tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6059095776066394557.post1308619004692756038..comments2023-10-25T03:22:30.728-06:00Comments on Ragamuffin Studies: More on Mixed Premises: Part II--Common ThemesElisheva Hannah Levinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16061377724926154037noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6059095776066394557.post-70370256189775768572010-07-23T09:39:52.146-06:002010-07-23T09:39:52.146-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Elisheva Hannah Levinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16061377724926154037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6059095776066394557.post-52072729514050700442010-07-23T09:39:47.680-06:002010-07-23T09:39:47.680-06:00Hi, Briana:
1)Yes--and No. The first statement co...Hi, Briana:<br /><br />1)Yes--and No. The first statement could very well have been "reporting on a collectivist" group; but since he did not clarify, most Jews heard only the very scary collective responsiblity. Thirty seconds of clarification would have solved that problem. Still, that was a blunder.<br />What was not a blunder was his agreement with his side-kick Pat Gray's statement in the radio program on Friday. (I find that since Pat Gray has joined the show, Glenn gets distracted a lot--however he did agree with the substance of what Gray said a week ago). <br /><br />2) About stooping. <br />None of it is rational, as you pointed out. And that's the problem--it's really hard to discuss irrationality. I have come to the conclusion that I am going to need to stop listening to Beck. I find myself talking back to the computer, because I am hearing more and more irrationality. And I am beginning to understand that it is "either-or"--that if there is a refounding of this country on Beck's terms, we will be in the same boat within a generation. <br />I do think Beck is right on the crisis approaching, but I know that and don't need him to know what to do about it. <br /><br />3) I had some of the same conclusions as you had, fairly early in life. When I heard in High Holy Day sermons that the rabbis had some of the same questions I had, I realized that all religious people are not stupid. (I thought they must be if I could come up with such questions at my age). <br />Many rabbis thought that the story of Abraham's near sacrifice of his son was a warning not to accept personal revelation; that Abraham had looked around him and saw what other people were doing and assumed that this was what he should do. Since Judaism is a religion of separations, to be holy means to be separate--not to do it like others just because that's the custom, their interpretation makes sense. (Of course those ideas came with Rabbinic Judaism--the Israelite Religion, especially the Temple Cult, was pretty standard middle eastern barbarism). <br />In Midrash and Talmud the Rabbis focus on the Abraham who argued that it was not just to destroy Sodom and Gommorah--though he didn't go far enough--as the model of a Jew. They saw the Akeda--the story of the near murder of Isaac--as a fall for Abraham, one that G-d had to rescue him from at the last moment. ("Abraham! Ayecha!). Although I know from the Jewish-Catholic dialogue that many Christians interpret the story as an example of perfect obedience, that is not a Jewish interpretation. We take pride in our stubborn willingness to argue even with G-d. Rather, normative rabbinic interpretation is that G-d does not demand human sacrifice. <br /><br />4) We liked Phillip Pullman's novels. Used them in homeschooling. Unfortunately, the Catholic Church has made sure that there will be no more movies. But the books are better anyway!Elisheva Hannah Levinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16061377724926154037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6059095776066394557.post-32913107606924861722010-07-23T00:43:44.043-06:002010-07-23T00:43:44.043-06:00So you simply disagree with the possibility that h...So you simply disagree with the possibility that his statement could have come from the fact that he was reporting on a collectivist and undoubtedly anti-semitic group, rather than from any premise he holds on his own part. OK. Certainly I have no evidence to contradict you with that you haven't already considered, and I admit that the longer I consider it, the more I think that he would not have said it that way unless he held the premise on some level.<br /><br />"Briana, you went in to very few details about Jesus' death compared to some comments I received as FB messages."<br /><br />OK. I just wanted to make sure this hadn't been set off by me somehow, since I hadn't actually seen anyone else mention the death of Jesus.<br /><br />"However, I think you underestimate the depths to which a bigoted, anti-semitic jerk will stoop!"<br /><br />I meant rationally. Once you've thrown out reason, of course you can stoop to any depths you want. Not that it makes such stooping any more understandable from a rational standpoint.<br /><br />"I have been called "Christ Killer" within this year. I was shocked, even though I thought I couldn't be."<br /><br />OK... that's just a wee bit creepy.<br /><br />"I imagine that you disagree with Christian doctrine for the same reason that I disagree with Glenn Beck? It is collectivist and it is altruistic?"<br /><br />I was 9 when my mother married my stepfather. My stepfamily was roman catholic, but we did not go to church before then. Unfortunately for them, this meant that I, being a rather precocious and stubborn child and something of a reader, was past the age of easy indoctrination. There were a few things I objected to. Galileo's bout with the Church, and the Crusades. The idea that Jesus had either the right or the ability to take my sins on his shoulders; I once heard it compared to a guilty guy getting off death row because an innocent man offered to take his place and that was it for me, I was out. Abraham and Issac: where the heck does God get off telling you to sacrifice your firstborn, anyway? I figured that if God was an invisible guy in the sky who didn't talk, then any idiot who claimed to know God's will was impossible to contradict, and if he said it was God's will that group X be slaughtered, well how would Joe Schmo be able to prove otherwise? My view of original sin was that it was stupid and unfair, and my version of the eating of the fruit of good and evil was/is pretty much exactly the same as the Jewish version (or the Phillip Pullman version), except back then I didn't know that that WAS the Jewish version or that anyone else had ever thought of it that way. <br /><br />Anyway, the upshot of the whole story was that my family eventually gave up on hoping to sway me to their religion, and by the time I was 15 or so I had the house to myself on Sunday morning. I think I caught hints of the collectivist/altruistic stuff when I was younger; I read what Rand had to say about Christianity in her fiction, and basically agreed with it, and certainly I was surprised last year when I read Rand's opinion of Jesus's sacrifice, and it was pretty much exactly the same as mine was. But that wasn't something I understood in full and explicit detail until fairly recently, for the simple reason that I'd never really heard it before.Briannahttp://www.opinion-forum.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6059095776066394557.post-83913679273766228412010-07-21T20:44:10.234-06:002010-07-21T20:44:10.234-06:00Briana:
1)No--he would have clarified on his Frid...Briana:<br /><br />1)No--he would have clarified on his Friday radio program--see the Sunday blog--if he did not unconsciously accept the collectivist principle involved. My objection is that he is inconsistent because on the one hand he objects to collective salvation, slavery reparations (and he is right about these!), but on the other hand agreed that the death of Jesus is the fault of "the Jews." <br /><br />Briana, you went in to very few details about Jesus' death compared to some comments I received as FB messages. I figured you were not a Christian, but some of these people are, and they mentioned quite a lot about Pontius Pilate washing his hands, which placed the responsibility on "the Jews" apparently. Perhaps I erred, but I thought it a good thing to deal with all the comments at once. However, I think you underestimate the depths to which a bigoted, anti-semitic jerk will stoop! I have been called "Christ Killer" within this year. I was shocked, even though I thought I couldn't be. <br /><br />I imagine that you disagree with Christian doctrine for the same reason that I disagree with Glenn Beck? It is collectivist and it is altruistic? <br /><br />Thanks for all the comments.Elisheva Hannah Levinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16061377724926154037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6059095776066394557.post-65243060671632746592010-07-21T14:42:32.467-06:002010-07-21T14:42:32.467-06:00So if I understand you correctly, your main object...So if I understand you correctly, your main objection is not so much about whether he was reporting on the viewpoint of the people he was talking about as that he would not have done it <b>in that way</b> unless he on some level accepted the collectivist principle involved?<br /><br />As an aside, I would like to point out that when I went into the details about Jesus's death, I was merely outlining the facts as best I knew them, in order to point out that even in the absolute nastiest interpretation of that biblical record by the most bigoted, anti-semitic jerk, you can't honestly claim that any jew who is alive today is in any way responsible for what some self-contradictory book says some members of their race did or didn't do 2000 years ago. I'm not Christian, I disagree with the fundamentals of Christian doctrine on principle, and I don't really <i>care</i> about who did or didn't do what on that day Jesus died.Briannahttp://www.opinion-forum.comnoreply@blogger.com