cyber,
But is this something you know to be an absolute truth, or is this itself a matter of faith?
Why do you assume I haven't? Could it be instead that my approach to my own subjective experiences is different from yours?
How can your own subjective experiences be objective? What would you say to the schyzophrenic for whom the voices they hear are real?
Is that really any different than expressing our love for someone, or our anger at someone? When we are angry, generally it is at something, even if at ourselves.
I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying both that you are trying to offer an argument against faith in something physically not seen as well as maintaining faith in the unseen?
Is it possible to communicate to a person that you have faith in them without coming into contact with them? I don't see any difference.
What is empirical about an I statement?
Science and metaphysics have nothing to do with each other. Quantum physics does hold that the nature of the universe is a bit more complex than the way we see it ourselves, but this does not become proof of something beyond the material world. It is simply another way of viewing the material world.
When did he claim that recital is prayer?
That statement was never made by myself or the author. He's talking about why people don't abandon Judaism, why people stay with it, not the definition of what makes a Jew. And he's not addressing members of other religions. This is an article for Jews in a Jewish magazine. I presented it because the issues it raises are more universal. If he was addressing an interfaith audience, he would not have stated things the same way. imo, the definition of what makes a person a member of any group is based primarily on general consensus within that community and much more secondarily on the views of the rest of the world.
I never detected any slur.
How else should he refer to his own religion among a group of co-religionists? And as a Jew, it is entirely his right to define. Whether or not his co-religionists will agree with him is another matter, but as a Jew he absolutely has a right to interpretation, and time will tell if his interpretation is honored by the Jewish Community.
Then whose is it, if not the Jewish community? It is the Jewish community that determines the direction Judaism will take as it evolves, as it has many times in the past.
Being Jewish is absolutely limited to Judaism, as is Judaism. Learning about Judaism is not any more than learning about any other religion, but the actual religion is for the Jewish people, especially because it is a tribal religion by nature that makes no claim to universality.
For me, that is absolutely true, but I also think there are more levels to prayer, and more than one thing to gain from it. And I don't see the lack of belief in God as anything that would keep someone from being able to effectively pray. They may even commune with God, in their own way.
I didn't think it was profound. I thought it was lacking foundation. And implying that you have special knowledge that I lack hardly puts you on the high ground. It only shows that you have been very taken by your own subjective experiences, to the point that you have become blind to the contrary subjective experiences of others. There are many lenses with which we can view the world.
A person, unlike God, is something we can all point to and agree in its existence and general nature. You're also addressing something different here. You're addressing an individual's behavior that we interpret as love, that creates chemical reactions within us when we either reciprocate or feel differently. Is there a metaphysical thing called love, or is it simply a label we give to the feelings and sensations we associate with a certain state of being?
There was a time when some men believed in a physical dome surrounding the earth, a firmament, upon the top of which was the throne of God. Then we reached the heavens. Lack of knowledge about something is not proof of a metaphysic, nor does it necessitate the metaphysic of our choice to be true. It only shows us that we do not have all the answers.
This is a discussion forum. I presented the topic to create a discussion. How much discussion can happen if we only speak with those who agree with us, or only to say we agree with others? Your contribution has enriched this thread, as have those of everyone who have contributed. Otherwise it would be a bit dull. Shalom u'vrachah.
Dauer
But is this something you know to be an absolute truth, or is this itself a matter of faith?
Why do you assume I haven't? Could it be instead that my approach to my own subjective experiences is different from yours?
How can your own subjective experiences be objective? What would you say to the schyzophrenic for whom the voices they hear are real?
Is that really any different than expressing our love for someone, or our anger at someone? When we are angry, generally it is at something, even if at ourselves.
I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying both that you are trying to offer an argument against faith in something physically not seen as well as maintaining faith in the unseen?
Is it possible to communicate to a person that you have faith in them without coming into contact with them? I don't see any difference.
What is empirical about an I statement?
Science and metaphysics have nothing to do with each other. Quantum physics does hold that the nature of the universe is a bit more complex than the way we see it ourselves, but this does not become proof of something beyond the material world. It is simply another way of viewing the material world.
When did he claim that recital is prayer?
That statement was never made by myself or the author. He's talking about why people don't abandon Judaism, why people stay with it, not the definition of what makes a Jew. And he's not addressing members of other religions. This is an article for Jews in a Jewish magazine. I presented it because the issues it raises are more universal. If he was addressing an interfaith audience, he would not have stated things the same way. imo, the definition of what makes a person a member of any group is based primarily on general consensus within that community and much more secondarily on the views of the rest of the world.
I never detected any slur.
How else should he refer to his own religion among a group of co-religionists? And as a Jew, it is entirely his right to define. Whether or not his co-religionists will agree with him is another matter, but as a Jew he absolutely has a right to interpretation, and time will tell if his interpretation is honored by the Jewish Community.
Then whose is it, if not the Jewish community? It is the Jewish community that determines the direction Judaism will take as it evolves, as it has many times in the past.
Being Jewish is absolutely limited to Judaism, as is Judaism. Learning about Judaism is not any more than learning about any other religion, but the actual religion is for the Jewish people, especially because it is a tribal religion by nature that makes no claim to universality.
For me, that is absolutely true, but I also think there are more levels to prayer, and more than one thing to gain from it. And I don't see the lack of belief in God as anything that would keep someone from being able to effectively pray. They may even commune with God, in their own way.
I didn't think it was profound. I thought it was lacking foundation. And implying that you have special knowledge that I lack hardly puts you on the high ground. It only shows that you have been very taken by your own subjective experiences, to the point that you have become blind to the contrary subjective experiences of others. There are many lenses with which we can view the world.
A person, unlike God, is something we can all point to and agree in its existence and general nature. You're also addressing something different here. You're addressing an individual's behavior that we interpret as love, that creates chemical reactions within us when we either reciprocate or feel differently. Is there a metaphysical thing called love, or is it simply a label we give to the feelings and sensations we associate with a certain state of being?
There was a time when some men believed in a physical dome surrounding the earth, a firmament, upon the top of which was the throne of God. Then we reached the heavens. Lack of knowledge about something is not proof of a metaphysic, nor does it necessitate the metaphysic of our choice to be true. It only shows us that we do not have all the answers.
This is a discussion forum. I presented the topic to create a discussion. How much discussion can happen if we only speak with those who agree with us, or only to say we agree with others? Your contribution has enriched this thread, as have those of everyone who have contributed. Otherwise it would be a bit dull. Shalom u'vrachah.
Dauer