|
RagnarokAngel posted:
If this is true, why go to a Rabbi for advice? If you practice in the way that you think is best for you, why consult the Torah, the Midrash, the Talmud? If all that matters is your own liberty to decide for yourself, what real weight is there in any search for truth outside of yourself, if what we think is best for us is what really matters? There are clearly things that we must not do, even should we become delusional and think that they're best for us. Human sacrifice, for example, is clearly objectively wrong. Just because someone says, "I think that's best for me" wouldn't make it ok for them to practice that. And if it's true for that, then how much else might this be true for?
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 11:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 09:21 |
|
|
I think you took my point about practicing in our own way out of context, jumping to human sacrifice is a hell of a loving leap dude. I was just trying to make the point that you don't need to be practice my specific religion to not go to Hell, or whatever, and you can totes be a good and redeemable person without having shared my exact literal experience.
RagnarokAngel fucked around with this message at 11:39 on Mar 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 11:35
|
|
|
Is it true that orthodox Jews are not allowed in Christian churches because they're idolatry but can enter a mosque?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
It wouldn't surprise me, as many see the trinitarian theology as polytheistic. I mean, trinitarians don't, but they wouldn't think that would they? If this theory I'm putting forward is correct, then it'd have some interesting ramifications, as it would mean that Unitarian churches would be "kosher" so to speak. I'm not sure how they'd feel about the J-Witnesses, as they believe that Jesus wasn't god, but rather an archangel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:I think you took my point about practicing in our own way out of context, jumping to human sacrifice is a hell of a loving leap dude. I was just trying to make the point that you don't need to be practice my specific religion to not go to Hell, or whatever, and you can totes be a good and redeemable person without having shared my exact literal experience. I'll admit it is a leap. An unfortunate flair for the dramatic, mea culpa. Let's take a milder example. There are some who, reading Genesis, read the serpent as the hero of the story. So, rather than worshiping the creator G-d, they worship the Serpent, Lucifer, whatever name you want to give this theoretically force. From a Jewish perspective, how is this at all permissible? How would this act not both blaspheme and deny God? Or do you think that the Noahide laws are not necessary for gentile redemption?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
As I stated earlier what Judaism thinks about pagan practices is irrelevant, it only concerns itself with those who are part of its covenant. Like yes if someone is attacking the Jews, in whatever form that takes they care but that's a physical and worldly reason. Judaism also has a lot less of a focus on redemption in the after life than it's descendant faiths do and doesn't prosletytize to "save". They're not part of our covenant so the rules don't apply to them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Being Jewish is a lot like joining a secret society; you have to undergo a degrading and painful initiation ritual, you have to follow bizarre and arcane laws when you are around other members of the society, and the only ones who really matter are the members who have money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
What is the purpose of these rules? If the rules are a tool for a better happier life, than why not preach them to the gentile? if they're mere irrational tradition, why hold to them? Your vision of Judaism not concerning itself with the practices of the gentiles does not conform to my own experience with Jewish people and historical Jewish thought. If you see your neighbor worshiping a false God, one that teaches actual ethical malpractice, does one not have a moral imperative to speak up? If my neighbor were a Christian Scientist, and didn't allow his/her children to go to a doctor, you can be assured that I'll say something. Respectfully, to be sure, but a righteous man cannot let wickedness flourish unopposed. Let's consider the temple mount, for example. A Mosque was built on the site of the first and second temple. Is this not a continuous attack on the Jews, given that it is a non-Jewish building built upon the very place where the holy of holies, God's dwelling place on Earth, was?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:What is the purpose of these rules? If the rules are a tool for a better happier life, than why not preach them to the gentile? if they're mere irrational tradition, why hold to them? I think the general explanation is that these are the rules, and you follow them because that's what you do. It's like asking "why do you follow the rules of English grammar but do not insist that Spanish speakers do the same?". The Jewish Law is not universal, it's just for Jews. Followers of Judaism will probably interfere when their neighbors do something really unethical, much like anyone else. It's just that "breaking Jewish Law" is not in itself a problem if the neighbor is not a Jew. I think the Talmud has a bunch of rules dealing with gentiles, but afaik they're mostly limited to Jew-gentile interactions, and do not deal with correcting what gentiles do to each other.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 11:15
|
|
|
Yeah, you might as well ask why any faithful do anything related to their faith. Jews are actually rather ecumincal in the sense that anyone who converts are considered a true believer( may not apply in Israel, but that's a whole other  ).Slightly off-topic, but I'd like to drop some stuff here by Rabbi Twerski, because I'm really into him, and he's one of the most amazing and entertaining jewish voices I've come across: https://www.facebook.com/goalcast/videos/1309547322455788/?pnref=story
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 11:35
|
|
|
It's also important to remember that Judaism was created not just as a religion but as the rules and practices for a specific nation at that period of time. Unlike say, Christianity or Islam, which were not designed for a singular nation but to be spread to people at the far corners of the Earth.CountFosco posted:
Absolutely...but that's because of the actions themselves bringing harm to others. It has nothing to do with not believe in MY GOD in particular. As an example, Evangelical Christianity says if you don't accept Jesus Christ as your Lord (And even then, some mean THEIR Jesus as opposed to another church's interpretation of Jesus) you will goto Hell, full stop. Doesn't matter how good a person you are, without Jesus you can't be saved. Ancient Judaism really didn't give a flying gently caress if non Israelites went to Hell, or wherever, that's on them. Because Modern Judaism is no longer contained to Israel it has changed its stance that you don't need to be Jewish for redemption, the laws only apply to us though. It's kinda like asking why we don't enforce US copyright law in China. We do, but only if it impacts us and we can only do so much, since international law is fickle. Outside of that case, does anybody in the US actually care if someone in China plagiarizes another Chinese creation? Probably not. RagnarokAngel fucked around with this message at 11:44 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 11:41
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:Ancient Judaism really didn't give a flying gently caress if non Israelites went to Hell, or wherever, that's on them. Because Modern Judaism is no longer contained to Israel it has changed its stance that you don't need to be Jewish for redemption, the laws only apply to us though. It's kinda like asking why we don't enforce US copyright law in China. We do, but only if it impacts us and we can only do so much, since international law is fickle. Outside of that case, does anybody in the US actually care if someone in China plagiarizes another Chinese creation? Probably not. "To make of Abraham a great nation and bless Abraham and make his name great so that he will be a blessing, to bless those who bless him and curse him who curses him and all peoples on earth would be blessed through Abraham." This clearly shows some level of engagement with the gentiles. And another passage, from Jeremiah: 25 “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will punish all those who are circumcised merely in the flesh— 26 Egypt, Judah, Edom, the sons of Ammon, Moab, and all who dwell in the desert who cut the corners of their hair, for all these nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in heart.” If the circumcision is merely intended for the particular Israelite people, then why is G-d getting so incensed at the Egyptians et al for being uncircumcised? Is being circumcised a prerequisite for being circumcised in heart? If this is true, then all men on Earth should be circumcised, so that they do not offend G-d, and so that they may become circumcised in the heart. CountFosco fucked around with this message at 12:18 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 12:11
|
|
|
I may be off here, because what little knowledge about Judaism I have I mainly got from more conservative rabbis (or so I think), but aren't the seven mitzvot obligatory for all bnei Noach? My understanding is that, although converting anyone to Judaism is not something that Judaism is conserved with in particular, making sure that gentiles follow those seven main commandments is at the very least desirable: 1) Do not murder. 2) Do not steal. 3) Do not worship false gods. 4) Do not be sexually immoral. 5) Do not eat the limb removed from a live animal. 6) Do not curse God. 7) Set up courts and bring offenders to justice. Sorry if I've screwed up some terminology in my post.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 13:04
|
|
|
Well, judaism is one of the clearest examples of a religion of laws - so it seems pretty evident that it would be desirable for all people to do what your laws perceive are just things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 13:12
|
|
|
Here's I think one way a lot of Jews see it: it's hard enough to make sure you as an individual are following the laws in your own life. Harder still to be sure of your family, let alone your particular branch of the Jewish community, let alone the Jewish community as a whole. You aren't going to have the time and competence to make sure your own house is in order and also be concerned about whatever laws the gentiles are following. Another way that some Jews deal with this is by turning to political/social activism rather than religious evangelization per se.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 13:33
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:"To make of Abraham a great nation and bless Abraham and make his name great so that he will be a blessing, to bless those who bless him and curse him who curses him and all peoples on earth would be blessed through Abraham." I legit think you're asking interesting questions, but I think trying to argue thousands of years of philisophical and religious debate with a couple out of context bible quotes is not really the answer. Jews aren't biblical literalists, for one thing. I'm not a Rabbi so I'm going to claim to be on the up and up about every little thing, but the continuing interpretation via Midrash is more important than just what one line out of the Bible says. RagnarokAngel fucked around with this message at 13:53 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 13:46
|
|
|
Earwicker posted:Here's I think one way a lot of Jews see it: it's hard enough to make sure you as an individual are following the laws in your own life. Harder still to be sure of your family, let alone your particular branch of the Jewish community, let alone the Jewish community as a whole. You aren't going to have the time and competence to make sure your own house is in order and also be concerned about whatever laws the gentiles are following. "A pious Jew is not one who worries about his fellow man's soul and his own stomach; a pious Jew worries about his own soul and his fellow man's stomach." RagnarokAngel posted:I legit think you're asking interesting questions, but I think trying to argue thousands of years of philisophical and religious debate with a couple out of context bible quotes is not really the answer. Jews aren't biblical literalists, for one thing. I'm not a Rabbi so I'm going to claim to be on the up and up about every little thing, but the continuing interpretation via Midrash is more important than just what one line out of the Bible says.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
It's pretty dense and unreadable, and wouldn't recommend it as anything but a cure for insomnia. When I'm talking about Midrash I'm not talking about the books but the zeitgeist surrounding continuing talk and discussion about biblical topics, which continues constantly. Even what we're doing right now, debating about these things, is technically Midrash. Rabbis exist pretty much to be a vehicle to ask difficult questions because they spent years studying it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
Keromaru5 posted:
I just fundamentally disagree with this. What would you rather have: your soul or your stomach? You can only choose one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:I just fundamentally disagree with this. What would you rather have: your soul or your stomach? You can only choose one. are you even jewish cause if not who cares if you agree with it, if that quotation summarizes judaism it summarizes judaism
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:I legit think you're asking interesting questions, but I think trying to argue thousands of years of philisophical and religious debate with a couple out of context bible quotes is not really the answer. Jews aren't biblical literalists, for one thing. I'm not a Rabbi so I'm going to claim to be on the up and up about every little thing, but the continuing interpretation via Midrash is more important than just what one line out of the Bible says. There's a quote from Eastern regarding this which I think is useful: "If you are a theologian, you will pray truly. And if you pray truly, you are a theologian." Evagrios the Solitary (of Pontus) I would not define myself as a Biblical literalist, for what it's worth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:I just fundamentally disagree with this. What would you rather have: your soul or your stomach? You can only choose one. Are you saying you disagree with it as mindset for your own life, or you that disagree with the idea that this is how a pious Jew would see things?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:are you even jewish cause if not who cares if you agree with it, if that quotation summarizes judaism it summarizes judaism I care about Jewish critiques of Christian theology and take them seriously and give them due respect. My point is not that it inaccurately summarizes Judaism, my point is that the soul is something of value far greater than any particular body part. I mean, do you disagree with this? quote:Are you saying you disagree with it as mindset for your own life, or you that disagree with the idea that this is how a pious Jew would see things? The former. I suspect that it is universally true that it is good for us to care about both the stomach and the souls of our neighbors, but far be it from me to insist that other people should have such a conscience.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:my point is that the soul is something of value far greater than any particular body part. I mean, do you disagree with this? The quotation doesn't disagree with this. It's saying look after your soul more than your own stomach, and more than worrying about the souls of others. Looking after the stomachs of others is also a part of looking after your soul. Earwicker fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Mexican (atheist) jew chiming in. I'm no expert on Kabbala but I did go to a couple of presentations so I think I've got the gist of it. Take this with a grain of salt. Basically "Kabbala" comes from "lekabel" which means "to receive" the light or knowledge from God. Previously it was only passed down in vocal form to the wisest leaders but in recent years some Rabbis decided that it was time to open it up for anyone who wished to study it. I don't know if this view is widely accepted or not amongst their ranks. In very broad terms it seems like the core is to teach people to be good, I.e. not be angry, selfish, rash and so on. The tree of life holds many of these teachings and meanings but it is too complex for my limited exposure to get into any more details. There's also a mystical part involving numerology in the Torah where numbers are assigned to letters and words rearranged to find hidden meanings. It has a meditation component where the sounds of those words hold special properties when recited. The speaker didn't really cover this aspect much but one of the things he did say was that the word "amen" doesn't actually mean anything and is just channeling positive energy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:I care about Jewish critiques of Christian theology and take them seriously and give them due respect. My point is not that it inaccurately summarizes Judaism, my point is that the soul is something of value far greater than any particular body part. I mean, do you disagree with this? The quote is saying that worrying about other people's soul is not productive because it is an incredibly personal matter. Feeding someone is universal regardless of religion. To assume that you know what is best for a another person's soul is presumptive in a way that Judaism is not about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:The former. I suspect that it is universally true that it is good for us to care about both the stomach and the souls of our neighbors, It's not up to me to decide what a "good soul" is on behalf of other people, that's personal. To rephrase what I said earlier, but more from my personal perspective: everyone has their own relationship with God or the universe or however they want to see it, there are lots of moral laws people follow and ways that they interpret and follow them, it is more than enough work to get right with it in my own life, I don't have the knowledge or equipment to tell other people what that relationship should be and I feel it would be hypocritical to do so. quote:but far be it from me to insist that other people should have such a conscience. Oh no of course not, you'll just make lovely passive aggressive remarks like this instead. 
Earwicker fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
Keromaru5 posted:"A pious Jew is not one who worries about his fellow man's soul and his own stomach; a pious Jew worries about his own soul and his fellow man's stomach."
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Thanks for answering questions, by the way  Another area of interest occurred to me, about to what extent your social and every-lives take place within the framework of a Jewish community, and whether these communities are divided more or less formally. Like, do you have close personal friends and relatives who aren't Jewish or doesn't practice Judaism, or how far out on the family tree before anyone practicing Christianity or other religions appear? If you are part of a Jewish community, does this extend to something like hobbies and sports largely taking place within that Jewish community? Like, is your rowing or chess club or whatever specifically Jewish, formally or informally? To the extent that these communities exists, do you chose or engage in them or to engage elsewhere? Is it your experience that, within whatever Jewish communities you may be part of, that people, formally or informally, organize themselves or keep to social circles that are divided along the lines or practitioners of Judaism and secular Jews?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:I care about Jewish critiques of Christian theology and take them seriously and give them due respect. My point is not that it inaccurately summarizes Judaism, my point is that the soul is something of value far greater than any particular body part. I mean, do you disagree with this? dude i'm buddhist we don't believe in souls also also you're not talking critiques seriously if you constantly debate what they should believe! if you want to have a discussion with someone who's not your religion you can't constantly be telling them they're wrong when they've telling you WHAT they believe! that's a debate, not a discussion, and all it does is reinforce your own worldview while completely dismissing what the other person is saying. if you want to understand judaism you can't constantly critique it on the basis of christian theology, and it's only when you understand judaism that you can begin the process of critique, which might never take place. but right now all you're doing is essentially accusing jews of not following christian principles, which yeah duh. it's a bad discussion to be involved in AND read
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
Really that quote boils down to "imposing your own religion on someone is being a dick, don't be a dick." Nobody thinks you are a dick for feeding them when they are hungry.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
Grandmother of Five posted:Thanks for answering questions, by the way quote:Like, do you have close personal friends and relatives who aren't Jewish or doesn't practice Judaism, or how far out on the family tree before anyone practicing Christianity or other religions appear? quote:If you are part of a Jewish community, does this extend to something like hobbies and sports largely taking place within that Jewish community? Like, is your rowing or chess club or whatever specifically Jewish, formally or informally? To the extent that these communities exists, do you chose or engage in them or to engage elsewhere? quote:Is it your experience that, within whatever Jewish communities you may be part of, that people, formally or informally, organize themselves or keep to social circles that are divided along the lines or practitioners of Judaism and secular Jews? Chernabog fucked around with this message at 22:26 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:this is what we're supposed to do as well, although the flavor is different--each of us must think that they are "the worst of sinners" and not judge others. Count Fosco, you mentioned going to an Orthodox church, I don't know if you want to become Orthodox but if you do "don't judge others" is rule number 1 I struggle not to judge others as much as the next man. However, I would posit that one can care about the souls of others without judging them. Indeed, to share what you think of as the path to salvation is to judge a person positively, as implicit in the transmission of the knowledge of how to be ethical is the sense that the person is worthy of receiving the message. Consider what happened during the Anglo-Saxon invasion/migration. Massive numbers of pagan Germanic peoples entered the island and the native Romano-Brittani inhabitants were pushed to the west (Wales/Cornwall). After things settled out, there were problems with Anglo-Saxons who sought to join the Celtic Christianity that existed there, but the British generally refused to accept them. Furthermore, I think there really is some truth to judging the action and not the person. It seems clear to me that, as morally confused as we may be at times, there are certain actions that we can clearly judge as immoral, sinful. Murder, for example. A person commits a murder, we are obligated to condemn that. If a friend of family member of mine committed murder, I would be worried for their soul, wouldn't you? The critical question is how we act on that concern. How we act on the concern is critical. Reasoned dialogue, friendship and amity across faith lines, these are the only paths I can recommend. If Judaism is really not concerned about other peoples' souls, I stand corrected. My own particular understanding of the Noahide laws led me to believe that there exists within Jewish tradition some moral standards that they expect for gentiles. I personally believe that to look after the stomachs of others (i.e. simple charity work) carries within it an implied caring for their soul, for the soul depends on its earthly existence upon the body. When I extend a hand to another in assistance, I'm not doing it because those seem to me to be a particularly valuable arrangement of molecules, but because of the person that that all makes up. The whole being greater than the sum of its parts. If someone's starving, I don't give them some food with the expectation that the food will simply permit them to live a life of pain and misery. You give food with the expectation and hope that the food will allow them to continue to live life to enjoy and thrive as a human being. The action is not just an action, but a symbol. Charity is a living symbol of hope for the future of humanity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:It seems clear to me that, as morally confused as we may be at times, there are certain actions that we can clearly judge as immoral, sinful. Murder, for example. A person commits a murder, we are obligated to condemn that. If a friend of family member of mine committed murder, I would be worried for their soul, wouldn't you? Even things that seem universal like "murder is wrong" are not truly universal because so many groups of humans have come to define "murder" in so many different ways. Or to put it another way, many different societies - and groups within those societies - have decided that there are morally acceptable reasons for one human to kill another, and these range from self defense to punishment to defense of property to defense of one's perceived "honor" or the honor of one's family, or even in vengeance for a previous wrongdoing. Killing that falls outside of these boundaries is what is called "murder", but those boundaries are all over the place, there is no universal definition. To answer your question, of course if a friend of family member committed murder - or even if they had killed someone in purely self defense, and had no choice in the matter - I would be worried for their soul. But it generally stays on that personal level, this does not expand into me somehow believing that my own moral standards need to be applied to others. To me, that is kind of presumptive, it's saying you've morality all figured out and know whats best for everyone, and I don't really believe that's true of anyone. I think you'd have to be psychic to have that kind of knowledge. quote:If Judaism is really not concerned about other peoples' souls, I think you are kind of off the mark about what is meant by "concern" or "care" here. It doesn't mean to be unconcerned in the sense of not giving a poo poo, it means to be unconcerned in the sense of not dictating what being a good person means to others. Earwicker fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:
The whole conversation has, in keeping with rich forum tradition, gone all over the map. I came into this thread with some small measure of knowledge about Judaism. When I came upon things in this thread which struck me as different from this knowledge, I asked questions, engaged in dialogue (or debate if you want to call it that, whatever). Ok, let's get right back to the original paragraph which, when I read it, confused me. quote:My view of anyone not my religion (or an atheist) is we can't really know the truth. We all have to just sort of practice in the way we think is best for us. I can't say Judaism is the correct path and I'd never advocate anyone to follow me, because the covenant of Israel only covers those born into it, or those who willingly convert, nobodies going to Hell because they're not Jewish, it just doesn't work that way. I protested this point of view. I'll quote from what seems like a reasonable website: quote:Only truly righteous souls ascend directly to the Garden of Eden, say the sages. The average person descends to a place of punishment and/or purification, generally referred to as Gehinnom. This generally corresponds to the understanding of Jewish afterlife thought that I had. Now, RagnarokAngel has a strong agnosticism in regards to the fate of future souls, and that's fine, but this strong agnosticism didn't seem to me to be the norm throughout the global Jewish community, or among the majority of Rabbis. Am I wrong?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:Now, RagnarokAngel has a strong agnosticism in regards to the fate of future souls, and that's fine, but this strong agnosticism didn't seem to me to be the norm throughout the global Jewish community, or among the majority of Rabbis. I haven't seen any hard data or anything but in my experience, which is mostly in Conservative and a little bit in Reform communities, most people are really not concerned with the afterlife at all. It's just not something people talk about as any kind of motivation for their thoughts or actions, if they do they certainly keep it very private but generally the whole idea of life after death in re: one's actions during life is just not a major point of discourse. Again, purely anecdotal, but it has always seemed to me that Jewish people in these communities are generally much more concerned with how their actions will affect living people here on Earth, and certainly in future generations.. but here not in a "hereafter". Even most rabbis I've known have been far more concerned with the fate of the Jewish community (or various forms of it) or with the fate of humanity as a whole, than they have been with anyone's eternal soul. Probably different in Orthodox communities though. Earwicker fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
Earwicker posted:
You're jumping from caring about the souls of others to presuming that this same person has morality all figured out and is going to impose it on the world (presumably through domination?) for their own benefit. That's a leap. Caring about the future of others is caring about the future of others, and if other peoples' futures extend past death (which it may very well not) then one can care about that as well. One can care about the soul of one thinks is perfectly exemplary morally, because not being omniscient, we may not be correct about the moral exemplariness of such a person.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 23:40
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:You're jumping from caring about the souls of others to presuming that this same person has morality all figured out and is going to impose it on the world (presumably through domination?) for their own benefit. That's a leap. Caring about the future of others is caring about the future of others, and if other peoples' futures extend past death (which it may very well not) then one can care about that as well. I'm not talking about domination specifically, but I'm also not forgetting that part the context of this particular branch of the conversation is the question of evangelism. I'll put it this way: of course I and, I'm pretty sure, almost all other Jews care about the souls of others, whether they are Jewish or not. But this "caring about" does not translate into presuming to have any knowledge of moral standards that other people need to follow in order for their souls to be right with God, or right with the universe or their own moral standards. Whether in terms of a hypothetical afterlife or otherwise. That's for them to decide. And to be clear, this isn't the same thing as pure moral relativism. But I make a distinction between the material and the spiritual. We can, as a society, through dialogue and introspection decide what kind of moral standards we should collectively uphold for the benefit of everyone in said society. But as to what standards make your soul right with God, or what happens to you after you die, that's personal. Earwicker fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
Since it's been brought up, I'd like to know what the Jewish take is on the afterlife. I once listened to some radio essay about it, and from what I recall: Judaism in biblical times didn't really have a concept of the afterlife, if anything they had Gehenna, which is sort of like limbo in that it's just a boring place without punishments or rewards. Then in medieval times the more esoteric strains of Judaism had some belief in reincarnation, while others adopted a heaven/hell model or didn't believe in an afterlife at all. Overall the afterlife is much less important in Judaism as compared to the other Abrahamic faiths, which is weird all things considered. After all, you'd expect the branches to be similar to the tree. So, what's your experience with this? Is it talked about? What would a typical believer of your tradition expect to happen after they die?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2017 07:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 09:21 |
|
|
CountFosco posted:You're jumping from caring about the souls of others to presuming that this same person has morality all figured out and is going to impose it on the world (presumably through domination?) for their own benefit. That's a leap. Caring about the future of others is caring about the future of others, and if other peoples' futures extend past death (which it may very well not) then one can care about that as well. One can care about the soul of one thinks is perfectly exemplary morally, because not being omniscient, we may not be correct about the moral exemplariness of such a person. You can't ignore the historical implication that "caring about" the souls of others has. There's a long list of examples of people/government/institutions who have done horrible things in the name of saving people from eternal suffering or something along those lines. So there is a context there that needs to be taken into account, because Jews always take it into account, we can't afford not to. Simply caring about the ultimate fate of another man's soul is one thing, but that's where it should begin and end. To go any further is to presume that you know more than the other man does, and that's being an arrogant jerk(in the best of times).
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2017 15:15
|
|