Monday, June 15, 2009

Jewish Heretics



[one of my favorites]

This is a little bit off the topic of this blog, however since this question arises from time to time I feel that it is worthwhile to deal with it in a separate post.

Orthodox Judaism takes the issue of heresy very seriously. Heresy basically means the denial that any part of the Torah was authored by God. The Torah means the Pentateuch as well as the traditional rabbinical interpretation of the Pentateuch as recorded in the Talmud. Obviously, the idea that there is no God would be included in heresy. (See Talmud Sanhedrin 90a and Maimonides Laws of Repentance, iii. 17.)

As a rule, for someone to qualify as a heretic, one must have studied Torah and then have rejected it. Therefore Maimonides considered the Karaites to be legitimate Jews, in spite of their rejection of the Talmud, because they had lived since birth in this tradition and had been taught nothing else.

The Talmudic attitude regarding heretics is negative in the extreme.

First of all, he must be hated. We pray constantly for his complete destruction. When he dies, his relatives celebrate his death (Yoreh De'ah , 345, 5) . He may not read from the Torah in the synagogue or lead communal prayers. If he pours wine, a Jew may not drink it . I think this helps us to understand why it is imperative to identify such people and purge them from the community.

As far as the afterlife is concerned, the Talmud (Rosh haShanah 17a) makes their fate clear: They will be punished in hell forever. The Talmud explains that the fire of hell is sixty times stronger than ordinary fire (Berakoth 57b). This is referred to in Isaiah 66:24 “And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have rebelled against Me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.” After being totally ostracized by the Jewish community in this world, they will after death face eternal suffering.

In summary, the Jew who has studied the Torah and then rejected it is not merely a Jew who is imperfect or who has sinned or who has a problem. He is an anti-Jew. We must love the Jew: Leviticus 19:18 states “Thou shalt not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.” But we must hate the heretic: Psalms 139:21-22 “Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate Thee? And do not I strive with those that rise up against Thee? I hate them with utmost hatred; I count them mine enemies.” A Jew will enjoy eternal paradise after death, “All Israel have a portion in the World to Come” Sanhedrin 90a. The heretic, in contrast, will burn in hell forever.

The above is referring to someone who is merely a heretic privately, however obviously someone who is going further and attempting to persuade other Jews to become heretics is committing a far more heinous crime and his punishment will be proportionately greater. This would include the many “Jewish skeptic” bloggers on the Internet today.

It should be noted incidentally that of course a Jewish heretic may repent, just like any sinner, and receive complete atonement. However, this process may be so stressful and painful, if done sincerely, that it will result in the death of the penitent, as we see from the case of R. Eleazar b. Dordia (‘Abodah Zarah 17a).

151 comments:

DrJ said...

Showing a video of that asshole proves nothing.

Anyway you completely ignore all of the rulings of rishonim and achronim, which reflect the reality of most Jews not believing in the Torah anymore. The Talmudic statements that you quote simply don't apply anymore.

But believe your own fantasies if it makes you feel good about yourself. Your hell doesn't scare anybody, other than maybe yourself.

Your theology also complete negates any significance whatsoever for the 6.7 billion gentiles in the world, who have no connection whatsover to jews or judaism.

jewish philosopher said...

"Showing a video of that asshole proves nothing."

Nobody else has a video.

"The Talmudic statements that you quote simply don't apply anymore."

Of course they do.

Shalmo said...

JP Garnel believes in religious zionism but is an orthodox jew as well. Is he a heretic by your standards?

jewish philosopher said...

I'm not sure.

Anonymous said...

One can only imagine how many will turn away from Judaism because of this post.

-Larry-

jewish philosopher said...

I'm sure Joseph Cohen aka Yusuf Khattab will definitely repent after this.

Abe said...

I don't know who is bigger idiot, you or he?

Surely, Mr. Cohen is a crackpot. However, since you believe that the origination of the black race arose from some perceived sexual infraction on Noah's ark, your credibility is no less mendacious that that of Mr. Cohen's.
But don't stop exulting in your fundamentalist idiocy. You're quite entertaining and good for a few laughs. Please continue until at least September when Jay Leno returns to TV -- there are so few good comedic clowns around today. But until then, you're a great substitute.

jewish philosopher said...

"I don't know who is bigger idiot, you or he?"

Let me help you a little. The biggest idiot is someone like you who believes that worms can turn into people thanks to some magic "evolution".

Shalmo said...

Many of the reasons Yusuf gives for his rejection of Torah MiSinai are spot on and are much better elaborated than what you see on the skeptic blogs.

That said you can accept him as righteous gentile now since by all accounts his religion permits him to follow all the 7 Noachide laws, particularly the not to commit idolatry part, which Christianity falters on.

alex said...

"this helps us to understand why it is imperative to identify such people and purge them from the community"

"After being totally ostracized by the Jewish community in this world..."

OK, from this, we see that "purge" = "ostracize".

But from the "new Atheists = new Nazis" post, you wrote: "I think this can help us to appreciate the urgency of hunting down and eliminating these degenerates from the Orthodox community."

Care to define "purge" more precisely?

jewish philosopher said...

"are much better elaborated than what you see on the skeptic blogs"

I think it's about the same level of nonsensical ranting.

"you can accept him as righteous gentile"

Sure, except he's not righteous and not a gentile.

"Care to define "purge" more precisely?"

Alex, I think I explain that here.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/10/secret-orthodox-atheists-and-how-to.html

alex said...

Oh, that's the link with the SWAT team pointing their rifles at men lying on the ground, with the German Shepherds prepared to attack. OK, just so long as you're clear.

jewish philosopher said...

Alex, look at it like this.

I am fighting for truth, love, happiness and peace.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2006/12/truth-of-judaism.html
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/01/genius-of-judaism-kindness.html
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/04/real-happiness.html
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2007/08/creating-world-peace.html

Atheists are obsessed with coke and bitches.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Maher#Personal_life

So we do have some conflicts, naturally.

Abe said...

>Let me help you a little. The biggest idiot is someone like you who believes that worms can turn into people thanks to some magic "evolution".<

Your rejection of evolution does not necessarily mean that the Torah and all its empty-headed pronouncements manifest veracity. Nor do the manifestos of the Talmud and subsequent assorted holy ignoramuses engender much credibility.
If evolution is not true, there is certainly no antipodal reason to believe that your fundamentalist confession is true .
So I'll just remain faithful to my atheism until such time as you can reproduce a talking snake or transform the Hudson river into vast estuary of blood.
But don't stop trying. As I said, there is such a paucity of clown-comedy on TV in the summer.
You may not recognize it, but in Jay Leno's temporary absence, you're on a mission from god !

jewish philosopher said...

So I'll just remain faithful to my Judaism until such time as you can transform a can of worms into hummingbirds, elephants, aligators and people.

Abe said...

You're not too bright.
Just because you can't transform a can of worms into hummingbirds, elephants, aligators and people, doen't mean that that Fundmentalist Torah Judaism is sacrosanct or worthy of homage more than cursory approval of its humanistic appeals.

jewish philosopher said...

The Watchmaker Analogy and Kuzari Principle prove that.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2006/12/truth-of-judaism.html

Abe said...

You're not getting any brighter.

Kuzari "proof" has long been dismissed as nothing more than a grand exercise in circular reasoning.
Watchmaker analogy serves nothing more than than an attempt to establish that god exists. It does not demonstrate that the Fundamentalist god of Ultra-orthodox Judaism is the true god nor is there any reason to be obedient to him.

jewish philosopher said...

Abe, you're just spouting dogma.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma

alex said...

"Alex, look at it like this.

I am fighting for truth, love, happiness and peace."

I believe you. However, I can't "look at it" in any other way than the way you present it. A picture of a SWAT team aiming their guns at the people sprawled out on the ground is not exactly a good example of "ostracism."

DrJ said...

Abe, good point about the "watchmaker" analogy. I suppose that it intuitively shows that some sort of "force" created life, which isn't necessarily god, it could be nature, evolution, the flying spaghetti monster, etc.

jewish philosopher said...

Except that then revelation at Mount Sinai told us who the Creator is and what He wants.

DrJ said...

Off topic, from previous post about hell, to Shalmo:

Rambam Laws of repentance 3:5-6-

[ג] כל מי שניחם על המצוות שעשה, ותהה על הזכייות, ואמר בליבו ומה הועלתי בעשייתן, אוליי לא עשיתי אותן--הרי זה איבד את כולן, ואין מזכירין לו שם זכות בעולם: שנאמר "וצדקת הצדיק לא תצילנו ביום רשעו" (ראה יחזקאל לג,יב), אין זה אלא בתוהה על הראשונות.

ו כשם ששוקלין עוונות אדם וזכייותיו, בשעת מיתתו--כך בכל שנה ושנה, שוקלין עוונות כל אחד ואחד מבאי העולם עם זכייותיו ביום טוב של ראש השנה: מי שנמצא צדיק, נחתם לחיים; ומי שנמצא רשע, נחתם למיתה. והבינוני, תולין לו עד יום הכיפורים: אם עשה תשובה, נחתם לחיים; ואם לאו, נחתם למיתה.

no mention of hell, just cessation of existence.

Forgot your jewish education, Shalmo? How much did your parents pay?

jewish philosopher said...

How about this:

יד [ו] ואלו שאין להן חלק לעולם הבא, אלא נכרתין ואובדין, ונידונין על גודל רשעם וחטאתם, לעולם ולעולמי עולמים

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/1503.htm#14

"they are judged forever for their great sin"

DrJ said...

Meaning they have forever lost out on olam habah, sorry, no burning furnaces or boiling oil.

It mentions a whole list of sins, including blashphemy, etc, for which the punishment is loss of irreversible loss of olam habah.

jewish philosopher said...

ונידונין על גודל רשעם וחטאתם, לעולם ולעולמי עולמים

presumably means burning in hell forever, as per Rosh haShanah 17a

יורדין לגיהנם ונידונין בה לדורי דורות

It's almost the same expression.

DrJ said...

The rambam is very precise with his language.

Besides, in 8:2
ב שכר הצדיקים--הוא שיזכו לנועם זה, ויהיו בטובה זו; ופרעון הרשעים--הוא שלא יזכו לחיים אלו, אלא ייכרתו וימותו. וכל מי שאינו זוכה לחיים אלו, הוא המת שאינו חויה לעולם, אלא נכרת ברשעו, ואובד כבהמה. וזה הוא הכרת הכתוב בתורה, שנאמר "היכרת תיכרת הנפש ההיא" (במדבר טו,לא); מפי השמועה למדו "היכרת" בעולם הזה, "תיכרת" לחיי העולם הבא: כלומר שאותה הנפש שפרשה מן הגוף בעולם הזה--אינה זוכה לחיי העולם הבא, אלא גם מן העולם הבא נכרתה.

It says very clearly that a wicked person just dies like an animal, losing out on the world to come.

So evidence for hell in the Rambam, is lacking.

jewish philosopher said...

He says "judged eternally for their great wickedness".

And elsewhere:

11. I believe with perfect faith that G-d rewards those who keep His commandments, and punishes those who transgress Him.

http://www.ou.org/torah/rambam.htm

Abe said...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma


Is that the best you can do? -- cite another website which does nothing to refute why Kuzari proof is nothing more than circular reasoning? Or why Watchmaker thesis doesn't prove that the Fundamentalist Orthodox god is the one to be obeyed.
Mr. Stein, you're getting dimmer by the moment.

jewish philosopher said...

Besides ridiculous insults, you apparently can't do better than recite your neo-Soviet, militant atheistic dogma. Some actually rational criticism would be more interesting, if you think you spare any time from the coke and bitches.

DrJ said...

I'd day death is pretty eternal punishment. Your dead forever.

jewish philosopher said...

"Unconscious" is not the same as "judged".

Shalmo said...

DrJ why are you so resistant to Judaism having firm beliefs in eternal hellfire

Even the first book of Enoch talks about eternal hellfire for jewish apostates, fallen angels and others proving these concepts are not foreign to Judaism at all.

As for my parents, no they did not support my Jewish education. Like most children of Holocaust survivors they felt all religion is evil, and work for a world free of religion. Thus they were quite against how I went full OJ, I was even planning on becoming a rabbi once. However they did sometime support a few out of pockets payments for my Judaism.

And please don't bother quoting the Rambam. One of the reasons I lost my calling was because I was aware that Maimonides was a notorius liar. Examples of which are abundant, such as his famous lie to Yemeni Jews when he told them there exist in discrepancies in the Torah scrolls, when in fact he himself had commented on these discrepancies.

Shalmo said...

You know DrJ you epitomize the world I left behind and the reasons I never looked back.

Theodor Hertzl and the cult he founded did a good job of changing the definition of Judaism from religion to nationality.

Jews like you may not believe in God, but you WORSHIP the Jewish people. This is why in our discussions you could not stop bragging about how Jews are the center of civilization, something which is a tad too far away from reality.

This is why when criticism of Israel comes your way you like any other blind follower of a fundamentalist religion are blind to the truth that is right in front of you

But here's the juicy part. Fundamentalist cults don't last long, especially ones biult on a people's self-worship. This is why zionists, not unlike the pan-iranian theoriests, are breeding themselves out

How then can anyone then be surprised at the 50% intermarriage rate and the ever growing OTD rate?

These Jews are becoming ashmed of Israel, ashmed of their cultural and religious heritage because they can no longer justify racism and genocide that zionism is breeding.

This is the kind of stuff I am talking about: http://offthed.blogspot.com/2009/06/indoctrination-is-ugly_10.html

As zionism goes up, the number of Jews goes down.

Hell, even my brother-in-law just helped convert a jew who became disgusted with the racism endemic to Israeli culture.

there are similar stories all over the net:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH1wkqSgjkQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XzB9hkGIdA&feature=related

So please continue doing what you are doing. Because of people like you Jewry at best is gonna last another 150 years. Congratulations!

SJ said...

>> The Talmud explains that the fire of hell is sixty times stronger than ordinary.

The center of the sun is about ten million degrees celsius, don't you think JP that this is a tiny bit harsh just for disbelieving in God and still being a good person?

jewish philosopher said...

I think that arguments from personal incredulity and wishful thinking are logical fallacies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance#Argument_from_personal_incredulity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wishful_thinking

SJ said...

Argument from personal incredulity = I don't know how it really happened so I create a myth O.o

jewish philosopher said...

"I can't believe this is possible, so it can't be true."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance#Argument_from_personal_incredulity

Abe said...

...Besides ridiculous insults, you apparently can't do better than recite your neo-Soviet, militant atheistic dogma. Some actually rational criticism would be more interesting, if you think you spare any time from the coke and bitches...

You still havn't responded to the fact that the Kuzari thesis is nothing more than circular reasoning... I'm not sure that you fully understand the Kuzari. Or that the Watchmaker argument says nothing about the truthfulness that Hashem is the true god.
Its quite an impeachmment of your faith when all your responses are reduced to citing websites without offering any counter arguments.
And my insults are not ridiculous. They aptly describe you.

DrJ said...

SJ- not only that, but after our supposed death our non-physical soul continues to suffer from the physical pain of heat. Interesting.

Shalmo- so you're a turned-off Jew. So whats the wisdom in substituting one "ism" for another "ism"? Islam is just as particularistic and parochial if not more so than Judaism, the only difference being there are a billion of them so they don't worry about being wiped out.

Also many children of holocaust survivors were screwed up because they were emotionally deprived by their parents. It sounds like it got passed on to you, so you went off the deep end. You know, there is more than just black and white, but thats all you see.

I don't worship the Jewish people, but as a member of this tribe I have a stake in its survival. So I care about Israel and write a blog. So what? No different than any other ethnic group that tried to take care of its own. The fact that you begrudge Jews for that is your problem and shows your irrational self-hatred.

You are correct in that Zionism in part substituted for Judaism for the Jewish people, which is why people like JP oppose it.

As for your predictions, neither you or I will be around to know what will be in 150 years. I could just as easily predict that aliens will take over the earth. Why don't you take a shot at predicting something sooner?

jewish philosopher said...

"You still havn't responded to the fact that the Kuzari thesis is nothing more than circular reasoning"

Something happened. People wrote it down. Nothing circular except the nonsense going around and around in your head.

"after our supposed death our non-physical soul continues to suffer from the physical pain of heat. Interesting."

I'm sure it will be.

DrJ said...

And 1+1=3.

jewish philosopher said...

First of all, people who have near death experiences continue to see although their physical eyes are not functioning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-death_experience

Secondly, presumably what the Talmud means is not that hell is literally 60 times hotter than fire.

An ordinary fire is about 1,500 F.

http://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/QA_Templates/info/582/

This comes out to be about 1,100 Kelvin. Times 60, that would be 66,000 Kelvin and Celsius or about 120,000 Fahrenheit. Some parts of the sun may be about that temperature.

http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/sun_worldbook.html

Presumably the Talmud is not trying to give us a weather forecast for hell, but rather to explain that the pain of burning oneself in this world is merely a taste of the suffering of hell.

DrJ said...

"Presumably the Talmud is not trying to give us a weather forecast for hell, but rather to explain that the pain of burning oneself in this world is merely a taste of the suffering of hell."

And how would they know this? Ruach Hakodesh? The same holy spirit that told them that fleas don't replicate but arise from sweat (Shabbat 107b)? Or did god forget to correct that one?

I wouldn't bet your future on the rabbi's cosmology/biology from 1600 years ago.

What makes you think that the Rabbis had any more knowledge of these things than we do?

The point is that all of these statements were made for allegorical/moral purposes, to emphasize their position and strengthen their authority. (by scaring people like you into obeying them)

Sorry, most of the world's Jews are too smart for that.

jewish philosopher said...

People who use drugs also think that the government is just trying to scare them.

http://suburra.com/blog/2009/05/31/drug-war-myth-726001-cocaine-is-deadlier-than-aspirin/

DrJ said...

Great analogy.

With your MENSA IQ you don't see the difference between drug policy which is based on evidence and experiece, vs rabbinic statements from 1600 years ago based on ignorance and superstition from lack of scientific knowledge?

But I shouldn't be surprised at this coming from someone who says that rejecting orthodox Judaism is the same as holocaust denial.

jewish philosopher said...

"drug policy which is based on evidence and experiece"

Depends who you ask. As you can see, cocaine users think cocaine is as safe as aspirin.

I think rabbinical statements are pretty solid.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2006/10/judaic-literature-providing-proof-of.html

Anyway, it makes sense. A heretic, having the rejected the Torah, is the antithesis of the Jew who accepts the Torah. What do you think God's going to give you for spitting on Him - a big pat on the back? I wouldn't be too sure.

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0220.htm#4

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/06/holocaust-clear-evidence-of-gods-hand.html

Anonymous said...

JP says: "[C]ocaine users think cocaine is as safe as aspirin.

I think rabbinical statements are pretty solid."

Rabbinical statements are just another kind of cocaine. You're sniffing big time, and reason is your buzzkill.

-Larry Tanner-

jewish philosopher said...

The Torah gets me much higher than cocaine can Larry.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/04/real-happiness.html

Anonymous said...

"The Torah gets me much higher than cocaine can Larry."

I've never done cocaine, so I wouldn't know.

I find the Torah interesting and at times sublime. There's some literary truth in there, sure, but it's ridiculous to consider it the accurate, infallible portrayal of events as they actually happened. In my opinion, of course.

-Larry-

jewish philosopher said...

And your comments at best are simply atheistic dogma.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma

Anonymous said...

"And your comments at best are simply atheistic dogma."

Oooh. But OK, let's assume we're dealing with "atheistic dogma." Is atheistic dogma somehow more reprehensible than theistic dogma such as that which you spout?

Personally, I'm against dogma - atheistic or theistic.

-Larry-

Shalmo said...

DrJ you are horribly wrong about the commonalities between those isms. No problem, because at one point even I used to believe that too

I always had issues with the often enough repeated instructions to kill little boys, kill pregnant women, and enslaving of virgins girls. Well guess what. Mohammed never did any of that. In fact the Quran demands the muslims to never harm women, children and non-combatants in war. Which of the two is more appropriate for 21st century standards?

What about mamzers? What about entire families being cursed with the sin of a forefather as was the case with Jechoaim? Yup Islam doesn't have that either.

Women? Let's see in Islam women with broken hyms are not "defiled"; a woman's sexual status plays zero role in her marriage prospects; the virginal obsession that is filled to the brink in the Torah is absent in the Quran; marriage contracts for women are not modeled after property ownership contracts; best of all women can inherit property without reservation (something Islam got right 1400 years ago and the West only caught up to in the 19th century)

When I see the mental gymnastics involved when people like Garnel try to re-work jewish law so that stealing from goys is no longer permissible then I am reminded all the more why I apostated.

If Judaism was true then why is proof for Moshe and the prophets so scarce? In contrast, Mohammed it the most documented individual in history. Ask any historian. The entire library of Alexandria was at one point filled with nothing but what the people wrote on this sage. We have more corroborating accounts on him than any individual in all of human history. Makes sense for God to make his life story available for the rest of us if he is indeed preaching the right religion, no?

Contrary to your rambling, I never developed self-hatred as you call it. In fact it was a very painful process to get to where I am now, because I realized the religion of my enemies was what I had always wanted Judaism to be. I would have preferred the hindus to be right, or the buddhists, or zorastrians, anybody but those who I loathed.

Now I no longer have to pretend evolution is "just a theory". I no longer have to pretend that the world is 6000 years old. I no longer have to pretend to understand why God made everything and everyone for the Jewish people, because I never did. And best of all; there is no "us" and "them", no jew nor gentile.

There are no internal inconsistencies, there is no opposition to science in fact Islam has a very good reputation for advocating syncretism between science and theology. Which is why you never see muslim versions of creationist museums lol. Its a religion that both encourages logic and rationality and itself finds fruit in those fields. Thus there is nothing to second-guess, nothing to cause doubts.

My parents taught me critical thinking. They are both sane people, they just hate religion.

I'm glad you used the word "ethnic" because at the end of the day, that's exactly what zionism is, a love for an ethnicity and culture. Really not that different than the way the nazis loved all things aryan. And the bigotry on your blog reflects that.

In Israel, you can be either religious or secular. And since zionism is even more absolute in the secular sphere, I realized that there really wasn't any form of judaism that worked for me. Hence why I left. I went where the evidence lead me, so you cannot blame me for that.

Your analogy on predictions is very weak as well. My estimate on where the Jewish people are headed is based on the sky-rocketing rates of apostacy, intermarriage and birth-rates. Personally I feel its karma for what your ilk are doing in Palestine. And FYI my opposition to Zionism developed long before I went OTD.

Any more questions?

jewish philosopher said...

At the core of the dogma concept is absolutism, infallibility, irrefutability, unquestioned acceptance (among adherents) and anti-skepticism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma

That's not a rational way to make major life decisions. All my beliefs are based on clear facts and reason.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2006/12/truth-of-judaism.html

DrJ said...

So let's see. Two presumably intelligent people, Shalmo and JP, go through a supposedly rational intellectual process. One converts from Christianity to Judaism, the other from Judaism to Islam. Diametrically opposed, 180 degrees.

It only proves my point that religion is an emotional psychological need, and the intellectual foundation is artificially built to support it.

Shalmo if you were true to yourself, with your rejection of Judaism, you wouldn't "need" to find another religion (or any religion at all) with its own dogma of jihad and kofer and the like. As both of us know, biblical Judaism has nothing to do with what exists today. It evolved, as do all religions. And there are many forms, including humanistic Judaism.

As far as my "tribalism" is concerned, I don't think it is nearly as hateful and prejudiced as you and your Muslim colleagues. Think about Al Qeeda, Saudia Arabia, and Iran. Are those your ideal societies? No "inconsistencies"? You don't think that women should drive? So, Jews and Israel aren't perfect either, but we try to learn from our mistakes.

DrJ said...

"All my beliefs are based on clear facts and reason".

"Facts and reason"? Mostly delusions.

The only reason that all religious beliefs aren't characterized as delusions (they should be) is that society defends them as "religion" so that puts them off limits to criticism. JP, wouldn't you consider Scientology, mormonism or christianity to be delusions?

Anonymous said...

Shalmo,

Are you seriously trying to argue that Islam is somehow less wacky, evil and false than any other religion?

-Larry-

jewish philosopher said...

"One converts from Christianity to Judaism"

I see; if I would have been raised in a Jewish home you would surely dismiss my beliefs because I am just imitating my parents. As Richard Dawkins famously wrote "it is a telling fact that, the world over, the vast majority of children follow the religion of their parents rather than any of the other available religions"

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/Dawkins/viruses-of-the-mind.html

On the other hand, since that is not the case, I am instead dismissed as a "crazy convert". In your bizarre sex obsessed world, you just can't lose, DrJ.

"The only reason that all religious beliefs aren't characterized as delusions (they should be) is that society defends them as "religion" so that puts them off limits to criticism."

Do you understand what the word "dogma" means DrJ? Neo-Soviet militant atheistic dogma is still dogma.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma

Doesn't it bother you that your beliefs are based on it?

DrJ said...

"...you would surely dismiss my beliefs because I am just imitating my parents..."

The point is that AT LEAST one of you is wrong, if not both.

"Doesn't it bother you that your beliefs are based on it?"

Why do you invent straw men? Atheists don't have any dogma and certainly don't get it from Soviets or Nazis. Its like me trying to disprove Judaism by attacking Bin Laden.

We just reject dogma. The rejection of dogma is not dogma itself.

Lets add "straw man arguments" to your long list of invalid proofs and arguments:

1. argument by authority (talmud, bible)
2. circular logic ( "kuzari principle")
3. Ad hominem attacks ("atheists are sex and drug addicts")
4 False analogies ("watchmaker")
5. conspiracy theories (all scientists are lying about evolution)
6. confirmation bias (one thing from the torah happens to be true, proving the torah is true, ignoring all other events.)
7. Straw man arguments-- overlaps with ad hominem--comparing atheism to nazism, communism, cannibalism then knocking it down.

Come on, JP, nobody buys it.

jewish philosopher said...

"The point is that AT LEAST one of you is wrong, if not both."

The fact is that no matter what you believe, including atheism, probably about 80% of humanity disagrees with you. Everyone is in a minority.

"We just reject dogma."

Making statements without bothering to provide any factual and logical basis for it sounds like dogma to me.

About your arguments:

1. argument by authority (science)
2. circular logic ( "evolution - there is no God because evolution made us and evolution made us because there is no God")
3. Ad hominem attacks ("rabbis are close minded idiots")
4. False analogies ("evolution - just like moths can change color, worms can become people")
5. conspiracy theories (all rabbis are lying about God)
6. confirmation bias (one thing scientists say happens to be true, proving evolution is true, ignoring all other evidence.)
7. Straw man arguments-- overlaps with ad hominem--comparing Judaism to Islam, Christianity then knocking it down.

Come on, DrJ, nobody buys it.

DrJ said...

restating my arguments in the converse is one of your favorite rhetorical tools, but it doesnt work.

1. science is not an authority. It is a method. I accept it, you reject it.
2. atheist don't make that argument at all. We simply state that god is unnecessary because evolution already explains things without him.
3. We only say that about you.
4. We don't say that either, there you go, straw man argument. worms don't turn into people. Fossils and carbon dating confirm evolution.
5. no more a conspiracy theory than all muslims lying about muhammed. its not conspiracy, its how religion and dogma work.
6. we don't do that at all. In fact, scientific theories are disproven all the time and replaced, based on evidence.
7. Some atheists do that, I don't. Orthodox Judaism can be disproved all by itself. No need for anything else.

"probably about 80% of humanity disagrees with you"

Disagrees about what? That the one real god is the Jewish god? probably 99.9999% agree with me on that one.

And 99.9999% of humanity disagrees with you.

jewish philosopher said...

Of course I accept science, however evolution is not science, as I have demonstrated.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/03/evolution-science-hijacked-by-atheism.html

"God is superstition and evolution is science" is another example of neo-Soviet atheistic dogma, by the way.

"worms don't turn into people"

Supposedly the ancestor of all vertebrates is some sort of flatworm.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/209735/flatworm/64460/Evolution

"That the one real god is the Jewish god?"

The majority of mankind believes in God, while 16% are nonreligious. You're a little above Hindus.

http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

Shalmo said...

"So let's see......It only proves my point that religion is an emotional psychological need, and the intellectual foundation is artificially built to support it."

DrJ you have no idea who I am so bother trying to guess why I converted or what were the arguments that convinced me to do so.

"Shalmo if you were true to yourself, with your rejection of Judaism, you wouldn't "need" to find another religion (or any religion at all) with its own dogma of jihad and kofer and the like."

Did you not hear me when I told you it was a VERY VERY VERY painful process to take on the religion of my enemy? The giult of betraying my people, leaving what they had suffered holocausts/programs to survive, etc etc all weighed down on me. BUT TRUTH IS TRUTH and I decided to follow it. I even at one point tried following a odd mix of Judaism with islamic ideas, but it soon enough became obvious that I was denying the truth because I wanted to hold on to my ancestral heritage.

You seem to be misinformed about jihad here; which really adds to your resume of being clueless on what you are talking about. Go ahead use wiki.

"As both of us know, biblical Judaism has nothing to do with what exists today. It evolved, as do all religions. And there are many forms, including humanistic Judaism."

Yes but I still believed in God. And no not all religions evolve. Proper religion would not have to change, it would be fine the way it is. That's one of the things that attracted me to Islam. Its true that laws need to be malleable so we can change with the times, which in islam is called "ijtehad" but theology should not change.

"As far as my "tribalism" is concerned, I don't think it is nearly as hateful and prejudiced as you and your Muslim colleagues."

Oh but I think it is. You worship the Jewish peope and Jewish culture, even though you may not know it. And you worhip Israel as well, which is why you are blind and deaf to any criticism sent its way.

'Everybody hates us. Everybody is out to get us'. that's what zionism is all about. Its hate-mongering and endless fear indoctriniated to create morons like you. I wanted no part in it hence I left

Shalmo said...

"Think about Al Qeeda, Saudia Arabia, and Iran. Are those your ideal societies? "

Al-Qaeda was something formed in Afghanistan thanks to CIA training by the US, and the war with Soviets. Before they got involved these people were a prospering modernizing society. Perhaps you should get the US government to stop empowering them against their enemies and then we can deal with them.

Saudia Arabia was created by Abdul Wahab and the Saud family deal with the Brits to create the kingdom. It was and is sponsored by the Brits. You have a problem with it, then by all means tell the US government to stop their support of it

As for Iran. Well Iran is doing great. Jews are happier in Iran, and just last year got a government sponsor biult for them in Tehran. Iran is doing great to advance. Thankfully Ahmadinejad is trying to bring more transparncy in government to do away with corruption. I wish I could say the same as Israel.

"No "inconsistencies"?"

You didn't name any. Give me something that is wrong with Islam and I will gladly clear any misconceptions you have

"You don't think that women should drive?"

You are a lying cow. Yes of course I think women should be allowed to drive. Both my mother and sister drive more than me lol

"So, Jews and Israel aren't perfect either, but we try to learn from our mistakes."

So? You don't think other people never learn from their mistakes?

And what mistakes have Jews and Israel learned from? Every attack against Palestinians solves nothing. Every two-solution rigged in Israel's favour (last time they tried to create states that isolate arabs from all water sources) is rejeced, because these people are a lot smarter than you give them credit for. Yet look, Israel continues to follow the same pattern over and over again. So you are horribly wrong about Jews learning from their mistakes; zionists are just as genocidal as they were 60 years ago.

Shalmo said...

"Shalmo,

Are you seriously trying to argue that Islam is somehow less wacky, evil and false than any other religion?

-Larry-"

I don't think its wacky, evil or false at all

I can accept that you left Judaism for atheism for intellectual reasons, why can't you accept I did the same?

I went where the evidence led me. It did not lead me to either the frum world or the secular jewish world. So there was no place for me in the Jewish world.

Or is it that to be a true OTD you have to be an atheist?

DrJ said...

Shalmo, all of your theological arguments against JP and Judaism in general apply to Islam as well. The problems of evil, the omnipotent and onmnicient creater, the absence of divine justice, the immorality inherent in ancient texts-- you have it all. Morever, you got them from Judaism and Christianity. Mohammad invented Islam in the 7th century, copying various aspects of Judaism and Christianity and brought them to the Arab world. I know that Muslims believe that Islam actually existed before the prophet but this is not the historical view and there is no independent evidence of Islam's existance before him.

So with all of the problems of the religion of Judaism, what on earth would make you adopt a newer invented religion, a mishmash of older religions? You ended up with the worst of both worlds. The old crap from Judaism along with the prophets new BS.

I know that religions, including Islam, have their positive aspects and influences. What has it given you?

Anonymous said...

Shalmo -

I understand you don't think your religion is wacky, evil or false.

I fail to see how one chooses a religion for intellectual reasons. This means you accept the story of how this religion came to be as the infallible, unbridled truth, no?

How is it that you accept this story on intellectual grounds?

"So there was no place for me in the Jewish world."

Oh, please spare me. Is this your intellectual decision? Whining about your "place"? This is the problem with all religion, including your new one: each religion, and sometimes each denomination, acts as its own sovereign state with its own pronouncement on what the order of the world is. I totally reject the idea that people need to be in their "place." You seem like a thoughtful person, but you are complicit in needlessly categorizing people - that is, tribalism and oppression.

"Or is it that to be a true OTD you have to be an atheist?"

I think atheism most likely represents the true state of affairs in the universe. I simply want to encourage people to think for themselves and investigate for themselves. Don't just go OTD. There is no D.

Now, I should disclose that I harbor a lingering affection for Judaism. I lament at the evil its done and its inherent evil. I have fondness for the good it's done, its many good people, and its inherent goodness. There's much in Judaism to be marveled, but it's just not true.

-Larry-

Anonymous said...

A few years ago, I taugh in a Yeshiva for boys "at risk." Every single student in that Yeshiva was seeing a a psychologist and/or a psychiatrist. Every student was diagnosed as suffering from depression, ADHD, learning disabilities, or some combination. Most of them were on medication. I've kept in touch with some of my students. They are all frum, functioning adults. My exerience indicates that young people at risk tend to have organic psychological problems. In subsequent conversations I've had with professionals and parents, they related similar experiences. Going OTD is usually the result of some underlying pathology.

Shalmo said...

"Shalmo, all of your theological arguments against JP and Judaism in general apply to Islam as well. The problems of evil, the omnipotent and onmnicient creater, the absence of divine justice, the immorality inherent in ancient texts"

Nope because with JP I do things like the DH and so forth, which don't apply to Islam at all

Things like problem of evil, etc already have great and amazing answers in the Sunnah. That's the intellectual attraction I had to it. Aside from the Sunnah, the early muslims like Imam Ghazali did a wonderful preserving and then refuting all the great greek schools of atheism. And today's atheists are nothing compared to those great classical masters if you ask me.

As for the immorality of ancient texts I have already told you that the Quran says in warfare never to harm women, children and non-combatants during warfare. Similar kool instructions are litered over islamic texts. And by the 21st century models they do great.

"Morever, you got them from Judaism and Christianity. Mohammad invented Islam in the 7th century, copying various aspects of Judaism and Christianity and brought them to the Arab world."

Nonsense, he never even left the arab world. In fact as even secular historians have noted there were no written document (no bible) for him to copy anything from. So how did he copy anything? Who did he copy from? Where did this copying take place?

Its amazing you hear all these colorful theories but to this day no one has found a source that was even remotely believable for Mohammed's information. What is even more ludicrous DrJ is that you think I never even considered this point myself before converting.

If all Mohammed did was copy then please answer me why he never copied the bible's errors as well?

Here is a good example of Quranic accuracy vs biblical error: http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/josephdetail.html

Mohammed did not have access to these archaeological sciences only available in the 19th century, so how come he was right?

Why doesn't the Quran for instance have the scienfitic absurdities of Genesis; where creation happens in different days, plants being created before photosynthesis could support them, etc etc? Where as in the Quran creation happens all at one point. In fact the Quran describes the Big Bang as the source of creation in surah 21:30.

If Mohammed copied this stuff then how did he know what was true and what was false? How did he know Genesis was scientifically false 1400 years ago?

In fact Islam says that the Torah and the Gospel are corrupted, so it makes copy theories even harder to believe.

Shalmo said...

"I know that Muslims believe that Islam actually existed before the prophet but this is not the historical view and there is no independent evidence of Islam's existance before him."

WRONG (don't believe that at all)- This is what happens when you learn religion from wikipedia.

"So with all of the problems of the religion of Judaism, what on earth would make you adopt a newer invented religion, a mishmash of older religions? You ended up with the worst of both worlds. The old crap from Judaism along with the prophets new BS."

The moment you prove your case of islam being a mishmash of different religions (people smarter than you have tried), will be the moment I apostacize. Good luck trying!

"I know that religions, including Islam, have their positive aspects and influences. What has it given you?"

When I went for hajj I was able to eat, drink, swet and suffer the burdens of this wonderful pilgrimage with men of all colors (black, white, brown,chinese). When we did tawaf around the Kaaba it was the happiest moment of my life. No other religion has such a ritual that can unite people from all corners of the world in such a form of worship. It taught me all humans are one people, it taught me humility, peace, love for God and all the mushy stuff.

PS: If you think this emotional appeal is why I converted, then no.

Shalmo said...

Larry:

"I understand you don't think your religion is wacky, evil or false."

I don't think, I KNOW it isn't. The burden of proof is on you to prove it is.

"I fail to see how one chooses a religion for intellectual reasons. This means you accept the story of how this religion came to be as the infallible, unbridled truth, no? How is it that you accept this story on intellectual grounds?"

Ofcourse I accept this religion and the way it came to be.

I don't believe in fairies or unicorns; and that includes the magic of randomness. I don't believe nothing from nothing; the universe is here so clearly we have something. I have yet to meet an atheist who proves randomness, perhaps you can oblige.

"Oh, please spare me. Is this your intellectual decision? Whining about your "place"? This is the problem with all religion, including your new one: each religion, and sometimes each denomination, acts as its own sovereign state with its own pronouncement on what the order of the world is. I totally reject the idea that people need to be in their "place." You seem like a thoughtful person, but you are complicit in needlessly categorizing people - that is, tribalism and oppression. "

Congratulations! you are speaking islamic theology without knowing it. In Islam there is no jew or gentile, no us or them. All human beings regardless of race, color and gender are "ashraful maklookat" aka best of creation.

"I think atheism most likely represents the true state of affairs in the universe. I simply want to encourage people to think for themselves and investigate for themselves. Don't just go OTD. There is no D. Now, I should disclose that I harbor a lingering affection for Judaism. I lament at the evil its done and its inherent evil. I have fondness for the good it's done, its many good people, and its inherent goodness. There's much in Judaism to be marveled, but it's just not true."

Ah the ever so familiar arrogance of the secular jew. How could I forget it?

An easy way to sum up your post is "my way is right, anything that contradicts my way is wrong". As arrogant as the theists you criticize

Why we are here? What we are doing here? Who are we? Why we exist?

How does the creed of randomness answer any of those? It doesn't, hence why you aren't going to win uch ground with me.

Shalmo said...

JP where are all my replies disappearing to? I have no said anything offensive have I?

DrJ said...

"The majority of mankind believes in God, while 16% are nonreligious. You're a little above Hindus."

But not in your god, in fact, they believe in gods that compete with your god, they are like night and day. Kind of like the FSG. So don't put yourself in their category.

"worms don't turn into people"

This is a gross oversimplification and distortion of what evolution is. Kind of like saying that Judiasm is about "the Jewish god that kills babies". Its inaccurate and only part of the story.

"God is superstition and evolution is science" is another example of neo-Soviet atheistic dogma, by the way.'

Straw man argument. What is your purpose in comparing it to "soviet dogma"? I could similarly say that Jewish theism is another example of "nazi-era nationalist religious dogma" since the nazis thought they were doing god's work.

Your false arguments and analogies are transparent to all, JP, except in your own head. Not only that, your extremist black and white statements only bring disgrace and shame to judaism making it an object of ridicule.

Jews have enough trouble as it is, without your ridiculous misrepresentations of Judaism attract antisemitism.

jewish philosopher said...

"But not in your god, in fact, they believe in gods that compete with your god"

OK, fine. So how what percentage of mankind are traditionally Jewish, Zionist, secular humanist atheists? Maybe just you?

"This is a gross oversimplification and distortion of what evolution is."

It's exactly what evolution is. Evolutionists believe that you could take a can of worms, leave it on a desert island and return in few hundred million years to find elephants, hummingbirds, alligators and people walking around.

"What is your purpose in comparing it to "soviet dogma"?"

That's exactly what it is.

"Marxism-Leninism has consistently advocated for the suppression, and, ultimately, the disappearance of religious beliefs, due to their unscientific and superstitious character."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union#Policy_toward_religions_in_practice

"Jews have enough trouble as it is"

Coming from a anti-Jew like yourself, I'm really worried.

Anonymous said...

Shalmo,

Obviously I hit a nerve with you. Your wild ravings fail to impress or convince. Please calm down and let's discuss.

You seriously want me to prove your religion is wacky, evil and false? OK, I can do that in two phrases: "angel dictates Koran to illiterate pedophile warlord" and "flying horse." Case closed.

Why do you keep asking me to prove randomness? What does that even mean? And why would randomness - which you actually can observe in the world - be more unbelievable than a deity - which you can't?

You said I had a familiar arrogance. I hope not to be arrogant and can't imagine what in my language would have come across that way. Is it possible that your feathers just got ruffled?

Then you make a very dishonest parsing of my comments to you: "An easy way to sum up your post is 'my way is right, anything that contradicts my way is wrong.' As arrogant as the theists you criticize."

What I actually said was that "I think atheism most likely represents the true state of affairs in the universe." If you read carefully, this is not a statement of absolute certainty, and I also claimed ownership for the thought. I said it was what I thought was true, not what you should think is true. I can't imagine why you would want to mis-interpret me in this way.

Finally, you ask all sorts of philosophical questions: "Why we are here? What we are doing here? Who are we? Why we exist?"

Truthfully, I don't know the answers to these questions. I don't think you do, either. Neither does JP.

Really, look at those questions you asked and then ask yourself: why is it so important to you to have "answers"? Aren't the questions rather meaningless?

As I said, you seem by and large like a nice kid, but your need to have some system tell you who you are is distressing and sad.

-Larry-

Shalmo said...

Larry:

"Obviously I hit a nerve with you. Your wild ravings fail to impress or convince. Please calm down and let's discuss."

non-sequitar

"You seriously want me to prove your religion is wacky, evil and false? OK, I can do that in two phrases: "angel dictates Koran to illiterate pedophile warlord" and "flying horse." Case closed."

Actually that angel did not dictate the Quran. He only gave the order to reveal it. Mohammed had already been been taught the Quran by God before that. The Quran has an interesting revelation process because each Surah was revealed to the ummah over 23 years rather than all at once.

Pedophile? I was unaware norms on sexuality that only developed in the 19th century apply to 7th century Arabia. For the record, there are contradicting accounts on Aishah's age. At lowest she was 15, and at highest she was 25. More importantly Mohammed did not even have a choice in the marriage, nor did he know who she was. He only knew about her when he was presented her in an arranged marriage by her father Abu Bakr. He thus had no choice in it. It was a political marriage which he HAD to undertake in order to stop civil in arabia. Mohammed's first wife Khateja was in fact 20 years older than him. And for two decades he never sought any other woman but her. That was until he was annexed into the politics of the arab world, after which the political marriages became a necessity.

as for the "warlord" nonsense, I am going to provide you what a SECULAR historian, Karen Armstrong, has to say about the matter:

“The Prophet Muhammad was not a warrior, but he found himself, like many of the Axial Age sages, in a violent society and he eventually brought peace to the region by practicing a daring policy of non-violence. He stopped the violence and went into Mecca unarmed and forced the Meccan to negotiate with him accepting terms that his followers thought were disgraceful,”

and

"There is far more violence in the Bible than in the Qur’an; the idea that Islam imposed itself by the sword is a Western fiction, fabricated during the time of the Crusades when, in fact, it was Western Christians who were fighting brutal holy wars against Islam. The Qur’an forbids aggressive warfare and permits war only in self-defence; the moment the enemy sues for peace, the Qur’an insists that Muslims must lay down their arms and accept whatever terms are offered, even if they are disadvantageous. Later, Muslim law forbade Muslims to attack a country where Muslims were permitted to practice their faith freely; the killing of civilians was prohibited, as were the destruction of property and the use of fire in warfare."

Shalmo said...

Larry:

"Why do you keep asking me to prove randomness? What does that even mean? And why would randomness - which you actually can observe in the world - be more unbelievable than a deity - which you can't?"

The universe is either designed or its all a sea of randomness. So which is it? I don't believe in fairies, unicorns, witches; which is why I find the magic of randomess all the more ludicrous. I have yet to meet an atheist who prove this dogma, which is why I asked if you could do so.

"You said I had a familiar arrogance. I hope not to be arrogant and can't imagine what in my language would have come across that way. Is it possible that your feathers just got ruffled?"

I have my fair share of dealings with secular jews, and your arrogance is reminiscient of it.

"Then you make a very dishonest parsing of my comments to you: "An easy way to sum up your post is 'my way is right, anything that contradicts my way is wrong.' As arrogant as the theists you criticize." What I actually said was that "I think atheism most likely represents the true state of affairs in the universe." If you read carefully, this is not a statement of absolute certainty, and I also claimed ownership for the thought. I said it was what I thought was true, not what you should think is true. I can't imagine why you would want to mis-interpret me in this way."

AHHH NO. That is exactly what you are saying. When you call my religion "evil" and all those other caricatures you made it of it then you are indeed making statemens of "absolute certainty". Thus you are now contradicting yourself.

"Finally, you ask all sorts of philosophical questions: "Why we are here? What we are doing here? Who are we? Why we exist?Truthfully, I don't know the answers to these questions. I don't think you do, either. Neither does JP."

Ofcoure I have the answers to those questions.

Shalmo: I know 1+1=2

Larry: no it does not equal that at all

Shalmo: then what is the answer

Larry: I don't know

Shalmo: Huh? But you just said I am wrong. How do you know that when you yourself don't have an answer?

Larry: you seem by and large like a nice kid, but your need to have some system tell you who you are is distressing and sad.

Shalmo: Careful you don't argue yourself into a box:)

"Really, look at those questions you asked and then ask yourself: why is it so important to you to have "answers"? Aren't the questions rather meaningless?"

Nope!

Otherwise me, and the rest of humanity, would not be asking them. Human history shows we are wired to ask such questions.

Run along Larry, and let the grown ups take it from here!

DrJ said...

Shalmo, please interpret the koranic verses about the trees telling that Jews are hiding behind them so they can be killed.

DrJ said...

Shalmo, I am no Koran expert, but I believe the producer of Fitna more than I believe you. The Koran is full of verses of violence and extremism.

DrJ said...

The basic reason that all of these arguments lead nowhere is that we can't agree on mutually acceptable and objective sources of information. As long as JP's undisputed source is Talmud, and Shalmo's is Islamic apologetics sites and Koran, there can be no fair argument. Therefore, everything gets reduced to emotional and philosophical rantings.

On my blog I once challenged Shalmo to a debate using mutually agreed upon sources, but he refused, because he likes to bring propogandistic and anectodal stories as evidence. Similarly I think that BadRabbi once offered to debate JP.

No source of information is 100%objective and reliable, but sources such as wikipedia, major news agencies (AP, Reuters, etc) are a good start. Otherwise, anybody can "prove" anything by googling and finding a source. That is essentially what JP does, and was including in my list of his rhetorical devices-- comfirmation bias.

jewish philosopher said...

I think that without exception my posts are based on indisuptable facts of science

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/06/biomechanics.html

and history

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/06/holocaust-clear-evidence-of-gods-hand.html

and my conclusions derive from the simplest logic.

On the other hand, the comments made on this blog constantly, again and again, over and over are based on nothing factual or logical whatsoever.

"Your theology also complete negates any significance whatsoever for the 6.7 billion gentiles in the world"

"As remarkable as the heart seems, it is far from a masterpiece."

"JP, so you are now reduced to comparing my disagreement with you to Holocaust denial?"

I am desperate for someone to write some sort of serious counterargument to my posts, but it's never happening. Instead every day I open my browser and read pointless nonsense like "Frankly, I think you're a nutbag" or "I spit on your "god"."

I have no way of knowing, however I have a feeling that I’m dealing mainly with a few teenagers messing around on the Internet in between beers and marijuana cigarettes.

DrJ said...

" am desperate for someone to write some sort of serious counterargument to my posts,..."

I successfully rebutted your post on the causality between the Jewish Enlightenment and the holocaust. You deduced causality by a single event time correlation, which is invalid. You were reduced to making you authority based claims.

All of your claims about hell our authority based claims from questionable sources.

I can only debate you if you and I agree on mutually acceptable source evidence. Biblical verses are unacceptable to me (except as an internal reference to the torah itself) If you don't like my sources, suggest an acceptable "neutral" source.

The current post is just bigotted hateful opinion, and doesn't even correspond with contemporary poskim's attitud towards "heretics". If you want to assert that hell awaits me, prove it! Let's agree on sources. I promise, I won't quote dawkins or hitchens.

You can argue till you're blue in the face about the torah being your source, but it does not good if you want to argue your point with others unless you verify your claims with other sources.

jewish philosopher said...

"I successfully rebutted your post on the causality between the Jewish Enlightenment and the holocaust. You deduced causality by a single event time correlation, which is invalid."

I explained why you are wrong.

Let's say you have a girlfriend. And this girlfriend has a husband. And this husband is an explosives expert for the military.

One night, you get a phone call from the husband. He informs you that if you meet his wife again, he will kill you.

Tomorrow, you meet his wife.

Two days later, as you get into your car and turn on the ignition, the car explodes.

I would say based on this information that the husband did it. He had a motive, he made a threat and he had the ability to carry it out.

You could argue that the threat was ambiguous. You could say it's untestable; in science inference about causation can be made from REPEATED observations or experimental manipulation. You could argue it's just coincedence.

I would say that at very least, if you continue dating this lady, you are a moron and deserve whatever happens to you.

"The current post is just bigotted hateful opinion"

The current post is exactly what it claims to be: an accurate explanation of the Talmudic attitude toward heresy.

"doesn't even correspond with contemporary poskim's attitud towards "heretics""

This blog as a rule follows the teachings of the Lithuanian rabbinical seminaries of the 1920s and 1930s.

DrJ said...

Your analogy is invalid. (A better analogy would be if you got a threat from the husband 30 years ago. )The torah's warning from 2500 years ago is irrelavant in showing causality for a current event. You have not demonstrated causality. Human assumption and perception of coincidence is extremely poor indicator of actual correlation. What is your chance of winning the lottery? Well, there is 100% someone HAS to win, so the winner thinks that there was this or that reason he won. But its just chance. If you claim its not chance, the burden of proof is on you.

Furthermore, an analogy is not a proof. A bad analogy is a good way to cover up invalid logic or lack of evidence. Its exactly like the torah codes scam.

in 2009 human knowledge requires more than just dumb analogies and logic . It requires evidence. Otherwise we'd still be believing that infections are caused by evil spirits.

Let's say that the talmud says that heretics burn in hell. Now convince me that its true. Otherwise your statements have as much validity as someone quoting from the koran.

Anonymous said...

OT, but still interesting. Here is some more evolutionary confusion:


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090618084304.htm

It seems that we are closer to orangutans morphogically, but closer to chimps genetically.

jewish philosopher said...

"The torah's warning from 2500 years ago is irrelavant in showing causality for a current event. You have not demonstrated causality."

Sure I have. The Holocaust did immediately follow the Enlightenment.

Let's say the husband made the threat - "Meet my wife again and I'll kill you." After ten years, you finally gave into temptation, called the lady and met her at a local motel. Two days later your car explodes. I have little doubt that detectives assigned to this case would consider the husband to be the prime suspect.

The basic attitude I get from you and others is something like “JP, don’t you realize that all this God stuff makes no sense because there is no God?” That may be your belief, I would call it dogma, however just because you may feel that way, doesn’t make it true.

Shalmo said...

DrJ:

"Shalmo, please interpret the koranic verses about the trees telling that Jews are hiding behind them so they can be killed."

No such verses exist and of course the onus is on you to prove they exist, which you won't be able to do.

"Shalmo, I am no Koran expert, but I believe the producer of Fitna more than I believe you. The Koran is full of verses of violence and extremism."

Proof? DrJ with each post you continue to live up to the title of the stuck up cow I called you earlier.

Are you really that desperate that you are gonna go looking for bigots to tell you what you wanna hear?

IF so then by all means don't complain when I start citing sources that show the holocaust never happened, as well as every anti-semitic/anti-jewish website out there:

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/talmudtruth.html

lol

"The basic reason that all of these arguments lead nowhere is that we can't agree on mutually acceptable and objective sources of information."

Nonsense. You examine each historical source for its own merit

The problem is trolls like you only go to sources that confirm your preconceptions about the world.

"As long as JP's undisputed source is Talmud, and Shalmo's is Islamic apologetics sites and Koran, there can be no fair argument."

You never bothered reading what they say. Deceptive creature!

"Therefore, everything gets reduced to emotional and philosophical rantings."

I agree

"On my blog I once challenged Shalmo to a debate using mutually agreed upon sources, but he refused, because he likes to bring propogandistic and anectodal stories as evidence. Similarly I think that BadRabbi once offered to debate JP. "

LIAR!!!!!!

I gave you nothing but Jewish sources. Even the so-called apologetic sites as you call them, used nothing but Jewish sources

When I showed you Jewish sources that show that Jews have never inhabited all of Canaan, WHAT DID YOU DO?

YOU DELETED THEM!

Your intellectual dishonesty was exposed on your own blog

JP always keep this in mind about DrJ; he preaches objectivity yet on his blog deletes comments he has no rebuttal for

"No source of information is 100%objective and reliable, but sources such as wikipedia, major news agencies (AP, Reuters, etc) are a good start."

Anybody can write anything on wiki and after I already embarassed you on stupid things you have learned from wiki, I'm surprised you are still on this train

"Otherwise, anybody can "prove" anything by googling and finding a source. That is essentially what JP does, and was including in my list of his rhetorical devices-- comfirmation bias."

The kettle calling the pot black

PS: I stopped debating you because it was obvious you had no clue what you were talking about such as your nonsense that the Esther story was factual, which it wasn't

Shalmo said...

JP I think you should BAN DrJ, and you will be fully justified in doing so.

He doesn't practise what he preaches.

He talks about freedom of speech and objectivity, yet he deletes comments from his own blog that he can't refute.

No one can blame you for banning such a hypocritical troll.

Shalmo said...

One more thing, I find it ironic DrJ is barking about objectivity in sources

Yet when I gave him a secular historian on Islam, Karen Armstrong, he doesn't even have the courage to so much as address what she has to say. Its obvious that even when the secular perspective contradicts his paradigm, he is unwilling to confront his own bias.

Instead he goes of on tangents quoting bigots who make kooky movies. I suppose we all should follow DrJ's example and only look for what the bigots say. I guess I should now start quoting David Duke for all things on jews and judaism.

I'll say it again. ITs the ever familiar arrogance of the secular jew surfacing its head. Such bigots are the source of the ever increasing OTD and intermarriage. It comes as no surprise his daughter is an apostate.

DrJ said...

Anyone is free to follow the thread of the debate on my blog, and see for yourself who I am dealing with.

DrJ said...

I think that everybody should take a deep breath. Then read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

JP, and this Shalmo fellow, like to provide lots of links in their posts, but that is not the same as providing evidence to support a conclusion.

Shalmo, make one point at a time and I will answer. You shoot in all directions. I will not write a 500 word essay every time I comment. No apologetics sources since they misquote and take out of context. Only original text sources or wiki, or legitimate news sources (Not IRAN press TV!!).

BTW, I suppose you blame the Zionists of causing Muslims to slaughter Muslims in Iran.

DrJ said...

"ITs the ever familiar arrogance of the secular jew surfacing its head. Such bigots are the source of the ever increasing OTD and intermarriage."

Lets examine the assumptions of this statement, to reveal your agenda:

1. I am a secular Jew (wrong, I am observant (orthoprax))
2. secular Jews are arrogant (generalization)
3. secular Jews are bigots (generalization, considering that secular Jews everywhere tend to be the most liberal)
4. people go off the derech because of "secular bigots" and intermarry. (huge undocumented generalization, and contradicts the social reality of American Jewry) Perhaps it reflects your own story. (anecdotal). It also confuses cause and effect (do people go off the derech because of "secular" people or do they become secular because people when OTD. )

BTW, Shalmo, I don't consider my daughter to be an apostate. Even you are not an apostate. Its not even part of my lexicon. I would have other words to describe you, but I won't write them here.

Anonymous said...

Shalmo,

You type a lot of words but say little. You come across as a rather desperate and unstable person who whines "arrogance" whenever the pristine vision of your cultish beliefs get challenged.

Let me respond to only one item of of yours, since you don't seem to have the historical and theological knowledge or the skill in logical reasoning that would be necessary for a real discussion to continue.

When I call your religion wacky, false, and evil - and think this is equally true of all religion- then I am stating my opinion. It's an opinion formed over 20 years in my adult life researching, studying and reflecting on such matters. Some of this work has been related to my professional life.

However, my point is only that I make such statements not with "absolute certainty," as you charge. Rather, I make them as a conclusion resulting from a long period of consideration.

You shouldn't get so upset. People can have different opinions; heck, it's a very good thing they do! As I've also said, you are entirely welcome to believe whatever nonsense you wish. You say you went OTD because that's where the evidence led you.

May I humbly suggest that you find sources of evidence outside of the so-called holy books and outside the the subject of religion altogether? I don't know your level of familiarity with science, philosophy, literary analysis and other disciplines, but you may enjoy absorbing these approaches to the world and how people try to express the truth about it, its nature, its origins, and its potential future.

I would, finally and humbly, also advise that you not be a searcher, but be a researcher. Searchers want people to tell them "the great thing." Researchers find great things in most everything they apply their hands and minds to.

Good luck, truly.

-Larry-

jewish philosopher said...

DrJ, my beliefs are based on indisputable facts of science and history.

http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/did-life-form-by-accident/
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/proof-torah-true/

Your beliefs are apparently based on Marxist-Leninist dogma.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union#Policy_toward_religions_in_practice

I choose to be rational and you choose to be irrational, because that's easier.

Anonymous said...

Good ahead and "link" as much as you want. You bring your usual circular logic and pseudoscience arguments, neither of which prove anything. What is the wiki link to the soviet union prove? That you can ad hominem attack?

jewish philosopher said...

"neither of which prove anything"

Nothing proves anything to someone who has adopted the irrational Marxist-Leninist dogma.

DrJ said...

"Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: it is authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or diverged from."

wiki.

atheism, which is sketicism of the dogma of religion, is not dogma itself.

jewish philosopher said...

That's not true.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/05/atheism-in-nutshell.html

Actually, Judaism is not a religion. It's just the truth.

DrJ said...

Your "truths" are immutable.

My "truths" are subject to inquiry, rebuttal and change.

The first is dogma, the second rational scientific thinking.

jewish philosopher said...

"My "truths" are subject to inquiry, rebuttal and change."

I've rebutted them but you won't change them. That's called dogma.

DrJ said...

You're twisting the meaning of words. Dogma applies to the beliefs themselves, not the one who holds them. That I won't change my mind because of your 'rebuttals' doesn't mean dogma; it means I'm unconvinced.

The theories themselves are what defines if its dogma or not. In religion your are told what immutable truths are; if you don't believe it you are a heretic and condemned to burn in hell. On the other hand, of science comes up with a better theory than evolution or quantum mechanics, we can throw them out and replace them.

You are engaging in a pathetic and dishonest distortion of what dogma is, because you don't want it applied to your form of Judaism (although I'm sure you're perfectly fine with applying to other religions).

In contrast, modern orthodoxy rejects dogma in favor of incorporating the accumulated wisdom of humanity.

jewish philosopher said...

Marxist-Leninist atheistic dogma is the established doctrine held by an ideology: it is authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or diverged from.

DrJ said...

Right, since all atheists are marxist-leninist. Excellent logic. And since JP believes in heretics burning in hell and so do Islamo-Fascists, JPism is the same is Islamo-fascism. And since JPism believes in loyalty to his people and so does Nazi ideology, JPism has adopted Naziism. Its Nazi dogma.

Sounds absurd, right? Well that is your logic.

jewish philosopher said...

This is the basic reason why I have no respect for atheists or atheism. There is not even an attempt by atheists to logically, rationally prove their beliefs. Instead, they just sit in amazement at anyone who seriously disagrees with them because of course they are right. The fact that they think so somehow proves it.

How is that different than the most fanatic Christian or Muslim who "just knows" he's right?

DrJ said...

I don't seek your respect.

You tendentiously call atheism a "belief".
The burden of proof is on theists, not atheists. I don't have to prove that "there is no god" or "torah is not from god". It is not a "belief". It is you who are making the positive assertion and must defend it, and I have to rebut it.
If you assert that the sun is going to collide with the earth, and I say its not, the burden of proof is on you. I don't have to prove my "belief".
As a scientist I don't have to prove that girls DONT have cooties. Nor do I have to prove there is no god.

Anonymous said...

JP says: "This is the basic reason why I have no respect for atheists or atheism."

That's the difference. Atheists respect people and ideas. Theists don't. It seems virtually everything JP writes has a selfish, ideological subtext.

How to rationally prove my belief that atheism is correct? Well, because every supernatural explanation has proven untenable. It's simple process of elimination. Claims made for special creation have been soundly refuted. Claims for an original Adam and Eve have been shown false. No global flood. No tower of babel. No sodom. No gomorrah. The existence of Abraham is doubtful. The exodus probably didn't happen as recorded in the bible.

Archaeology and other disciplines have collected evidence that increasingly makes any supernatural explanation unlikely.

Jesus was a myth, a legend that sprang from fervent wishing and re-writing of a certain kind of Judaism. Islam, too, was man made.

The proof of atheism is in the world itself, a world where people tell stories and confuse what they want to be (gods, chosen people, messiah coming back) with what really is (a cool universe whose origins and nature are even better than the ancients imagined).

The proof of atheism is in the self-contradicting and culturally generated holy texts that people have transmitted to one another. The language, phrasings, archaeology, supporting texts - all better support the man-made idea.

Why be afraid of this conclusion, JP? Why are you so hostile to atheists and atheism. We simply reject one more god than you do.

Why is it that you are the one with hatred and violence in your heart? Why do you make your god a god of hate? Why do you reflect so poorly on this god? Aren't you supposed to love him? or perhaps you love to hate atheists and other non-believers more than you actually love god. Maybe you love torah more than you love god.

You do not act or speak like one who loves your supposed god. What's more, your posts present evidence for atheism more than for theism.

Show me one post of yours that better supports theism. Just one. You have never proven judaism to be true at all.

Perhaps you should focus more on trying to prove judaism than trying to shake your cage in frustration at atheists. I don't know what your problem is. Maybe you are sexually confused, or maybe you don't like your work or station in life. In any case, you need to practice better manners.

-Larry-

jewish philosopher said...

Atheisms is the belief that there is no Biblical God and evolution created us.

DrJ said...

It is not belief. It is rejection of a supernatural claim.

Anonymous said...

No. To me, atheism is the rejection of the idea that any gods exist - biblical or otherwise.

While atheism strictly speaking has nothing to say about how exactly intelligent life arose in our universe, I think it's fair to say an atheism believes that physical forces acting and interacting over billions of years would make part of a plausible explanation.

Does evolution make a better explanation than any of the 1000s of theistic ones? Yes.

Does evolution make a perfect, unmistaken theory that must be accepted 100% in every single aspect? No, no, no.

I feel bad for you that this should need explaining.

Here's a challenge, and I wonder if you have the intellectual courage to accept: Name one "difficult" idea to accept in judaism. Explain and defend its non-acceptance. Then, explain and defend its acceptance.

Or is everything in and about judaism easy for you to accept? And do you so easily accept everything else in your life? Why?

-Larry-

jewish philosopher said...

"Claims made for special creation have been soundly refuted."

You mean by evolution? I don't think so.
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/03/evolution-science-hijacked-by-atheism.html

"Claims for an original Adam and Eve have been shown false. No global flood. No tower of babel. No sodom. No gomorrah. The existence of Abraham is doubtful. The exodus probably didn't happen as recorded in the bible."

Not to my knowledge.
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/09/how-i-understand-genesis.html
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/10/biblical-deluge.html
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/02/torah-and-archaeology.html

"The proof of atheism is in the world itself, a world where people tell stories and confuse what they want to be (gods, chosen people, messiah coming back) with what really is (a cool universe whose origins and nature are even better than the ancients imagined)."

The proof of Judaism is in the world itself, a world where people tell stories and confuse what they want to be (evolution, no intelligent creator who demands anything) with what really is (God and the Torah).

"The proof of atheism is in the self-contradicting and culturally generated holy texts that people have transmitted to one another. The language, phrasings, archaeology, supporting texts - all better support the man-made idea."

The proof of Judaism is in the self-contradicting and culturally generated atheistic idealogies that people have transmitted to one another. The language, phrasings, archaeology, supporting texts - all better support the God-made idea.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/06/gods-wisdom.html

"Why be afraid of this conclusion, JP? Why are you so hostile to atheists and atheism. We simply reject one more god than you do."

Why be afraid of this conclusion, Larry? Why are you so hostile to Jews and Judaism. We simply accept one more god than you do.

"Why is it that you are the one with hatred and violence in your heart? Why do you make your god a god of hate? Why do you reflect so poorly on this god? Aren't you supposed to love him? or perhaps you love to hate atheists and other non-believers more than you actually love god. Maybe you love torah more than you love god."

I've explained about the hatred.
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2007/12/good-hatred.html

About the violence, I think atheists have more of a monopoly on that one.
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/12/famous-atheist.html
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/02/massacre-of-midianites.html

"You have never proven judaism to be true at all."

Sure I have.
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2006/12/truth-of-judaism.html

"It is rejection of a supernatural claim."

Define "supernatural".

"atheism is the rejection of the idea that any gods exist"

Define "god".

All the above are again just dogmatic assertions based on nothing rational, factual or logical.

Anonymous said...

Judaism is the belief that there is a Biblical God that created us. Why? Because the bible says, and because people who believe the bible say it's so.

Oh yeah. That's solid reasoning.

DrJ said...

"The proof of Judaism is in the self-contradicting and culturally generated atheistic idealogies that people have transmitted to one another. The language, phrasings, archaeology, supporting texts - all better support the God-made idea."

JP you have turned the use of language into a joke.

Don't be evasive, you know what supernatural means.

jewish philosopher said...

"Judaism is the belief that there is a Biblical God that created us. Why? Because the bible says, and because people who believe the bible say it's so."

Just like atheism is the belief that there is evolution. Why? Because the Origin of Species says, and because people who believe the Origin of Species say it's so.

"you know what supernatural means"

It means whatever you don't want to believe in.

Anonymous said...

"Just like atheism is the belief that there is evolution. Why? Because the Origin of Species says, and because people who believe the Origin of Species say it's so."

This is false, as has been pointed out.

No belief in evolution. Sorry. You're flailing as well as failing now. Must be a buzzkill for you.

-Larry-

jewish philosopher said...

And so are you, as has been pointed out.

http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/did-life-form-by-accident/
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/proof-torah-true/

DrJ said...

You seem to have a problem with evolutio, because, as you say, you can't understand how "worms turn into people". But you seem to have no problem with talking snakes and donkeys, or splitting seas, or stuffing all of earths species into an ark. I wonder why that is.

jewish philosopher said...

I believe in God who can do miracles. Atheists believe in no such mechanism.

DrJ said...

No, we don't believe in miracles, but we understand biology and physics and understand that the improbable becomes the probable, given enough opportunities. Even you could throw 100 pennies and get 100 tails in a row, without a miracle. Just throw it 100,000,000 times.
I just read a story about somebody who won the lottery jackpot two years in a row. The chance of that happening was something like 1 in 75,000,000. But it happened. No miracle required.

I think that a natural mechanism however "improbable", is more plausable than any supernatural explanation. Why? Because we observe the improbable all of the time, but we never observe the supernatural.

jewish philosopher said...

Regarding the Madoff scandal:

CONSISTENCY IS BAD Even the New York Yankees don’t win the World Series every year (at least not anymore). And if anyone should have known this, it should have been Fred Wilpon, the owner of their crosstown rival, the Mets. For the last two seasons, he put together stunning teams, loaded with sluggers, fielders and ace pitchers, only to watch them collapse in the last weeks of the season.

What does this have to do with Mr. Madoff? It shows that consistency at the highest level isn’t bad; it’s impossible. There are too many variables that inhibit being great on a regular basis. Yet Mr. Wilpon, through his Sterling Equities, suffered undisclosed but reportedly significant losses from Mr. Madoff. It defies logic that someone so well versed in a market with as many unforeseeable glitches as baseball would believe that an equally imperfect world — investing — could be so steady.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/your-money/06wealth.html

Evolution seems to propose something infinitely more improbable.

"Because we observe the improbable all of the time, but we never observe the supernatural."

Anything we observe is by definition natural, therefore that's a meaningless statement.

Anonymous said...

According to this article:

http://www.genetics.org/cgi/content/full/180/3/1501

it would take ~200,000,000 years for the simplest sort of mutations that can cause genomic change to spread through a population of organisms that reporduce at the rate humasn do. After mathematical and logical errors where corrected, it turns out that it would take a lot longer.

Michael Behe predicted that the mutations necessary for the AIDs virus to acquire resistance to a three drug cocktail are so unlikely, that we won't see them happen anytime soon. So far, his prediction has held up. He also wrote the malaria will never find a way around sickel cell disease because the number of mutations needed is just too great. Its been thousnads of years and his prediction is still standing.

Now Robert Shapiro wrote that the chances of making a single functioning protein are along the lines of 20^100. Now there have only been 10^19 seconds since the big bang. Yuo would need a whole bunnch of universal lifetime to make a simple protein.

DrJ said...

So I accept only the observable phenomena
You accept things that aren't or can't be observed.
Is that right?
So if you accept the truth of non-observable things, what does that say about you standards of evidence?
Which standard is more rational?

Shalmo said...

let's do a recap:

DrJ: I want objectivity in sources.

I gave you nothing but jewish sources which you couldn't do refute on your blog

DrJ: I don't trust apologetic websites

I NEVER gave you any. Even the so-called apologetic sites as you call them use nothing but Jewish sources to get their points across

DrJ: I think wiki is reliable

Despite the fact that I have already on more than one occassion shown you how wrong you are based on what you learned on wiki

DrJ: We can only rely on secular sources

I gave you a SECULAR historian on islamic history, which you shamelessly did not even address.

Its pitifully obvious you can't handle any source that contradicts you preconceptions.

DrJ: I trust Fitna more than you

You wish to quote bigots then fine, but I can do the same. I can quote David Duke for all matter on Jews and Judaism. This is a particularly big hole you have just dug yourself under, which is why you have no reply for it.

PS: not only did Swedish groups rebuke this movie, but refutations for its distortions are all over the net

DrJ: I think the Quran is violent. The Quran says to kill Jews hiding behind trees.

Its obvious you are a liar who has never read the Quran because no such verse exists. Were you an honest fellow you would have recanted your falsehood. But hey keep learning from wiki.

Btw I also asked you to provide PROOF that the Quran is violent, you didn't bother doing that either because you knew your usual copy and paste will not get you far with me.

DrJ: People can see on my blog what I am dealing with

No they can't because you DELETED my posts, because they expose your illiteracy on Jewish history and Jewish religion.

I pity you. You are a miserable creature caught in delusional world, you are so far away from reality. I see no trace of the spirit in you. The more there are Jews like you, the more they will continue breeding themselves out.

Everyone else is free is observe the exchange that took place from the beginning of this thread to see who here is being intellectually honest.

Anonymous said...

Oh, and JP to toss a hundred pennies and get 100 tails in a row would require ~1.26^30 trials, not 10^8 trials. Now, that means that if you tossed 100 pennies every second, it would take you >10^11 universal lifetimes to get 100 tails. Please correct me if my math is wrong.

jewish philosopher said...

"You accept things that aren't or can't be observed. Is that right?"

Absolutely. Therefore I believe in protons and electrons.

http://www3.nsta.org/main/news/stories/science_and_children.php?news_story_ID=51054

And George Washington.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington

And also God.

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0220.htm

Among other things.

Anonymous said...

JP, of those things - protons and electrons, George Washington, and god - which are you willing to hate other people for? Which ones will you use to permit and encourage the most heinous violence against anyone you call an enemy? Which ones do you address to beg for the destruction of human beings?

Just curious.

Side wager: JP will not answer the question directly but will try to evade. If he does this, can we once and for all realize that JP is a wuss?

-Larry-

DrJ said...

Shalmo you're shooting in all directions again.
Since Islam is such a peaceful religion, perhaps
you would find things more peaceful if you loved
in Iran rather than infidel Canada.

JP- I said observable, not observable by you.
protons and electrons CAN be observed. Ever
hear of a particle collider?

GWs existence is confirmed by multiple independent
sources.

God is not. If you use other religions you are
either talking about another god, or a parroting
of the Hebrew god.

DrJ said...

Anonymous--
Fine, take 25 tails in a row. The point is that extremely improbable, apparently miraculous events occur given enough opportunities.

Shalmo- "The more there are Jews like you, the more they will continue breeding themselves out."

This sort of comment demonstrated your type of thinking.

jewish philosopher said...

"Which ones will you use to permit and encourage the most heinous violence"

Several of my ancestors fought in the American Revolution under General Washington, so I guess I could say him.

"protons and electrons CAN be observed"

Wrong.

"Scientific explanations often make use of things we cannot see or feel, such as protons, electrons, and quarks."

http://www3.nsta.org/main/news/stories/science_and_children.php?news_story_ID=51054

"GWs existence is confirmed by multiple independent
sources."

God's existence is confirmed by every organelle in every living thing, along with the tradition of all Jews from Mount Sinai. Far more people heard God at Sinai than ever saw Washington.

Abe said...

...God's existence is confirmed by every organelle in every living thing, along with the tradition of all Jews from Mount Sinai. Far more people heard God at Sinai than ever saw Washington...

No scientific proof, just bible-thumping assertions. That old but noteworthy aphorism -- religious belief is like an A-hole, everybody has one, is demonstrated prodigiously here by Mr. Stein. Nothing more than inconsequential blather.
If you want evidence that brain rot is a consequence of over-exposure to Torah, you need look no further than the comments on his blog.

jewish philosopher said...

Biology is a science and I don't know of any scientific proof of George Washington either.

jewish philosopher said...

But Abe, don't let anything as trivial as facts and reason keep you away from whores and cocaine.

Anonymous said...

DrJ:

the chances of getting 25 tales in a row is 1 to 2^25, ~3*10^8. The chances of getting the simplest biomolecule would be about 20^100, which is ~10^130. Some things are just beyond the reach of chance. If we can accept such unlikely things to happen, why should you have a problem with the miracles in the Torah? Maybe the chances of all the molecules in the Yam Suf moving to opposite sides at the same time would be much greater than a biomolecule forming by chance.

Anonymous said...

And scientist tell us that electrons, photons, etc can do impossible, that is, supernatural, things all the time. They can be both waves and particles at the same time, they can penetrate impenetrable barriers, they can travel from one point to another without passing through the intervening space, they can be two places at once, they can read our minds. They make the miracles of in the Torah look easy.

Abe said...

J.S....But Abe, don't let anything as trivial as facts and reason keep you away from whores and cocaine...

If I want whores and cocaine, all I need to do is open tanach. Its a scandalously more satisfying than any internet porn or ghetto drugs. Lots of whore stories like Yehuda and Tamar. Or drug tales like Yechezkel's ma'aseh merkava vision when he was high on coke or god knows what else.

jewish philosopher said...

That's a great idea Abe. Get high on Torah.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Abe should look at this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7302609.stm

Studies show religious people are happier, more stable, etc.

bankman said...

i wonder what the probability of all of the water in egypt turning into (human? pig?) blood for a week or so and then turning back to water would be?

it probably cant be calculated.

pick and choose - evolution, big bang - etc is false because the probabilities are so small (its more likley that a tornado would rip through a junk yard and a fully assempled 747 would appear) - but dont apply the same thesis to the probability of miracles, or TMS, etc.

jewish philosopher said...

Once we know there is a God, the chances of miracles look pretty high.

After all, if you live alone on an island, it's unlikely that dinner will be ready on the table every night when you come home. If, however, you have a wife living with you, the chances are much better, provided you don't annoy her too much.

bankman said...

i actually cook dinner for my wife.

why dont you use probabilities to calculate how likely it may be that some all knowing spaghetti monster (u call him god, whatever) exists, that he wrote a book and gave it to some dude on a mountain and that we still have this book and it is magical.

jewish philosopher said...

Spaghetti, definitely not. Too messy. But I'd go for baked ziti.

Anyway, it's clear that there exists an Intelligent Designer.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/06/biomechanics.html

And probably He would tell us at some point who He is and what He wants.

bankman said...

i'll try this again.

what do you think the mathematical probability of a divine, all-knowing ghost of a being that controls every single thing in the world (nay! universe) and cares which shoe we put on first and wants us to wear strings hangin out of our shorts (etc) and chose a small (Strange) sect to follow these rules - just respond with a number please.

like 12^4532876028734 power or something.

thanks

jewish philosopher said...

Considering this
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/did-life-form-by-accident/
and this
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/proof-torah-true/
it's not a chance, it's a fact.

bankman said...

interesting.....

so you will use stastics to "prove" that evolution is virtually impossible, but you wont use that same science to "prove" god exists and that he/she gave a scroll to a small little sect of people in the middle of the desert?

i wonder why?

jewish philosopher said...

I don't get it.

Would you argue that there is no reason to believe that Barak Obama is President, because "what do you think the mathematical probability" of a black kid from Hawaii with a Muslim name and no father or money becoming leader of the free world in 2009 is? "like 12^4532876028734 power or something."

Once it happened, the chance is 100%.

bankman said...

"Once it happened, the chance is 100%."

why can the same not be said about evolution....study the science and it seems so obvious. even though the "chances" are small.

be consistent. dont pick and choose and you will be set free.

jewish philosopher said...

"why can the same not be said about evolution"

Because there is no evidence it happened.

bankman said...

and the "evidence" for god writing a book is.....(please dont link me to another thing you wrote like 3 years ago)

just explain the proof in simple man terms - i am a simple man.

please please please no links

"just evidence that it happened"

jewish philosopher said...

What's the evidence of a person writing a book? Maybe it just wrote itself?

bankman said...

i thought so

jewish philosopher said...

Evolution means "machines being created by natural processes". This never happens. God means "machines being created by an intelligent being" which we see happens all the time. Obviously, God makes more sense.

About God writing a book, once we know that He exists, it seems reasonable that He would at some point tell us who He is and what He wants, which He did at the revelation at Mount Sinai.

Moreover, the Torah is exactly the type of book we would expect God to write
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/06/gods-wisdom.html
and He revealed it at the only time and place in history where a large group of people were interesting in receiving it.

Anonymous said...

jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com is very informative. The article is very professionally written. I enjoy reading jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com every day.