ethiopia vs. Palestine as the logical place for the Jewish state. While I admire Ruvy's passion, I have to say that I'm concerned about the resistance to accept Western ideas while accepting huge amounts of Western cash. I don't know how much of the Israeli budget is financed by the United States, but I'll wager Americans haven't a clue how much of their tax dollars go to Tel Aviv. In the end, gonzo sums it up by saying that SOME kind of co-existence MUST be worked out.