--
In reading this read, I'm struck that cnorman18 is trying to argue for Judaism on the basis of it inspiring good behavior rather than an actual truth-value.
Is that a fair summation, cnorman? If not, what should we judge Judaism by?
It seems that any discussion in this particular forum is assumed to be about the truth or falsity of a religion, or, of course, about the existence of God. I suppose there have been so many debates on those subjects that the assumption is unavoidable.
No. I am not interested in proving that Judaism is true, if that's what you mean. I'm equally uninterested in proving that Christianity is false. My point is rather more limited.
Criticisms ought to be fair.
From my very first post here, I have been arguing that most of the criticisms of religion in general,
in which I would join, do not apply to Judaism.
That does not mean that Judaism is necessarily true, and that has never been my point.
I have never said (nor thought, for that matter) that Jews are perfect or ever have been. We have problems--crimes, sins, misdeeds, whatever one wishes to call them--characteristic of our own people, and if anyone wishes to criticize Jews or Judaism on those bases, have at it; I will likely have nothing to say other than, "Yeah, we're working on that." (And we are. Another criticism that cannot be directed at Judaism is that of being blind to its own faults. There are few more self-critical people on earth than Jews.)
So is
misbehavior on the part of a religion's followers evidence of its falsity? As I conceded to Yoink, no; not in the abstract, according to rigorous logic.
If one wishes to address that question, though, it is certainly relevant; not necessarily decisive, but relevant.
But it was never my intention to address that question, or at least not
here.
My point on the present thread, by reproducing my post on another forum, was to say, "Look, here are the sins and crimes that are laid at the feet of 'religion' by atheists. Bigotry, violence, hypocrisy, indifference to evil.
Notice to whom those crimes are being done." It was, as most of my posts have been, an effort to differentiate Judaism from "religion" in general.
Even on the other forum, my point was never "My religion is true and yours is false, and here's why," but "How likely is it that we will even listen to what you have to say, when your religion has done all this to us and you will not even acknowledge that as a problem? Why should we listen, when you do not even acknowledge the evil that lies here on the table between us in the present moment?"
Once again, though, an effort was made here to show that Judaism is the same as all other beliefs,
no matter what, this time by appealing to the brutality apparent in the Old Testament. Or, more accurately, by forcing Judaism to conform to the stereotypes and caricatures of "religion" that have been determined
a priori to apply to any group that believes in God and studies the Bible. I think I have rather conclusively that that
particular criticism, which I have seen here often, is fallacious.
I have also seen it argued that, since Judaism "invented" monotheism, it ought to be held responsible for all the ills that monotheistic religions have brought to the world--as if the discoverer of fire ought to be blamed for every act of arson, or Johannes Gutenberg blamed for pornography, or Albert Einstein for Hiroshima. (Oddly, I have also seen it denied that the Jews were the first monotheists when I tried to make that point; and true that objection was, which invalidates blaming the Jews anyway.)
We Jews have grown rather used to others defining our religion for us and condemning us for beliefs that we do not hold. The Blood Libel, that Jews ritually murder Christian children and drink their blood as a sacramental act, was not the first such example of that, and I doubt that accusing Jews of being okay with alleged acts of genocide in our past will be the last.
But both are inaccurate, false, and unfair criticisms, and anyone who insists on invoking either in reference to Judaism might reasonably be suspected of being more concerned with following an agenda than with determining the truth.
Again: It is not my intention to prove the truth of Judaism to anyone; I do not believe that an objective (or subjective) proof of any religion is possible. Further, I do not believe that anyone, ever, has "chosen" a religion on the basis of it having been 'proven."
Atheism, yes; I will freely admit that the approach of seeking objective, logical and factual 'proof" rather inclines, if not compels, one to land on the square that says "No God." But humans are required by no law to base all their decisions on logic, either; and many of the decisions that we make, including some of the most important, are not generally based on logic--e.g., the decisions about whom to fall in love with and what to do for a living. Those decisions
may involve logic, but inarguably also involve issues of personal taste, visceral inclination, culturally imbibed biases, and unconscious motivations which no one can define even for himself, and all are unique to the individual. It is further my belief that such decisions are no less valid and "livable" for all that. Indeed, one of those decisions is whether or not to depend solely on objective logic in the first place. But all that is really a subject for another thread.
What should Judaism be judged by?
On whether or not it is true? There, I cannot help you; see above. I have no right, no warrant, and no interest in influencing anyone making that decision. Unlike Christians, Jews do not believe that everyone must or even should believe as we do, and the fact that others reject our religion as false troubles us not at all. You're on your own on that one.
On the question of its intrinsic or relative worth, the question is easier:
Judaism ought to be judged on the basis of what it actually believes and does, as opposed to what others
think it believes and does, or, even more oddly,
should believe and do according to
their reading of the OT.
Judaism also ought to be judged on the basis of what
Judaism believes and does, and not as a mere subset of "religion in general," with which Judaism shares very little in terms of either belief or practice.
If one objects to Judaism solely on the basis of its affirmation of a belief in God, fine; no one could have any problem with that. But all these extraneous and irrelevant objections that basically boil down to "ALL religions believe (x) and do
, and therefore so does yours, and therefore I oppose it," are profoundly
illogical and
invalid.
I think that these observations are perfectly logical, fair and reasonable. It seems odd to me that they have met with so much resistance in a forum supposedly dedicated to reason, logic, the pursuit of truth, and the negation of prejudice and irrationality.
Well, no, I made the three millionth post on the board, actually. And it's stupid as all hell, as that little link will show you. Typical me, actually. Do something really cool, but do it as stupidly as possible. 
