Rabbi Riskin (who's originally from the US and therefore, I'm sure, understands Hagee perfectly well), is known in Israel for his liberal and sometimes controversial views.
-
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!
Voices of hope in the RF wilderness of religious chaos.
- Thread starter pearl
- Start date
Quick question; is it not possible for a rabbi to be liberal and yet remain within Jewish orthodoxy?
Certainly possible, as I stated:
However, they aren't mainstream orthodox. The article makes it sound as though all the big orthodox rabbis got together and decided to crown Jesus chief rabbi over all of the Jews, which is not at all the case because: a. these rabbis may be orthodox, but they aren't mainstream (=their views aren't that popular by orthodox Jews). b. this is a pretty small group. c. nothing of the sort was ever actually stated in this letter.I recognize like three names on the list. Those three rabbis are orthodox but liberal, as far as I'm aware. I noticed they also included at least three women on a list titled "Rabbis"...
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
I totally agree. In this day and age, even baby steps are "a giant leap for mankind."
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
I suppose that is rather better than killing them, as they have done throughout history.
though neither attitude shows much glory to anyone.
I'm sure you do agree with the statement, except that's not what it says in the letter...
This would obviously be a misreading of the statement and I don't think the purpose of the statement. The headline could be deliberately misleading or typical eye catching to perk the interest to read the column. I think it was the latter.
I asked about the orthodoxy question because of the same issues within the Church; a more liberal priest or theologian is often depicted a heretic though the Church finds them within Catholic orthodoxy.
From the article I did not find praise for Jesus, but acknowledgment that Jesus is speaking completely within the confines of the arguments of the Judaism of His time.
And if so, did Jesus intend a new religion apart from Judaism or a renewal of his own?
I don't think they're heretics, I don't think most Orthodox Jews would see this as heresy, just perhaps a little too liberal for most Orthodox tastes. There's a big disagreement today in Israel whether or not Israelis should accept monetary aid from Christian organizations.
Guess we'll never know, given how the apostles twisted him and his teachings up.
a. That is praise for Jesus. b. The article isn't really worth anything, considering that the letter wasn't saying that; the author of the article has a clear pro-Jesus bias, in my opinion. What the letter said was that Jesus did the world a certain favor by emulating some Jewish ideas and spreading them. It never said he was within the confines of Judaism in his doings.