Interesting quote Sells.

But what does it mean?

Specifically, what exactly is "Human Faith grounded upon the testimony of man"?

To an outsider, it would appear to directly contradict the first sentence, where "original belief" and "preceding faith" are nominated as prerequisites for any human activity.

Are the faiths described as "preceding" and "grounded on the testimony of man" somehow one and the same?

Could somebody provide a translation?

DSM,

The purpose of science is as you said, to determine how things work, and how they occurred. It does not pretend to formulate philosophy.

However, in saying that, any philosophy that is worth considering is based on facts, those that aren't are no more than fantasy.

Likewise I am yet to be convinced that the bible has worth as a basis for moral conduct, certainly the Vatican has been a source of some of the world's worst atrocities.

If you want to believe that the earth is flat no one will stop you, but don't be surprised when no one takes you seriously.

George wrote:

I indeed prefer Jews and Christians who are not interested in keeping alive past animosities between the two faiths.

Dear George,

I also prefer Jews and Christians who are not interested in keeping alive past animosities.

For the animosities to die both Jews and Christians must know enough about each other faiths and history to be aware of the sensitive spots. Of course the animosities could also disappear if we both discarded our traditions. That might be a cure worse than the disease.

The Christian attempt to convert Jews to their faith is a very sensitive area. Jews have been forced to listen to Christian sermons, have been compelled to engage in ‘disputations’ and have even been given the choice of death or conversion. Sometimes the choice was between a quick, painless death after conversion and a slow, torturous death if refusing conversion. Christian missionaries who approach Jews aware of this history keep the animosity alive. Regarding Jews as unfilled vessels to be filled by Christian revelation also perpetuates the animosity.

Lustiger converted as a child and learned about Jews from studying under Christian auspices. Where would he have acquired a feeling for Jewish sensitivities?

Lustiger’s remark, “For me, the vocation of Israel is bringing light to the goyim. That is my hope, and I believe that Christianity is the means for achieving it.”, I find insulting.

That contains the Christian idea that Judaism is just preparation for Christianity rather than a religion and tradition with its own values and worth.

I knew little about Lustiger before you mentioned him. He grew up surrounded by a culture which denigrated Jews.

Lustiger escaped his Jewishness by converting. Present culture no longer denigrates Jews for the most part so he seemed to want to reclaim his Jewishness. He was irrevocably isolated.

Perhaps you have other insights from reading his book. I wonder at the title. Judaism is God-centred. He didn’t have to convert to choose God.

If you decide to leave us you may come back. If you don’t wish to come back please leave us alone. Don’t missionise us.

Dear Relda,

I wrote “Self-Determination and Human Rights” which was published by the “Indian Ocean Centre for Peace Studies of The University of Western Australia. It makes the case that self-determination that is the formation of a political entity on the basis of an ethnic or religious identity is not compatible with other rights. Probably there is no place on earth where boundaries can be drawn that do not enclose people of diverse ethnicity and religions. If a state represents part of the people within its boundaries there is an inherent unfairness. I advocate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights eliminate the right of self-determination.

Generally the desire for self-determination is a reaction to oppression. The solution is to eliminate oppression on the basis of ethnicity or religion. Governments should neither encourage nor discourage religion. In the case of Australia the government should stop funding religious schools. If they continue funding those schools with taxes taken from the general public it should be the right of the general public to sit on the boards of those schools and determine policy.

Zionism is a consequence of the oppression of Jews. The Dreyfus case inspired Herzl to advocate a Jewish state. In some respects Israel is very different from the state Herzl envisioned.

He advocated a state like Switzerland with no common language. Jews from various areas would cluster together and maintain the culture of the places they came from. At that time Hebrew was only used as a liturgical language and for religious study. Most Jewish women did not know Hebrew. Hebrew became a modern language only later.

It seems ridiculous that a Jewish state differentiates between different kinds of Jews. Only Orthodox rituals are accepted for rites of passage. Australia and the US don’t care whether I am a Jew or not and certainly not what kind I am.

Actually it is much more complicated than merely a conflict between religious and secular. There are conflicts within the religious community and within the secular community.

It is a tragedy I can do nothing about.

david f,

Thank you for expanding your views on Lustiger. I am doing my best trying to understand them.

>> I knew little about Lustiger before you mentioned him. He grew up surrounded by a culture which denigrated Jews. <<
You indeed know little about him if you call “culture denigrating Jews” his surroundings at the Lycée in Orléans - where he was sent from Paris at the age of 13 to escape the Nazis - which obviously influenced his conversion a year later.

>> Lustiger’s remark, “For me, the vocation of Israel is bringing light to the goyim. That is my hope, and I believe that Christianity is the means for achieving it.”, I find insulting.<<

This is a personal belief and as such cannot be insulting to anybody. Of course, one can have a different idea of how to bring (or not bring) this light to the goyim.

>> Lustiger escaped his Jewishness by converting. <<
He certainly did not think of his Jewishness as something you have to escape from (neitherd do I). He saw his conversion as a continuation of his Jewishness. Of course, religious Jews cannot see it this way but most of those I know take a tolerant attitude towards conversions, the same as most of today’s Catholics towards opposite conversions.

From a review of his last book, The Promise, (that I have not read):
“Lustiger's book is a stimulating theological read related to Christianity's understanding of the Election of Israel. Non-Jewish Christians (Lustiger's Pagan-Christians) participate (not supplant or replace) in the Covenant of Israel through the Messiah of Israel, Jesus. For non-Jews to accept/follow Jesus' offer of salvation and participation in the Covenant of Israel as non-Jews, a prerequisite is to affirm the Election of Israel and see their own Election/Salvation as an extension of the Election of Israel.“

This sound as a call for a “conversion” of Christians, not Jews.

The “Choosing God-chosen by God” does not refer to his conversion but to him becoming a priest, and probably indirectly to the “chosen people“ whom he still regarded himself as belonging to.

George

"Generally the desire for self-determination is a reaction to oppression. The solution is to eliminate oppression on the basis of ethnicity or religion."

The solution is to ensure fair access to resources for everyone. People who control the minds of others usually control the basic resources necessary to sustain life. In doing so, they can get people to believe/support anything.