Talk:Modern attempts to revive the Sanhedrin/Archive 7

message: I haven't had time to look into this, but there is else something going on in terms of trying to come up with a new formula for prayers. See here.  Its not actually being done by the new Sanhedrin, but by Rav David Bar Hayim "in cooperation with the nascent Sanhedrin". I wish there were 25 hours in a day. --Historian2 11:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC
:What is the Sanhedrin going to do next, publish an Orthodox Gates of Prayer?  —  Rickyrab | Talk 22:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Restoring version of Prayers

message: Reading the articles right now = the first I even heard of this New Sanhedrin. I wonder if most Reform and Conservative Jews have even heard of it, especially on my side of the Pond (America). Has anyone from the frei camps had opinions on this, or is this practically an entirely frum debate?  —  Rickyrab | Talk 22:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The nascient Sanhedrin has indeed asserted a power to change Jewish law, a power that might be thought welcome from a liberal perspective. But I think these three documents are likely to provide a flavor for how the actual nascient Sanhedrin (as opposed to a theoretical concept of one) is likely to be regarded by Jews from the more liberal denominations: , ,  . Best, --Shirahadasha 00:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The 'authority' it claims rests with medieval scholars and the Shulchan Aruch so I would be surprized if it were otherwise.  On the one hand its agenda includes several "towards unity and healing among the various divisions of the people of Israel".  On the other hand it is clear that it wants to do this 'healing' from a strictly orthodox POV. --Historian2 10:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reform and other Liberal Attitudes

message: This article's title paragraph needs to be summarized. It is simply not enciclopedic to have such a long opening paragraph. Chavatshimshon 12:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Many wikipedia articles are this long, it is essentially a subheading of Sanhedrin.  Do you have a suggestion? --Historian2 09:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title Paragraph 

message: We had discussed earlier whether and to what extent a revised Sanhedrin would have the power to change Jewish law. The current Sanhedrin has declared itself to have such a power, stating that "The Sanhedrin has the authority, in certain cases, to rule differently than is currently in Jewish law." Given that it has expressly taken upon itself the war power of a sovereign traditional Sanhedrin, any doubts as to whether it thinks itself as really a Sanhedrin or not should be laid to rest. One may agree or disagree with its POV, but it is not waiting for every city to have a lesser Sanhedrin, or for any of the other events that have been proposed, before assuming to itself an authority that only a Great Sanhedrin can have. Best, --Shirahadasha 23:45, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree --Historian2 09:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authority of Sanhedrin 

message: The original text was "Recent military operations have come under scrutiny by the new Sanhedrin (generally for being too dovish)", now it says "Its opinions, in the exercise of this claim to authority, have been quite hawkish".  The former was an attempt to describe its actions relative to the Sanhedrin's point of view.  The latter sound like a judgment.  Perhaps we can come up with a better description? --Historian2 09:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Sanhedrin's recent actions 

message: Added section given recent Isreali government actions in response to the group's calls on soldiers and policemen to disobey orders etc.  --Shirahadasha 00:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That may happen in the future, but this particular arrest was a little different. An IDF officer had issued restraining orders to someone living in the West Bank from entering the West Bank (ostensively to prevent trouble).  This settler appealed to the Sanhedrin as a court.  The court requested the IDF officer to appear before them and explain his actions.  But the officer refused to appear before the Sanhedrin.  So, as is customary in these situations, the officer was placed in a mild form of "cherem" where a letter was sent to his synagogue requesting that he not be honored with be called to the reading of the Torah.  This letter was considered incitement by the israel government and they summoned Rabbi Ariel for questioning.  He agreed to questioning, but not at the police station. After several summons, the police came and "escorted" him to the station for questioning, although it was not really an arrest.  Go figure.  Although the reaction of the new Sanhedrin was defiant.--Historian2 00:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Will move this to "The Sanhedrin's recent actions" section --Historian2 00:41, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicts with Israeli government 

message: Bear and Dragon has marked this section under dispute:  Daniel, please explain what is under dispute. Everything is sourced. Perhaps the comment "Events as portrayed by the media, however, have not always fit this idealic picture"? Do you want this removed? --Historian2 12:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Daniel if you don't write anything here, I will remove the dispute-section tag. --Historian2 13:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

text: All that belongs to the dispute above, why do you dispute The Sanhedrin's Actions section? --Historian2 13:28, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because of this. Weasel wordings. It was you who started this paragraph on the talk page, remember? --Bear and Dragon 14:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Sanhedrin's Actions

message: Now, let's discuss the biography. What added value does it give to copy Rabbi Halberstam's entire biography here? If we do so, why not copy the biography of the Chazon Ish as well? If you revert it, then that is indeed what I will do. --Bear and Dragon 13:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please explain what relevance that biography has. Anybody who wants to read it can simply click his name and read it there. We do not copy the biography of anyone else to the article either. It seems to me like you two are simply reverting me for the fun of it. Could you now please come up with a motivation for insisting on the inclusion of Rabbi Halberstam's biography? --Bear and Dragon 14:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a six line summary of his biography and is required as supporting information for the statement "He was known for his tolerance towards other streams of thought in Orthodox Judaism. Despite his own Chareidi anti-Zionist background, he also maintained contacts with Modern Orthodox, religious Zionist leaders." which would be of interest to a wiki reader wanting to know what kind of person was claimed to have renewed semicha, and indirectly a sanhedrin type body.  He was a unique and unusual individual. I don't known why I bother to explain, you will just delete it anyway... --Historian2 14:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I will not delete it anyway, since this is merely a content-related dispute and there is no sense in holding a rv-war for that. I am merely noting that, for example, Steinsaltz does not have such a biographical summary. Why should Rav Halberstam have it, but not Steinsaltz? --Bear and Dragon 14:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Biography of Rabbi Halberstam