But of course there is no imperitive for the 'Jewish State' to exist in the 'Holy Land' because as you are an atheist you don't believe anything is 'Holy'. So the Jewish state could be in Australia for all you care, so it seems. Also there is no reason to identify as a Jew because you are trying to destroy the Jewish faith, so what purpose is there in identifying as one.
Also you claim to believe in 'evil' which is very undefined if you have no belief in an ultimate being who is compassionate to the Jewish nation. Maybe the Muslims are right and the Jews are wrong... There is no right or wrong in a world without a creed, as is established with our Holy Torah which you outright rejected. Maybe your 'logical' thought would lead you to conclude that the Jewish nation is wrong and the Crusaders, or the Inquisitors, or the Muslims or Hitler was right. It is called Moral Relativism [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_relativism ] and it is very dangerous. This is what allows the Goldstone cretins to claim 'war crimes' against Israel while it acted with moral restraint in the Cast Lead operation almost a year ago. Moral Relativism is what is destroying America and American culture.
I am sorry but I have a difficult time understanding why someone would discredit their mother and father, their faith, and their people because you simply don't believe in the force which gives you life. You must have had a good upbringing and it is just sad. I have met so many good Orthodox Jews who have been Frum {Observant} from birth and they are very, very special people.
Once again... I hope that you realize, before the coming of Mashiach, that you belong to the Jewish nation and Hashem is what gives you your special features. We know that Hashem is very patient and he wants us all to receive rewards, both in this world, and in the next.
I believe I already spoke to your first point, but once again, I need not consider land or the founding of a state holy to support rebuilding the Jewish state inside its historical borders. As I said, there is nothing per say special about Israel that makes necessary we locate ourselves there. Still, given the HISTORIC connection and the time and resources INVESTED in developing it into a first world nation, I believe we have created due cause to be particular about keeping our state there rather than relocating to Australia.
If you claim that I have no reason to identify as a Jew, you either failed to read my previous post, or you willfully ignored its point. Essentially, I identify as Jewish in non-religious terms as a matter of pride and in the interest of combating anti-semitism. Believe it or not, there are many people who see value in a Jewish identity outside of its religious origins. I happen to be in that camp, and will therefore continue to identify myself as I presently do. I have no interest in destroying Judaism, even in religious terms. What other people wish to practice is their own business. And so long as I am free to not behave in accordance with religious Jewish standards, I have no reason to begrudge my neighbor the opportunity to obey Jewish law if he so chooses.
I am well aware of what moral relativism is, and equally aware that I essentially endorsed it. That is not so much because the outcomes thrill me, since as you pointed out, there are certain negatives that come from particular moral systems, but because nobody has yet been able to prove a particular moral code correct to me. I therefore take a libertarian approach to politics and morality. And largely speaking, this is preferable, for all of those instances of violence you cited came from people who were rather certain it was they, not their enemy, that was morally correct.
The problems in America come not from moral relativism but from a combination of religious fundamentalism, anti-market socialist economic tendencies, and overbearing nanny state that has forgotten its constitutional limitations, and an uneducated public that can't be motivated to fight against the aforementioned issues. None of that, insofar as I can tell, is an issue of morality, at least in the way you see to define it.
As to discrediting my parents, I'm not sure how I've managed that, as neither of them were ever, at any point, observant of Jewish law. Indeed, when I became an Orthodox Jew for a couple of years, it was the first time in three generations that a member of my family did more than go to temple a couple of times a year and avoid eating ham. Both of my parents are Atheists who respected my choice to become Orthodox, and later to abandon that. To discredit my faith, I would need to have one. Jewish law deems me Jewish, but I do not recognize it as a valid legal code, therefore meaning that I have no practical ties to it.
Finally, as to your divine invocations and what essentially amounts to a suggestion that I return to the faith, ignoring the fact that it is essentially an inviable proposition since I view religion generally as a negative force, I would point out that the fairly antagonistic tone you've taken doesn't do much in terms of compelling somebody such as myself to rejoin the faithful.
The same source (Torah) that says you're Jewish also commands you to observe everything else in the source. It's never too late. I've been shomer shabbos for a year now, so you never know. If you don't observe Torah, you are gambling on the afterlife, and it's always better to be on the safe side. You might have something inside of you that needs to be opened up.
That's pascal's wager, and it is faulty reasoning. After all, we must consider the odds. 50/50 chance there is a G-d, and if so, another 50/50 chance it isn't of the deistic variety. So there is a 25% chance that we need to be reverent of a divine for our own good. If that is the case, we again have a 50/50 question of whether there is a correct religion or not. If not, we can only speculate as to the correct course. If there is, then we have no cause to believe a particular faith is more likely to be correct. That is, the odds favor Judaism no more than Hinduism or Islam, or any of the thousands of other religions. Now, considering how many faiths regard rival doctrines as even worse than atheism/agnosticism, you are more likely to suffer a worse end by practicing any faith at all.
Of course, I say this as an Orthodox Jew turned Atheist. The statistical question is a logical calculation, and faith by definition is not reliant on logic, but on belief in the unverified.
Why do you impugn Pascal? "Pascal's wager" is not faulty reasoning, it's an honest philosophical point. Not saying that has to compel everyone to believe in G-d themselves, but I can't see how you can "disprove" something like that with math calculations. It would seem that is missing the whole point of it.
Anyway, I do not agree with you that there is equal likelihood of all faiths being true. THAT is faulty reasoning on your part. Torah is based on testimony of a group of people to a group experience. You can say you don't believe it, but you cannot say its evidence is at equal weight with other hypothetical 'faiths' or religions. It's a different kind of faith. Skepticism allows one to disbelieve ad nauseum, even to disbelieve otherwise credible or reliable circumstantial evidence, for instance corroborated witnesses in a court of law. Skepticism gives a person that freedom. But that does not mean all things are equally uncertain. A person would have to be very dogmatic to think that way.
I question Pascal because his wager is a faulty one. It works when there are but two equally reasonable choices. But if many thousands exist, his conclusion loses all merit. And indeed his does, for your claim of a group experience in terms of religious testimony may just as fairly be applied to Islam and Christianity. So even then, we have at least three choices in terms of viable faiths if we accept the existence of the divine, and a final judgement by standards outlined in a major faith. Given that in any such tradition practicing the others is essentially a sentence for hell (or gehenom as the case may be), none is a more compelling wager than Atheism.
As to your point about certainty and lack thereof, it is true not all things are equally suspect. For instance, it is far more likely that Obama was born outside of the US than it is you'll contract AIDS without being sexually active, a drug abuser, or receiving a blood transfusion, as the former is reasonably probable and the latter essentially impossible. But in the context of our discussion, I am equally skeptical of all religions because I see no evidence that indicates I should feel otherwise.
he said it was, "because the world still makes it an advantage not to be one. Thus it becomes a matter of pride...." As long as their is anti-Semitism, which exists in great measure today, I will stand tall and defend my heritage.
That seems rather vindictive.
Yet sensible... That is, until antisemitism ceases to exist, and then you could drop your "front." In that hypothetical, your current position seems very not sensible.
Anti-Semitism is a constant, thus rendering your point irrelevant. But that aside, I hardly consider it a front. I was born of Jewish parents, I have a reasonable grasp of Hebrew, I went to Jewish schools, I eat Jewish foods, I have taken college courses on Jewish history, and have by all accounts embraced the secular aspects of my heritage. I simply am not religious, and thus have no cause to tie myself to Judaism by that particular metric.
Topic: A Secular Jew's Yom Kippor Story (Read 4346 times)