Political Crossfire Forums

[Duchifas]

John wrote: Duchifas wrote: No it's not. It's a horrible answer. Smile Where does prohibition on homosexual acts fit in? What is so immoral, pray tell, about two adults having some consensual fun? Which category does NT place that in?

Is there anything ceremonial about sex? No?

Then issues concerning homosexuality is a Moral issue...as the New Testament clears up, just in case you can't see why that would be true instinctfully.

It doesn't matter whether it is ceremonial or not. The only thing that matters is whether it is moral or not. And if one were to pick and choose Torah laws, I don't see why this one has to be bunched in with morality. Outside of the Torah prohibition, I can't see what is wrong with it. Two guys having fun, what's the big deal?

Quote: Quote:
The crux of the problem is very simple -- the NT writers just chose on their own, which laws of OT are moral and which are not, i.e., using their subjective judgment. That's way worse than what the Oral Law can ever do, because while the Oral Law holds the Written Law as supreme authority, NT throws away a good 70% of it.

What makes you so sure about that? I seem to remember reading about a New Covenant in the book of Jeremiah. Are you choosing to throw that out as God's word?

http://www.aish.com/spirituality/philosophy/Maimonides_Seventh_Principle_The_Prophecy_of_Moses.asp

Everything is answered in there. Nothing can ever contradict G-d's Torah, and still claim to be from the same G-d who gave the Torah. Read.

Quote: Quote: It is anything BUT silly. G-d is G-d, and you are not. G-d does not need to explain Himself to you ON EVERY OCCASION. And if you need to know the purpose and reason for every single thing that you do -- who is your god? G-d, or your intellect? Is the purpose of the Torah to show us how to serve G-d, or to satisfy our childish curiosities?

You have reduced God to a capricious prankster who just barks out orders for the heck of it.

Absolutely not for the heck of it. I am not saying that there is no reason or purpose behind every law. There absolutely is. What I am saying is that G-d chose not to reveal every single reason and purpose to you. There is no caprice or prank there. You are not G-d's equal, to be privy to know everything that He knows. To presume so is sheer arrogance. G-d works in mysterious ways, says the psalmist. You have to learn to accept and deal with it.

Quote: I personally don't believe this is how God is presented in Torah.

Ok.

Quote: He is a God abounding in loving kindness and grace.

The fact that you don't know the ultimate reason for every rule does not mean that G-d doesn't love you. I don't see how you connect those two. At best, the connection is tangential.

Quote: He gives us rules for a reason, because He loves us. So if God is really as the Torah describes...and I believe He is, then He gave us every Law for a reason.


Who is arguing? There absolutely is a reason for every law, when did I say otherwise? What I am saying is that it is supreme arrogance, and worship of ourselves, instead of G-d, to presume that we should be privy to every such reason for every such law, and if we are not, we get an automatic license to cancel such laws. The notion is absurd.

[John]

Duchifas wrote: It doesn't matter whether it is ceremonial or not. The only thing that matters is whether it is moral or not. And if one were to pick and choose Torah laws, I don't see why this one has to be bunched in with morality. Outside of the Torah prohibition, I can't see what is wrong with it. Two guys having fun, what's the big deal?


Homosexuality is a perversion, like all other sexual perversions. The more one chases after the lusts of the flesh, the less pleasure they will give him, and the more insatiable the desire will become. Sexuality was designed by God to be between a married man and a woman.

Can you say the same about lighting fires on Sabbath? Or eating pork? NO. These are ceremonial ritualistic laws.



We can even see in the Torah that all animals were ok to eat....

It was only under Mosaic ritualistic ceremonial law that this was different.


Genesis 9
3"Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.




God took away the Temple 38 years after Jesus died on the cross for us; this in effect made it impossible to keep most of Ceremonial Law.

Why did He do this? I'll tell you why....because it had been fulfilled in Messiah. You are to accept Messiah instead of insulting God by denying the fulfillment of His plan.

[John]

Quote: Absolutely not for the heck of it. I am not saying that there is no reason or purpose behind every law. There absolutely is. What I am saying is that G-d chose not to reveal every single reason and purpose to you. There is no caprice or prank there. You are not G-d's equal, to be privy to know everything that He knows. To presume so is sheer arrogance. G-d works in mysterious ways, says the psalmist. You have to learn to accept and deal with it.

No. I just accept God's word as revealed to us in the New Testament. It is explained there...and I have very good reason to believe that it is the truth.

[Duchifas]

Did you read the link I pasted? Do you have comments on the arguments made there? That's with regard to your New Covenant thing.

Quote: Homosexuality is a perversion, like all other sexual perversions. The more one chases after the lusts of the flesh, the less pleasure they will give him, and the more insatiable the desire will become.

One can say absolutely the same about food. Much like anything in this world, consumption of food can be perverted. Know the obesity problem in this country? That's because people can't stop eating. Super-large, X-large burger, with gargantuan soda, and half a pound of french fries. The more one eats, adn the more one lusts for it, the less pleasure food will give them, and the more insatiable the desire to eat eat eat will become.

There. I have made just as convincing a case for eating as you have made for homosexuality. And there we have it -- eating is immoral.

Quote: Sexuality was designed by God to be between a married man and a woman.

Yes it was. But unless G-d tells you that homosexuality is immoral, it is not immoral.

Just like food. Like sexuality, food consumption can be perverted. And same goes for alcoholism. And both of those can lead down the very same path that you describe.

But is eating immoral? Is drinking a glass of wine a day immoral? No. Know why? Because G-d didn't say so.

And from this the conclusion is inescapable -- cancelling some laws and keeping others by virtue of them being "moral" is absurd.

Quote: Can you say the same about lighting fires on Sabbath? Or eating pork? NO. These are ceremonial ritualistic laws.

I just made the case for eating. Believe me, I can make the same case for the Sabbath.

Quote: Quote: Absolutely not for the heck of it. I am not saying that there is no reason or purpose behind every law. There absolutely is. What I am saying is that G-d chose not to reveal every single reason and purpose to you. There is no caprice or prank there. You are not G-d's equal, to be privy to know everything that He knows. To presume so is sheer arrogance. G-d works in mysterious ways, says the psalmist. You have to learn to accept and deal with it.

No. I just accept God's word as revealed to us in the New Testament. It is explained there...and I have very good reason to believe that it is the truth.

No, what? What are you saying no to? That you don't want to accept the fact that G-d is G-d and you are not? Or that G-d works in mysterious ways? Is that what you are saying no to? Be more specific, what is the NO directed at?

Again, for the reason why NT, or NTv2, or any NT XP that will come in the future could not have come from G-d, see the article, and feel free to comment on it.

[John]

Quote: One can say absolutely the same about food. Much like anything in this world, consumption of food can be perverted. Know the obesity problem in this country? That's because people can't stop eating. Super-large, X-large burger, with gargantuan soda, and half a pound of french fries. The more one eats, adn the more one lusts for it, the less pleasure food will give them, and the more insatiable the desire to eat eat eat will become.

There. I have made just as convincing a case for eating as you have made for homosexuality. And there we have it -- eating is immoral.


Over eating is immoral. I agree.

[John]

Quote: Yes it was. But unless G-d tells you that homosexuality is immoral, it is not immoral.

Just like food. Like sexuality, food consumption can be perverted. And same goes for alcoholism. And both of those can lead down the very same path that you describe.

But is eating immoral? Is drinking a glass of wine a day immoral? No. Know why? Because G-d didn't say so.

And from this the conclusion is inescapable -- cancelling some laws and keeping others by virtue of them being "moral" is absurd.

You're saying that morality is relative. I don't believe it is....I believe that God IS Truth. Not that He makes up what Truth is. Do you see the difference? Since God always was...then He didn't make up who HE is.

Eating is not immoral. But over eating is.

Drinking a glass of wine a day in not immoral. But getting drunk everyday is.

Sex with your wife in not immoral. But having sex with another man is.

[Duchifas]

You just love going through my posts and picking the least important details to get away from the subject, don't you? :lol:

John wrote: Over eating is immoral. I agree.

And so is oversleeping. And so is having too much sex. And so is watching too much TV. And so is driving an SUV.

As you can clearly see, one can easily qualify almost anything as moral or immoral, based on personal preferences. And believe me, if the preference is there, the reason is not hard to come up with, as I have shown you.

And that, in essence, is what the NT does. These laws we like, so we will put them into the "moral" category, and these we don't, so let's forget about them alltogether.

So what the NT does, is merely substitute personal preferences for G-d's preferences. And that's why Christianity has been so extremely popular and appealing over the last two thousand years. Because it is so much easier and funner to live life according to your own preferences, than to G-d's.

[uzi]

http://www.aish.com/spirituality/philosophy/Maimonides_Seventh_Principle_The_Prophecy_of_Moses.asp


Nice article. :tu:

[Duchifas]

John wrote: You're saying that morality is relative.

I am not saying that morality is relative. I would be the very last person to say that. I am merely giving examples here to show that between Judaism and Christianity, the latter gets as close to moral relativism as one can get.

Quote: I don't believe it is....I believe that God IS Truth. Not that He makes up what Truth is. Do you see the difference? Since God always was...then He didn't make up who HE is.

Amen. So, since G-d ALWAYS was and since He IS TRUTH, then quit telling us how some of G-d's laws are relevant and how some are not relevant. G-d's laws are G-d's laws and they are an inherent part of G-d, and thus inherently True. If He ALWAYS is, and if He is Truth, then His laws, ALL OF THEM, not 1, not 2 of them, but ALL OF THEM, are a part of Him and a part of that Truth.

Deciding to disregard half of Truth, is as good as falsehood. In fact, it IS falsehood. And that's precisely what the NT does. All laws came from G-d who is the Truth, yeah? So how can one come and cancel half of them?

And I don't care how the cancellation is phrased -- fulfilled in JC, or whatever. That's all semantics. The truth and the substance of the matter is that they were cancelled, pure and simple. And once you cancel half of Truth, you are left with a half-truth.

[John]

Quote: And so is oversleeping. And so is having too much sex. And so is watching too much TV. And so is driving an SUV.

As you can clearly see, one can easily qualify almost anything as moral or immoral, based on personal preferences. And believe me, if the preference is there, the reason is not hard to come up with, as I have shown you.

No...you just named off a bunch of stuff that doesn't make any sense.

When you're ready to really prove your point I'll be here. :wink:




Quote:
And that, in essence, is what the NT does. These laws we like, so we will put them into the "moral" category, and these we don't, so let's forget about them alltogether.

So what the NT does, is merely substitute personal preferences for G-d's preferences. And that's why Christianity has been so extremely popular and appealing over the last two thousand years. Because it is so much easier and funner to live life according to your own preferences, than to G-d's.


That's just not true. In fact the New Testament clarifies Moral Laws in the Old Testament that people didn't even realize were against the Law before its revelation. According to the New Testament, to even THINK a hateful thought about someone else..ANYONE...is a sin.

In fact, whereas the Torah is said to contain Taryag Mitzvot (613 commandments), it can be argued that the New Testament (Brit Chadashah) contains over 2,000 distinct commandments! All of the moral law given in Torah is clearly restated in the New Testament.

[John]

Duchifas wrote: I am not saying that morality is relative. I would be the very last person to say that. I am merely giving examples here to show that between Judaism and Christianity, the latter gets as close to moral relativism as one can get.

Yes you are saying that morality is relative...

Here's where you said it.

Quote:
Yes it was. But unless G-d tells you that homosexuality is immoral, it is not immoral.

Just like food. Like sexuality, food consumption can be perverted. And same goes for alcoholism. And both of those can lead down the very same path that you describe.

But is eating immoral? Is drinking a glass of wine a day immoral? No. Know why? Because G-d didn't say so.


You see. You said that morality is relative to what God says.

[Duchifas]

Quote: No...you just named off a bunch of stuff that doesn't make any sense.

When you're ready to really prove your point I'll be here.

The argument is contained in the article to which I linked. The argument is concise and clear and addresses every aspect of the discussion. So far, you are carefully ignoring it. Hey, Shabbat is coming soon, you only have a few more hours to drag it out until....:)

Quote: That's just not true. In fact the New Testament clarifies Moral Laws in the Old Testament that people didn't even realize were against the Law before its revelation. According to the New Testament, to even THINK a hateful thought about someone else..ANYONE...is a sin.

In fact, whereas the Torah is said to contain Taryag Mitzvot (613 commandments), it can be argued that the New Testament (Brit Chadashah) contains over 2,000 distinct commandments! All of the moral law given in Torah is clearly restated in the New Testament.

I don't care how many more commandments the NT adds. The problem is that it subtracts a whole lot. Deuteronomy 13:1 tells you what you need to know about both addition and subtraction:

G-d wrote: 1. Everything I command you that you shall be careful to do it. You shall neither add to it, nor subtract from it.



John wrote: You see. You said that morality is relative to what God says.

:rotf: It is not relative to what G-d says, it IS what G-d says. G-d says X is immoral, X is immoral. Where is the relativism?

I can see where you got confused in my statement, let me add three words to make it clearer:

Quote: But unless G-d tells you that homosexuality is immoral, it is not immoral from our perspective.

Better?

[Duchifas]

And...

Quote: I don't believe it is....I believe that God IS Truth. Not that He makes up what Truth is. Do you see the difference?

No, I don't see the difference. Unless you are telling me that G-d lies on occasion, there is no difference. G-d is the Truth, and what He tells us is that very same Truth. Unless you have another source from which to discern the Truth besides what G-d chooses to tell us, what Truth is and what G-d tells us is one and the same for our purposes.

[John]

Duchifas wrote: And...

Quote: I don't believe it is....I believe that God IS Truth. Not that He makes up what Truth is. Do you see the difference?

No, I don't see the difference. Unless you are telling me that G-d lies on occasion, there is no difference. G-d is the Truth, and what He tells us is that very same Truth. Unless you have another source from which to discern the Truth besides what G-d chooses to tell us, what Truth is and what G-d tells us is one and the same for our purposes.

Well...you're changing the rhyme to your reason there. That's not what you said...you said the only reason something is immoral or moral is because God says so. I say God just tells us what the truth is.

[John]

Quote: I don't care how many more commandments the NT adds. The problem is that it subtracts a whole lot. Deuteronomy 13:1 tells you what you need to know about both addition and subtraction:

That's what you don't understand. Nothing is subtracted....actually..you're the one who is subtracting by rejecting Messiah.

If you or Oak would just answer my original question, I could get around to explaining to you why.

[Duchifas]

I am not changing anything. When I wrote my original post, I thought it was abundantly clear what I meant, but since you didn't get it, I clarified it for you.

See where I added the words "from our perspective?" That was the clarification.

So, hey, uzi liked the article. It just baffles me a little that you would open a thread here in the Judaism forum, presumably interested in the subject, and as soon as you get a clear and direct response, you just keep on ignoring it in post after post.

If you don't really care about the Jewish mindset, why ask in the first place?

[John]

Quote: I am not changing anything. When I wrote my original post, I thought it was abundantly clear what I meant, but since you didn't get it, I clarified it for you.


Well then I guess we agree then...is that so bad? :-D




Quote: So, hey, uzi liked the article. It just baffles me a little that you would open a thread here in the Judaism forum, presumably interested in the subject, and as soon as you get a clear and direct response, you just keep on ignoring it in post after post.

If you don't really care about the Jewish mindset, why ask in the first place?

Well, I'm sorry if it looks that way. From where I'm standing, Oak and I started to have a conversation and then it went askew.

I don't see whats wrong with just answering the question I asked.

[Duchifas]

Quote: Well then I guess we agree then...is that so bad?

No, I am cool with it. :)


Quote:
Well, I'm sorry if it looks that way. From where I'm standing, Oak and I started to have a conversation and then it went askew.

I don't see whats wrong with just answering the question I asked.

This one?

Quote: What is the purpose of keeping the dietary Laws?
It's not just because God says so...that's silly. There is/was a purpose. What is it?

I will answer it for you.

There is a purpose and a reason. What exactly that reason is, we are not privy too. From that there are a number of options, pick one you like most:

1) I can and do argue that doing something without knowing a reason for it manifests a deeper connection than doing something that only makes sense to you or that you know the reason for. When you do G-d's commandment without knowing the reason, you are doing it because you love G-d, not your reasoning capacity. And that, perhaps, is the ultimate reason why G-d gave us these laws, while concealing the reason. He wants us to follow His will BECAUSE it is His will, not because we like the reasoning process behind it.

2) Accepting the fact that the ultimate reason is unknown to us until G-d chooses to reveal it when Moshiach comes, we can still discern some very good reasons for dietary laws. For example, here are two additional reasons:

Quote: In his book "To Be a Jew" (an excellent resource on traditional Judaism), Rabbi Hayim Halevy Donin suggests that the dietary laws are designed as a call to holiness. The ability to distinguish between right and wrong, good and evil, pure and defiled, the sacred and the profane, is very important in Judaism. Imposing rules on what you can and cannot eat ingrains that kind of self control, requiring us to learn to control even our most basic, primal instincts.

Donin also points out that the laws of kashrut elevate the simple act of eating into a religious ritual. The Jewish dinner table is often compared to the Temple altar in rabbinic literature. A Jew who observes the laws of kashrut cannot eat a meal without being reminded of the fact that he is a Jew.

As I said above, these (among some others) are good reasons to do it that we can conjecture into, but whether these are the PRIMARY reasons behind Torah's dietary laws, we don't know. Perhaps so, perhaps not. That lack of knowledge, however, in no way detracts from the importance or the relevance or the Divine authority of these laws.

Same or similar reasoning applies to most other hukkim (laws for which we do not know the reason), except for red heifer law. That one nobody has a clue about, and in light of my point 1), perhaps that is the most important law in the whole of Torah in that it manifests the highest bond between man and G-d -- follow G-d's will not because we can wholly grasp it, but because we love G-d, and we want to do His will.

Are you content with the answer?

[John]

Quote: Are you content with the answer?



Well...I'm so sure that was an answer. Why complicate it so much?

Can we agree that it has to do with defiling yourself? That certain foods were deemed to defile the body ceremonially before the Lord? That the non-kosher animals have negative characteristics that we would absorb by eating their flesh?

Isn't that the answer?

Now this law is obviously a Ceremonial Law because many kosher animals consume non-kosher animals (i.e. kosher fish that eat non-kosher fish and sea creatures). If "we are what we eat," don't we indirectly absorb those negative elements when we eat those animals?

The dietary laws purpose was to make the Jews "different" and to serve as a testimony to their difference in the most intimate ancient setting, that of meal fellowship.

[Duchifas]

John wrote: Quote: Are you content with the answer?



Well...I'm so sure that was an answer. Why complicate it so much?

Can we agree that it has to do with defiling yourself? That certain foods were deemed to defile the body ceremonially before the Lord? That the non-kosher animals have negative characteristics that we would absorb by eating their flesh?

Isn't that the answer?

Dude. That's an answer, but not to your question. The answer to your question would tell me why eating the meat of a cow, or a deer, or a gazelle does not make me ritually defiled, while eating the meat of a hare or a camel does. Why eating some grasshopers does not defile, while eating others does. Why eating tuna fish is not defiling, while eating swordfish is.

Try to answer that question.

Quote: Now this law is obviously a Ceremonial Law because many kosher animals consume non-kosher animals (i.e. kosher fish that eat non-kosher fish and sea creatures). If "we are what we eat," don't we indirectly absorb those negative elements when we eat those animals?


Can we agree on this and move on? :wink:

No, we can't agree on this, because (as I bolded in your post) you are generalizing, and quite incorrectly so. Horses don't consume non-kosher animals. Neither do camels. They certainly don't do it in a worse fashion than cows or sheep. So your reasons don't even come close to being applicable.

So no, we absolutely cannot agree on this because it is blatantly wrong.