-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is the Tanakh for everyone?
- Thread starter Sha'irullah
- Start date
- Status
Tumah
Veteran Member
The Torah is not meant to be a light unto the nation. The people are.
The Torah is an inheritance for Israel (Deut. 33:4). The people (should be) a light for the nations.
Avi1001
reform Jew humanist liberal feminist entrepreneur
Lets take this to the level of common sense....if Torah contains fundamental lessons of ethics and morality, wouldn't we want to share ?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Since Torah is the basis for the statement and is mandated conduct for us, then I would suggest that all of the above may apply. In this case, I don't believe we can separate the two. If people want to know what's the basis of our morality, how could we not open up Torah and show them, and then also hope they may chose to follow its path as well, even if they're not bound by it?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Tumah
Veteran Member
Because we are not mandated to explain why we are such bright lights (ie. by opening up the Torah and showing why), we are mandated to be a light. On the other hand, we are also required to treat the Torah as our personal inheritance, not as a possession for anyone to take.
Being a light by contradicting what is written in the Torah, is not called being a light. It's called doing whatever we want.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Which I guess would be fine and dandy if I believed all of Torah (broad use of the term) was divinely inspired and inerrant.
To me, if you have a good thing going for you, maybe it's best to show it. If we want morality, it's probably best to state and display the source of morality so that others may want to also go in that direction. IOW, to me, morality trumps a dubious command.
Do I pick and choose which parts of Torah to follow? Yes. Why? Because I don't deify it, nor do I find it a substitute for reason. But, to me, it's still important, and there's no doubt that it has very much molded us in what I believe to be a mostly positive direction. Therefore, I don't deviate lightly from what is written.
Avi1001
reform Jew humanist liberal feminist entrepreneur
I do believe Torah was divinely inspired, but my view of divine inspiration is by a non-anthropomorphic G-d. This G-d would never tell me not to share his book with the world or not to fight for my country because I should be reading the book.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I have no clue if Torah is divinely inspired or not, nor can I figure out how anyone could know the answer with any certainty of being correct. As you well know, I'm the master of "I don't know"-- and my avatar is a pure indication that "ignorance is bliss".
What I do know is that Torah has very much helped us to become the people we are-- and that ain't too bad. However, too much of any one thing probably isn't the best way to go. One can use Torah for enlightenment or for a set of blinders, imo, and I don't prefer the latter.
Tumah
Veteran Member
Then technically, there is no need to be a light unto the nations either. In which case there is also no need to share the Torah!
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I honestly don't see how you concluded that from what I wrote? Let me give you an example.
Right to my left is my trusty little Oxford Desk Dictionary, which I frequently have to use since I don't have spell-check. Now, do I believe it must be divinely inspired and inerrant for me to use it? Do I have to believe it's the "word of God", or whatever words one wants to use? Can't I just use it because it seems to work at least most of the time?
Therefore, why can't we use Torah in the same way and let others do as well?
Tumah
Veteran Member
What I was saying is (mostly in jest), is that since you don't believe that the Torah is divine, then neither is the imperative to be a light unto the nations. If I don't have to be a light unto the nations, then by extension, I don't have to - according to your original logic ("If we, according to Torah, are to "be a light unto the nations", how could we not share?") - need to share it either.
Yes, I understand that still according to your explanation you can if you like.
Avi1001
reform Jew humanist liberal feminist entrepreneur
Now that you mention it, I think I saw a picture of Noah Webster standing next to Moses in Cecil B. DeMille's, Ten Commandments. He had a rock and chisel
Last edited:
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
But I think we actually have been "a light unto the nations" because it is our scriptures they chose to mostly copy even though it's true they sometimes distort it. Christianity and Islam have added a lot of morality to humanity even though we may not always want to recognize that. We have to remember not to just focus on our differences while ignoring our similarities and accomplishments.
Religion has often been used as a set of walls and sometimes even as weapons, but I'd much rather see it used as bridges to help and understand each other. Yes, we will and should have our differences, but seeing others as the "they" really doesn't help anyone. I don't have a problem with joint services or prayer meetings for that reason.
Anyhow, thanks for the explanation above as I wasn't too sure how to take it.
shalom
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Now that you mention it, I think I saw a picture of Noah Webster standing next to Moses in Cecil B. DeMille's, Ten Commandments. He had a rock and chisel
Close, but you didn't make the proper connection-- what's Webster's first name? Whaddya think he did with all his time after the animals departed and he cleaned the ark-- and cleaned it-- and cleaned it...?
FWIH, I agree.
TheKnight
Guardian of Life
RabbiO
הרב יונה בן זכריה
What does it mean to you?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I think we already have been. After all, both Christianity and Islam emanated from Judaism, and even though we don't share some of their beliefs, nevertheless they have added a great deal of morality to much of the world.
Levite
Higher and Higher
I think we have a long, long way to go.
Right now, we can't even establish tolerance and respectful differences of opinions between ourselves, let alone with others. The one Jewish state in the world is as riddled with corruption, discrimination, and other social problems as any other Western nation. To say nothing of the drain on the state of dead-weight charedi population, who take state welfare and sit in the beis midrash instead of getting jobs and serving in the army, in order to contribute to the economy and productivity of the nation.
Both religiously and socially, the far left is a mess of appalling ignorance of Jewish text and tradition, apathy about nearly every kind of Jewish practice and observance, and indifference to the preservation of Jewish identity; the far right is a mess of oppressive sexism, homophobia, tolerance of corruption and perversion amongst authority figures, and rigid quashing of flexible thought. The middle, such as it is, doesn't appear able to sort its a** from its elbows without tripping twice over its own feet.
We're not even being a light unto ourselves right now, let alone unto anyone else.
We have a long way to go before we can honestly hold ourselves up as a model of thoughtful faithfulness, self-integrity in tradition, pluralism and tolerance, respectful discourse, social justice, and compassion for others. Where we all follow the ethical mitzvot taught to us in the Torah, and work toward following our various interpretations of the ritual mitzvot, so that we can be said to be a people who-- based on our behavior toward one another and to non-Jews also-- truly understand what it means for human beings to be created in the image of God.
- Status