What does it mean to be Jewish if there is no YHVH?

[Willum]

What does it mean to be Jewish if there is no YHVH?

[cnorman19]

[Replying to Willum]

So does mine, without a substantive response or counterargument of any kind.

I gather that nothing much has changed around here. Be well, everyone.

If only because your counter arguments didn't actually mean anything, twice.

Easy to say that. Let's see you prove it.

Since your eloquent counterargument consisted of "Nah," I'm not holding my breath.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 11 by cnorman19]

Well, what else could I say? Your reply was at best, wandering, and in general non-sequitur, and then you complain about me.

I lread it, and responded appropriately to hundreds of words that did not address the point.

"Nah."
Sorry man, you got no fist in your glove.

[jgh7]

If you take all the supernatural out of religion, then you might as well just call it philosophy or culture. Supernatural is what makes religion religion.

[cnorman19]

[Replying to post 12 by Willum]

"...that did not address the point"?

Sorry, I misunderstood.

I read your OP as a good-faith question about the place of God-beliefs in the Jewish religion, and I attempted to give a good-faith answer. It's now apparent that your only goal was to find an excuse to dismiss, demean, sneer and score points.

Without going into the other points and arguments I posted without your acknowledging or responding to them in any way (including your transparent and clumsy attempt to have your cake and eat it too on the subject of the existence or nonexistence of gods being a matter of "FACT"), I posted a link that addressed your question, quote, "What does it mean to be Jewish if there is no YHVH?" DIRECTLY by showing that to an enormous proportion of modern Jews, belief in God is either deemed irrelevant or rejected outright.

Claiming that that "doesn't address the point" is beyond ludicrous.

Like I said; fake debate. Pretending to engage in serious discussions for the sole purpose of scoring phony, self-serving "victories" and then strutting around as if one has actually done something significant while avoiding any actual debate at all.

Whatever you say, dude. Phffft. Not worth my time.

(To OLIVER and DAVID: THIS is why I don't bother to post here any more. If you can't prevent or at least acknowledge the illegitimacy of this kind of pretend-debate, there's nothing here worth engaging in. Goodbye for a few more years.)

[cnorman19]

[Replying to post 13 by jgh7]

Not that it's worth my time to note this, but NOT ALL "religion" is fundamentalist supernaturalism.

But then, it was proven long ago that the "debaters" here are, by and large, entirely ignorant of Christian theology since Rudolf Bultmann, including that of Paul Tillich, Schubert Ogden, Teilhard de Chardin, et. al., and of virtually ALL Jewish theology since the 17th century.

Tell me, do you argue that throwing out the concept of changing base metals into gold by means of the Philosopher's Stone nullifies the concepts of modern chemistry? Or that ending sacrifices to Apollo destroys the essence of modern medicine?

Respond, or pretend to, as you like. I'll not be reading them. I don't read treatises on modern literature written by illiterate third-graders either.

[Willum]

[Replying to Willum]

So does mine, without a substantive response or counterargument of any kind.

I gather that nothing much has changed around here. Be well, everyone.

If only because your counter arguments didn't actually mean anything, twice.

Easy to say that. Let's see you prove it.

Well, your responses are becoming so derogatory to all comers I hesitate to respond, and all my responses seem so obvious to me that they don't really merit discussion, but I will tender an example of a response that will demonstrate one point - at the risk of you having what I perceive as another "melt-down."

As to the durability of Judaism: Nothing has changed whereby Jews should not be making animal sacrifice. The truth is the truth, no?
When was the last time you sacrificed a ram?

[marco]

[Replying to post 13 by jgh7]

Not that it's worth my time to note this, but NOT ALL "religion" is fundamentalist supernaturalism.

But then, it was proven long ago that the "debaters" here are, by and large, entirely ignorant of Christian theology since Rudolf Bultmann, including that of Paul Tillich, Schubert Ogden, Teilhard de Chardin, et. al., and of virtually ALL Jewish theology since the 17th century.

Tell me, do you argue that throwing out the concept of changing base metals into gold by means of the Philosopher's Stone nullifies the concepts of modern chemistry? Or that ending sacrifices to Apollo destroys the essence of modern medicine?

Respond, or pretend to, as you like. I'll not be reading them. I don't read treatises on modern literature written by illiterate third-graders either.

Moderator Comment

This and your preceding post suggest irritation, which would be best kept private lest it be seen as uncivil. If you feel the generality of posters here is deficient in Christian or Jewish history, you can be helpfully informative. As for not reading treatises penned by illiterates, one would think they are remarkably rare - by definition. I offer a guiding comment rather than a warning this time. Go well.



Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to Willum]

So does mine, without a substantive response or counterargument of any kind.

I gather that nothing much has changed around here. Be well, everyone.

If only because your counter arguments didn't actually mean anything, twice.

Easy to say that. Let's see you prove it.

Well, your responses are becoming so derogatory to all comers I hesitate to respond, and all my responses seem so obvious to me that they don't really merit discussion, but I will tender an example of a response that will demonstrate one point - at the risk of you having what I perceive as another "melt-down."

As to the durability of Judaism: Nothing has changed whereby Jews should not be making animal sacrifice. The truth is the truth, no?
When was the last time you sacrificed a ram?

"I desire mercy, not sacrifice." (Hosea 6.6) Rabbinic Judaism is built upon the wisdom of the Prophets, not on the blood-sacrificial system. See also Micah 6.6-6.8.

Their greatest sage Maimonides characterized blood sacrifice as transitional only. In effect, a Pagan vestige.

The essence of Judaism is Divinely inspired ethics, not theory and theology or "right belief".

With the help and enlightenment of it's prophets and sages, most Jews have evolved well beyond primitive practices of blood sacrifice. In short, they have outgrown them.

And they have done so without resorting to "Christ" in order to make blood-sacrifice obsolete.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 18 by Elijah John]

Well, it is a good argument, and refreshing, thank you.
However Hosea is a minor prophet, and although it does diminish sacrifice in the face of mercy, such as abrogating human sacrifice, it does not eliminate the requirement of animal sacrifice,* as we know that animal sacrifice stopped during the Roman occupation, long after Hosea was allegedly written. Which. you will agree, Jesus or no, is an interesting... coincidence?

Sacrifice was also abrogated when Jerusalem lost its temple. Which would also be an interesting argument, except for far grander temples have been erected around the world, which should lead to animal sacrifice again.

But we all know it will not. That chapter, true or false, in the eyes of a YHVH, existent or not, is gone. Which demonstrates, a least finger of the conversation: Judaism has changed dramatically.

V/R

* = in heraldry, at about the same time as the Star of David was established to represent Jews, the six-pointed star was the symbol for animal sacrifice... the head/tail and four legs, just as the pentagram mean human sacrifice... head, arms and legs.

[paarsurrey1]

If you take all the supernatural out of religion, then you might as well just call it philosophy or culture. Supernatural is what makes religion religion.

It is only natural, something and or nothing, both created by One-True-God. There is none as supernatural, there can never be. Right, please?
Regards