Judaism

[Valke2]

Can God cause someone to be of Jewish descent via means other than the standard biological means?

You can convert to judaism. Then your children would be jewish and their children would be jewish. WOuld that be an example of someone being of jewish descent via non-biological means?

 

[Damascus]

From what I’ve read here, I think it would be that we are a religion of primarily law and not faith. That there is something about judaism that lacks a spiritual component.

Thanks Valke2.

To be clear, I would not make that accusation.

I hope that this thread helps clear up some of these things.

 

[Valke2]

Thanks Valke2.

To be clear, I would not make that accusation.

I hope that this thread helps clear up some of these things.

Well, if nothing else, it’ll kill some time

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

You can convert to judaism. Then your children would be jewish and their children would be jewish. WOuld that be an example of someone being of jewish descent via non-biological means?

Yes and no.

I’m aware that people can convert to Judaism.

I guess I was speaking more on a spiritual level though.

For example, above you mentioned that other’s misconceptions about Judaism often involves somehow thinking there is something about Judaism that lacks a spiritual component.

But what spiritual component would be involved if someone converted to Judaism?

Would the conversion only be permitted on an intellectual level of consent as they are accepted into the Temple?

And, if in the case of babies and children for example, could a non-Jewish child be adopted into a Jewish family and be considered Jewish via a circumcision?

Or, for another example, could God make someone Jewish on spiritual level even if they were not biologically Jewish and yet desired to be so and yet did not have access to Temple for example?

 

[Mystophilus]

You know, as I re-read my post, I asked myself the same question, regarding the resurrection being only for jews. I’ll have to look into that a bit and get back to you. Truthfully, it is not something I’ve thought a lot about. Regarding the above texts, we use:
Ecclesiasticus 32 B.C. yes …
Additions to Esther If this is the same as the book of Esther, yes.
Suzanna (Daniel 13) If this is book of Daniel, yes.
Bel & the Dragon (Daniel 14) same answer

Are you sure that we are talking about the same texts? Ecclesiasticus is not Ecclesiastes, remember, and the Additions are not in the traditional Esther. All of the books asked about were found only in Greek, and the additions to Esther and Daniel likewise. They were excluded when the Ketuvim were collected together into the canon, and the Jewish Encyclopedia (see response to Saint_Michael) believes that they remain so.

 

[Mystophilus]

“there are the books which are commonly found in the Greek and Latin Bibles, but are not included in the Hebrew canon, and are hence rejected by Protestants; to these, as has already been said, Protestants give the name “Apocrypha” specifically. These are (following the order and with the titles of the English translation): I Esdras; II Esdras; Tobit; Judith; The Rest of the Chapters of the Book of Esther; Wisdom of Solomon; Wisdom of Jesus, the Son of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus; Baruch, with the Epistle of Jeremiah; Song of the Three Holy Children; History of Susanna; Destruction of Bel and the Dragon; Prayer of Manasses; I Maccabees; II Maccabees. These, with the exception of I, II (III, IV) Esdras and the Prayer of Manasses, are canonical in the Roman Church.”

jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=1644&letter=A

 

[Saint_Michael]

“there are the books which are commonly found in the Greek and Latin Bibles, but are not included in the Hebrew canon, and are hence rejected by Protestants; to these, as has already been said, Protestants give the name “Apocrypha” specifically. These are (following the order and with the titles of the English translation): I Esdras; II Esdras; Tobit; Judith; The Rest of the Chapters of the Book of Esther; Wisdom of Solomon; Wisdom of Jesus, the Son of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus; Baruch, with the Epistle of Jeremiah; Song of the Three Holy Children; History of Susanna; Destruction of Bel and the Dragon; Prayer of Manasses; I Maccabees; II Maccabees. These, with the exception of I, II (III, IV) Esdras and the Prayer of Manasses, are canonical in the Roman Church.”

jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=1644&letter=A

I don’ t think this is correct at all, there hasn’t been a formal Jewish authority since around 70 A.D. and as far as I know there is not a “Jewish Canon”. Some Orthodox Jews only use the Torah, some Jews like Valke2 use some of the books of the ‘apocryphal’ texts. Protestants hate to hear that Jews use the books of the apocrypha, they especially hate to hear that they used them and Christ used them ~ 33 A.D…

 

[Mystophilus]

Jews can’t agree amongst themselves about many things

“Wherever you have two Jews, you have three different opinions.”

• Jewish poster on another forum

That is one of the things which I have always really liked about your faith: the degree of freedom to argue ideas, even when you are arguing them with G_d.

Of course, this also makes it very confusing when I go looking for rabbinical interpretations of Hebrew Bible passages, and come back with twenty completely different views of the same text.

While I have no questions at the moment, I just wanted to say, “Hi!” , and warn you that I might well PM you any time that I need a source, or a corroboration, on Jewish thought or practice.

 

[Valke2]

Yes and no.

I’m aware that people can convert to Judaism.

I guess I was speaking more on a spiritual level though.

For example, above you mentioned that other’s misconceptions about Judaism often involves somehow thinking there is something about Judaism that lacks a spiritual component.

But what spiritual component would be involved if someone converted to Judaism?

Would the conversion only be permitted on an intellectual level of consent as they are accepted into the Temple?

And, if in the case of babies and children for example, could a non-Jewish child be adopted into a Jewish family and be considered Jewish via a circumcision?

Or, for another example, could God make someone Jewish on spiritual level even if they were not biologically Jewish and yet desired to be so and yet did not have access to Temple for example?

A jewish convert is considered a jew in every way and is indistinguishable from any other jew. In fact, it is considered improper to even ask someone if they are a convert. As for babies adopted by Jews, there is a conversion process that most religious Jews would have for the child (taking them to a mikva [ritual bath] before 3 rabbis. It serves as a public delcaration that the child is being taken into the jewish community). The child technically should reaffirm its decision to convert to Judaism when it is at bar or bat mitzvah age (the age where a jew freely takes on the obligations of Judaism).

As far as being made jewish in a place where formal conversion is not possible, I don’t think it can be done. We would say such a person has a “jewish soul”. SUch a person can certainly be a righteous person, but can’t be a jew unless he or she goes through the conversion process.

Can a catholic be a catholic without being baptized?

 

[Valke2]

btw, circumcision is not something that determines if you are a jew or not (despite what many jews probably think). A male baby born from a jewish mother is a jew, whether or not his parents have a bris/circumcision. The obligation for a bris is one for the parents. The boy is jewish whether they fullfill that obligation or not.

 

[Mystophilus]

I don’ t think this is correct at all, there hasn’t been a formal Jewish authority since around 70 A.D. and as far as I know there is not a “Jewish Canon”. Some Orthodox Jews only use the Torah, some Jews like Valke2 use some of the books of the ‘apocryphal’ texts. Protestants hate to hear that Jews use the books of the apocrypha, they especially hate to hear that they used them and Christ used them ~ 33 A.D…

As a de facto Protestant, I have no ideological problem with the idea of the Jews, or anyone else, reading whatsoever books they choose. I was under the impression that the ‘canon’ of the Tanakh was the collection of texts which were found to have Hebrew originals. Searching online now, I find such things as a couple of online Jewish Bibles, and a series of other sites, all of which support the idea that there is a very definite corpus of texts which form a Bible, and that, while others do exist, they are not admitted to that corpus. As for there being a Jewish authority, while there is no centralised authority, as there is the Roman Catholic Church, there is still a cultural consensus, as there is among Protestants. Deviate too far from the cultural centre, and you become no longer ‘one of us’, but ‘one of them’. Of course, how far is too far depends upon the location and attitude of the observer…

 

[Valke2]

I don’ t think this is correct at all, there hasn’t been a formal Jewish authority since around 70 A.D. and as far as I know there is not a “Jewish Canon”. Some Orthodox Jews only use the Torah, some Jews like Valke2 use some of the books of the ‘apocryphal’ texts. Protestants hate to hear that Jews use the books of the apocrypha, they especially hate to hear that they used them and Christ used them ~ 33 A.D…

Well, we do have a canon of texts, which make up the Tanakh, which jews universally agree upon. This does not prevent us from referring to other books, such as Maccabes, to make a point.

For the record, the Tanakh is made up of the following ("TaNaKh) is an acronym for “Torah” “Nevrim” and “Ketuvim”:
Torah, is the 5 books of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy).

Nevrim is made up of the books of prophets:
Joshua, Judges, Samuel 1 & 2, Kings 1 & 2, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micha, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi.

Ketivum, means “other writings” and consists of:
Psalms, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemia, Chronicles 1 & 2.

Those would be the “Canon” of jewish texts. IN addition to that, we have the Talmud, or Oral Torah. The Talmud greatly expands on the Torah using all the above texts to make its various points.

 

[inJESUS]

How many Jews are there aproximately and what is the percentage of those who still believe the Messiah will come as a person? ( i heard many don’t believe he’ll be a person right?)thx

 

[Valke2]

How many Jews are there aproximately and what is the percentage of those who still believe the Messiah will come as a person? ( i heard many don’t believe he’ll be a person right?)thx

There are about 15 million jews in the world. Most in the USA and Israel. Maybe a little less. I don’t know what percentage believe the Messiah will come. Probably at least 5 million are secular and not religious. Of the religious jews, I would guess a majority believe the Messiah will come as a person. It is one of the traditional 13 basic princpals of faith in Judaism, set forth by Rambam in the 12th (I think) century.

 

[inJESUS]

There are about 15 million jews in the world. Most in the USA and Israel. Maybe a little less. I don’t know what percentage believe the Messiah will come. Probably at least 5 million are secular and not religious. Of the religious jews, I would guess a majority believe the Messiah will come as a person. **It is one of the traditional 13 basic princpals of faith in Judaism, set forth by Rambam in the 12th (I think) century./**QUOTE] yes i read this 2 days ago. thx

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

A jewish convert is considered a jew in every way and is indistinguishable from any other jew. In fact, it is considered improper to even ask someone if they are a convert. As for babies adopted by Jews, there is a conversion process that most religious Jews would have for the child (taking them to a mikva [ritual bath] before 3 rabbis. It serves as a public delcaration that the child is being taken into the jewish community). The child technically should reaffirm its decision to convert to Judaism when it is at bar or bat mitzvah age (the age where a jew freely takes on the obligations of Judaism).

As far as being made jewish in a place where formal conversion is not possible, I don’t think it can be done. We would say such a person has a “jewish soul”. SUch a person can certainly be a righteous person, but can’t be a jew unless he or she goes through the conversion process.

Can a catholic be a catholic without being baptized?

I think so-- though I’m not sure. There seems to be a ‘baptism of desire’ within Catholic theology, something which is why I was asking the questions I was asking you.

So, in a sense, I was looking to see if there was any Jewish equivalent to this Catholic teaching.

In addition to that, I was wondering what your take on the following passage was…

“The days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will punish all who are circumcised only in the flesh- Egypt, Judah, Edom, Ammon, Moab and all who live in the desert in distant places. For all these nations are really uncircumcised, and even the whole house of Israel is uncircumcised in heart.”

Quite frankly, I don’t understand this passage within a Jewish context.

Don’t get me wrong. I think I do understand this passage from a Christian perspective (cf., Romans 2:29). And, admittedly, it may not be a flattering understanding.

That’s why, going back to Jeremiah 9:25-26, I was asking if there was some other way that a Jewish person could become a Jewish person outside the normal constraints usually associated with conversion to Judaism.

 

[blessedtoo]

There are about 15 million jews in the world. Most in the USA and Israel. Maybe a little less. I don’t know what percentage believe the Messiah will come. Probably at least 5 million are secular and not religious. Of the religious jews, I would guess a majority believe the Messiah will come as a person. It is one of the traditional 13 basic princpals of faith in Judaism, set forth by Rambam in the 12th (I think) century.

If the Jewish people could not accept that the Messiah could be both God and man, than what would the disposition and form of the Messiah be?

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

Well, now that Rosh Hashanah is over, I’ve gotta play too.

Valke2:

I’m a Conservative and not an Orthodox Jew…

Aha…methinks we will, perforce, differ about a few things!

Franciscan:

How close is today’s Orthodox community to the ancient practice etc…Do Orhodox Jews consider conservative and reform to be valid?

Valke2 is, of course, quite right when he says that Judaism evolves & changes, But I would respectfully seek to add that it does so only within given parameters. Like, Tevye says in Fiddler on the Roof, everybody/thing has to bend. But, he also added that if one bends too far, one breaks. Thus, I must strongly disagree Valke2, with your statement that

Valke2:

Conservative Judaism has the right idea about how to interpet and apply halacha (jewish law), but its congregants are generally not very educated in what it means to do this. The orthodox, on the other hand, have a very educated understanding of the texts and the commandments, etc., but their method of determining halacha and law is too rigid and actually not how judaism was traditionally practiced.

The Conservative method of interpretation & application of Jewish law has way overstepped the bounds of what even the most liberal & lenient orthodox schools would allow. Our method of determining & applying halacha is not at all rigid & is precisely how Judaism has been traditionally practiced. Who was Conservative or Reform or Reconstructionist 200 years ago? Nobody. These “movementsd” didn’t exist.

The spectrum that is orthodoxy is the organic, lineal & normative decendant of ancient (i.e. Pharisaic & then Rabbinic) Judaism. While many/most Conservative, Reform & Reconstructionist (more for the Conservative though) are undoubtedly Jews, much of what they believe & practice (especially the R & R) is simply not Judaism. Traditional, normative Judaism is orthodox (orthodoxy being a far broader spectrum than many non-Jews, and many non-orthodox Jews, seem to realize; see jewfaq.org/movement.htm#US for a good summary on orthodoxy & the other “movements” within Judaism). Historically, the Sadducees & Esseners were heretics. (The Pharisees embodied normative Judaism then, much as their direct descendants & heirs, i.e. our more modern orthodox Sages, embody it today.) Currently, the Reform, Conservative & Reconstructionist “movements” are newfangled movements that developed in Europe, in reaction to the Enlightenment. They have junked so many core Jewish beliefs and, in effect, make it up as they go along, influenced by whatever happens to be trendy at the moment & taking care to be “politically correct”. This is Judaism??!! I grew up, as I like to say, de jure Conservative but de facto nothing. I looked (seriously) at what the Conservative movement had to offer & was thoroughly underwhelmed & unimpressed. Orthodox Judaism is all-encompassing, touches on every aspect of one’s life, and supplies a deep emotional commitment & spiritual food for the soul. Orthodox Judaism believes that the Torah comes from God; the Reform movement does not. Historically, the Conservative movement has tried to straddle a middle ground that does not exist. If one does not believe that the Torah is from God, then what’s the point? Judaism is not, and never has been, an everyone-for-him/herself religion. Orthodoxy recognizes that there is a certain set of core beliefs that are immutable & which serve to bind all Jews everywhere, much as they have for thousands of years.

Here’s a recent ferinstance:

(cont.)

 

[stillsmallvoice]

(cont.)

This is from Ha’aretz from this past March:

Conservative movement weighs recognition of gay marriage

by Shlomo Shamir, Haaretz correspondent

The Conservative movement is considering the recognition of gay marriage and allowing homosexuals to be ordained as rabbis, a move that is threatening to split the movement. The movement’s Halachic (Jewish law) committee will discuss the initiative Wednesday, and according to a number of the movement’s rabbis, it will likely be approved.

(…).

Rabbi Joel Myers, chairman of the movement’s “Rabbinical Parliament” told Haaretz that reports of a possible split were exaggerated. “Recognition of gay marriages and of homosexual rabbis creates tensions due to the conflict between the principles of Jewish law and the values of our time. However, this issue is not central or critical to our movement,” Myers said.

Allowing for gay marriage and for homosexual rabbis represents far-reaching changes in the movement’s principles. The initiative’s approval would bring the Conservative movement ideologically closer to the Reform movement and would likely cause a rupture between the Conservative and Orthodox movements.

The Conservative movement is the only movement among the four Jewish movements active in the United States that has lost a significant amount of members in the last number of years. Over the last decade, the percentage of Jews who identify with the Conservative movement has dropped from 43 percent to 33 percent, while the Reform movement has grown from 35 percent to 39 percent and the Orthodox movement has grown from 16 percent to 21 percent.

Link: haaretz.com/hasen/spages/691226.html

Re the italicized portion: “…values of our time…”!!! As my Dad (who’s not orthodox) would say, “…values of our time…”, that and fifty cents will get you a cup of coffee. (And I tell my Dad, “Dad, the only cup of coffee that you can get for fifty cents nowadays is the paint thinner they sell at McDonalds and have the chutzpah to call coffee.”

*"…values of our time…"!!! *A fig for the “…values of our time…”!! What are they? Whatever whims & pc dogma decides they are at any given moment, i.e. they’re nothing! “Values of our time” as opposed to the Torah, the word of God to Moses our Teacher!!! This one is, and should be, a no-brainer. Torah wins every time! Here’s a current update from The Jerusalem Post from earlier this month: jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1157913601283&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull. (How wishy-washy can one get?) Valke2, and the Conservative movement wonders why we orthodox find it increasingly difficult to take it seriously?

I’ve seen Catholic posters here bewail “supermarket Catholicism”. Well, we have that phenomenon in Judaism too, unfortunately. The Conservative movement seems to be rapidly going the way of the Reform & Reconstructionist movements & embracing it wholeheartedly. I mean no offense to Valke2 (God forbid!) & I hope that we can discuss things both frankly & amicably!

Valke2:

But orthodox will not recognize a conversion of someone into judiasm unless it is an orthodox conversion. I think it is safe to say that they do not agree with how we practice judaism.

Correct, on both counts.

Valke2:

Most orthodox want the Temple rebuilt and believe sacrifices will continue at that time.

Correct. See forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=1454296&highlight=offerings#post1454296.

Valke2:

jAlex:

I was thinking of intercessory prayer - one that is addressed to a righteous person having in mind that the respective person will intercede on your behalf to God.

That’s definately not part of mainstream judaism. I can’t say it hasn’t been done though.

Correct (again).

When we visit the tombs of holy men/women, we certainly don’t/shouldn’t pray to them. Rather, we pray to God and beseech Him to count the merit of the particular holy man/woman in our favor, we ask Him to remember us in their merit. When DW & I were plowing through fertility treatment way back, we prayed at Rachel’s Tomb (rachelstomb.org/main.html) & at Samuel’s Tomb; we certainly didn’t pray to Rachel our Mother or to Samuel.

(cont.)

 

[stillsmallvoice]

(cont.)

While praying to the deceased is a whopper of a no-no, it is a belief in (orthodox) Judaism that our Patriarchs & Matriarchs look out for us from their vantage point in the world-to-come (as we call it). Rachel our Mother is a very good example. Our Sages ask why Jacob our Father buried her in Bethlehem, a very short journey from the family tomb (the Tomb of the Patriarchs at the Machpelah Cave) in nearby Hebron. Our Sages say that Jacob saw that one day, his children (i.e. us) would be punished for our sins and exiled from our Land. He buried Rachel by the roadside that she might weep for us and beg God for mercy as we passed by en route to exile; see Jeremiah 31:15-17.

Saint_Michael:

And do Jews believe in an afterlife? and secondly the resurrection?

Yes, on both counts. See forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=217006#post217006.

Our Sages excluded the so-called Apocryphal books from the Tanakh (what we call what you call the “Old Testament”) for several reasons. Ferinstance, I Maccabees, while considered to be very historically accurate & written by a believing Jew, was not considered to be Divinely inspired. The Prayer of Manasseh, while quite moving & a spiritual gem, was considered to be inauthentic (i.e., not by King Manasseh) as well as uninspired. Other books were considered to contain/be full of/ nonsense (i.e. ideas that didn’t jibe with the Torah), as well as to be inauthentic and/or uninspired.

Saint_Michael:

Judaism is a nice religion.

Thanks! We think so too! Roman Catholicism isn’t so bad either. I like this Benedict XVI fellow!

Valke2:

Damascus:

What do you think is the biggest misconception of Judiasm that Christians have about your worship and faith?

From what I’ve read here, I think it would be that we are a religion of primarily law and not faith. That there is something about judaism that lacks a spiritual component.

Agreed; well-said!

“Wherever you have two Jews, you have three different opinions.”

• Jewish poster on another forum

That is one of the things which I have always really liked about your faith: the degree of freedom to argue ideas, even when you are arguing them with G_d.

Ah, but it should be: "Whenever you have two Jews, you have three opinions each!

About arguing with God…

There is a very famous account in the Talmud in which our Sages were discussing a certain fine point of Jewish law. Rabbi Eliezer disagreed with his colleagues, led by Rabbi Joshua. Rabbi Eliezer was absolutely adamant that he was right; he cried out, “If the law agrees with me, Heaven itself shall prove it!” A bat-kol (a voice from Heaven) thereupon declared that Rabbi Eliezer was correct. Rabbi Joshua rose and, citing Deuteronomy 30:12, “It is not in Heaven,” declared that Heaven had no authority in the matter at hand and it was for the Sages, using the authority granted to them by God in Deuteronomy 17:8-11, to decide. The Sages voted against Rabbi Eliezer’s view, establishing their view as normative Jewish law.

Valke2:

A jewish convert is considered a jew in every way and is indistinguishable from any other jew. In fact, it is considered improper to even ask someone if they are a convert.

Correct.

Valke2:

As for babies adopted by Jews, there is a conversion process that most religious Jews would have for the child (taking them to a mikva [ritual bath] before 3 rabbis. It serves as a public delcaration that the child is being taken into the jewish community). The child technically should reaffirm its decision to convert to Judaism when it is at bar or bat mitzvah age (the age where a jew freely takes on the obligations of Judaism).

Well, Da Boyz that I am very fond of mentioning in my posts here at CAF are Da Adopted Boyz. (cont.)