Tuesday, March 20, 2018

Open Orthodoxy Update, Parshas Tzav

  • cross-currents



  • Rav Zalman Nechemia Goldberg revokes semicha of musmach who 


  • attended Yeshivat Chovevei Torah. Says he “acts not in accordance to Torah Law by becoming a rabbi from Chovevei Torah.”
  • While admitting it “sounds heretical,” R. Dr. Shmuly Yanklowitz (YCT graduate), says “Torah was deeply incomplete,”before incorporating modern feminist values.

18 comments :

  1. Back in the heyday of blogs there was a marked difference between frum blogs and OTD ones. The frum blogs spent some time attacking non-frum folks, sure, but also lots of time spending divrei Torah and divrei hashkafah. The OTD ones only did one thing: attack the Torah and insist it was all a lie. That's why most OTD blogs flamed out after a short time. They had nothing original to say.
    If Cross Currents is the flagship frum blog nowadays then its sad to see it following the same path: attack, attack, attack. What happened to frum creativity?

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Torah is incomplete" is used by Rabbonim to argue against the Karaim and others who reject the Oral Law. Yeshayahu Leibovitz once said that the T'Nach has no value other than the fact that it was put together by Anshei Knesess Gedolah. So these "heretical" statements are often used by the orthodox as polemical statements, even though they are heretical. "Purim never happened" is in the same mode of statements by Chazal - Iyov never existed, and Ain Moshiach L'Yisrael. These statements also deny both history and future. But are not mainstream . Open Orthodoxy seems to expand the oral law to today's world and they think about incorporating modern ideas into the "oral law". One author said that Hillel's statement about Moshaich would be heresy if somebody said it today. In any case, the crazy comment that hanging Haman's sons was "murder" is apikorsus , from a crazy leftist idiot. But, we get crazy statements from some hareidi leaders about the same thing today, that they oppsoe fighting our physical enemies.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If we put it another way - it is easy to attack Open Orthodox, even modern orthodox is the subject of mockery and hatred. When Rav Soloveitchk was alive, he was reviled by half the hareidi world, now occasionally they admit he was the greatest Rosh Yeshiva in his generation.
    However, Open orthodox has a kernel of truth to it. I don't agree with all their ideas, but in many areas, the world is a different world from what we read in Sifrei kodesh. You can have Kareth through no fault of your own, eg from tumas hameit - as we have no red heifer (or we do but are to strict on how we define one). There are many other areas which need to be dealt with. So homosexuality is a big problem, the numbers keep increasing - we have no understanding why that is happening. So what are we going to do, mass execution? They cannot be "converted". I heard from someone that in a major yeshiva they have the same problems that they would in the general population regarding this matter. But it doesn't come out in the open. That is just one example, but there are many others.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm sure that you're aware that the conditions needed to be met n order for capital punishment to be administered by Beis Din are so onerous, that your imagined scenario of "mass executions" is quite unrealistic.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Attack, attack, attack."
    Isn't that precisely what you yourself are doing in this comment?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Of course
    Anyway, it's not my problem, let them deal with it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm not sure there's a sticke Chareidi in the world that thinks RJBS was the greatest RY.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Turn the other cheek ? That's a Christian idea.
    Who said give aliyos? I said there is a kernel of truth, not a truck load. No, I think their marches should be outlawed in Israel, As does my rebbe.
    In xhul, it's a problem, since it's a crime to hate them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. it was outlawed in many countries, until about 50 years ago. I think in Russia it might still be illegal, or Iran.

    ReplyDelete
  10. There should be a law outlawing sodomy. At least such as the one that the SCOTUS overturned in 2003.

    Better would be if it carried capital punishment or at least life imprisonment.

    ReplyDelete
  11. On what basis should there be such a law? Why would you think it is a good idea to have laws based on religion?

    ReplyDelete
  12. It was outlawed in many US States until the 2003 SCOTUS decision against Texas. Time to reinstate it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Why do you think walking naked in the street should be illegal?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Because certain behaviors, when done in public, downgrade the moral atmosphere. If you are suggesting that the behavior in question be illegal in public, I certainly would agree with that.

    ReplyDelete
  15. So you believe in imposingyour moral or religious beliefs on others in society.

    Openly parading in support of homosexual conduct or otherwise publicly demonstrating or publicly supporting or publicly advocating or publicly defending or publicly justifying or publicly normalizing or publicly teaching or publicly advertising homosexual conduct and/or homosexual relations and/or homosexual activity and/or homosexual partnerships and/or homosexual relationships is a far far more severe "downgrading of the moral atmosphere" than someone walking naked in the streets.

    Just as walking naked in the streets is a moral violation that society ought to outlaw so too is public advocating or public supporting any of the aforementioned homosexual activities a severe moral violation that degrades the public atmosphere and ought to be outlawed.

    ReplyDelete
  16. It's already illegal to walk naked. Perhaps in the Amazon jungle people still do it, they think they are still in gan Eden.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The topic of our conversation was behavior in private, not in public. As the pasuk says, הנסתרות לה' אלוקינו והנגלות לנו ולבנינו.
    I do not believe in imposing any of my beliefs on anyone. I do believe that a society has the right to decide what behaviors it will accept in the public sphere and which it will not accept.

    ReplyDelete
  18. 1. My last comment specifically and only addressed public, not private, behavior.

    2. Jewish law and secular law have always (and still do) legally regulated all sorts of private behavior. Including, crucially and specifically, sexual behavior and other moral issues.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.