Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let me start with the fact that LearnMe asked a basic, but certainly fair, question. I am also someone who, as a UCSJ Sunday school attendee through my Bar Mitzvah and then confirmation, and a very ethnoculturally proud but non-religiously observant Jew, doesn’t know the 613 commandments like the back of his hand or anything close to that. I do know the broad brushstrokes of the commandments as a whole, and a smattering of the more prominent ones specifically. Some of this broad brushstroke knowledge includes understanding that some commandments are directly related to slavery. I searched the thread and confirmed my recollection, and hence, responded as such.
As for your post:
I fully understand and appreciate that. I can also appreciate the scientific-like maxim that as with matter, commandments can neither be created nor destroyed. When I say that Jews no longer practice the slavery-related commandments that is not me claiming that they are unworthy of study or understanding or should be “cancelled” like the latest celebrity credibly accused of sexual assault.
Am I discarding parts of the human body, or, perhaps, am I suggesting that we should no longer use specific parts of our body to do certain things? I don’t advocate amputating our arms and hands, but we certainly shouldn’t be using them to whip “disobedient” slaves. It’s just like how we don’t go out and murder Amalekites, whether one takes the view that this commandment is reserved for Jewish Kings (which do not currently exist), or that we no longer have any way of discerning who Amalekites are—at least as a cohesive tribe.
Understand or misunderstand me, call me deep or shallow. That’s certainly your right. But don’t be so quick to assume my intentions or motivations when I make one very basic statement, especially when it is considered within the context of my other posts within the same thread.
I continue to appreciate your ongoing efforts to address the sort of comments that have always been very frustrating for me for many reasons, on many levels for a long time now. You do a fine job, me and others a great favor.
I would only add that reading, learning and considering any number of codified laws, rules or commandments is NOTHING like considering the parts of a body. Not to my way of thinking in any case, and all this about needing to read and understand well beyond what is actually written strikes me as the ongoing want to ignore and dismiss the obvious with an extremely biased veil of protection against any level of scrutiny and critical thinking.
This is the sort of thinking on the part of many religious people that I simply can't respect. The "my way or the highway" sort of thinking that never lends itself to any sort of progress or betterment. We only came to better know and appreciate the genome, as another example, not by way of leaving our knowledge and understanding "as is," but by forever an ongoing effort to know more, better understand what was there all along to consider and evaluate. Ultimately accepting the truth about how our genes or genetic material present themselves in a cell or organism and DISCARDING what we learned to be irrelevant or flat out wrong about our prior understanding.
"What is written" (by all manner of men at all different times of history) is another matter altogether, and forever insisting on confusing these issues with inappropriate analogies is quite frankly not helpful but hurtful with regard to a fair, objective and mature evaluation and discussion of whatever may have been written by men for whatever their reasons. I mean please, and thanks again for what seems a bit more honest and fair manner in which to discuss this topic.
I totally get what you are saying and trying to express. This space is too small to discuss a body, a discipline, of religious studies. People go to graduate schools and do research in great academies to study them. Such a body of knowledge cannot be addresses adequately in a forum such as this because those who post here may not have the faculty and fundamentals to understand them. It is not possible.
Although I agree with most you explain here, I suppose there would be very few threads or discussions in this forum if the required "space" and qualifications you highlight were required. This is not a forum for professionals of any discipline, however, though there are obviously people posting in this forum that are more knowledgeable about certain subjects over others.
That any religion or aspects of any religion can't or shouldn't be evaluated and discussed by lay people strikes me as yet another example of trying to protect religion or anything that "is written" from fair, honest and appropriate scrutiny. Always apparently for reasons that smack of confirmation bias, which I view as one of the major stumbling blocks for human progress.
Although I agree with most you explain here, I suppose there would be very few threads or discussions in this forum if the required "space" and qualifications you highlight were required. This is not a forum for professionals of any discipline, however, though there are obviously people posting in this forum that are more knowledgeable about certain subjects over others.
That any religion or aspects of any religion can't or shouldn't be evaluated and discussed by lay people strikes me as yet another example of trying to protect religion or anything that "is written" from fair, honest and appropriate scrutiny. Always apparently for reasons that smack of confirmation bias, which I view as one of the major stumbling blocks for human progress.
no one is saying don't evaluate, no one is saying don't discuss.
just pointing out that a superficial reading yields shallow results.
It is an ineffective methodology, and it is NOT scrutiny, to parse and dissect something into parts without considering their relation, function, and role within the whole.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 11-13-2022 at 09:53 AM..
Although I agree with most you explain here, I suppose there would be very few threads or discussions in this forum if the required "space" and qualifications you highlight were required. This is not a forum for professionals of any discipline, however, though there are obviously people posting in this forum that are more knowledgeable about certain subjects over others.
That any religion or aspects of any religion can't or shouldn't be evaluated and discussed by lay people strikes me as yet another example of trying to protect religion or anything that "is written" from fair, honest and appropriate scrutiny. Always apparently for reasons that smack of confirmation bias, which I view as one of the major stumbling blocks for human progress.
The scholars and and the results of their research are very much available for any interested lay people to study. Study and understand. This space has its limitations because of the way it is organized. Actually there are several posters here who do have the depth of knowledge and the vocabulary to discuss the topic here. It is not a requirement but that knowledge is an asset for a forum such as this which is an attempt to discuss such matters. That asset means something only to those who respect the value of education, in any field.
We can only evaluate anything when we have knowledge and expertise in it. A diamond can just be carbon to you but a gemologist , due to his greater knowledge and depth of experience, can precisely state its qualities that make it priceless.
People who do not value the humanities, the human sciences, can only see carbon, not the cut and brilliance. They are in no position to evaluate. They can of course. Anyone can post anything on these pages. But the vaLue of their opinion is questionable.
no one is saying don't evaluate, no one is saying don't discuss.
just pointing out that a superficial reading yields shallow results.
It is an ineffective methodology, and it is NOT scrutiny, to parse and dissect something into parts without considering their relation, function, and role within the whole.
As one who has been learning as much as I've been able about the history of the world that most certainly includes Judaism, it's everything I can do to avoid getting into insults as you continue to describe my efforts as "superficial." Although I can appreciate how most of us have "superficial" knowledge and appreciation for just about any subject (unless we are scholars of that subject), and although I don't claim to have any great depth of knowledge about anything, I dare say I've studied and learned a fair bit more than the average person far as I can tell from the discussions I've had in this forum and others in person. Not sure what great claim to knowledge and understanding you may want to suggest on behalf of yourself in comparison, but sure seems to me you are always over-inflating your ability to reason and think logically and/or know more about what you think you know.
To suggest this exercise by way of this one thread is "ineffective methodology" utterly dismisses all prior and ongoing efforts to learn what I have, and again per your agenda that has nothing to do with learning or understanding. An agenda that is the opposite of promoting learning and better understanding. An agenda I have come to learn and understand quite well over the course of my years as well. One I don't respect in any way at all.
In any case, if you don't want to be a part of this discussion, then don't. If you do want to be a part, then discuss the subject. Don't forever go about how that can't be done by me or anyone else who is interested. I mean for the love of have mercy, please.
As one who has been learning as much as I've been able about the history of the world that most certainly includes Judaism, it's everything I can do to avoid getting into insults as you continue to describe my efforts as "superficial." Although I can appreciate how most of us have "superficial" knowledge and appreciation for just about any subject (unless we are scholars of that subject), and although I don't claim to have any great depth of knowledge about anything, I dare say I've studied and learned a fair bit more than the average person far as I can tell from the discussions I've had in this forum and others in person. Not sure what great claim to knowledge and understanding you may want to suggest on behalf of yourself in comparison, but sure seems to me you are always over-inflating your ability to reason and think logically.
To suggest this exercise by way of this one thread is "ineffective methodology" utterly dismisses all prior and ongoing efforts to learn what I do, and again per your agenda that has nothing to do with learning or understanding. An agenda that is the opposite of promoting learning and better understanding. An agenda I have come to learn and understand quite well over the course of my years as well. One I don't respect in any way at all.
In any case, if you don't want to be a part of this discussion, then don't. If you do want to be a part, then discuss the subject. Don't forever go about how that can't be done by me or anyone else who is interested. I mean for the love of have mercy, please.
What is the subject? Really. What is the subject? The 613 or your opinions about religion?
The scholars and and the results of their research are very much available for any interested lay people to study. Study and understand. This space has its limitations because of the way it is organized. Actually there are several posters here who do have the depth of knowledge and the vocabulary to discuss the topic here. It is not a requirement but that knowledge is an asset for a forum such as this which is an attempt to discuss such matters. That asset means something only to those who respect the value of education, in any field.
We can only evaluate anything when we have knowledge and expertise in it. A diamond can just be carbon to you but a gemologist , due to his greater knowledge and depth of experience, can precisely state its qualities that make it priceless.
People who do not value the humanities, the human sciences, can only see carbon, not the cut and brilliance. They are in no position to evaluate. They can of course. Anyone can post anything on these pages. But the vaLue of their opinion is questionable.
Not sure what you are explaining here that me or anyone else doesn't understand, but what I don't understand is this notion that people can't discuss a subject -- any subject -- by way of this forum even if they are not scholars. I am a great fan of history, U.S. history, politics, following the news, and all topics that influence "how the world turns." Most certainly including religion. I've also got a fair amount of higher education under my belt. I have served as an Executive Coach to help others learn how to better themselves and their careers, and the last stint of my career was working to help adult learners get their college degrees by way of on-line learning.
All this experience has helped me learn one thing about learning and understanding any subject. It's not so much what you already know but what more there is to learn and NO MATTER where one might be on that spectrum, there is no manner of learning that is not improved by at least learning something. Something more, whatever it might be.
What is the subject? Really. What is the subject? The 613 or your opinions about religion?
The 613, my observations and opinions about them as well as the same from anyone else who cares to share theirs. That and my OP would seem clear enough to make me wonder why you would ask such a question...
The 613, my observations and opinions about them as well as the same from anyone else who cares to share theirs. That and my OP would seem clear enough to make me wonder why you would ask such a question...
It seems to Tzaphkiel is precisely doing that - discussing the subject of discussing the 613. She is offering her opinion about your opinions and observations about the 613. I find her observations interesting and educational.
Yours, not so much. It might have something to do with her depth of knowledge and study of the 613, and the lack of yours.
It seems to Tzaphkiel is precisely doing that - discussing the subject of discussing the 613. She is offering her opinion about your opinions and observations about the 613. I find her observations interesting and educational.
Yours, not so much. It might have something to do with her depth of knowledge and study of the 613, and the lack of yours.
I can only think to sign off now as I read this last comment for me today in this forum...
The two of you are for the most part just too much for me, but however you want to describe anyone's comments, Tzap's, mine or others, clearly there are other comments posted in this thread that don't line up with either of you. I sign off now at peace knowing at least this simple fact.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
