Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
Need advice from a learned Jew re: the 'poor'
newman:
Some Rabbis(a minority) have written that anyone who follows the Sheva Mitzvot have a place in the world to come whether they believe in their divine source or not.
This seems illogical as it is difficult to adhere to any laws unless one has some ultimate moral authority to believe in. The secular cultural elite of today seem to think that it's possible to have no ultimate moral authority still have a moral code that all will agree on and adhere to. They believe they can give ascent to sodomy, infidelity,blasphemy, pornography and abortion but somehow draw the line at pedophelia.
This seems unlikely as they advocate that all people, cultures, religions and ideas all have equal merit and worth. Therefor the opinions and ideas of radical islamists, pedophiles,nazis, and sadists must hold equal virtue to the opinions of secular humanists. How can they assume the ideas of the latter will prevail?
It would seem that the only logical choice is to base morallity on a supreme moral source even if some individuals may have difficulty beleiving in the divinity of that source. I'm sure that secular western humanists would opt for the Sheva Mitzvot if confronted with some of the ghastly possibilities of man-made morallity. Would an agnostic who adheres to Sheva Mitzvot ( this being a more difficult task for him as opposed to one who believes) then get his place in the world to come as the minority opinion suggests?
MarZutra:
--- Quote from: lubab on July 22, 2007, 11:17:31 PM ---
--- Quote from: MarZutra on July 22, 2007, 05:45:09 PM ---I believe that the concept of Charity is only meant to be given to the G-d fearing and not just anyone who happens to be poor under Halacha. Charity is such a distortion today it is hardly comparable to anything that it was meant to be...
--- End quote ---
I hope G-d is not so strict in evaluatiating whether he will give us the charity He does everyday ::).
--- End quote ---
I think I must have mis-stated something. One must not forget that the Torah was given to and solely to the Jewish people within which only its tennents (aside from the Noahide) apply. Therefore, the concept of Charity according to Judaism is directed to the G-d fearing: Jew. Albeit adopted by the Christians and distorted by the liberal/socialist etc. to mean anyone and everyone if they are "less fortunate" or "poor" (even if their cultures have equated such since time began: Africa) To me this definition of Charity, in the Jewish perspective, is quite logical. We are now witnessing the "benefit" of giving charity to the "Bolistianians" the Muslim Indonesians who were dancing on cars handing out candy after 911 and the cyclical International Charity/Welfare raping African. Rabbi Kahane has a fabulous chapter on Charity according to Halacha in his "Jewish Idea Vol 1." This is my understanding of this topic which, to me, is logical and moral.
kahaneloyalist:
Lubab, I have heard that the death penalty is only for Noahides who break the law in a Jewish nation, also Rav Hutner said the death penalty may be enforced for these crimes but isnt a requirment
Lubab:
--- Quote from: kahaneloyalist on July 26, 2007, 02:59:08 PM ---Lubab, I have heard that the death penalty is only for Noahides who break the law in a Jewish nation, also Rav Hutner said the death penalty may be enforced for these crimes but isnt a requirment
--- End quote ---
I'm not seeing that in the Rambam, but if Rav Hutner said it then I'm sure it's true.
Lubab:
--- Quote from: newman on July 23, 2007, 12:13:36 AM ---Some Rabbis(a minority) have written that anyone who follows the Sheva Mitzvot have a place in the world to come whether they believe in their divine source or not.
This seems illogical as it is difficult to adhere to any laws unless one has some ultimate moral authority to believe in. The secular cultural elite of today seem to think that it's possible to have no ultimate moral authority still have a moral code that all will agree on and adhere to. They believe they can give ascent to sodomy, infidelity,blasphemy, pornography and abortion but somehow draw the line at pedophelia.
This seems unlikely as they advocate that all people, cultures, religions and ideas all have equal merit and worth. Therefor the opinions and ideas of radical islamists, pedophiles,nazis, and sadists must hold equal virtue to the opinions of secular humanists. How can they assume the ideas of the latter will prevail?
It would seem that the only logical choice is to base morallity on a supreme moral source even if some individuals may have difficulty beleiving in the divinity of that source. I'm sure that secular western humanists would opt for the Sheva Mitzvot if confronted with some of the ghastly possibilities of man-made morallity. Would an agnostic who adheres to Sheva Mitzvot ( this being a more difficult task for him as opposed to one who believes) then get his place in the world to come as the minority opinion suggests?
--- End quote ---
I brought up your question at the end to my Rabbi. He said someone who is not deliberately trying to make a system of laws separate from G-d, but he's just keeping them anyway would have a place in the world to come.
He said to understand what it means "have a place in the world to come:" or "not to have a place in the world to come" you'd need to delve into this discourse-posted here: http://www.revealtheessence.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=21 So you know a thing or two about heaven and hell.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version