Talk:Modern Orthodox Judaism

message: An example to illustrate dthe ifference between modern orthodox and orthodox, from the orthodox point of view, is the young modern orthodox man who described the tremendous progress his community was making to a Chasidic Rosh Yeshiva. They had put up an eruv around the tennis court. The Rosh Yeshiva was stunned.
For the Rosh Yeshiva, the young man had not a clue what Shabbos is about. And that seems to illustrate main point of contention.
Mcnelson 23:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Um. Is this supposed to be some kind of joke? I'm Modern Orthodox and I definitely know what Shabbos is all about. Someone who makes a "comical" error and happens to consider himself Modern Orthodox does not speak for all of Modern Orthodoxy. This is an encyclopedia, not a compilation of anecdotes. Kolindigo 23:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Contrast between Modern Orthodox and Orthodox/Haredi

message: I have made a few minor but essential changes to put Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch's position into perspective. I appreciate that Modern Orthodoxy derives much inspiration from his works, and views his Torah im Derech Eretz as echoing ideals on the synthesis of Judaism and general culture. However, most of the things that Modern Orthodoxy believes in (according to the article) are not part of his ideology. For example, a "relaxed stance" in halakha is about the last thing that he advocated. For the sake of simple honesty, I have put his influence on M.O. into perspective.  JFW | T@lk 14:54, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rabbi Hirsch and Modern Orthodoxy 

message: *I have removed the "Origins" sections to be replaced with a "History" section. I Propose writing about early history in W Europe, History in US, History in Israel, History in Western World. My concern is that this will entail a "double count" with the Philosophy section. 
*I also intend to remove the textual criticism section - it no longer fits - any suggestions for its new home?
Fintor 12:40, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Modifications

message: To define Centrist Orthodoxy as being equivalent to Torah Umadda is imo VERY pov.  Many people both to the right and the left of YU would claim to be centrist Orthodox.
(Definition of Centrist: me.  Leftist: anything to the left of me.  Right wing: anything to the right of me.)
~Mkop
about centrist orthodoxy: isn't centrist orthodoxy seperate from modern orthodoxy; i thought that YU hashkafa is pretty much modern orthodoxy And rav Aharon (shlita) is pretty much the only centrist orthodox jew in the world. In other words modern orthodoxy is associated with Rav Samson Rafael Hirsh, The Rav, The roshei yeshivah at YU (Rav Schachter, Rav Twersky etc.) while centrist orthodoxy is associated with Rav Aharon. I always thought the two we're somewhat similar but definently not the same thing.
Messengeroftruth 21:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centrist Orthodox 

message: This is a request for comments and help on a re-write of "Roots of Modern Orthodoxy".
It seems that the current article implies that Modern Orthodoxy traces it's generation to R' Hirsch and R' Hildesheimer, and is a descendent of the Hirscian movement. It would be interesting to hear other opinions, but it seems that few, if any, leaders or Rabbis in current or early Modern Orthodoxy trace their religious roots and ideas to 1800's Germany. A more correct approach would be to say that Modern Orthodoxy, although not springing in any way from German Jewry, notices some similarities between it's ideas and those of German Jewry.
If this is true, perhaps someone out there could suggest a re-write to reflect this and to explain the generation of Modern Orthodoxy in it's proper context.
ShykeeShykee
COrrect me if I am wrong, but SOloveitchik was the originator of Modern Orthodoxy. He was a break off of the Brisk dynesty with no connection to German Orthodoxy. Meanwhile the Frankfurt people of Washington Heights refer to Yeshivah University, SOloveitchik's yeshivah, as , "The church on the hill." 88.154.234.14 12:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Roots of Modern Orthodoxy" ?

message: Restored category Orthodox Judaism removed by IZAK. Modern Orthodox Judaism is a form of Orthodox Judaism, and removing all Modern Orthodox topics -- even Modern Orthodox Judaism itself -- from the Orthodox Judaism category tends to convey an impression that Modern Orthodox Judaism is not a form of Orthodox Judaism. Such a viewpoint is distinctly non-mainstream. --Shirahadasha 16:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Modern Orthodox Judaism is a subcategory. There is no need to include it in the parent category as well, please see Wikipedia:Category. JFW | T@lk 01:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why does it matter if something is "mainstream"? And how do you define that? Yehoishophot Oliver 13:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Rabbi Dr. Eliezer Berkovits, in Knowledge of the World, Knowledge of G-d (in Essential Essays on Judaism, Shalem Press, ed. Hazony), points out (following Rambam, Kuzari, and Hovot haLevavot), that the epistemological path is well paved for us to see secular learning as another of the truths which G-d has planted in this world; no real great effort is required to utilize this perspective nowadays. It has been said that Rabbi Hirsch's Torah im Derech Eretz is really just a recreation of what was true in Muslim Spain. Berkovits (ibid.) also points out, likely from the influence of his teacher (R' Akiva Glasner)'s father (R' Moshe Shmuel Glasner), who in turn followed the Hatam Sofer (from whom Glasner was descended), that at least in Eretz Yisrael, it is untenable to claim that Jewry can survive without technical knowledge and ability; G-d commanded us to have a state, and concomitantly this demands the requisite knowledge and technical skill. Cf. the elder Glasner's haTzionut b'Ohr haEmuna/Zionism in the Light of Faith. As for halachic leniency, the Sefardi world has even until today been known for what would be called Modern Orthodox-style leniency. See, for example, Professor Zvi Zohar's review of Rabbi Marc D. Angel's Loving Truth and Peace: The Grand Religious Worldview of Rabbi Benzion Uziel, at http://www.edah.org/backend/JournalArticle/1_2_zohar.pdf. In particular, Zohar notes that Sefardim never adopted the Hatam Sofer's infamous adage, hadash assur min haTorah (anything new is forbidden by the Torah). In conversation, Rabbi Angel has remarked to me that Rabbi Uziel's student, Rabbi Hayim David Halevi, was not a "Modern Orthodox" rabbi, but that he was simple a traditional Sefardi rabbi with his head on straight, leading him to adopt many of the same sorts of opinions that Modern Orthodoxy would espouse. In a recent issue of Rabbi Angel's magazine, Conversations, vol. 3 (Winter 2009/5769), Professor Marc B. Shapiro writes ("The Moroccan Rabbinic Conferences", regarding a measure that was to be passed by the Moroccan chief rabbinate, to equalize unmarried women in matters of inheritance under Jewish law, to make them equal to sons, contrary to Biblical and Talmudic law; this measure was aborted by the mass Moroccan aliyah to the State of Israel in 1956, but all signs indicate the conferences would have resulted in the measure's being passed), similarly to Zohar, that the Sefardim never adopted the Hatam Sofer's adage. Shapiro continues, "The Sephardic world never had to contend with non-Orthodox religious movements, and thus it was able to develop in a much more natural - one might say organic - fashion." Note the following quotation which Shapiro brings, from a traditional not "Modern Orthodox" Moroccan rabbi, Rabbi Moshe Malka, Mikveh ha-Mayim, vol. 1 no. 54:I am convinced that the times require adjustments and a revitalization of the structure of Jewish religious life, but one must approach this with great care and seriousness. We must esteem the modern outlook to the extent that it doesn't conflict with the Torah and tradition.Sevendust62 (talk) 13:18, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Hi! Just want to mention that, as User:Jfdwolff pointed out above, :Category:Modern Orthodox Judaism is a subcategory of :Category:Orthodox Judaism. The category system uses a "tree" structure. Once you add a leaf to a branch, it's already connected to the trunk and there's no need to add it to the trunk separately. Best, --Shirahadasha 22:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Category: Orthodox Judaism

message: Changed section title to "Sociological Objections" (more NPOV) --Shirahadasha 23:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. --DLandTALK 03:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difficulties inherent 

message: A source is needed for the claim that most Modern Orthodox Jews believe that JOFA advocates Conservative ideology. A simple citation to the criticism section of the Conservative Judaism article isn't adequate. What people think about Conservative Judaism provides no evidence about what critics think about JOFA.
:Take the ordination of women. The decision to ordain women was made not by halachic scholars but by a commission composed largely of laypeople. from the article on  Conservative Judaism--yisraeldov 05:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ""Statements such as [JOFA President Blu Greenberg's] 'When there's a rabbinic will, there's a halakhic way,' imply a complete disregard for halakhic boundaries," alleged one Rosh Yeshiva."  --yisraeldov 05:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Also I didn't make the original comment , but I figured it would be something easily verifiable, I agree that it is hard to define what "most Modern Orthodox Jews" believe, maybe change it to something like "the traditionally accepted Ortodox opionion"--yisraeldov 05:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

text:  Also I did not say that JOFA was (or was not) conservative. I was impliying that the Orthodx opinions of the conservative movement may also be applicable to this orginization via the fact that Orthodoxy is, generaly opposed to femisit movements, Take the ordination of women.--yisraeldov 05:54, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I'd like to resolve this disagreement by leaving the comment as stating that JOFA is a "controversial" r "Far-left" organization within Modern Orthodox Judaism. You're welcome to provide detailed criticism of JOFA, but it would make much more sense to put it directly in the article on the Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance itself. There's plenty of room for it there. The comment accompanying the link in the MO article is supposed to be only a sentence. If you add criticism of JOFA to the Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance article, suggest adding a "Criticism" section to the article and putting it there. Also, suggest using direct quotes of published criticism, specifically and clearly about JOFA. WP:OR does not permit quoting criticism of one subject and representing it as being about another subject on the basis of a personal opinion that it may be applicable. And there should be no need to. If direct critism is easily verifiable, finding it shouldn't be much trouble. Shabbat Shalom. --Shirahadasha 23:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is fine with me ( Like I said I didn't make the original comment ) as for the sources go, the more orthodox a source is the less likely it will be easily found on the internet. Also, what I showed was a direct criticisim of the orginization by a Leader of the MO community. Any way I'm fine with marking it Controvesial but we should see what the original author says. ... --yisraeldov 20:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The YU Commentator article you cited above is an appropriate source and you are welcome to put this criticism into the JOFA article. There is some other criticism and critical references and "Further Reading" articles that have been added to some other articles, such as the Jewish feminism, Partnership minyan and Shira Hadasha articles, that you might find relevant. Shavuah Tov. --Shirahadasha 02:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  JOFA 

message: A link was recently added to openorthodoxy.blogspot.com, a personal blog critical of the Open Orthodox philosophy and Avi Weiss as and associated organizations operated by one Mark Einhorn. I removed it immediately from the Avi Weiss article due to the heightened criteria for WP:Reliable sources for material critical of living individuals, but I am leaving it here for now to make sure there is agreement that personal blogs by non-notable individuals not meeting any exceptions don't meet WP:RS criteria. Users are welcome to find critical views from reliable sources. Best, --Shirahadasha 01:39, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to Mark Einhorn's blog 

message: The three distinctions are not adequate.  There is not a sliver of difference between what was described as the Hirschian ideology and the "Torah uMadda" ideology of Rav Aharon Lichtenstein and, one suspects, Rav Soloveitchik.  At least regarding the former, one can discern this quite easily by reading his definitive article on the subject.  Thus, the distinctions are not credible —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.157.212.2 (talk • contribs) 
Please sign your posts. There are many documented differences between Hirsch, Modern Orthodoxy and Soloveitchik. The goal is to record as an Encyclopedia and to describe the past not to do original research. If you think that the article needs a paragraph about Lichtenstein, then please add a paragraph explaining his posiiton and how it is similar to Hirsch. But it should not be your own ideas or Original Research.  See the Wikipedia policies WP:OR Find documents by or about Lichtenstein and add his posiiton. --Jayrav 18:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If the unsigned editor is researching the writings of Rav Soloveitchik and Rav Lichtenstein and claiming from his personal research that there is no difference, but a reliable source claims that there is a difference, then the opinion of the reliable source must be used over the editor's personal research, since original research cannot be used. The editor is welcome to find a different reliable source which makes a claim supporting the editor's point of view, but the editor cannot use his or her own personal research as support. As the WP:OR policy explains, Wikipedia editors are simply not in a position to evaluate the merits of editor research or claims derived from such research. Best, --Shirahadasha 18:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Similair modifications have been made to the Torah Umadda article - propose that this talk page now covers both... Fintor 08:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

text: There are two objections to "unsigned's" edits. Firstly, he/she would like to represent R' Lich. as the sole voice of Modern Orthodoxy. This is simply not true. The article, as it was before the "unsigned" edits, had quoted directly from Belkin and Lamm, who are certainly representative of normative Modern Orthodox philosophy. Secondly, at the very heart of the issue is why engage in secular disciplines at all? Is it as R' Hirsch holds- the Torah demands a complete dominance over all human endeavor; or is it as Belkin, Lamm, and R' Solov. would have it- there are two separate realms, that of Torah (Adam Alef), and that of the secular (Adam Bet). I am reverting the article to its previous state. Additionally, a direct source for these differences can be found in Joseph Elias' introduction to The Nineteen Letters.  38.117.213.19 03:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Torah im Derekh Eretz/Neo-Orthodox comparison 

message: I placed an POV concern template here. It reads to me as if WP is arguing that MO is an oxymoron. I know this isn't an attempt at original research, but the POV needs be described neutrally and really coming from some notable people/sources. All quotes need to be attributed. Also, shouldn't Heilman or other sociologists be brought into play, given the heading? Also, the ref's make me think that the "objections" are part of internal soul-searching and critique, so not objections to the movement per se. (The preceding sections should also clarify if the critique is internal reflection.) Thanks. HG | Talk 16:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sociological objections

message: I believe that all criticisms of Conservative Judaism in this section should be sourced to notable Modern Orthodox figures and I would caution against editors attempting to write their own  statements about what Conservative Judaism is, does, and believes. So long as the article simply reports statements by notable Modern Orthodox figures, it is on solid ground with respect to core Wikipedia policies like WP:NPOV and WP:V. Once the article goes outside reporting statements and attempts to make its own claims about Conservative Judaism,  great difficulties are likely to arise. I would urge simply reporting what Avi Weiss and similar figures said. Best, --Shirahadasha 21:14, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved the references to Weiss bacvk to the end of Weiss' argument. I believe it essential to identify what Weiss said putting the cite at the end of his statement distinguishes what he said from what others said. The section currently has some problems with original research and proper attribution is essential to reduce these problems. I don't believe Wikipedia should be making its own original comparison of Modern Orthodox Judaism with Conservative Judaism but should rely on sources who have made such a comparison themselves. Weiss has done this, so it's important to distinguish his argument from other, possibly original ones which may need to be deleted.  Best, --Shirahadasha 14:41, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Conservative Judaism]] 

message: As far as I know, there have been no modern orthodox teshuvot in support of same sex commitment ceremonies or the sanctification of same sex relationships from modern Orthodox rabbis/communities - with the singular exception of Steve Greenberg. That seems like a significant divergence from the Conservative movement, not really less significant than their differences on egalitarianism. I would be interested to hear other's thoughts about adding that back in, and/or more about Lisa's understanding of how MO is really like conservative Judaism with regards to homosexuality. Thanks! TaraIngrid (talk) 16:58, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Homosexuality

message: I dont think that MO is defined by Torah U'madda is universally accepted. I think the exact applications of Torah U'madda are also hard to define. Even the yeshivishe Briskers who are into the rambam see his somewhat extensive knowledge of astronomy in paskening about kiddush hakhodesh, and presumably aren't against that. So torah u'madda also needs clarification. Messengeroftruth 21:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition of Modern Orthodoxy

message: In recent years Modern Orthodox Jews have seen a resurgence of attacks against the legitimacy of Modern Orthodoxy from Haredi rabbis.  For decades many Haredi rabbis have derided Modern Orthodox Jews merely for the "sin" of receiving a secular education as well as a Jewish education.  For instance, here is one of the older criticisms against all of Modern Orthodoxy as being inauthentic:
* Those who receive a secular education cannot express authentic Torah views, from p.25 of Cosmopolitans and Parochials", Samuel C. Heilman, Steven Martin Cohen
What is notable is that this trend to deligitimize Modern Orthodox has greatly accelerated in the last few decade, with literally worldwide consequences.  In Israel Haredim have tried to deligitimize the conversions made by Modern Orthodox rabbis in the USA, thus deligitimizing the rabbis themselves!  For instance:
*"The latest, most public, such salvo was issued by Rabbi Elya Svei, a prominent member of Agudat Israel's Mo'etzet Gedolei HaTorah. In a speech before several thousand listeners at Agudat Israel's annual convention, Rav Svei called {modern Orthodox} Rabbi Norman Lamm "an enemy of God." He later refused to retract his charge. 
::Modern Orthodoxy in America: Possibilities for a Movement under Siege, William B. Helmreich and Reuel Shinnar
::'Modern Orthodoxy in America: Possibilities for a Movement under Siege'
It is not just this issue.  The past decade has seen a growing number of attacks against any form of Orthodoxy that isn't seen as Haredi, and this needs to be more fully written about.
However, this is not to say that this is true of all of Haredi Orthodoxy.  But it is true of a "big enough" segment.  This subject needs to be more fully addressed in this article.  Caution: Wikipedia editors to take careful note of editorial standards: We don't censor articles reporting on racism in America, for fear of being unpatriotic.  Why not? (A) Wikipedia isn't a pro-American, anti-everyone-else publication.  It is an NPOV encyclopedia.  It is the job of encyclopedia editors to describe reality, not to hide it.  (B) SImply because some percentage of Americans do bad things doesn't mean that all, or even most, are bad.  The same is true for Jews in general, and Haredi Jews in specific.  Just because our article describes the extent of the Haredi attacks on the legitimacy of Modern Orthodoxy, it doesn't mean that all or most Haredim attack all or most MO Jews.
I certainly say or believe no such thing, and I would take offense at anyone who does such a thing.  Someone who tries to edit this article to make such a point that that is not only mean, but also they would be factually incorrect.  I would, in fact, take both pride and pleasure in defending the legitimacy of Haredi Judaism as an authentic form of rabbinic Judaism, and would edit out comments which state that Haredi Jews should in general be suspected of being not-nice deligitimizers, or violent.
Sadly the problem we historically see in Wikipedia articles is that some editors take a "They are all bad stance", and try to make everyone in a given group (Haredim, Democrats, atheists, lawyers) look like bad people, or at least idiots.  These editors are then rebutted by the "No, everyone in this group is great, and really their opponents are bad and idiots!" comments.  Neither said turns out to be factually correct, and they resort to statements which violate our NPOV policy.  Just as bad, edit wars erupt in which self-appointed "protectors" of the article censor the articles by editing out everything they disagree with.  (Which is my Citizendium is so much better.)  Thus, I want to remind editors of these problems so we can avoid the ahead of time.  In fact, as a sign of good faith, I will resist the temptation to write anything at all about this topic, for the time being, and let other Wikipedians study these sources (and others they come across on their own) and write more in this article. RK (talk)
* Modern Orthodoxy Under Attack: Noah Feldman's intimate critique in the Times seen as raising the question of how to deal with Jews who marry out, Gary Rosenblatt, The Jewish Week, 7/27/97
* Orthodoxy is under attack by what the authors refer to as "Yeshiva Orthodoxy", p.259
:Accounting for Fundamentalisms Martin E. Marty, R. Scott Appleby, American Academy of Arts and Sciences
*Haredi Jews in Israel have beaten up religious Jews merely because they didn't dress like Haredim.
:'Haredi, religious residents clash in Beit Shemesh - Three religious teen girls beaten up by ultra-Orthodox mob while passing through haredi neighborhood. Religious residents report escalating violence on haredim's behalf, latter cite promiscuity as trigger for clashes..later in the article Haredi rabbis state that they approve of these attacks against non-Haredi Orthodox Jews:
::...meanwhile the members of the Haredi Community stream in Beit Shemesh present a different version for the state of affairs in town. Moshe, a haredi resident, said that young religious boys and girls often pass through the haredi neighborhood together, and that on occasion yeshiva students have to "drive them away by force."   "Boys and girls laughing together is forbidden. This shouldn't happen in a secular neighborhood, let alone an ultra-Orthodox one," Moshe stated...
:Haredi, religious residents clash in Beit Shemesh, Kobi Nahshoni 12.21.08, YNet Jewish World,
:Haredi, religious residents clash in Beit Shemesh
* Modern Orthodoxy decides to fight back, Rabbu Martin Lockshin, Canadian Jewish News, Thursday, 15 May 2008
* article Modern Orthodoxy decies to fight back
* Sliding to the Right: The Contest for the Future of American Jewish Orthodoxy, Samuel C. Heilman,
—Preceding unsigned comment added by RK (talk • contribs) 
::There is nothing new about the discussion about the legitimacy of Modern Orthodoxy. This has been going on for decades. Leaving aside the one incident where there seems to have been physical violence, there is no history of large-scale clashes between the two movements. Indeed, it is extremely common (especially in the USA) for parts of one family to belong to different camps. In the UK certainly there is no iron curtain between the Modern Orthodox and Haredi communities, although there is a degree of separation which is completely mutual and not instigated by the Haredim.
::I think you overstate the depth of the rift. Haredi authorities do indeed have problems with some of the halachic leniences approved by MO rabbis. Again, this has been going on for a very long time and it would be somewhat nonsensical to say that MO is "under attack" any more than it has been in the past, and it is equally nonsensical to say that there is no opposition to Haredim by MO spokespeople. JFW | T@lk 21:42, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern Orthodoxy under attack

message: Hi All. I propose combining "Right and left" with the introductory material from "Philosophy" - thereby creating a new first section which is more broad than the rest. This section would then lead in to the "Philosophy" and "Comparison with other movements" sections. Perhaps it could be titled, simply, "Modern Orthodoxy". Any comments? Thanks.
Fintor (talk) 11:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My proposal is as below: Fintor (talk) 08:50, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I take it that I may proceed ☺. Fintor (talk) 07:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Am proceeding. Thanks. Fintor (talk) 07:24, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed restructuring

message: Hello.  I am finding myself repeatedly archiving links on this page.  This usually happens when the archive doesn't recognize the archive to be good.
This could be because the link is either a redirect, or I am unknowingly archiving a dead link.  Please check the following links to see if it's redirecting, or in anyway bad, and fix them, if possible.
* http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0411/is_4_47/ai_54600118
* http://www.edah.org/backend/coldfusion/search/document.cfm?title=Some%20Comments%20on%20Centrist%20Orthodoxy&hyperlink=lamm21%2Ehtml&type=Document&category=Orthodoxy%20and%20Modernity&authortitle=Rabbi%20Dr&firstname=Norman&lastname=Lamm&pubsource=Tradition%2C%2022%3A3&authorid=285
* http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0411/is_n1_v42/ai_13796421/print
In any event this will be the only notification in regards to these links, and I will discontinue my attempts to archive these pages.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:47, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trouble archiving links on the article 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Modern Orthodox Judaism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20051110172630/http://yuweb.addr.com:80/v63i9/news/edah.shtml to http://yuweb.addr.com/v63i9/news/edah.shtml
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070308081945/http://yuweb.addr.com:80/v67i7/culture/toyou.html to http://yuweb.addr.com/v67i7/culture/toyou.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:53, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: How is there not a history section in this article? john k (talk) 03:07, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Modern Orthodox Judaism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0411/is_4_47/ai_54600118
*Added  tag to http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0411/is_n1_v42/ai_13796421/print
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wzo.org.il/en/resources/view.asp?id=1219
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051109103642/http://www.tzemachdovid.org/gedolim/jo/tworld/rbreuer.html to http://www.tzemachdovid.org/gedolim/jo/tworld/rbreuer.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070926234137/http://www.vanleer.org.il/Data/UploadedFiles/Files/fundamentalis.doc to http://www.vanleer.org.il/Data/UploadedFiles/Files/fundamentalis.doc
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.yctorah.org/downloads/articles/aw-open-orthodoxy.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:31, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Modern Orthodox Judaism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100714155030/http://www.shechem.org/torah/mesyesh/14.htm to http://www.shechem.org/torah/mesyesh/14.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111005151246/http://www.jtsa.edu/x497.xml to http://www.jtsa.edu/x497.xml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:44, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Modern Orthodox Judaism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041216072651/http://www.mizrachi.org/ideas/view.asp?id=122 to http://www.mizrachi.org/ideas/view.asp?id=122
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:46, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The criticism section doesn't seem to be sourced very well and appears to be more original research. Any comments on improving the section? Disagreements with my worry that it is original research? too_much curiosity (talk) 02:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section