The Evolving Jew

On Facebook, in a Jewish group dedicated to debate and discussion between believers and non-believers someone asked: "How can a book such as this, written with misleading passages, be used as a guide?" I answered: Short answer? It can't. Not so much because of scientifically inexact passages, but more because of the commandments of slavery and genocide called for therein. That's why very few Jews today actually use the Torah as any sort of guide for living. Rather, they use a vast body of interpretations of the Torah as their guides, interpretations that span well over 2 millenia. It is upon those interpretations that Judaism rests, not the original document (which even has interpretations in the actual text). It's not about the foundational text, admittedly a composite document of bronze and iron age legends and laws, it's what we do with it. 

In a discussion on Facebook, a friend (a non-believer, BTW) made an incidental argument that the Kuzari hypothesis a slightly stronger argument that other "proofs" for the Torah's authenticity. He does not believe that the Kuzari proof is any sort of "proof", but that since its claim is more philosophically based than empirically based, it's less disprovable, since empirical proof is not the currency of argument in the philosophical realm. However, the Kuzari hypothesis does rest on an empirical assumption of an unbroken chain of transmission of the mesorah since Mount Sinai. However, that very mesorah tells of several "re-introductions" of the Torah, such as Ezra's. Therefore, the entire "proof" is refutable in a somewhat empiric manner.

Sad - A Better Place, which was an ambitious project to introduce a very innovative business model for electric cars in Israel, is filing for the Israeli version of bankruptcy and liquidation. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/business/global/israeli-electric-car-company-files-for-liquidation.html I had high hopes for this back in 2010:  http://evolvingjew.blogspot.com/2008/01/israel-goes-electric.html Maybe it was just before its time. Maybe in another few years, someone will take another stab at it.

http://evolvingjew.blogspot.com/2009/09/god-does-not-exist.html

One side effect of "going public", so to speak, is that I'm looking back at a lot of posts that I wrote some 5 or 6 years ago, to decide if I want to publish them under my own name. In the process, I'm seeing how my thinking has evolved since then (which is appropriate, given the name of this blog). In a post titled "Women's ritual roles" , in March 2008, I praised the new partnership-type minyanim for giving women more of a role, and for taking up a time-honored tradition of "stretching (not breaking) halacha to enable women to expand their roles." Though I still greatly admire those minyanim for the work they are doing, I've accepted a more pluralistic perspective since then, and feel that there are multiple approaches to worship. I happen to affiliate with Orthodoxy, for the most part, but I have no problem with full egalitarianism. My way works for me, but halachic mores on shul seating and gender roles is entirely man-made, and eve...

I've been blogging for over 6 years, under a variety of names, including Yehudi Hilchati, DYS, Rabba bar bar Chana, and Philo. This is a new blog in the sense that the site is new, and I'm using my real name, but I've imported most of my old posts. However, I don't feel comfortable posting them all at once, so I've kept them private and will gradually be making public the ones I feel comfortable sharing under my real name. That will eventually likely be most of them. But there may be a few posts where I've changed my mind from my feelings at the time, or ones that are no longer remotely topical, like posts about the 2008 presidential election. For the ones that I feel are still of current interest, I'll be putting up a new post pointing out the emergence of that old post, perhaps with some introductory comments. Hope this clears up any confusion! Thanks for reading.

I originally posted these under my blogging name "Yehudi Hilchati" in December 2007. My thinking on this topic has definitely evolved somewhat since then, as I no longer have a "salvage what I can of the dogma" attitude. But my basic overall perspective remains the same. I still see no reason not to see holiness and value in my Judaism. 1) Faith vs Evidence, posted December 24, 2007 2)  More on Faith vs. Evidence, Dec 27, 2007 3)  Answers to a couple of recent comments on Faith vs. Evidence, Dec 31, 2007