rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 21,232
- 4,495
- 290
Sure and has absolutely nothing to do with my point about theocracies. No freedom to worship God as we see fit.
Didn't expect you have anything substantial
beyond the usual tautology.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Sure and has absolutely nothing to do with my point about theocracies. No freedom to worship God as we see fit.
I don't expect you to accept that a theocracy is a bad thing.I didn't expect you have anything substantial
beyond tautology.
That's kind of difficult when most of the technology the US employs is developed in Israel.I would be fine with Israel doing whatever they wanted if only the U.S. would withdraw its fealty
You mean when US President Lyndon B Johnson wanted Israel to be obliterated in June 1967.We should have separated IsNtReal from earth after the US Liberty incident and let them chase their Pals on camelback with bolt action rifles. The only good thing about the Covid and Co-black vural activity is the news isn't littered constantly with their bullshit
Well, I meant a somewhat different thing. Maybe it would be more correctly to call them not laws, but prescriptions (or something like this).Remember the example of stoning punishment for desecrating Shabbat?
That was used only twice in all Jewish history, when the Sanhedrin saw they'd have to apply capital punishment, they exited the Gazit lodge, in order to not be able to judge on these cases at all.
These weren't modern times, it's just common sense - for whom are the laws?
G-d said that we should "live in them", it's a basic principle when most of Israel are guilty of even idolatry, the obligation on persecution is absolved of humans into the hands of the heaven's court.
Rabbi Sherki specifically looks into Shabbat desecration in public, and the specific ruling that the Hebrew court can take to circumvent this issue if capital punishment was even possible, which the Jewish law itself prevent us today in the first place, regardless of what state form we may choose.
The sotah is far more complicated that it appears.Well, I meant a somewhat different thing. Maybe it would be more correctly to call them not laws, but prescriptions (or something like this).
I can offer an example. I re-read the Numbers now and there is a prescription there about what to do with a wife allegedly engaged in adultery. And I can agree that this prescription was good for ancient man, but in our time it seems somewhat outdated.
And I can't imagine that Israel may adopt it as a law even if it becomes a 'theocracy' state.
Well, this depends on what one feels this prescription to be. Someone may understand this literally and really think thay the bitter water can cause such effects. Another one may perceive this prescription as a deterrence from more severe punishment, without causing such effects on practice.The sotah is far more complicated that it appears.
In fact, if the husband has been flirting and accuses the wife of adultery, even if she did commit adultery, the waters will not affect her.
If the husband is faithful and the wife committed adultery, the wife and the lover both suffer the same fate at the same time.
If the husband has been flirting and the wife is innocent and the wife survives and doesn't get pregnant, everybody knows the husband was being at least somewhat unfaithful.
The dirt from the ground of the Bais HaMikdash is more spiritually sensitive than from elsewhere.Well, this depends on what one feels this prescription to be. Someone may understand this literally and really think thay the bitter water can cause such effects. Another one may perceive this prescription as a deterrence from more severe punishment, without causing such effects on practice.
So, as I can understand, you perceive this passage literally. Are there any accounts of this ordeal being actually happened with the consequences described as in the scripture?The dirt from the ground of the Bais HaMikdash is more spiritually sensitive than from elsewhere.
The ground will literally interact with the state of the person's soul.
The water itself was not actually bitter; the "bitterness" is the intolerance for inappropriate sexual activity.
So, as I can understand, you perceive this passage literally. Are there any accounts of this ordeal being actually happened with the consequences described as in the scripture?
Hm, and how they justified this cancelation? I think that abusement by the common people is not too justified reason to cancel a prescription which was given by God.The gemara states that many innocent couples suffering from infertility would do it in order to have children.
In fact, the ceremony was abused so much in this manner that the Sanhedrin stopped it.
People would stop praying for children and just pull this stunt.
There was little free will during the First Temple because every infraction caused an almost immediately.
The ceremony was meant to prevent flagrant public sexual behavior.Hm, and how they justified this cancelation? I think that abusement by the common people is not too justified reason to cancel a prescription which was given by God.
Well, I meant a somewhat different thing. Maybe it would be more correctly to call them not laws, but prescriptions (or something like this).Remember the example of stoning punishment for desecrating Shabbat?
That was used only twice in all Jewish history, when the Sanhedrin saw they'd have to apply capital punishment, they exited the Gazit lodge, in order to not be able to judge on these cases at all.
These weren't modern times, it's just common sense - for whom are the laws?
G-d said that we should "live in them", it's a basic principle when most of Israel are guilty of even idolatry, the obligation on persecution is absolved of humans into the hands of the heaven's court.
Rabbi Sherki specifically looks into Shabbat desecration in public, and the specific ruling that the Hebrew court can take to circumvent this issue if capital punishment was even possible, which the Jewish law itself prevent us today in the first place, regardless of what state form we may choose.
I can offer an example. I re-read the Numbers now and there is a prescription there about what to do with a wife allegedly engaged in adultery. And I can agree that this prescription was good for ancient man, but in our time it seems somewhat outdated.
And I can't imagine that Israel may adopt it as a law even if it becomes a 'theocracy' state.
I think Israel should boot all the arabs out of the West Bank and Gaza. Blame it on the Hassids, then separate church and state.Some people say Israel is a Jewish state, which gives some special privileges to ethnic Jewish people. Others say Israel is a theocratic republic. While some people say Israel has evolved from democracy to theocracy. And others have said Israel is a benevolent autocratic, religious dictatorship.
But whatever one chooses to believe about the form of Israel's government, it cannot be denied that Israel does not separate Church and state.
Given that less than a 1/3 of Israelis self identify as religious, should Israel separate church and state?
We don't separate church and state, why should anyone else?The point remains despite your beliefs about me.dingy dong have you got more "dog bar mitzvah" "rabbays",
to troll around the subject?
Dude get real.
There can be no consensus when there is a ruling religious sect and no separation of church and state.
Is that your final answer, Sybil?We don't separate church and state, why should anyone else?The point remains despite your beliefs about me.dingy dong have you got more "dog bar mitzvah" "rabbays",
to troll around the subject?
Dude get real.
There can be no consensus when there is a ruling religious sect and no separation of church and state.
Yes, and it's Melania.Is that your final answer, Sybil?We don't separate church and state, why should anyone else?The point remains despite your beliefs about me.dingy dong have you got more "dog bar mitzvah" "rabbays",
to troll around the subject?
Dude get real.
There can be no consensus when there is a ruling religious sect and no separation of church and state.