Should Israel separate Church and State?

[rylah]

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.

 

[ding]

I didn't expect you have anything substantial
beyond tautology.

I don't expect you to accept that a theocracy is a bad thing.

 

[Indeependent]

I would be fine with Israel doing whatever they wanted if only the U.S. would withdraw its fealty

That's kind of difficult when most of the technology the US employs is developed in Israel.

 

[Indeependent]

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

You mean when US President Lyndon B Johnson wanted Israel to be obliterated in June 1967.

 

[ESay]

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.

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 And I can agree that this prescription was good for ancient man, but in our time it seems somewhat outdated.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.

 

[Indeependent]

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.

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.

 

[ESay]

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.

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.

 

[Indeependent]

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 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.

 

[ESay]

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?

 

[Indeependent]

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 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.

 

[ESay]

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.

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.

 

[Indeependent]

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 ceremony was meant to prevent flagrant public sexual behavior.
After all, the wife had to overtly give her husband a reason to be suspicious enough to want his wife to die.

If you study Tanach you will find the great people of each generation having a relationship with, and reliance, on God to grant them a child.
God did not intend a ceremony to become a farcical magic trick to have children.

 

[rylah]

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.

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.

No, not prescriptions, laws.

Each legal system has its own set of principles of interpretation.
There're basically three types of laws, and what is called "takanah",
as in order that can be added unto laws by the leadership, while also
vesting authority in "takanat kahal", i.e. popular order (set by representative branch).

For example Takanat 'Ezra forbade Torah study and prayer for men who did not go through Mikveh immersion after intercourse. But the order was abandoned because people couldn't uphold it.

Torah capital punishments were meant more as an indication of the severity of the sin,
and the same Torah gave the tools to make them virtually almost impossible,
to the point that a court sentencing capital punishment once in 70 years,
was defined as a cruel court.

It's not trickery, nor black and white, the law wasn't given to angels,
rather to humans, and wired for them - to apply practically in real life.

 

[Taz]

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?

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.

 

[Taz]

dingy dong have you got more "dog bar mitzvah" "rabbays",
to troll around the subject?

Dude get real.

The point remains despite your beliefs about me.

There can be no consensus when there is a ruling religious sect and no separation of church and state.

We don't separate church and state, why should anyone else?

 

[ding]

dingy dong have you got more "dog bar mitzvah" "rabbays",
to troll around the subject?

Dude get real.

The point remains despite your beliefs about me.

There can be no consensus when there is a ruling religious sect and no separation of church and state.

We don't separate church and state, why should anyone else?

Is that your final answer, Sybil?

 

[Taz]

dingy dong have you got more "dog bar mitzvah" "rabbays",
to troll around the subject?

Dude get real.

The point remains despite your beliefs about me.

There can be no consensus when there is a ruling religious sect and no separation of church and state.

We don't separate church and state, why should anyone else?

Is that your final answer, Sybil?

Yes, and it's Melania.