Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

Religion » Why or why not Islam? Why or why not Judaism? » 9/18/2018 11:55 am

119
Replies: 44

Go to post

Regarding Reddit: in addition to The Quotable Zionist Conspirator check out The Essential ShamanSTK. The latter is a Classical Theist's Theist. I don't really know these guys. I admired their posts and went into Boswell mode.

Gentiles for Moses started (less than a year ago) as a repository for bookmarks. My laptops commit suicide often. Why not back everything up publicly. Reddit has its moments. I couldn't post this on the religion forum yesterday because of its excessive length.

Religion » Why or why not Islam? Why or why not Judaism? » 9/17/2018 9:23 pm

119
Replies: 44

Go to post

Jason wrote:

I would be very interested to know why it is a false religion.

A Noachide's Response To Chr*stianity is one place to start. The burden of proof is on Islam, Christianity, Mormonism, Sikhism, etc. to demonstrate they "fulfill" or replace or update the Torah. In the case of Christianity we aren't even dealing with compatible paradigms. This is often overlooked.

I've been a Noachide about 3 years, a Theist for less than 10. Etzelnik has forgotten more about Judaism than I'll ever know. I want to thank him for writing, "Our job is not merely to transcend this world, it is to transform it from mundane matter to a chariot of HaShem's Glory." This is mantra-tier.

Johannes wrote:

Viewing any prophecy as having been fulfilled or not depends on your interpretation thereof. The point is: do you allow God any way to correct your interpretation of the TaNaKH? 

Your conception of "absolute epistemic insulation" presupposes unsupportable views on the Oral Torah and who is given the authority to interpret Torah Law. From the same thread cited: 
 

Johannes wrote:

On the one hand, all Christians share with Karaites the view that the traditions that later formed the "Oral Torah" were developed and passed on by Pharisees and scribes starting from around 150 bC without the involvement of divine inspiration. This is a logical conclusion from the TaNaKH, history and the nature of the Mishna text itself. For Christians, also, it was positively taught by Jesus.

Johannes wrote:

BTW, the reason why in the Old Covenant there was no divinely revealed Oral Torah while in the New Covenant there is a divinely revealed Apostolic Tradition and a divinely assisted Church Magisterium i

Religion » Why or why not Islam? Why or why not Judaism? » 9/17/2018 1:56 am

119
Replies: 44

Go to post

It's a little-known fact that there are chapters in Isaiah after 53 (a verse by verse exposition). The haftarah for Parshah Ki Tavo is Isaiah 60. It describes the glorious Light, Beauty, and Truth that will be revealed in the Messianic Era. This is not currently perceivable: 

The haftarah opens with Isaiah telling Jerusalem to arise and shine (literally, and not the literally where we mean figuratively, the literally where we mean literally), for the Glory of God will shine upon her. Verses 2 and 3 announce that our light will come at the same time as the non-Jewish nations’ light disappears, leading them and their kings to follow us and our light. …

It also explains why the light of Jacob cannot shine while Esau’s does—these are not alternate sources of light, they are competing ones. As long as Esau’s worldview and ideology are still around and attractive, there is little chance that people will find their way to Jacob’s, and thus little chance that our worldview will shine forth.

In the future, we are being promised, those other nations’ light, the attractiveness of the erroneous parts of their ideologies, will wane, and the Truth (remember that in our prayers, we speak of God giving truth to Jacob) will provide spiritual and physical light to the world, as it did at Sinai and the entire time in the desert. … Isaiah also predicts that the nations will actively participate in recognizing the truth of God’s rule. (The Light of the Future and Joining with the Non-Jews

Isaiah's vision has been partially, but not completely, fulfilled. It will not be realized until the days of the real messiah when the entire world will know there is one G-d.

Tha

Religion » Why or why not Islam? Why or why not Judaism? » 9/16/2018 1:16 am

119
Replies: 44

Go to post

A series of answers to the question Is Beauty Truth?

It is concerning the object of beauty that wise Solomon says, "Charm is false and beauty is vain." But in the experiencing of beauty we open a window upon the infinite that is synonymous with the experience of truth. Throw out the chaff of the static object and focus upon the inner experience, seeking a beauty that will last forever, and you will find true beauty—and beautiful truth.

And Ugliness? Ugliness is when the mind takes one look and gives up.  Tzvi Freeman

Sometimes truth is ugly.

***
I don't have a theory regarding their connection. Some of the most beautiful things in existence were inspired by Christianity: Beethoven's Missa Solemnis, Faure's Requiem, Haydn's Seven Last Words of Christ, Mahler's Resurrection Symphony, everything by Bach & Bruckner. Eastern religions have a shattering beauty of their own. If this were evidence on their behalf we'd need to quantify beauty somehow and seek the most beautiful.

Religion » Why or why not Islam? Why or why not Judaism? » 9/15/2018 11:07 pm

119
Replies: 44

Go to post

That essay is almost chutzpah-free compared to others:  

With the recent anti-sodomy ruling, a ruling on "gay marriage" pending, and even more blatantly propagandistic shows for our "entertainment" next television season, the homosexual juggernaut seems unstoppable.  Indeed, the only thing more depressing is the stuttering, unsure responses of the homosexual movement's opponents.  Over and over again spokesmen invoke populism (the right of the people to decide what they want to consider moral and immoral), tradition, family, and the consequences to society . . . everything but the one and only response to the issue:  homosexual activity is forbidden (and decreed a capital offense by) HaShem.

But what else was to be expected?  The vast majority of spokesmen for "family values" cannot tell the world about HaShem because they have never heard of Him.  And they cannot invoke their own "gxd" because American law does not now, and never has recognized, any deity as its basis except perhaps for Thomas Jefferson's "nature's gxd."  And "nature's gxd" is not HaShem.

American law cannot enforce the Will of HaShem because it does not recognize Him and never has.  One may piously invoke the Pilgrim Fathers from sunup to sundown but the fact is that the people who actually created our government some one hundred sixty years later were a different breed than their ancestors.  Relativistic "conservatism," with its false doctrine of a different truth for all peoples, cannot condemn these men for their irreverence because it demands that they be treated almost as chr*stian apostles.  No matter how much these "conservative" people attack the liberals' "misuse of" separation of church and state, they cannot attack the principal itself, since it was bequeathed to us by our sainted founders.  Yet it is the principal itself, with its enlightenment and chr*stian ancestry, that makes it impossible for the Unite

Religion » Why or why not Islam? Why or why not Judaism? » 9/14/2018 1:26 pm

119
Replies: 44

Go to post

Arguably the most distinct and original voice in the Noahide community belongs to the Redneck Rastafarian. He has a quasi-prophetic* status in some circles: 

Admittedly, "The Redneck Rastafarian" may seem at first glance to be an unusual title for a Noachide web site. However, in addition to the standard Noachide message this web site wishes to stress three principals: Theonomic positvism, Theocratic Judaism/"Palaeozionism," and "Redneck Rastafarianism." Actually, the first two should be implicit in any Noachide philosophy. The latter, however, is admittedly an idiosyncratic position of this web site maintainer. It arises, however, out of not only careful thought but also personal experience. I beg the reader’s indulgence while I now attempt to define and explain the philosophy which provides the title of this web site.

It must first of all be understood that in choosing this designation I do not mean to endorse the actual "rastafarian" religion, which worships a deceased emperor of Ethiopia. No, this site endorses only the most orthodox Torah Noachism. Why then that particular designation? Because the rastafarian religion of Jamaican Blacks developed in response to a deep and legitimate need of that ethnic group. It is my thesis that the poor Anglo-Saxon Fundamentalist Protestants of the rural American heartland have that same need, and that Nochut can legitimately fill this need (in addition to being the objective responsibility of all non-Jewish humanity). In fact, in the absence of having Nochut presented to them, some members of this community are turning to other things to fill the void—things that are at best totally vain and at worst, downright evil and dangerous. ... (this essay was written 15 years before the Alt-Right was a thing)

***

AKA the Zionist Conspirator. He grew u

Religion » Why or why not Islam? Why or why not Judaism? » 9/14/2018 2:00 am

119
Replies: 44

Go to post

Jeremy Taylor wrote:

the point of religion is to transform us entirely

If this is your standard, then ALL religions fail. There is no such thing as complete transformation in this life, no matter which path you follow. You will continue to sin until you die: 100% guaranteed. You will wrestle with doubts, hatred, lust, and every other nasty mortal weakness. Any path that promises total transformation is lying. You’re holding Noahide observance up to a false standard that no religion can satisfy.

Jeremy Taylor wrote:

  to unite us with God through the divine spark within us

This is exactly the position I’m advocating. Humans channel G-dliness into this world by following G-d’s commandments. A Noahide can attain the same spiritual and moral level as a High Priest (Talmud, Bava Kamma 38a). Observant Noahides earn a place in the World to Come. It doesn’t get any more spiritual, mystical, unifying or transformational than that.

Jeremy Taylor wrote:

  [The point of religion] is to be God-like , or, in Shakespeare's terms, to wipe away mortality.

Regarding Imitatio Dei, testify! Regarding the wiping away of mortality, this won’t happen until you die and any system that promises anything to the contrary is lying.

Jeremy Taylor wrote:

I have very little interest in a path that doesn't offer not just community, ritual, and worship, but a veritable mystical path, as in Orthodox Heyschasm and the Sufis and Shia Batin of Islam, as well as the Eastern religions.  

Note well: your subjective interests bespeak nothing of objective truth. This is a statement about you. I agree with this statement. You aren’t interested. Interesting is not the criterion. Truth is the criterion. The games of Mikhail Tal are more interesting to me than anything in philosophy. I reluctantly concede they’re not as important as questions of Theism and free will. Thi

Religion » Why or why not Islam? Why or why not Judaism? » 9/13/2018 1:18 pm

119
Replies: 44

Go to post

The only purpose of a religion is to be objectively true. There's no a priori standards other than this. The fact that most incorporate ritual and communal worship doesn't entail that G-d desires this. That most of us can't conceive of "religion" in any other terms doesn't mean we're right. Think of Aaron's sons pursuit of extra credit.

"It's not a religion at all, nor does it require regular study."

B'nai Noah - The Religion, The Danger

This forum covers most of the options/details better than I can. I'm definitely celebrating the non-religious nature of this "religion," though I understand it's counter-intuitive and difficult for others. I think Synagogues prefer that you call first, but generally don't have problems with Noahide attendance. I honestly don't know. (On the other hand, intermarriage is called the second Holocaust and they want to prevent anything that might lead to it.)

I never dig deeper into Kabbalah than Rabbi Infinity. (Grab a towel. This might melt your face. A 3 minute cartoon explains the necessity of Divine hiddeness in terms of otherness.) If you can't read Hebrew it's not really possible to study Kabbalah. Like many things, it's prohibited except when it isn't. That said, some Rabbis don't exactly keep it under wraps.

For spititual-religious aspects, you might be more interested in this Noahide guide book. [url=

Religion » Why or why not Islam? Why or why not Judaism? » 9/13/2018 4:10 am

119
Replies: 44

Go to post

Maybe Noahides need edgier PR: We're The Alternative Alternative Right! or Reactionaries From The Start! or Secular Theocrats. It's not Judaism-Lite; it's the minimum standard that preceded the Revelation at Sinai. G-d gave homework to only some of the class. Yes, you've just discovered a "religion" that prohibits mandatory observances and has no obligatory Bible study or prayer. Jackpot! And it gets better. You can have more than one wife. (Do any chicks hang out here? PM me.)  

Levity aside, there's a tremendous sense of urgency. Christianity is on life-support and people are turning to crazy stuff.

Guide for the Noahide is recommended.

Yom Kippur starts Tuesday. What's the deal with the Book of Jonah? If you thought the fish was the weird part you're not even close.

Religion » Why or why not Islam? Why or why not Judaism? » 9/04/2018 4:21 am

119
Replies: 44

Go to post

DanielCC wrote:

First of all the contents of those stories and the notion of a special revelation itself, especially one directed at a specific tribal group, appears incompatible with the nature of God.

What's your source on G-d's nature? The Cosmo & Neo-Platonic arguments take us to a necessary unity that causes everything other than itself. What do they tell us about the nature of the singularity? It exists and nothing forced it to cause the subsequent layers of reality, so we ascribe something not unlike free will. It's benevolent in the sense that it can't benefit from creation. It doesn't need anything. Can natural theology take us deeper than this? Meh. 

Why wouldn't G-d reveal Himself via one particular tribe over a period of time that culminates in world-wide recognition? There's nothing in natural theology that precludes this.

DanielCC wrote:

A lot of the moral claims are unjustified (cf the food taboos) and some the pronouncements verge on blasphemy - example 'I am a jealous God'.

What makes you think the food taboos are moral claims? Perhaps some are intended to instill a perpetual state of mindfulness about the necessary singularity. That's where all food comes from and it's easy to forget. "Jealous G-d" = "Idolatry is dumb and bad for you. Don't do it!"

DanielCC wrote:

As an additional factor these texts show an apparent dirth of material on the soul and the afterlife. I doubt that ancient Judaism was completely materialistic but it does appear to lack a set out transcendent eschatology.

How do you know you're going to survive your death? Supposing you are, must the details be posted at a crossroads? The afterlife in Judaism is esoteric but it's one of the 13 principles.  (I, too, wish there were more details, but there's no a priori standard we can derive from natural theology that requires it.) 
 
 
[qu

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum