From: hem@col400.att.com (Hillel E. Markowitz)
Subject: Re: Re^4: Atheism and Intelligence
Originator: news@cbnewsf.cb.att.com
Organization: AT&T Federal Systems
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 15:21:00 GMT


Note: this response was to the posting on soc.culture.jewish and
is from that viewpoint.

In article <4341@novavax.UUCP> mitch@novavax.UUCP (Mitch Silverman) writes:
>waldo@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Todd J. Dicker) writes:
>
>>                                          Some study, some insight, and a 
>>good teacher could help you to realize that there are social and 
>>psychological~r meanings beyond the literal to these stories, and there 
>>is room for advanced understanding of these stories.  There are benefits 
>>to anthropomorphasizing God, even thought we don't see "Him" as a
>>white bearded old man sitting on a throne.
>
>Ahem.  I hope you'll forgive me if I ask whether or not you read my
>original post.  The "...social and psychological meanings...." of 
>Judaism are *precisely* the things that cause me to label myself a Jew.
>
>>                                                            ...we are far
>>from a tribal cult that actually expects our prayers to influence a
>>deity.
>
>I was not saying that I felt the purpose of Judaism to be influencing
>a deity, I was saying that it is the avowed purpose of the Conservative
>and Reform liturgy to do so, and that my attending Conservative and
>Reform services, as "an atheistic Jewish SubGenius minister" might
>be seen as conflicting with that avowed purpose.

While I cannot speak for the "avowed purpose" of the
Conservative and Reform liturgy, I can say that this does not (in
the sense that seems to be used above) the purpose of the
Orthodox liturgy (and I would think that C & R even less so).  
Analogies are always very slippery.  The sense
that the idol worshippers used (and still use) of treating the
"god" as a super powerful magician who can be bribed or
threatened is definitely not the viewpoint of Judaism (all
branches).  The idea of the "Old man in a white beard" is really
just an image to help very young children behave.  See how the
RMB"M explains the whole issue and the 13 principles.

Using the analogy of a child and his parent helps but we must be
fully aware at all times that it is an analogy to help our own
understanding.  As with all analogies there are limits that must
be realized to the comparison.  One problem with most analogies
is that people hearing them do not realize the intended limits.
Look at the "Constitution analogy" in the threads on Written and
Oral Law that surface here from time to time.

> 
>In fact, I *thought* I was saying the opposite.  I'm a Jew even if God
>does not exist.  I'm a Jew because of 4,000 years of history and 27
>years of personal Jewishness.  I'm even a Jew if (hypothetically--I
>don't expect this to happen) three Chasidic Orthodox rabbis reading this
>group (I believe that some of the people involved with the TORAH-L
>mailing list do) decided to convene a rabbinical court and excommunicate
>me. Fortuantely, Judaism is not at all monolitic about accepting such
>decisions....

You would still be a Jew even if you were excommunicated (or
deserved it).  You seem to misunderstand what "excommunication"
is.  Note that I use the English word even though it does not
precisely convey what "nidui" or "cherem" really is since it is
the term most English speakers think of.  However it is NOT
declaring that someone is not Jewish.

> 
>There.  How's that--have I now had your requisite "Some study, some
>insight, and a good teacher...."?

No.  There is a story of someone who came to his Rabbi and said
that after 20 years of study he had come to the conclusion that
he was an "apikorus" (heretic).  The Rabbi answered that he did
not know enough to reach the status of an "apikorus" and he
should study more if he hoped to reach that level.  The example
of an apikorus in the Talmud is Elishah Ben Avuya (aka Acher) who
was considered one of the four in his generation who had reached
the level of "pardes" along with Rabbi Akiva.

Besides, you may have read a little (call it "some study") but
you haven't shown the "insight" (at least in this series of
posts) and you haven't had a "good teacher".  Note that the first
element of the three you mention is impossible without the last
element.  That is why there are areas of study that are limited
to one on one teaching.

> 
>Sheesh.
>
>Mitch Silverman                    | As Voltaire never said, "I
>Student, New College of            | disagree with what you say,
>the University of South Florida    | but will defend to the death
>mitch@cfraix.cfr.usf.edu           | your right to say it."


-- 
____________________________________________________
| Hillel Markowitz    |     Im ain ani li mi li    |
| H_Markowitz@att.com | Veahavta Leraiecha Kamocha |
|_____________________|____________________________|