Can we discuss Judaism without the politics?

[ConstantLearner]

To anyone here, Jewish or non-Jewish, what is your favorite book about Judaism and why?

 

[niceatheist]

This is generally viewed as a later interpolation, and probably did not represent Josephus’ original text.

 

[ConstantLearner]

Thank you for the information @niceatheist. I appreciate it. Have to admit when I posted that, I didn’t even think of an interpolation! I admit, I have only read bits and pieces of Josephus. I knew he wrote about Jesus, but not exactly what.

Thanks again.

 

[GKMotley]

It is a subject of some complexity.

Josephus on Jesus - Wikipedia

 

[ConstantLearner]

Thanks for posting this. It’s very interesting and informative.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

I see. So you only trust first hand testimony and not any other evidence that may contradict that testimony?

Evidently you didn’t read all my post. I said I trust experts in their field. No astronomer has been to Mars, but I trust many highly educated ones to know a great deal about it. I specifically wrote: “When no firsthand account is possible, such as exists in the disappearance of MH 370, I listen to experts, then make up my mind.” You ignored that, I assume, to suit your own agenda.

Well, no, I didn’t ignore it to suit my own agenda, I pointed out an inconsistency in your agenda.

If you trust experts in their field, you ought to trust Tacitus and Josephus who were regarded as the foremost ancient historians in the fields of Roman and Jewish history focused on the first century. Instead of trusting these two experts you concocted some excuse about them not having “first hand experience,” as if historians are only reliable if their reportage is autobiographical, as if individuals never make up stuff about themselves and their own experiences. Yeah, no vested interest or bias there, I imagine.

Your position is unsustainable and you know it, if you are honest, because you arbitrarily move between trusting “experts in the field” and requiring “first hand experience” in order to scaffold your own viewpoint.

And I didn’t derail this thread, I asked a very simple question regarding Judaism: Why was a seemingly good and observant Jewish rabbi, Jesus, (and seemingly one of their own,) cast by the Sanhedrin as someone who should suffer the grievous penalty of crucifixion?

Your answer, it seems, is that it never happened. Yet you are neither an eyewitness nor an expert historian, yet you want us to trust your opinions over the writings of Josephus and Tacitus two trusted historians who did have access to eyewitnesses and the public record. Well, okay.

It seems pretty clear why you are backing out of the discussion.

 

[GKMotley]

You are very welcome. My father had a rather elderly copy of the works of Josephus in the religion portion of his book collection. He pointed out the Testimonium Flavianum portion to me, and later I became aware of the scholarly discussion on it.

 

[GKMotley]

I suggest another take on witnesses, experts, and their assertions. First hand witnesses get careful reading. Discussion on the reliability of witnesses, or of the accuracy of their being identified as witnesses does too. Same for assertions and discussions on secondary/tertiary sources, commenting on primary sources, or on other stuff, otherwise.

History is complex. Full of people and stuff like that. If you have a point of interest (and I have a large number of them which drives the immense size of my library), then read, explore all points of view, to give a well-rounded look at the topic. By becoming knowledgeable yourself, you become better qualified to winnow the wheat from the chaff. And there is wheat and there is chaff to sift through, everywhere .

 

[HarryStotle]

I suggest another take on witnesses, experts, and their assertions. First hand witnesses get careful reading. Discussion on the reliability of witnesses, or of the accuracy of their being identified as witnesses does too. Same for assertions and discussions on secondary/tertiary sources, commenting on primary sources, or on other stuff, otherwise.

History is complex. Full of people and stuff like that. If you have a point of interest (and I have a large number of them which drives the immense size of my library), then read, explore all points of view, to give a well-rounded look at the topic. By becoming knowledgeable yourself, you become better qualified to winnow the wheat from the chaff. And there is wheat and there is chaff to sift through, everywhere .

I am not sure where you are headed with this. The implication seems to be – given that your post was in response to mine – that I am not currently very knowledgable on the matter. We could take that up in another thread, if you wish.

This thread was an open one asking a question about events in Judaic history. The trial of Jesus was, I would submit, the most critical time in the history of Judaism, and merely asking for some clarity of thought on the subject, doesn’t imply provocation necessarily.

My critique of @ConstantLearner is that s/he dismisses both Josephus and Tacitus under the rubric of “not eyewitnesses” while at the same time admitting s/he knows very littłe about Josephus, for one, and didn’t know about the issue of possible interpolation and the extent to which that is considered an historical problem for either passage.

Have to admit when I posted that, I didn’t even think of an interpolation! I admit, I have only read bits and pieces of Josephus. I knew he wrote about Jesus, but not exactly what.

So rather than going on the defensive – and subsequently the offensive – perhaps asking for clarity or, as you say, “becoming knowledgable” on the question s/he may have approached the question in a more open way, since it does remain an open question among scholars.

The alternative would have been not becoming involved in the question or simply admitting not having sufficient knowledge to discuss it.

 

[GKMotley]

I have no knowledge of your knowledge of this or any other subject. Where I was going was where I always go in suggesting an approach to grasping history: in-depth reading, from many perspectives, for a rounded and informed appreciation of a topic. Applies to you and anyone else, myself included.

 

[Kaninchen]

My critique

It’s the way you tell them that’s key to the comedy, isn’t it?

For all the pretentious posturing, all the attempted bullying, it’s all just conjecture, all just Josh McDowell-ism and about as far from Catholic evangelism as you can get.

 

[Catholic_JIll]

Moses) a Written Torah alone. He gave an Oral Torah along with it, to explain all the secrets of Tanakh.

Hello Rabbi,

I was enjoying reading your replies below. I don’t know if you’ve already answered this but I read a long time ago that Moses gave an Oral Tradition with the Torah. Is this written down now? I’ve also read that Moses Oral Tradition is now the Kabbalah? Do Orthodox Rabbis like yourself also practice the Kabbalah?
I noticed there are Kabbalah centers in the ME and around the USA. I think many ppl are non Jews? Is there anything significant that many non Jews are participating?-
Forgive me if I ask anything silly or offending. I honestly only study and practice Catholicism so I may be asking something everyone knows already.

The second question, Have you visited the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem?

And thirdly. As Catholics, we love the Psalms!! We chant them every week in Mass. We memorize certain Psalms King David wrote. We carry books of just Psalms. Do Jews still read or enjoy the Psalms as much as us? I hope they do.

Thank. you. This is such an interesting and thoughtful topic for us.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

My critique

It’s the way you tell them that’s key to the comedy, isn’t it?

For all the pretentious posturing, all the attempted bullying, it’s all just conjecture, all just Josh McDowell-ism and about as far from Catholic evangelism as you can get.

Let’s, then, imagine that the question was posed by a conjecturing, evangelical Josh McDowell, pretentiously posturing and attempting to bully simply by asking the question, the issue of providing an actually reasonable and satisfying answer to the question still remains, no?

The question stands on its own merits, even if everything you say about the messenger happens to be true.

In other words, you don’t have a good answer. Is that our takeaway?

 

[BlueMaxx]

I think the Rabbi may have left the thread …

 

[Rabbi]

Shalom Jill,

I admit, I’ve been away a while. Yes, G-d also gave Moses the Oral Torah along with the Written Torah, this is self-evident in the fact that we wouldn’t know how to put on tefillin without an oral code, see, that oral code carries all the secrets of Judaism. It was first put pen to paper (or parchment, really), by Yehudah HaNasi (President of the Sanhedrin in the 2nd century) in what’s called the Mishnah. The Gemara, compiled around the 400s CE, was an extension to the Mishnah, espousing on its many vague concepts for future generations. Kabbalah just means “received wisdom”, there are, now, essentially two Kabbalahs. The first Kabbalah makes part of Tanakh, the second is even more esoteric in nature, the central text is the Zohar, penned by R. Yochai, a student of R. Akiva. I personally believe in the divine authorship of the Zohar, but I’m not a mystic. I’m not sure if many non-Jews practice Kabbalah, if this is so, they must be careful, for there are many fakers selling “commercialized” versions which promise quick riches, one must be careful when digesting true Kabbalah, this isn’t hard to recognize. True Kabbalah won’t be commercialized.

I haven’t been to Yisrael yet. I’d love to go someday!

Yes, we also adore the Psalms. In fact, we sing them often at Shul (Jewish worship house)! There’s so much spirituality and wisdom in there, more than any tractate in any faith, be it Jewish or Buddhist!

Thank you so much for the great questions, take care.

 

[BlueMaxx]

Whoo! Glad your back!

 

[ConstantLearner]

Thank you. I have so many books stored, too. and, I’m going to have to store a few hundred more soon. A lot of work, but worth it.

I love The Sabbath by Heschel. I read and re-read it. So much spirituality and beauty there.

 

[Kaninchen]

In other words, you don’t have a good answer. Is that our takeaway?

Let’s see if I can make it easy for you to understand.

I don’t have an answer you want because I don’t accept that the question has merit.

The origin of the ‘question’ lies in a text that I don’t accept as either scripture or reportage.

There is no way of establishing that it’s either scripture and/or reportage, no matter how much McDowell-ism you indulge in, it is futile and your attitude merely annoys and/or amuses your opponents.

You need to decide whether you want to talk to people or merely annoy and/or amuse them.

 

[Psalms62]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Shavua tuv! I hope that everyone had a good Shabbos!

 

[Evenshlomo]

Good week Meltzerboy2, the majority of our Rishonim like the Rosh , Rif, also Rambam as you might know, like pointed out in the Tur, Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah, hold a waiting time of 6 hours. (The Rambam holds a waiting time of “ca” 6 hours which is why many Sepharadim keep 5,5 hours.)
In my opinion this is not the place to discuss this as we’re hijacking this thread (a very Jewish trait lol) but since we’re at iit let’s continue for a moment.

A waiting time of 2 hours is unfamiliar to me. Everyone nowadays can do as they please it seems and I won’t mix in it. However, one should imo always remember that this is a Christian board. Hence, when someone, on top of all with a username of “Rabbi” throws out a phrase like this as if it were general accepted custom (and/or) halacha, then I see a certain possible danger in that.
I have family and friends in Antwerp where everyone keeps 6 hours.
Yekkes have come to terms with a waiting time of 3 hours.
There used to be a minhag of some Dutch people to wait only one hour, but this minhag can merely be found anymore amongst Dutch Jewery.
Sepharadim wait, as already stated, minimum 5.5 hours.

A waiting period of two hours is first, new to me, second a dangerous statement to spread in a non-Jewish environment where people innocently might take things for granted, and third, while at a Jewish table such a discussion might be very welcome and encouraged, this is not a topic to discuss amongst non-Jews in detail.