Abrahamic religions vs. Secularism

[Levite]

But in those areas where hyper-orthodox Jews gather, like New York City, life can be utter hell for anyone outside of that faith that lives in their area.

Actually, New York isn't that bad. Charedi (ultra-Orthodox Jews) have their neighborhoods, Modern Orthodox and non-Orthodox Jews have theirs, and even when there's some mixing, there isn't an excessive amount of friction. The majority of the problems between charedim in NYC and non-Jews have come less as a result of religion or culture and more as a result of poverty exacerbating tensions.

Where things actually are rather bad between charedim and Modern Orthodox or non-Orthodox Jews and non-Jews is Israel. But that's what happens when you let fundamentalists get power, privileges, and financial support in a society. It makes them feel like they can impose their worldview or desires on others. If they got their political power and their welfare benefits taken away and had to work for a living and serve in the army like everyone else, they wouldn't have the time and energy to be oppressive to others.

 

[Levite]

Really? Care to show the proof that it never happens ever? Or am I just supposed to take your word for it, since apparently you speak for all Jews?

It is prohibited by Jewish law to actively proselytize. In fact, we are technically supposed to discourage those who come to us seeking conversion, and only accept them if they press with determination.

The last time we experimented with active proselytization was near the end of the Second Temple era, before the beginning of the Common Era, over 2000 years ago. It was a failure, hence Jewish law clarifying that it is forbidden altogether.

This is actually very common knowledge, and pretty basic Judaism. Since you seem to be inclined to disbelieve Flankerl, despite the fact that she is quite correct, perhaps you might take my word for it, since I am a rabbi with multiple degrees in Jewish Studies.

 

[Nietzsche]

It is prohibited by Jewish law to actively proselytize. In fact, we are technically supposed to discourage those who come to us seeking conversion, and only accept them if they press with determination.

The last time we experimented with active proselytization was near the end of the Second Temple era, before the beginning of the Common Era, over 2000 years ago. It was a failure, hence Jewish law clarifying that it is forbidden altogether.

This is actually very common knowledge, and pretty basic Judaism. Since you seem to be inclined to disbelieve Flankerl, despite the fact that she is quite correct, perhaps you might take my word for it, since I am a rabbi with multiple degrees in Jewish Studies.

This is a bit off topic but you might know;

My knowledge of European history tends to end where Central-Asian Turkdom begins. Didn't the Khazars proselytize? I swear I remember them doing so. I might very well be wrong, but it's going to bug me until I find out.

 

[Thana]

It is prohibited by Jewish law to actively proselytize. In fact, we are technically supposed to discourage those who come to us seeking conversion, and only accept them if they press with determination.

The last time we experimented with active proselytization was near the end of the Second Temple era, before the beginning of the Common Era, over 2000 years ago. It was a failure, hence Jewish law clarifying that it is forbidden altogether.

This is actually very common knowledge, and pretty basic Judaism. Since you seem to be inclined to disbelieve Flankerl, despite the fact that she is quite correct, perhaps you might take my word for it, since I am a rabbi with multiple degrees in Jewish Studies.

Everyone knows that it's not common practice for Jews to proselytise, But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Flank implied it never happens, In fact those are her exact words.

 

[gsa]

I think it works like this. Islam complains about every one and everything including each other, secularism and Christianity complain about each other but at least here and now secularism is the only one hijacking the mechanisms of state to enforce their complaints on a majority Christian nation. However forget all of that for a second.

I would think the reason that Christianity and Islam complain more about secularism than other groups is because theism is secularisms natural opponent for the public square and since Islam and Christianity account for 1 out of approx. 2 people they will of course make up the majority of those who complain about secularism.

Secularism is not the religion of the United States, it is the law of the United States. A very fundamental law rooted in the Bill of Rights. The country could be 100% Christian and it wouldn't make any difference at all.

As it stands, using the restrictive definition employed by most Baptists I'd guess that Christianity is not the majority religion here anyway. The truth is that nonreligious, secular people should be making even more active attempts to socially de-Christianize this country.

 

[icehorse]

I think we can learn a lot from Pew Researches massive ~40,000 participants, across ~38 countries poll of Muslims. I don't think it's limited to the Wahhabis and you see similar results across many cultures.

 

[Nietzsche]

Everyone knows that it's not common practice for Jews to proselytise, But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Flank implied it never happens, In fact those are her exact words.

Quit being such a hair-splitter. It happens so seldom that it's fair to say "never".

 

[Thana]

Quit being such a hair-splitter. It happens so seldom that it's fair to say "never".

You're just speculating, How would you know how often it happens? And it's frequency is not the point.

The point is, Judaism isn't any better or worse than it's counterparts and I resent the implication that it is.

 

[LuisDantas]

When it comes to proselitism, Judaims is remarkably better than Christianity and Islam. Attempting to deny that is rather pointless really.

 

[Levite]

This is a bit off topic but you might know;

My knowledge of European history tends to end where Central-Asian Turkdom begins. Didn't the Khazars proselytize? I swear I remember them doing so. I might very well be wrong, but it's going to bug me until I find out.

Well, not all Khazars were Jewish. When the king converted, so did a number of his courtiers and people, but he never required conversion, and not only tolerated Christianity and Islam, but tolerated the persistence of the indigenous polytheistic religion of the region as well. In fact, the kingdom of Khazariya was one of the few places in pre-Modern history that Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and pagan religion lived together in comparative peace.

It is not impossible that Christian or Muslim Khazars proselytized. But from the evidence that we have-- as far as I am aware-- Jewish Khazars did not actively proselytize.

 

[Nietzsche]

You're just speculating, How would you know how often it happens? And it's frequency is not the point.

Because I can read Hebrew and am versed in the history of the Levant. There are so many passages in both the Torah, Talmud & Kabballah specifically stating not to go around trying to convert people that we would be here for days if I were to list them all.

The point is, Judaism isn't any better or worse than it's counterparts and I resent the implication that it is.

When did I ever say it was?

Well, not all Khazars were Jewish. When the king converted, so did a number of his courtiers and people, but he never required conversion, and not only tolerated Christianity and Islam, but tolerated the persistence of the indigenous polytheistic religion of the region as well. In fact, the kingdom of Khazariya was one of the few places in pre-Modern history that Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and pagan religion lived together in comparative peace.

It is not impossible that Christian or Muslim Khazars proselytized. But from the evidence that we have-- as far as I am aware-- Jewish Khazars did not actively proselytize.

Aha, danke schoen.

I've read a handful of papers on the Khazars(mostly in regards to their relations with Muscovy, Kiew & the Byzantines and later House of Osman) that suggested they attempted to proselytize various peoples, though it was rather unspecific on if the people doing the converting were Jews, Muslims, Christians or Tengrists.

 

[Levite]

Everyone knows that it's not common practice for Jews to proselytise, But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Flank implied it never happens, In fact those are her exact words.

Since it is prohibited, it would be, I think, difficult to find examples of Jews actively proselytizing, since they would be breaking Jewish law in an attempt to persuade others to follow Jewish law, which seems...irrational at best.

Granted, it's a big world. As I am sure Flankerl would agree, nobody could guarantee that some Jewish nutball out there isn't actively proselytizing despite the prohibition.

But, as has been pointed out, when something is prohibited, and if done at all, is done so rarely as to be unknown to Jewish scholarship and tradition, then it seems to be splitting hairs to criticize someone using the word "never" to describe it. If something does not happen 99.9% of the time, while it may be scientifically incorrect to say it never happens, such a usage would be entirely within the realm of common speech.

The point is, Judaism isn't any better or worse than it's counterparts and I resent the implication that it is.

I am not sure what this has to do with "better or worse." We don't actively proselytize. That doesn't make us better or worse than our fellow Western religions, it just makes us different. That is the objective case.

I admit, I personally find active proselytizing annoying and intrusive, so I am glad we don't do it. But I know plenty of Christians and Muslims who don't do it for just the same reasons, regardless of the fact that it may be permissible to them.

 

[Thana]

Because I can read Hebrew and am versed in the history of the Levant. There are so many passages in both the Torah, Talmud & Kabballah specifically stating not to go around trying to convert people that we would be here for days if I were to list them all.

That doesn't have much to do with knowing whether or not they do it. Muslim law prohibits drinking alcohol but you know that there are plenty who do.

When did I ever say it was?

You randomly picked my post whilst I was debating with someone else so I wanted to clarify my position to you.

 

[Nietzsche]

That doesn't have much to do with knowing whether or not they do it. Muslim law prohibits drinking alcohol but you know that there are plenty who do.

Think of it like this. Why is Judaism to tiny? If they proselytized they'd likely have, you know, more than a pittance of members. You can't really compare this to drinking. You can drink in secret. Trying to convert others is kinda' noticeable.

 

[Thana]

Since it is prohibited, it would be, I think, difficult to find examples of Jews actively proselytizing, since they would be breaking Jewish law in an attempt to persuade others to follow Jewish law, which seems...irrational at best.

Granted, it's a big world. As I am sure Flankerl would agree, nobody could guarantee that some Jewish nutball out there isn't actively proselytizing despite the prohibition.

But, as has been pointed out, when something is prohibited, and if done at all, is done so rarely as to be unknown to Jewish scholarship and tradition, then it seems to be splitting hairs to criticize someone using the word "never" to describe it. If something does not happen 99.9% of the time, while it may be scientifically incorrect to say it never happens, such a usage would be entirely within the realm of common speech.

There are many ways to proselytize, It doesn't require a speaker phone and a public square. Reasonably, I imagine it happens more often than one would think. I understand that it's not common practice, though it was done actively in the past. But like I said before, that isn't my point.

I am not sure what this has to do with "better or worse." We don't actively proselytize. That doesn't make us better or worse than our fellow Western religions, it just makes us different. That is the objective case.

Sure, I'm glad you think that.

 

[Thana]

Think of it like this. Why is Judaism to tiny? If they proselytized they'd likely have, you know, more than a pittance of members. You can't really compare this to drinking. You can drink in secret. Trying to convert others is kinda' noticeable.

Erm, many reasons. I imagine a large factor would be that they were nearly wiped out less than a few hundred years ago.
I don't know what you imagine when you think of proselytising, But I generally think of two people having a conversation where one advocates their religion. That isn't what I would call noticeable.

 

[Nietzsche]

Erm, many reasons. I imagine a large factor would be that they were nearly wiped out less than a few hundred years ago.
I don't know what you imagine when you think of proselytising, But I generally think of two people having a conversation where one advocates their religion. That isn't what I would call noticeable.

When you say proselytize I generally think of a concerted effort by non-negligible groups of people.

 

[Levite]

Erm, many reasons. I imagine a large factor would be that they were nearly wiped out less than a few hundred years ago.
I don't know what you imagine when you think of proselytising, But I generally think of two people having a conversation where one advocates their religion. That isn't what I would call noticeable.

I doubt that in conversation many Jews would "advocate" Judaism in the sense of "It's awesome-- you should try it!"

In part, this comes from the prohibition on active proselytization having been so deeply incorporated in our cultural worldview that doing things like that just doesn't occur to most of us: we don't think like that.

But in part, it's not only the prohibition, it's the theology. Judaism is not exclusivist: we see Judaism as the only viable religion for Jews, not for everyone. We don't believe you have to be Jewish for God to approve of you or to be a good person; and we have no concept of salvation that might require Judaism. We don't need to proselytize because non-Jews have perfectly good religions of their own.

 

[Thana]

I doubt that in conversation many Jews would "advocate" Judaism in the sense of "It's awesome-- you should try it!"

In part, this comes from the prohibition on active proselytization having been so deeply incorporated in our cultural worldview that doing things like that just doesn't occur to most of us: we don't think like that.

But in part, it's not only the prohibition, it's the theology. Judaism is not exclusivist: we see Judaism as the only viable religion for Jews, not for everyone. We don't believe you have to be Jewish for God to approve of you or to be a good person; and we have no concept of salvation that might require Judaism. We don't need to proselytize because non-Jews have perfectly good religions of their own.

I don't see why they wouldn't, But then I don't have a Jewish cultural perspective. I'm not sure whether that gives me more or less objectivity though.

Either way, No need to push so hard. I've already said that I understand it's not common practice.

 

[Cephus]

Actually, New York isn't that bad. Charedi (ultra-Orthodox Jews) have their neighborhoods, Modern Orthodox and non-Orthodox Jews have theirs, and even when there's some mixing, there isn't an excessive amount of friction. The majority of the problems between charedim in NYC and non-Jews have come less as a result of religion or culture and more as a result of poverty exacerbating tensions.

Where things actually are rather bad between charedim and Modern Orthodox or non-Orthodox Jews and non-Jews is Israel. But that's what happens when you let fundamentalists get power, privileges, and financial support in a society. It makes them feel like they can impose their worldview or desires on others. If they got their political power and their welfare benefits taken away and had to work for a living and serve in the army like everyone else, they wouldn't have the time and energy to be oppressive to others.

Oh, I don't know, there are some people like Taj Patterson who might beg to differ.