Faith schools

The Torah has acted as a safeguard for the Jews throughout our history, there are elements of it which will of been relevant millenia ago (but not now) while there are other elements that wont safeguard us until much later in our history.

I suppose a cynic could say that Jews didn't eat mussels because they caused illness, the circumcised babies for ritualistic reasons, they explained the big bang theory because it was logical, they said love thy neighbour because of darwinian urges, they knew that only Jewish intellect could make Israel fertile, they guessed that of all the millions of species of life on this planet only four would lack one of the qualities of chewing the cud & splitting the hoof, they thought there could be a profound order to the universe... Of course that would be the cynical view... I hold my own.

You misunderstand the relationship of Hashem and his people, if he wanted to make us an immortal people then we wouldn't die... death is a part of life.

In no shape or form has it done any of the above.

What an utterly naive comment, modern ethics evolve; whats inhumaine today may be considered humaine tomorrow... If we were jduging the morality of a deity - you could not compare it to what is acceptable today... as what is acceptable today may change tomorrow.

Of course you wouldn't no Jew would propose to the know the reasoning behind the Torah, we accept it as the word of G-d and act accordingly.

What are you talking about?

Circumcision may of saved the lives of millions of Jews, I don't care if I need to wait for science to catch up?

Where in Judaism does it say this?!?!?

Your arrogant cloaked ignorance is your downfall andy.

If there were a deity and he created us as mortals then surely we'd need to die? For death to have meaning then (at times) this would need to be a random process... Death helps sculpt the soul.

Where in the Tanakh does it say anything about the fossil record being a hoax?!?!?

You can't make things up to compliment your argument andy.

In the grand scale of planet earth it may well be, many Jews looking for reason in the Holocaust believe that the tragedy occured so that Jews would be able to return from the exile.

Like death, from tragedy comes life, value and meaning... If life were perfect would there be any motivation to excel?

Where in all of Judaism does it say this? We are told the total opposite - it clearly states in the Torah that we are to wrestle with G-d.

Why wouldn't a Jew use modern science?

By that logic I shouldn't use a knife and fork as it is a man made creation?

Andy you clearly don't know the first thing about Judaism and this debate is getting tiresome... if you want to debate with knee jerk literalist I suggest you talk to an evangelical christian.

Your argument has no relationship to Judaism in the slightest.

haha I loved how you avoided backing up any of your statements... anyway...

We believe all that exists in the Torah is true and when reading the Torah we read it with the knowledge of our Talmud (the Oral Law and discussion revolving around the Oral Law), wisdom (both traditional and modern) and our own personal interpretation/relationship with the text.

But my answer to your question is simple, we don't take any of the Torah on face value... We know that behind every word is a delicious depth that we can only scratch at with out limited wisdom.

He also says that universe was created on the first.... clearly these aren't earth days as planet earth and the sun hadn't yet been created.

You're mistaking christian interpretation with Jewish, we have documents thousands of years old stating that 1 of G-d's days at the beginning of time is not the same as the day a human experiences on planet earth.

I am telling you the Jewish perspective, while you're attempting to guess it... How naive can one be?

When did I say that?

I said Judaism lay the foundations of the modern conscience, in the west this seems to be evolving into the liberal conscience (which often contradicts Judaism).

Yet another manipulation from you.

Where in the Torah does it say G-d commanded the Jews to circumcise themselves to prevent aids?!?!?

A literal translation would say "On the eighth day, the childs foreskin shall be circumcised so that he shant catch HIV when the virus surfaces 3500 years from now".

The Torah doesnt say that, any current reasoning behind brit milah is an interpretation of man.

You seem to get very confused when discussing religion andy.

and wind up like you.....

what a delightful idea.

That would make sense if Jews had taught for 3400 years that 1 day = 24 earth hours; then upon the discoveries of modern science re-evaluated their position and stated that 1 day = G-d time.

But this isn't so, we have scholars and sages from nearly every recorded century stating that 1 day is much longer ( from calculations of billions to thousands of YEARS).

No one is re-evaluating Torah in the face of new evidence; we're stating what we've always stated.

This is something you seem to be unable to comprehend.

This is what I mean about you being an absolute idiot.

In the scale of intellects you are a dunce; a Walter Mitty character studying for some mediocre qualification at an average university, yet you have the fucking audacity to dismiss all Jews (who have reached far greater heights, possess wisdom you could only dream of achieving and lived a life you're barely a week into) as schizophrenics?!?!

Do you realize how utterly childish that makes you appear?

You may of read a few of Dawkins books, but that’s not an indication of intelligence... Any fool can recite the latest theories he stumbles upon.

Real intelligence is knowing that you know nothing... Something you haven't yet grasped... I look forward to you maturing.

good man, bare in mind its still not a substitute for the hebrew... but at least you can read the bible in a language closer to its original format.

if you can bear to read any more on this subject.......
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1976582,00.html

yeh good stuff (although there are still some incredibly thick people posting)
essentially though they all boil down to 'I'm right because god says it's so' and 'I'm right because logic and reason say so' and never the twain shall meet.
It seems to me that the religious pposition, if probed deeply enough leads to the sort of position which Joe sometimes espouses ie god is the universe or the creator of the universe and everything else is a matter of faith and may be open to interpretation.
And the scientific position if probed deeply enough has to admit that, at the most basic level there is and can never be any conclusive proof about the creation of the universe or it's nature.
At the very edge of the study of cosmology there will always remain an unknown which can equate to the god theory if one so chooses.
This seems to me to be of no danger to, or problem for society and so can be accomodated without contention by both the religious and the scientific mindsets.

to return to the subject of this thread

Where it becomes something taught to innocent children as 'fact' then it has serious implications for a society where that happens. See North Korea for an extreme example. But even a society that teaches it's children as a 'fact' that the supreme creator of the universe knows (and cares) wether you eat pork, snip off your foreskin, wear a beard, or use a condom is in deep shit. and if those children then decide this gives them the right to blow up tube trains or bash pakis or blow up the centre of Omagh or murder palestinians then faith schools can be held in some way responsible. And that alone is a reason for not having them

By the same logical it's completely illogical to label a child English as nationalism is a value created by men...

Your argument is incredibly strange, you accept that parents have the right to install certain values in a child - but then deny them the right to install values that disagree with your political philosophy.

You're overlooking one critical point:

It is the duty of the state to define who its nationals are (not the new born), thus nationality is not simply a case of where you or born... Its a case of whether the individual fits into a man made criteria.

The acceptance of nationality and rejection of religion is a huge statement of hypocricy.

The children of Turkish immigrants born in Germany are not considered German nationals; this is one of infinite examples that clearly demonstrate that nationality is a man made ideology that comes with distinct belief spectrums.... no different from religion.

You seperate the two because one is a belief spectrum that agrees with your current outlook on the world while the other is diametrically opposed to everything you stand for.

But it is your beliefs that causes the conflict and as we now live in a world that considers it ignoble to deny mankind access to individual rights, it seems wrong for you to not only deprive your brethren of these rights but to force your values upon them.

(you then went onto argue a point which had nothing to do with anything I'd said?)

this equating of inculcating religious beliefs with national identity is just a red herring. I'm english because I was born here. I'm atheist because I decided to be.
everyone has the right to decide for themselves what they believe. No-one can change where they were born and hence what nationality they are.
But no one has the right to insist that the state should indoctrinate kids with one set of beliefs over another and that the taxpayer should fund it.
Do it yourself in out of school hours at your own expense and let all kids be educated together so that they don't grow up hating and fearing the unknown others

How is being born within the man made borders of a country any different to being born within the man made borders of a religion?!?!?

As for suggesting that nationalism is any less dangerous than religion, thats insanity - the creation of the state has lead man to fight wars than any other of his creations!

I wasn't talking about Nationalism, I was talking about nationality.

in the context of this discourse its one and the same... the belief that man belongs to an entity that only exists in the conscious of man has lead to countless wars.

I don't understand how you proudly promote one while dismissing the other?

ARe you suggesting that the laws of nature define states andy?

I was pretty sure that statehood existed only in our minds.

no one is proudly promoting anything, except you.
Nationalism exists and I hate it. Nationality exists and is neutral