I'm glad to hear it's a helpful book. It seems like every few years a new book comes out and I gave up years ago trying to read every new book on the same review (for me). So these days, I read a few reviews, decide which of the books that are easily found in bookstores to recommend and then wait for feedback from our readers… like you. So, I appreciate your feedback.

Keep up the good work.

Have you ever wondered what was the 'State of the World' the day you came into it? What has changed since that day and have you, through your life's work and career, contributed in a positive or negative way toward bettering the world? If you haven't, you should. It's a worthy exercise personalizing your connection to the world… and an effective reality check. The day my daughter was born, almost a quarter-century ago, I purchased a couple of Israeli papers to make it easier for her to see what was going on that day. I'd been searching for such a connection for a number of years even back then.

For a number of years, I've searched the web for some significant event that occurred the day I was born: 1943.05.29. I've been searching for something that was not only significant in world events but also that I can relate to problems I've been grappling with; trying to educate the public to make the world better than when I entered. Ongoing military campaigns of WW-II achieved nothing of world note on that date. The most significant event on that date seemed to be the appearance of Norman Rockwell's painting, 'Rosie the Riveter,' celebrating women's contribution to the war effort, on the cover of the Saturday Evening Post—and I've never been able to find any meaningful connection between that and anything I could relate to, even in the smallest way, as my personal magnum opus contribution to the world.

Until yesterday, when my search turned up an obscure note keyed to my birth date from a scholarly 1997 paper in the Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences on the development of psychology:

"51. Members of SPSSI [Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues] and the Eastern Psychological Association (EPA) were quick to rally around Watson. In a unanimous resolution, the EPA vouched for the 'scientific integrity and professional competence of Goodwin Watson, and in the value of his present work.' The EPA members also stated that they 'regard him as a loyal citizen of the United States and not subversive in either speech or conduct.' See 'Psychological Association Defends Goodwin Watson,' Science News Letter (May 29, 1943): 341…" (Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences: Vol 33(1), 39-60 Winter 1997 © 1997 John Wiley & Sons. Inc.

First, in light of the enormous global media attention to American Pres. Barak Obama's wide-ranging revolution of social issues, the phrase "Social Issues" caught my eye; then the full phrase: " Psychological Study of Social Issues."

When I saw the title of the paper, The Politics Of Scientific Social Reform, 1936-1960: Goodwin Watson And The Society For The Psychological Study Of Social Issues by Ian Nicholson, the phrases "politics of scientific social reform" and "psychological study of social issues," many of these terms headlining countless media pieces, captured my attention.

I was astounded to find the original root of Pres. Obama's entire web of social organization… and, more importantly, how the liberals have achieved such startling success by remaining under the radar until they were in control to announce a fait accompli; that the revolution was over, won and it only remained to inform the naïve and recalcitrant conservatives who have had their heads in the sand feeling safe for decades; and now that they finally realize that they're threatened they don't know how to extricate them.

Immediate confirmation of the origins of "social democratic goals" and "left-wing political alliances" among psychologists is found even in Nicholson's preface:

"This paper explores the development and subsequent transformation of a 'radical' professional model in American psychology. Its focal point is Goodwin Watson and the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues (SPSSI), an organization Watson helped found in 1936. During the Depression, he and many of his SPSSI colleagues called upon psychologists to abandon value neutrality and political disinterestedness in favor of an explicit set of social democratic goals and left-wing political alliances. Government service and political [right-wing conservative anti-communist & McCarthy] persecution during World War II led Watson to conclude that his Depression era calls for sweeping change in psychology had neglected a number of significant political dimensions. Of particular importance was the problematic interface between psychological expertise and policy formation. In response to this concern, Watson encouraged the development of the now familiar model of the psychologist as a disinterested purveyor of value-neutral expertise."

Neither Glenn Beck nor scholars yet comprehend the length, breadth or depth of Obama's revolution, now "suddenly" revealed apparent fait accompli.

Within a day of discovering my key, as if corroborating its significance, Eurekalert published a corroborating brief of a professional paper by the Association for Psychological Science: "Where’s the Science? The Sorry State of Psychotherapy" (2009.10.02).

"The prevalence of mental health disorders in this country has nearly doubled in the past 20 years. Who is treating all of these patients? Clinical psychologists and therapists are charged with the task, but many are falling short by using methods that are out of date and lack scientific rigor. This is in part because many of the training programs—especially some Doctorate of Psychology (PsyD) programs and for-profit training centers—are not grounded in science…

"There are multiple practices in clinical psychology that are grounded in science and proven to work, but in the absence of standardized science-based training, those treatments go unused… a new accreditation system is the key to reforming training in clinical psychology. This new system is already under development: the Psychological Clinical Science Accreditation System (PCSAS www.pcsas.org)."

Obama's platform of "social change" revolution did not occur overnight. This is the culmination of decades of building the network who orchestrated the widespread liberal support that got him elected; a colossal achievement, of world significance, illuminated by the following abridgment of Nicholson's paper (see earlier link for unabridged paper).

"In 1939, the recently created Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues (SPSSI) published an edited book entitled Industrial Conflict: A Psychological Interpretation.¹ With articles on 'workers as a potentially dominant class,' a Marxist history of industrial conflict, and a critique of 'liberal' social science, the book was a novel departure for American psychology. Not only did the book examine subjects traditionally avoided by American psychologists, it did so from a politically and intellectually unorthodox point of view. Most of the contributions to Industrial Conflict were clearly informed by a socialist politics, and many questioned either directly or indirectly the very possibility of an objective science. Although the book was by no means indicative of American psychology as a whole, it was, however, representative of a significant minority of the field's membership. Industrial Conflict spoke for many of the field's younger members, and perhaps more significantly, it represented the views of those psychologists who wished to expand the field's role in everyday life.

"Less than ten years later, in 1945, the SPSSI launched its own journal, the Journal of Social Issues. The topic and the tone of the discussions in the new journal were very different from those that had appeared in Industrial Conflict. The 1945 issue on the 'Problems of Bureaucracy' is a case in point.² The revolutionary images that had colored the pages of the Depression-era book had given way to a gradualist vision of liberal progress. Concerns about the relationship between psychologists and the general public were eclipsed by an emphasis on the place of psychological expertise in bureaucracy. Finally, the self-criticism that had characterized Depression-era discussions of social science had been replaced by a quiet confidence in the discipline's methods and vision. Eleven years on, the progression from radicalism to liberalism, from disgruntled outsiders to contented insiders was complete. In 1956, David Krech and Dorwin Cartwright published a brief historical overview of the SPSSI that effectively captured social psychology's prevailing political mood.³ The organization was presented as a stable and robust entity dedicated to liberal reform through scientific research. It was confident in its methods and clear in its mandate. Conspicuous by its absence was any sign of the spirit of the social criticism, activism, and class-based analysis that had animated the organization during the Depression.

"The political and institutional development of American psychology from 1935 to 1955 is one of the most important chapters in the discipline's recent history. For it was during this crucial period that the field was transformed from a predominantly academic system of ideas into the multifaceted profession that it is today… The present study will try to shed some light on this movement by examining the career of Goodwin Watson (1899-1976). Watson provides a useful focus for those interested in the history of psychological expertise, because his career and thought closely parallel the ideological and institutional trajectory of the discipline's applied wing. During the Great Depression, Watson was one of the most influential critics of mainstream psychology. He repeatedly maintained that psychology needed to reconstruct its epistemology and its model of professional practice to better facilitate social change. Instead of regarding themselves as dispassionate observers of objective truth, Watson urged his colleagues to regard themselves as politically committed activists. To further this end Watson helped organize the SPSSI in 1936, a body that would later play a key role in moving the American Psychological Association in a more applied direction.⁴ … By the 1950s, he was advocating a model of 'value-neutral' professional expertise similar to the much criticized model employed by contemporary psychologists. A consideration of Watson's experiences helps make clear the political and intellectual choices that psychologists made in their quest to exercise influence.

WATSON AND DEPRESSION-ERA PSYCHOLOGY

"Watson's formative years and his reasons for entering psychology in the 1920s typify the experience of many of his reform-minded colleagues. Born in 1899, in Whitewater, Wisconsin, Watson was the eldest son of Walter Starr Watson, a Normal School biology professor, and Ellen Goodwin Watson, a teacher turned homemaker. Both parents had a reverence for education and for the precepts of Social Gospel Methodism. God, science, and a Wesleyan 'enthusiasm for humanity' were the hallmarks of Watson's upbringing.⁵ Watson was ordained as a deacon in the Methodist Church at the age of eighteen and despite the uncertainties of faith he periodically experienced, he decided upon graduation from the University of Wisconsin to enter the ministry full time. He wanted to 'save the world' and in his Methodist mind, the ministry was the best place from which to undertake such a mission.⁶ There could be 'no hope for the ultimate solution of our social problems,' he wrote in a 1920 diary entry, 'except in the development of character,' a province usually overseen by religious educators.⁷

"Watson's enthusiasm for religious education was pronounced, but it did not last long. Shortly after beginning his work as a religious educator he began to question his faith and the efficacy of the church as an agent of social transformation. He was no longer moved by religious symbolism and his practical experience as a church worker in Harlem convinced him that the church would never be able to bring about social change on the scale he hoped for. Science, particularly psychology, appeared to hold this promise. In 1923, Watson left the ministry and enrolled as a graduate psychology student at Teachers College, Columbia University. The discipline was to pick up where the church left off. It was to be a vehicle for furthering a moral cause: the building of a new, more humane society. In an autobiographical statement Watson recalled thinking that 'we [in psychology] could do better the very things that the religious education program was trying to do…'⁸

"What was needed, Watson felt, was a psychology that would be socially engaged and politically responsible. He discussed the idea with several colleagues at the 1934 meeting of the American Psychological Association and found that there was support for a 'psychology [that] could properly help in making plans for transient relief, … collectivization, community planning, adult education, labor struggles, social insurance, economic reforms and revolutions.'¹¹ With the help of Isadore Krechevsky (a.k.a. David Krech) and a handful of others, Watson made this idea a reality in September 1936, with the formation of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, a 'national group of socially minded psychologists.'¹² With Watson as Chairman and Krechevsky as Treasurer, SPSSI declared its intentions in a bold statement of purpose. The Society would 'work effectively for both the immediate and ultimate freedom of psychology to do its utmost to make contemporary American society intelligible to its members; and to test hypotheses regarding social change.'¹³ In doing this, Watson hoped to inspire popular discontent, which he assumed would in turn bring about a scientifically administered, social democratic state.'¹⁴

"SPSSI's emphasis on the general public and its goal of bringing 'the scientists one step nearer to the statesman' led to new forms of professional activity.' ¹⁵ One of the most important initiatives involved what one modern theorist has termed 'conscientization': 'the effort to enlighten men about the obstacles preventing them from a clear perception of reality?' It involves the 'ejection of cultural myths which confuse the people's awareness:' ¹⁶ The 'cultural myth' that Watson and many of his SPSSI colleagues endeavored to expose was the capitalist economy of the United States. Having surveyed the American social and economic landscape, Watson was convinced that America's economic organization was grossly unjust. Capitalism was a system of 'scarcity' and 'exploitation of the many by and for the few:' ¹⁷ What kept it in place despite its many failings was a powerful ideological framework that prevented ordinary people from seeing the 'true' nature of social and economic relations. The task of the politically enlightened psychologist as Watson saw it was to penetrate this veil of false consciousness. He called upon psychologists to 'help the average citizen see through the efforts to misconstrue our economic and political predicament' on the assumption that working class awareness of the shortcomings of capitalism would precipitate significant political change.' ¹⁸

"Along with conscientization, Watson also urged his SPSSI colleagues to undertake an intellectual program similar to what Prilleltensky has termed 'annunciation': 'conceiving a just social arrangement in which the well-being of the population is fostered.' ¹⁹ In Watson's view, psychologists could help determine the character of the ideal society and the means by which that society could be brought to pass. The discipline could identify 'the liberties most essential to human satisfaction' and 'define, for the intelligent leaders of social progress, the conditions under which the state can be made a dependable instrument of peaceful social transformation.' ²⁰ …

" 'I came to realize.' Watson noted, 'that there are really not many people trained in social psychology. who have had much contact with political theory and forces in other lands.' ²⁸ Thus, in November 1941 Watson went to Washington, D.C. to begin his duties as Chief propaganda analyst…"

Then, buried in a discussion of Congressional anti-communist hearings swirling around Goodwin Watson, the obscure birth date key was even further buried in an even more obscure note, that unlocked the gate to this trail: The anti-communist Congressional Committee "ignored numerous character references from Watson's colleagues in psychology.' ⁵¹"— the inconspicuous note shown at the beginning of this article.

"In cultivating the image of objective expert, Watson was engaging in a communal activity. Wartime experience had led many of his SPSSI colleagues to a heightened awareness of the political problems of mobilizing and selling psychological expertise on a nationwide scale. Down-playing political commitments and heightening the apparent objectivity of psychology were the most promising means of strengthening the authority and political viability of psychology…

"Ironically, the 'wiser course' that Watson pursued led him back to a manner of professional engagement with social change that was reminiscent of the program of religious character building that he had abandoned back in the 1920s. Wesleyan character builders had worked toward social improvement by means of individual conversion. Watson's 'new' approach to social reform had an equally individualized, spiritual focus. His attention now turned to 'T-groups,' a quasi-therapeutic procedure aimed at developing psychological wellbeing and social understanding.⁹⁶ Watson thought that T-group graduates would be able to 'listen better ... understand better … [be] easier to work with … [be] more flexible [and be] more open to change.' Deployed properly, Watson also believed that the procedure had important implications for social change. It seemed to offer the possibility of meaningful reform without having to engage in dangerous and draining political confrontation. Groups of senior executives from government and business could be gathered together and sensitized to the psychological and social needs of the people for whom they were responsible. A sustained application of these procedures across all administrative levels would ultimately result in a better adjusted workplace and a healthier society.

"The vigor with which Watson mobilized T-Group technology is a testament to his faith in its reforming power. Like the itinerant Methodist minister of old, Watson spent many weekends in his later career traveling a modern 'sawdust trail,' speaking to small groups of the spiritually needy. However, the flock to which Watson now ministered was quite unlike the largely working-class Methodist audiences of old. Watson's new audience consisted largely of senior executives of the nation's largest corporations.⁹⁷ They gathered together under the auspices of the National Training Laboratory's Key Executive Laboratory, an elite T-Group session for which Watson was partly responsible. A typical session would be held at a yacht or country club and might include such influential organization men as the treasurer of Dow Chemical, the vice president of Union Carbide, a division chief of the National Security Agency, and the manager of manufacturing of Lockheed Missiles and Space Company.⁹⁸ Through invitingly titled seminars such as 'On Giving and Receiving Help,' 'Improving Interpersonal Perception,' and 'Significant Dimensions of Group Excellence,' Watson endeavored to facilitate social change by helping these executives become more sensitive, more socially minded, and more aware of the aspects of social change and group dynamics.⁹⁹

"Watson's choice of senior management as both the site of psychological intervention and the engine of social reform may be viewed as a comment on what was politically feasible in Cold War America, but it can also be read as an endorsement of the virtue of the modem corporate sensibility. By 1960, Watson had largely assimilated the corporate world's own self-image as an enlightened domain in need only of an occasional bit of therapy. For instance, in 1963 Watson remarked that executives were 'more enlightened, socially conscious, [and] aware of a responsibility' than their counterparts in the labor movement.¹⁰⁰ Far from being the fetters on science and a 'small reactionary ruling class,' as he had portrayed them in the 1930s,¹⁰¹ Watson now felt that corporations were benevolent friends worthy of support. They are now people's 'basic social unit,' the new 'community, a place where they are rooted, where they belong, where people will understand them and help to take care of them.' ¹⁰² They had:

"enlarge[d] their concern not only for workers but also for the communities in which they operate. The higher the level of management, the greater appears to be the focus on purposes and values. At the peak of the enterprise stand men who must answer the questions of 'Whither?' and 'Why?' and 'For what ends?' Profit is not the only determinant.¹⁰³

THE POLITICS OF SOCIAL ENGINEERING

"…In the 1930s, Watson translated a message of redemption through science into what then seemed like a plausible political program. His experience in bureaucracy and his confrontation with anticommunists in the 1940s and early 1950s, undermined the credibility of the Depression era framework. A different political language and new political allies were needed to realize the goal of a scientifically managed, democratic society…

Watson's life-long efforts to address these [three pressing considerations: a commitment to progressive social change; a network of complex, sometimes dangerous political forces; and, finally, a professional obligation to maintain one's authority as a scientific expert] would seem to suggest that in order to purchase political viability and scientific status psychologists are often obliged to adopt a political and scholarly posture that ultimately subverts their moral intentions… Viewed in the light of Watson's postwar career, this perceptive passage adds further emphasis to the political and professional problems confronting all psychologists who wish to use their profession as a vehicle for significant social reform…' "

This is the same agenda and methodology, that has informed and spawned the postmodernist philosophy (which asserts that there are no absolutes; everything is "value-neutral" and relative—moving goalposts everyday) driving the liberals' politics—globally. See my earlier 2005 paper, "Satan, Religion of: Relativism (2005.06.21)" and "Today's Satan-science or relativism vs religiosity" (2009.08.03; both in our Web Café archives).

Watson's seed has been sown from his early origins in pulpits to his later profession in psychology training in universities and board rooms, spreading among churches, major corporations and universities; upward to politics and downward into lower schools.

Quite a Medusa!

Implications For Today

Anyone who still thinks that the "capitalist" financial pillars of American civilization collapsed as a result of oversight, lack of regulation, executive incompetence or even "capitalist greed," delude themselves. Their agenda is exposed in the scholarly literature above. To even suggest leading liberals are unaware of liberal goals is a mockery of intelligent reasoning. So, look at who drove—deliberately undermined and sabotaged—Freddie Mack and Fannie May and all of the peripheral financial institutions to swamp themselves in making conspicuously bad loans they knew a high percentage of which could not be repaid, ensuring eventual collapse, with the inevitable domino effect throughout the supporting network of financial institutions. This deliberate and calculated sabotage was ramrodded by infamous rabid liberal, Massachusetts Sen. Barney Frank (Until he recently died, who ran Barney Frank's state, directing who was elected to Congress? Granddaddy liberal Ted Kennedy!) in collaboration with Nancy Pelosi and the whole liberal Medusa network that developed in the articles above. As an even further humiliation, the entire Medusa network labels patriotic Americans, who complain of these widespread betrayals of America, crazy rioters.

Viewed in the real world, countless liberal collaboraters—all striving for the same goal of destroying capitalism—come into focus. Blaming "capitalist greed" was the liberals' perfect propaganda diversion, at once diverting attention from the saboteurs described in these articles while blaming their unswerving target: capitalists.

Think about it: since the inception of capitalism, those who have a vested interest in their company and work are concerned for the long term. My undergraduate degree is a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration (UF, '68). I can attest that the long term was taught in the UF Business School as a basic principle of doing business. The idea of "screwing the capitalists," taking what you can and absconding, is liberal, anti-capitalist, methodology. Surprise! The guys you love to hate are liberals, not capitalists; hate-mongering, slandering anti-Americans, not patriotic Americans.

Even if you ignorantly (and immorally) have been indoctrinated in liberal goals by the Medusa to generalize company owners and corporate executives as evil demons different from you—uncaring about their employees, society and America—they still want something to retire on down the line just like you do. They want jobs and prosperity for their children just like you do. As a point of business and financial education: dishonest, untrustworthy and unethical individuals are shunned even more in corporate and financial America than in the general public—and the higher one rises (the more one is invested) in corporate and financial America, the stronger that shunning becomes; a simple formula of avoiding being ripped off becomes increasingly important as one accumulates more to be ripped off. (To the dismay of liberals, these same corporate and financial Americans frequently are protecting their ability to support various charities.) The overwhelming majority of corporate and financial Americans are wise enough to recognize that they cannot afford to do business with such people. To blame the many for the evils of the few is no less immoral among corporate and financial America than among the general citizenry.

However, something, some government trend and theat, convinced them that the long term was being taken from them; and they had no choice but to consider their own families over the increasingly menacing, anti-capitalist environment, forcing those who recognized the inevitable direction of this threat to desert their ships. One doesn't desert one's ship unless all hope of saving it from sinking has been lost—and the liberal Medusa was firing torpedos from all directions.

While all of this was going on, exactly as the psychologists had correctly predicted, hedonist America was self-absorbed, heads in the sand, not listening until, perhaps, it was too late to stop the liberal tsunami. How gullible you, and even Glenn Beck, still are. How much more you still have to learn if you're going to overcome the Medusa.

For those who seek, or think they are receiving, counsel from psychologists: Caveat Emptor: hidden agendas (even many psychologists are themselves naïve & unaware of their "lofty goals," with which psych students are still unquestioningly being indoctrinated—"Don't think! It's my answers and political agenda or flunk!"—in universities around the world). This informs and impacts everything from politics to—wait for it—the "art" (humanities degrees) of archeology and Biblical criticism.

Wake u-uuup; wakey, wakey. You've been slumbering too long. Better get moving while if you still can.

The beginning of wise counsel is in revering י--ה and adhering to His Tor•âh′.

(Pâqid Yirm^eyâhu, Ra·ananâ(h), Israel) 

"Seventy years after the death of Sigmund Freud, researchers from Tel Aviv University say they have outlined unconscious thought and can even characterize the cerebral activity behind it.

"Freud, the Austrian-Jewish neurologist who revolutionized the way we view the human mind, studied the human defense mechanism of repression and presumed to reveal a world of unconscious desires and impulses beneath a thin veil of conscious behavior…

"In a study published in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Moti Salti, Dominique Lamy and Yair Bar-Haim, all of Tel Aviv University's psychology department, stress that the unconscious activity with which their research deals is not identical to the unconscious mind described by Freud in his writings.

We're not talking about an unconscious existence of traumas and impulses, but about unconscious perception," said Salti. "You walk around and are exposed to many stimuli from all directions, but are aware of few…

"[Salti] added: "On a philosophical level, it raises questions about the concept of volition. It's disturbing on a personal level." (hâ-Âr′ëtz 2009.09.27)

(Pâqid Yirm^eyâhu, Ra·ananâ(h), Israel) 

"In an unprecedented find, a group of Egyptian [Muslim] researchers and archeologists has discovered a cache of coins from the time of the Pharaohs.…

"The researchers discovered the coins when they sifted through thousands of small archeological artifacts stored in [the vaults of] the Museum of Egypt. [Initially] they took them for charms, but a thorough examination revealed that the coins bore the year in which they were minted and their value, or effigies of the pharaohs [who ruled] at the time of their minting. Some of the coins are from the time when Joseph lived in Egypt, and bear his name and portrait.…

"Research team head Dr. Sa'id Muhammad Thabet said that during his archeological research on the Prophet Joseph, he had discovered in the vaults of the [Egyptian] Antiquities Authority and of the National Museum many charms from various eras before and after the period of Joseph, including one that bore his effigy as the minister of the treasury in the Egyptian pharaoh's court…

"Studies by Dr. Thabet's team have revealed that what most archeologists took for a kind of charm, and others took for an ornament or adornment, is actually a coin. Several [facts led them to this conclusion]: first, [the fact that] many such coins have been found at various [archeological sites], and also [the fact that] they are round or oval in shape, and have two faces: one with an inscription, called the inscribed face, and one with an image, called the engraved face - just like the coins we use today.

"The archeological finding is also based on the fact that the inscribed face bore the name of Egypt, a date, and a value, while the engraved face bore the name and image of one of the ancient Egyptian pharaohs or gods, or else a symbol connected with these. Another telling fact is that the coins come in different sizes and are made of different materials, including ivory, precious stones, copper, silver, gold, etc…

"The researcher also pointed out that the coins made of precious metals or stones usually had a hole in them, like a woman's ornament, allowing them to be [worn] around the neck or on the chest. Some of them, which bore images of gods and texts from various prayers or incantations, were treasured belongings that were placed into the bindings of mummies or placed [on the chest, close to] the heart. The coins were scarab-shaped. What made the discovery possible was the fact that 500 of these coins were [recently] discovered in the Museum of Egypt, where they were [originally] classified as charms and stored carelessly in closed boxes.

"The researcher identified coins from many different periods, including coins that bore special markings identifying them as being from the era of Joseph. Among these, there was one coin that had an inscription on it, and an image of a cow symbolizing Pharaoh's dream about the seven fat cows and seven lean cows, and the seven green stalks of grain and seven dry stalks of grain. It was found that the inscriptions of this early period were usually simple, since writing was still in its early stages, and consequently there was difficulty in deciphering the writing on these coins. But the research team [managed to] translate [the writing on the coin] by comparing it to the earliest known hieroglyphic texts…

"Joseph's name appears twice on this coin, written in hieroglyphs: once the original name, Joseph, and once his Egyptian name, Saba Sabani, which was given to him by Pharaoh when he became treasurer. There is also an image of Joseph, who was part of the Egyptian administration at the time.

"Dr. Sa'id Thabet called on Egypt's Antiquities Council and on the Minister of Culture to intensify efforts in the fields of Ancient Egyptian history and archeology, and to [promote] the research of these coins that bear the name of Egyptian pharaohs and gods. This, he said, would enable the correction of prevalent misconceptions regarding the history of Ancient Egypt."

(Pâqid Yirm^eyâhu, Ra·ananâ(h), Israel) 

Shalom Paqid Yirmeyahu ha-Tzadiq,

I hope everything has been going well with you. I may petition the beit din after Yom Kippur as I work toward non-selective observance.

I attached some files thanks to my hairdresser. As a fitness trainer I exercise regularly and go to clients homes so it may be best to keep the beard and hair trimmed. May you please tell me if these pictures meet the minimum Netzarim standard. This is more important than personal preference and anything related to exercise. If the beard and/or hair is cut too short then I may request the next size trimmer and email each time until the minimum standard is met. Perhaps the beard may be short yet the hair needs to be longer. I'm scheduled for a haircut on 9/30. I appreciate your response. If you accept this than perhaps the photo may be used for Khavruta.

Sincerely,
Craig

I commend the sincerity and innocence of your intent to follow Tor•âh′ according to Ha•lâkh•âh′.

Through the centuries, however, rabbis and Bat•ei′-Din have gone down this road and this methodology inexorably leads to rabbinic intrusion into the most detailed aspects of one's personal life; from the length of peiy•ot′ to women's hair covering (hats, scarves and wigs) and the length of her sleeves, to whether a man can go to a female dental hygienist (much less be personal trainer to a woman), to how your legs cannot be crossed and how your toes must point during t^әphil•ot′, to which shoe one must put on first and tie first in the mornings and even designating which hand you must use to wipe yourself.

This is how the Ultra-Orthodox have arrived at their present state and how Muslims have sentenced their women to live in a personal mobile tent (burqa, khador, jilbab or niqab)—not what Tor•âh′ intended and we must learn how to early recognize and avoid going down that path.

Yet, at the same time we must avoid going down the opposite path of laxness to assimilation and acculturation like the Reform and other non-Orthodox faux-Judaism and Christians

The key is to always focus on the ideal—not the minimum—to which we must strive with our utmost ("all our heart, all of our nëph′ësh, etc.) and then recognize, tolerantly, that some latitude from that ideal must be expected; e.g., before and after a haircut (probably viewed as a 30 day growth), bald men, thick curly hair—as depicted in the stone relief—versus thin straight hair, etc.

Consequently, I meticulously avoid and discourage analysis of how close it's permissible to get to the edge of Ha•lâkh•âh′. By contrast, the goal is to do our utmost to satisfy the ideal Ha•lâkh•âh′, not microscopically search for the acceptable minimum—nor, in the case of fanatics, the maximum!

Because every standard encompases a range, striving only for the minimum incorporates a lower end of the unavoidable range that lowers the bar and ensures regular infringements. One can see how this tendency has operated over centuries toward acculturation and assimilation.

Today, Ultra-Orthodox Jews have no minimum length for their hair on the top of their head as long as no razor or knife are used. (Only scissor-like clippers—i.e., an electric razor—can be used.) Modern Orthodox (including most Tei•mân•im′) have regular hair length no different than most American businessmen.

The length of peiy•ot′, specifically mentioned in Scripture, is an exception (long enough to bend a strand of hair around to touch its root). Beard length is also a separate issue, probably matching the peiy•ot′. IMO, clipping the hair above the peiy•ot′ shorter than the peiy•ot′, while the practice of many Ultra-Orthodox, looks very weird. (Perhaps that's why they invariably wear some 19^th century-style hat over their kip•âh′.)

Since the advent of the electric razors (rabbinically defined as "clippers" rather than razor), the face of Jews changed as a product of assimilation to European and Western acculturation. Our paradigm should predate this modern assimilation to shaven beards under the artificial guise and rabbinic fiction that they are not shaven but "clipped." Before the advent of the electric razor, minimum beard lengths were much like the B.C.E. 7-century photo… often longer but probably never much (more than 30 days growth) shorter.

Since men's hair and beards grow at unique personal rates, how short the beard in the photo may have been 30 days earlier (if we assume a maximum length) is impossible to calculate with any high degree of accuracy. It makes far more sense to assume this was an average length, give or take 15 days growth at one's personal rate of hair growth.

It seems to me that we should look back at the practice and style of the earliest Israelites to understand what they meant by these passages that they wrote and commented; that it is they we should emulate as the paradigm.

Perhaps the earliest depiction is from the relief excavated from Sennakherib's palace at Nineveh showing three Israelite prisoners of the war at Lakhish playing lyres while being led away by an Assyrian soldier in the B.C.E. 7^th century. (The lozenged background is meant to depict wooded surroundings. Click image for enlargement.)

The leftmost figure is an Assyrian guard. In front of the Assyrian guard is a hatless B.C.E. 7^th century Israeli prisoner of war. (The two Israeli POWs in front of him are wearing some kind of helmet or headdress.) The kip•âh′ wasn't introduced until the European Church imposed head coverings on Jews in the Middle Ages. Rabbis eventually internalized the head coverings as yarmulkes or kip•ot′, rationalizing that the gentile church-imposed head coverings were "a sign of respect to י--ה."

Always strive for the ideal, never the minimum. Trying to ascertain and do the minimum inexorably results in creeping acculturation (i.e., assimilation). Always keep your eye on the right ball: Tor•âh′ requires one's utmost to strive for the ideal, neither the minimum nor the maximum. I know this is your true inner desire.

(Please, each tal•mid′, file this away to reproduce for future inquiries on this topic. This is an excellent question that comes up periodically. It is covered with documentation, BTW, in The N^әtzâr•im′ Reconstruction of Hebrew Ma•tit•yâh′u.)

(Craig Ertlmaier, Norwalk, Connecticut, USA)

שלום

Tod•âh′ Rabah for your guidance.

Next question, do I just give the correction and wait for a reply or give it all to him, let him consider and reply? It seems like getting to first base would be acceptable and not much more until he proves to accept the proper logic.

I will await for your thoughts before I answer.

Ani Modeh Lekhah.

You're exactly right. Only one step (or correction) at a time—and it's inviolably vital that you require satisfaction of each step before going to the next. No skipping over any step to even look at the next step. That is a diversion that leads to becoming absorbed in the next step—eventually forgetting and skipping the unsatisfied step. Never allow them to divert your focus. If they don't satisfy some step then the discussion halts and stays on that point until they address and satisfy that step… if it's forever. We must respect their free will if they refuse to continue at any point; but we cannot ignore their balking. For them it's "No soup for you… one step! Now, go back to your Kool-Aid and take the blue pill."

Keep up the good work.

(Gary Metilly, Milo, Maine USA)

2009.09.20, 1433  Y^әrushâlayim Universal Time

goys to convert

Pâqid Yirm^әyâhu ha-Tzadiq,

שלום

Recently, I had the following question given to me, "I am curious, where does it say in the Old Testament that a Gentile who is converted to Judaism will inherit the promises given to Abraham and his sons?"

Before beginning, I'd like to commend you for [a] pursuing qi•ruv′ and [b] for seeking the information before jumping in. That's the right way to do it.

The first order of business is to analyze some misconceived assumptions underlying the question.

The phrase "Old Testament presumes that it is "old" assuming the false Christian claim that it has been superseded by the NT. That is a baseless assertion that is [a] brazenly offensive to Jews and [b] the Xns' NT must be proven valid before asserting supersession or displacement—not simply assumed. You must refuse to accept discussion that assumes that terminology. You must adhere to the requirement of logic: Judaism, Christianity and Islam all agree that they derive from Tor•âh′. Therefore, Tor•âh′ (not Christianity, the NT, Islam nor the Quran) is the given; it is any claim of divergence from Tor•âh′ that must be proven—from Tor•âh′! Thus, anyone claiming divergence from Tor•âh′ must prove supersession and displacement before presuming it in any discussion. The correct terminology is Tor•âh′ or Ta•na"kh′. That method also puts the shoe on the correct foot as to who is required to do the proving; and that is not you because you begin from what all three religions accept as their foundation: Tor•âh′. Learn what logic requires regarding who must bear the burdern of proving his or her case and don't be sucked into "proving" something when logic dictates that it is they who must prove their case. Read the glossary entries OT and NT more closely.

Consider the following analogy. Some "prophet" proclaims that tomorrow is doomsday and the sun won't rise the next morning. You, sensibly, argue that isn't likely. He challenges you to prove that the sun will come up tomorrow morning. You're toast! You cannot prove the sun will come up tomorrow. The error was accepting a fool's challenge to prove something when the burden of proof rested on the challenger. The remedy is to insist that the burden of proof stay where logic dictates it belongs and not be drawn into that fallacy. Once that's established, Tor•âh′ provides the examples of the ei′rëv that accompanied the Jews out of Egypt (Sh^әm•ot′ 12.38), the paradigm of Rut, and is replete with passages setting forth what is required (e.g., the Sh^әm•a′ and Mi•sh^әl•ei′ Sh^әlom•oh′  28.9). The Halakhic definition of Jew includes converts. Those who reject the Halakhic definition argue purely overt racism (genetics, blood) and must be firmly told so.

To most Jews, "converting to Judaism" means becoming a Jew. We repeatedly inform that we do not perform conversions. Only Orthodox rabbis can perform conversions that are recognized by the Orthodox Jewish community. What we are about is showing goy•im′ how they can serve י--ה by living according to His Tor•âh′ as geir•im′. If an Orthodox rabbi is then willing to convert you that's icing on the cake but not an essential part of our program. (geir•im′ are also defined by Ha•lâkh•âh′.)

I would like to give a concise answer showing the "proofs" of such a need to do so in order to receive ha-olam haba.

Could you share some points that need to be made to establish the groundwork or would you even approach it like this?

The ? comes from an extended family member who has commented on noticeable changes in my life when visiting us a few years back.

I too am working on a reply and will wait for your reply and do as you suggest.

Todah Paqid Yirmeyahu ha-Tzadiq,

(GaryM, Milo, Maine USA)

Excellent question. Keep up the good work. Hope this has been helpful.

	Orthodox Socializing & Archeology News

2009.09.19, 0730  Y^әrushâlayim Time




N^әtzâr•im′ Orthodox Social Life & Historical-Archeological News

Our recent computer downtime produced the anticipated backlog. During the last couple of weeks, we were invited to two Orthodox banquets; a wedding and a Bar-Mi•tz^әw•âh′. Karen was able to go to the Bar-Mi•tz^әw•âh′ but, kha•val′ (pity), I wasn't able to make it to either event.

The N^әtzâr•im′ emphasis is on documented Judaic history of the Biblical period into the 1^st century C.E., which incorporates the scientific analysis of archeological findings (in contrast to the popular postmodern-relativist and politically correct "Dept. of Humanities" methodology of those with an Arts degrees instead of a degree in the hard sciences). During the recent computer downtime, there were several announcements in the field of archeology:

• Massive K^әna•an•i′ wall unearthed

• Ancient depiction of the M^әnor•âh′.

• Ancient stepped street in Y^әru•shâ•lay′im from B^ereikh•at′ Shi•lo′akh to Har ha-Bay′it.

• Recent discovery of a hoarde of 120 Bar-Kokh′vâ coins

• Ancient Beit ha-K^әnës′ët in Migdal (on the northwest shore of Yâm Ki•nër′ët); in which the depiction of the M^әnor•âh′ was found (see "menorah" above).

(Pâqid Yirm^eyâhu, Ra·ananâ(h), Israel) 

2009.09.14, 1530  Y^әrushâlayim Universal Time

leaving behind

Pâqid Yirm^әyâhu ha-Tzadiq,

I need to understand better the leaving behind of family, friends and such. Does this mean cut them off? Or be willing to leave everything and everyone behind to go home?(Israel) seeing what Ruth has done. I don't remember any cutting off, just leaving.

I am willing, just would appreciate your guidance.

Thanks for the update on the pâ•râsh•âh′, I see the Khag of Yom T^әru•âh′ has arrived this weekend.

Todah

You have the right idea. The contrast is between "leaving behind," which is what we must do, and severing relations or cutting them off—which we don't do.

When you follow Tor•âh′ and they refuse to follow Tor•âh′ a parting of the ways is unavoidable.

The result of this, however, is that they—not you—pull away and cut themselves off from you.

This is also equivalent to an alternate view of Hav•dâl•âh′.

As you observed, iIt means you must be willing to leave them behind like Rut, not that you wish them to be left behind. Quite the opposite. Would that they would follow Tor•âh′ with you.

I've had computer problems for a couple of weeks or more and today I'm starting on my backlog with the bi-monthly G^әma"kh′ report (below) followed by this response.

Still finding I'm having to restore little things here and there as I go.

I had written two respectable-sized rule-based AI (artificial intelligence) programs (one to answer initial inquiries for me without any input from me and another to automatically turn English into XML code as I type it). They were both lost in the xfer from the old computer (IBM Thinkpad R50e), which developed a hardware problem, to this one (Lenovo Thinkpad SL500—Lenovo has taken over the Thinkpad line from IBM). It took a bit over a week to hand copy & paste into .docx files around 3000 rules embedded in Word and about 700 rules embedded in Outlook Express, a few minutes to xfer the .docx files to the Lenovo. Then it took another week+ to re-embed the rules into the respective programs by hand, again copy & paste. Just finished that this morning. So, now I'm getting a first taste of using the Lenovo to output work instead of software engineering in the Lenovo. So far, the SL500 seems to be the all-business (not game-platform) small business machine I expected it to be.

Tod•âh′ to everyone for their patience during my down time. I feel like I'm coming up for air after 2 weeks or so underwater.

2009.09.13, 1530  Y^әrushâlayim Universal Time

eparashah

Pâqid Yirm^әyâhu ha-Tzadiq,

Personal side note just for you;

The weekly parashah has reverted to the previous weeks. I've noticed it should be, according to my Tanakh, Haazinu.(האזינו)

Also, I have misunderstood the order of the reading schedule, we still have to read; Understanding Judaism: The Basics of Deed and Creed. I am ordering the book now so we can have that finished soon and then we will be petitioning ha-N^әtzâr•im′ Beit-Din.

Another thought; Is the wait time the same between dairy to meat as meat to dairy? We have understood, that some Jews eat dairy, eat bread to clean the mouth, then eat meat after. How could this be?

Thanks for your time and reply.

Tod•âh′ for the "heads up." I was covered up in software engineering problems.

kol ha-kâ•vod′ on your progress. I look forward to receiving your petition.

The wait time is not the same for khâ•lâv′ ⇒ bâ•sâr′ as for bâ•sâr′ ⇒ khâ•lâv′. You should refer to the ka•sh^әr•ut′ book in our Syllabus. If that book is unavailable, a similar book is acceptable as long as it's written by an Orthodox rabbi. The difference is generally attributed to the paradigm of Av•râ•hâm′ (in b^ә-Reish•it′ 18) and the difference in difficulty of eliminating each from the mouth to remain separate from the other.

Keep up the good work and to all לשנה טובה תכתבו ותחתמו (see explanation via the link in our Calendar page)

(GaryM, Milo, Maine USA)

	2009.09.17, 1440  Yәrushalayim Time
	Gәma"kh′ to Beit ha-kәnës′ët Mo•rësh′et Âv•ot′: 2009.07-08

Receipt #2713 from Beit ha-Kәnësët Morëshët Âvot for $186.00, for contributions accumulated during the period 2009.07-08 earmarked to the Gëm"kh (benevolent fund for impoverished Israeli, primarily Teimânim, Jews) at Beit ha-Kәnësët Morëshët Âvot, an Orthodox Beit ha-Kәnësët ha-Teimâni in Ra·ananâ(h) that you can verify with the Israeli Rabbinate. The Rabbinate can also verify what a Gëm"kh is, how it works and whom it helps.

₪ 0.00 -->

Donor	Location	Amount
ו, לאה	Kissimmee, Florida, USA	$ 136.00
G, Jon	Vero Beach, Florida, USA	$ 45.00
Total		€ 0.00
Total		$181.00

A Responsible Steward Knows Where His Or Her Money Is Going It's irresponsible to give money without checking the claims about where it's going and how it's being used. It's a double curse. Not only does money given to bogus groups sponsor evil, the irresponsible squandering deprives worthy people from benefiting from it. Perhaps honest charities should publish receipts as part of its transparency? If honest charities would publish receipts, perhaps that would make it more difficult for frauds to operate? In hopes of that, unless we encounter some unforeseen security problem, we plan to publish the receipt from Beit ha-K^әnësët Morëshët Âvot – Yad Nâ·âmi for our accumulated contributions (every two months) to the Gëm"kh.

This is also in line with Ribi Y^әhoshua's teaching (NHM 5.16) "Let your or shine thusly before man, so that they may see your good ma·asëh – which are praises and kâvod [not for you, but] for your Father Who is in the heavens [Who should be credited for the good ma·asëh]."

(Pâqid Yirm^eyâhu, Ra·ananâ(h), Israel)

	More Computer Problems

2009.08.30, 1245  Y^әrushâlayim Time




May Be Offline Awhile Again

When the power cord is pulled, a laptop is designed to switch to battery power. My batteries are both good, yet a few seconds after I pull the power cord, the system reboots due to a power interruption (probable short); then reboots every couple of minutes thereafter. Not good. A power interruption at the wrong moment could destroy the information on the hard drive.

I mention the problem so that you can better guess how long I may be offline while my computer guy identifies the problem and we decide whether to fix or replace the computer. My guess is it will have to be replaced. Don't want to risk losing the info on the hard drive, even though I back it up weekly.

So, if I don't respond please be patient until I get back online.

(Pâqid Yirm^eyâhu, Ra·ananâ(h), Israel) 

2009.08.27, 0938  Y^әrushâlayim Universal Time

Inquiry: Nigerian Congregation

Pâqid Yirm^әyâhu ha-Tzadiq,

we shall submit to ur leadership, we are many give us direction and we shall abi[de]

Shâ•lom′ to you and your friends,

Our response to your survey provides much information. The first thing I'd like to do is verify that you received that response. Please let me know whether you received it.

Also, since I'm not sure my emails will arrive there, I'll post this to our Web Cafe as well so you'll have more likelihood of being able to receive this reply.

The next item is for you and your friends to explore and study our website together. Take the village tour by reading to the bottom of our home page and then taking the bus to the next stop and repeat the cycle until you've been through the whole website. (Sometimes you'll need to read through a number of sections before getting to the next bus.)

On this tour, one of the things you'll encounter is our free on-line Khav•rut′â course, which is a prerequisite to be a N^әtzâr•im′. There, you'll find our Syllabus, which explains exactly how to proceed and what texts you need. If necessary, you may save money by purchasing one copy of each text and sharing (or teaching) it with everyone there.

Upon individual completion of the Khav•rut′â, individuals must submit formal petitions to our Beit-Din, according to the format provided, requesting to be recognized as a N^әtzâr•im′.

I'm sure you'll have question as you all proceed. If the answers aren't found in the texts you should post your questions and comments in our Web Cafe.

In the blessings of Tor•âh′,
Pâ•qid′ Yi•r^әm^әyâh′u
The N^әtzâr•im′
Ra•a•nan′â(h), Israel

(MikhaelU, PortHacort, Rivers State, Nigeria)

	Response to James Tabor

2009.08.27, 1231  Y^әrushâlayim Time




Tabor Blog: Converting the Jews—Again

You have the "Big Picture" almost entirely accurate. How I wish other scholars would reach your level.

As the microscope increasingly focuses on the 1^st-century, I would introduce the suggestion that we must also investigate whether Paul the Hellenizer (Turkish-Jew) merely took the Hellenist baton dropped by Stephan, refining Stephan's Hellenist ideas into Christianity. (See the early Hellenist-P^әrush•im′ rivalry contrasted in my "30-99 C.E." section of our History Museum pages, click in panel at left).

In any case, there are a couple of minor (though important in their own right) supporting points that I think require further study. Your assertion that "Non-Jews, in most of these forms of emerging Judaism, were not expected to “convert” to Judaism in order to have a spiritual relationship with God…" contradicts Louis Feldman's agreement (in Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World) with Ta•na"kh′ and Tal•mud′.

Feldman and I both recognize that, by the 3^rd-5^th centuries, the meaning of the expression יראי שמים had morphed significantly. The meaning closest to the 1^st-century must be the focus of any study relating to Rib′i Y^әho•shu′a. In this context, Feldman wrote: "Moreover, although the expression appears seventeen times in the Babylonian Talmud, it nowhere has any meaning other than 'pious' or 'devout' Jews" (p. 353). "That the term [יראי שמים] does not mean merely 'pious' but that it probably refers to a person on his way to conversion would seem to be evidenced by the fact that the rabbis lament that the senator had committed suicide before conversion to Judaism (in their image, 'the ship had sailed before paying her dues'); his wife reveals that actually he had taken the step of full conversion, by exhibiting his foreskin" (p. 354).

Nowhere in the literature relative to pre-135 C.E. has anyone I'm aware of shown any contradiction of these statements.

The confusion among scholars arises out of the contrast between the Hebrew phrases Geir To•shâv′ and Geir Tzëd′ëq. Feldman lucidly demonstrated that Geir To•shâv′ referred to a gentile who had been accepted—exempted from the prohibition against teaching Tor•âh′ to goy•im′ (Feldman, p. 126 inter alia)—by a Beit-Din as a proselyte-in-training-to-convert. The many descriptions of Geir To•shâv′ that vary in the degree of Tor•âh′-observance demonstrate the spectrum of the Geir To•shâv′: from the absolute beginner (who satisfied the minimum threshhold criteria of the then-Four Noakhide Laws to the proselyte who, months later, was ready, and expected, to convert.

Feldman notes the clear contrast between the B^әn•ei′-No′akh—as goy•im′—and the geir (proselyte-in-training permitted solely in order to convert): "Moreover, the Jews, most intolerantly—at least to the pagan intellectual—asserted that the premises of pagan polytheism were all wrong and indeed instead that the pagans, as children of [B^әn•ei′-No′akh], were forbidden to worship idols. Jews, ironically, welcomed others into their midst as proselytes—but only on their own terms" (Feldman, p. 126, emphasis added). Both in Ta•na"kh′ and Tal•mud′, B^әn•ei′-No′akh refers only to "the goy•im′" in contrast to Yi•s^әr•â•eil′.

The preinclination to see a wrench in the gears where none exists lies in the Judaically-challenged frame of reference of gentiles—especially Christians accustomed to a single moment of decision that they believe obtains salvation—differentiating the Geir Tzëd′ëq from the Geir To•shâv′ who must study Tor•âh′ and Ha•lâkh•âh′ many months to learn how to live according to Tor•âh′.

Once the premise of Geir To•shâv′ as a proselyte-in-training-to-convert is recognized, the Geir Tzëd′ëq is therein implied. Not everyone who becomes Tor•âh′-observant is eligible to convert. For example, the Geir To•shâv′ who is married to a Tor•âh′-rejector cannot convert. (Such a relationship would approximate a prohibited intermarriage.) Upon becoming fully Tor•âh′-observant, however, they must be distinguished from the Geir To•shâv′: they become a Geir Tzëd′ëq—a fully Tor•âh′-observant non-Jew—who, like Jews, is a יראי שמים (though a יראי שמים non-Jew may not intermarry with a Jew).

There is in Tor•âh′ no, I repeat, no provision for, or acceptance of a permanently "semi-observant" person—whether יראי שמים, "B^әn•ei′-No′akh" or other. Despite the creative ingenuity of some modern rabbis who take advantage of gentile ignorance of Ta•na"kh′, Tal•mud′ and Ha•lâkh•âh′ (that explicitly preclude such interpretation), the very concept of "semi-observance" is inherently Christian and intractably contradicts Tor•âh′ at its most core level. The "semi-Tor•âh′-observant" idea is a post-135 C.E. innovation that contradicts Judaism in the time of Rib′i Y^әho•shu′a and Pâ•qid′ Ya•a•qov′ "ha-Tza•diq′".

I'm an Orthodox Jew who studies Tor•âh′ with other Orthodox Jews week-in and week-out for more than a decade. While several Orthodox rabbis promote B^әn•ei′-No′akh (as a post-Holocaust method of redirecting gentiles away from misojudaism without having to Judaize or convert them—essentially fooling the gentiles into a contra-Tor•âh′ belief), no Orthodox rabbi has ever justified the 20^th-century innovation of B^әn•ei′-No′akh from either Ta•na"kh′ or Tal•mud′! It's "creative pil•pul′"—purely rabbinic misdirection, lacking any solid basis in Ta•na"kh′, Tal•mud′ or Ha•lâkh•âh′, that's misleading goy•im′ astray from י--ה and His Tor•âh′ into eternal doom.

You misunderstand Tor•âh′ when you assert that "Judaism in all its forms has taught that all humans are sinners and can only be accepted in God’s eyes through repentance and faith." No form of legitimate Judaism has ever taught this. Yes, we all occasionally fall short of perfect compliance. Contrary to Christian teachings, Jews have always been aware of this. However, Tor•âh′ states clearly in the Sh^әm•a′ that acceptance hinges upon doing one's utmost (with all one's heart, etc.) to keep the mi•tz^әw•ot′ Tor•âh′.

"What does י--ה require of you? Keep the mi•tz^әw•ot′… Do mi•sh^әpât′, etc. (D^әvâr•im′ 10.12-22; Mikh•âh′ 6.6-8). Tor•âh′ just as clearly stipulates—e.g., T^әhil•im′ 51 that you cited—that shortcomings in keeping Tor•âh′ require t^әshuv•âh′ in order to receive ki•pur′ by the graciousness of י--ה.

Contrary to your assertion, however, faith is absent from that formula. Faith is in the Christian formula. Tor•âh′ doesn't require you to have faith. Tor•âh′ requires you to practice Tor•âh′: doing one's utmost to keep the mi•tz^әw•ot′, complemented by t^әshuv•âh′ to receive ki•pur′ for inevitable shortcomings, constitute the requirement of Tor•âh′ for acceptance.

This is the context in which we read of the two men praying in the Beit ha-Mi•q^әdâsh′. We see the same today. While some Ultra-Orthodox are sincere Tor•âh′-reverers, other Ultra-Orthodox are hypocritical; having a tunnel-visioned focus on ritual "frumness" (the "Ultra" in Ultra-Orthodox—"I'm frummer than you") while their practice, after meticulously completing the rituals, is the pursuit of corruption, throwing rocks and feces, attacking women, trafficking in body parts and all manner of evil.

Most Orthodox Jews, by contrast, try to live according to Tor•âh′ in all facets of their life, genuinely repenting of their shortcomings and struggling "with all their heart…" to return to doing their utmost to keep Tor•âh′.

These are the same two that Rib′i Y^әho•shu′a contrasted. It is obvious which obtains י--ה's gracious provision of ki•pur′ (as contrasted with "justification")—and, consistently, there is neither goy•im′ nor Bën-No′akh in his analogy!!!

I have tried tirelessly to eduate the rabbis that the entirety of Christian doctrines rests on the twin pillars of Christian claims of supersession and Displacement Theology as you noted, that no amount of pleading can possibly persuade Church clerics to renounce either of these twin pillars of Christianity—as they would be dismantling Christianity and, in the Christian view, committing deicide. The rabbis have no clue as to the impossibility of Christians granting their wish. Still, despite 2,000 years of repeated failures, they ignore the complicated possible to pursue the simplistic impossible.

There is only one way to bring about peace between Christians and Jews, and that is to circumvent Joseph Ratinger, his successors (usurpers of the N^әtzâr•im′ Pâ•qid′, BTW) and leading seminarians and evangelists: go over their heads, straight to their "boss," whom they ALL profess to follow: Rib′i Y^әho•shu′a—who taught Tor•âh′, not its antithesis, Christianity's claims of supersessionism and Displacement Theology.

2,000 years of horrific empirical experiences have disproved all alternatives as doomed to failure. Only Rib′i Y^әho•shu′a has any possibility of leading Christians out of their Hellenists' Christianity to Tor•âh′; to finally produce the prophesied Messianic peace between goy•im′ and Jews.

(Pâqid Yirm^eyâhu, Ra·ananâ(h), Israel) 

	International Law

2009.08.24, 1003  Y^әrushâlayim Universal Time

Pâqid Yirm^әyâhu ha-Tzadiq,

כבוד השופט

You will find a concise evaluation of international law concerning ישראל and the 4th Geneva Convention here. Seems to be another example of "motivated reasoning."

(EliyahuK, Y^әru•shâ•lay′im, Yi•s^әr•â•eil′)

	Univ. of Buffalo research: Why People Defy Facts To Preserve Beliefs

2009.08.12, 1630  Y^әrushâlayim Time




Cognitive Theory "Motivated Reasoning"

(EurekAlert) "BUFFALO, N.Y. -- In a study published in the most recent issue of the journal Sociological Inquiry, sociologists from four major research institutions focus on one of the most curious aspects of the 2004 presidential election: the strength and resilience of the belief among many Americans that Saddam Hussein was linked to the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

"Although this belief influenced the 2004 election, they claim it did not result from pro-Bush propaganda, but from an urgent need by many Americans to seek justification for a war already in progress.

"The findings may illuminate reasons why some people form false beliefs about the pros and cons of health-care reform or regarding President Obama's citizenship, for example…

And most frequently found in the ignoring and denial of documented facts in order to cling to false assumptions that seem to justify one's present religious beliefs… in other words, drinking the

"Co-author Steven Hoffman, Ph.D., visiting assistant professor of sociology at the University at Buffalo, says, "Our data shows substantial support for a cognitive theory known as 'motivated reasoning,' which suggests that rather than search rationally for information that either confirms or disconfirms a particular belief, people actually seek out information that confirms what they already believe.

"In fact," he says, "for the most part people completely ignore contrary information.

This isn't news. It's been known for eons… but, failing to confirm what people prefer to believe, remains ignored.

"The study demonstrates voters' ability to develop elaborate rationalizations based on faulty information," he explains.

Exactly what we experience when attempting to introduce facts and logic to the discussions of religion.

"While numerous scholars have blamed a campaign of false information and innuendo from the Bush administration, this study argues that the primary cause of misperception in the 9/11-Saddam Hussein case was not the presence or absence of accurate data but a respondent's desire to believe in particular kinds of information.

In our case, in order for Jews, Christians and Muslims to justify what they currently believe and reject any contradictory information.

"The argument here is that people get deeply attached to their beliefs," Hoffman says.

Ya think???

"We form emotional attachments that get wrapped up in our personal identity and sense of morality, irrespective of the facts of the matter. The problem is that this notion of 'motivated reasoning' has only been supported with experimental results in artificial settings. We decided it was time to see if it held up when you talk to actual voters in their homes, workplaces, restaurants, offices and other deliberative settings…"

"The study addresses what it refers to as a "serious challenge to democratic theory and practice that results when citizens with incorrect information cannot form appropriate preferences or evaluate the preferences of others."

"One of the most curious "false beliefs" of the 2004 presidential election, they say, was a strong and resilient belief among many Americans that Saddam Hussein was linked to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

"Hoffman says that over the course of the 2004 presidential campaign, several polls showed that majorities of respondents believed that Saddam Hussein was either partly or largely responsible for the 9/11 attacks, a percentage that declined very slowly, dipping below 50 percent only in late 2003.

"This misperception that Hussein was responsible for the Twin Tower terrorist attacks was very persistent, despite all the evidence suggesting that no link existed," Hoffman says.

"The study team employed a technique called "challenge interviews" on a sample of voters who reported believing in a link between Saddam and 9/11. The researchers presented the available evidence of the link, along with the evidence that there was no link, and then pushed respondents to justify their opinion on the matter. For all but one respondent, the overwhelming evidence that there was no link left no impact on their arguments in support of the link.

"One unexpected pattern that emerged from the different justifications that subjects offered for continuing to believe in the validity of the link was that it helped citizens make sense of the Bush Administration's decision to go to war against Iraq.

Interesting that a long history of religious wars with consequent annihilations didn't constitute a good reason to research "motivated reasoning." It took a massive and widespread Liberals' hatred of Bush.

"We refer to this as 'inferred justification,'" says Hoffman "because for these voters, the sheer fact that we were engaged in war led to a post-hoc search for a justification for that war.

"People were basically making up justifications for the fact that we were at war," he says.

Again, this is exactly what we encounter in religious discussions. The result is people finding no logical or factual justification have to resort to slander, misrepresentation, straw men, ad hominems—the full range of responses we see every day.

"One of the things that is really interesting about this, from both the perspective of voting patterns but also for democratic theory more generally, Hoffman says, "is that we did not find that people were being duped by a campaign of innuendo so much as they were actively constructing links and justifications that did not exist.

"They wanted to believe in the link," he says, "because it helped them make sense of a current reality. So voters' ability to develop elaborate rationalizations based on faulty information, whether we think that is good or bad for democratic practice, does at least demonstrate an impressive form of creativity."

This, too, has implications in the sphere of religious discussions. People neither stay in their present religion, nor change religions, as a result of being duped; but, rather, by "constructing links and justifications that d[o] not exist" to justify their current direction.

Bigger Question: How To Combat "Motivated Reasoning"?

I enountered the problem of "motivated reasoning" on a massive scale as a Safety Engineer with The Hartford Insurance Group in the early 1970s. My unequalled track record of trucking and fleet clients with exemplary loss statistics attested to my successful method.

Drivers are a good example. Drivers of every sort, whether truckers or cabbies or youths or Americans or Europeans or Canadians or Israelis… every group is "certain" that they are a special case who know more about driving and no one else can tell them anything about it. I wasn't popular but I learned the secret of success: pick the one who seems to be the leading resister and force an extremely painful collision with reality on him in front of the group; in other words embarrass and humiliate the worst offender and you can get the group's attention and get through to them that there are potholes and inherent arrogance in their overconfident "Motivated Reasoning" state of denial. It's not pretty but there is no effective alternative. If you wish to make the point, you must make the point. Comedians know that in their dealings with hecklers while playing to attract the crowd. No doctor ever persuaded a cancer patient to take chemotherapy by taking the easy way out and suggesting the patient may only have a cold. Standing up for Tor•âh′ requires courage, determination, preparation and grit.

(Pâqid Yirm^eyâhu, Ra·ananâ(h), Israel) 

From: YaelB Location: Ra'anana, Israel

2009.08.20, 1515  Y^әrushâlayim Universal Time

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem

I've recently seen a documentary about Darfur, which I recommend you see. I decided I wanted to do something about it, looked up on the internet what needed to be done, and found an organization called ARDC (African Refugee Development Center), which assists refugees from Africa that arrived in Israel and provides humanitarian aid (food, shelter, clothing, education). After speaking to one of the directors, I decided I wanted to volunteer at the educational center and teach Hebrew. The center is located in south Tel-Aviv, which is not the greatest neighborhood to hang around in, but I haven't run into any problems. Next yom rishon I'll be graduating my first class of students whom I have taught Hebrew from scratch. It has already been 10 weeks of classes, from learning the alphabet to reading short stories in Hebrew.

Israel was one of the first countries to sign the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees in 1951, and in fact was one of it's formulators as a result of the [lack of] international treatment of Jewish refugees after the holocaust. Today, Israel is not standing up to that convention. Refugees coming from Africa, some after going through unthinkable atrocities, are sometimes sent back to Egypt (and from there are sometimes sent back to their home countries where they would face sure death), and are sometimes sent to prison in Israel. The lucky ones somehow manage to get to Tel-Aviv or other cities and get a job (usually illegally since Israeli burocracy prevents them from obtaining legal status as a refugee)… It's a mess, and something needs to be done. Israel needs to get it's act together and find an efficient way of distinguishing between the refugees and the infiltrators who are looking for a better life in a western country, or worse, terrorists infiltrating from the surrounding Arab countries.

In the meantime, I think the most I can do is try to help those who are here. I don't know for sure who is a refugee and who is just looking for a better life and is here illegally. That's not my job to discern. Teaching Hebrew so that they can try and live a little in a new country is the best I can do right now.

What is the best you can do?

Note: Recently, ynet ran an article that doctors treating these refugees, "and anyone helping" these refugees could be subject to jail time. So Yael does this at some risk. We should never be deterred from translating Tor•âh′ into practice. It's called tz^әdâq•âh′.

(YaelB, Ra'anana, Israel)

From: YaelB Location: Ra'anana, Israel

2009.08.20, 1400  Y^әrushâlayim Universal Time

Archaeological Dig

While looking for a graduate program that combines archaeology with science, I came across the Kimmel center for archaeological sciences at the Weizmann institute. The general idea is applying science and asking scientific questions in an archaeological context. It is a multidisciplinary program, comprising scientists of different backgrounds- physics, chemistry, geology and botany.

This seemed quite promising (and the fact that the Weizmann institute is an internationally well known and respected scientific research center wasn't too shabby either), and I decided to take a closer look and made an appointment to come visit and see what they're doing and get to meet the people there. After discussing matters with the scientists there, I decided I would take a course at Bar-Ilan University by Dr. Elisabetta Buaretto, the carbon dating expert, and that I would participate in the field school in archaeological sciences at Tel-Safi (the biblical philistine city of Gat).

And this is what I'd like to tell you about. Since I didn't have any experience in digging at an archaeological site, I had to come a week earlier and see what it was like to dig. It was hard. Hard physical labor. We (and by "we" I mean the people who volunteered to come to this dig- most coming from abroad and much to my surprise, most also not Jewish) got up at the crack of dawn since we had to be on the bus at about 5 am, and started digging at 6. Keep in mind this was July in Israel, when you can really empathize with a chicken on a spit. We were working under a huge tarp that shaded the area, but it was still pretty hot.

Back to the physical labor. I had always imagined archaeologists with a small brush blowing feathering a bit of sand of bones sticking out of the ground. The catch I hadn't taken into account was that you had to dig a lot before you get to the interesting part where the brush comes into play. And that digging is hard. Swinging a pick ax over your head, breaking up earth and then digging that out with a big shovel, getting all that dirt into buckets, pouring the dirt from the buckets into a wheelbarrow and picking up that wheelbarrow (which is heavy since you just poured a whole bunch of dirt in it) and wheeling it to the dumping site (which is also hard because you have to tilt the wheelbarrow to get the dirt out, without having the wheelbarrow fall down the dirt mound) – all that under the supervision of a slave runner who would make sure we were making enough progress and not slacking. Just kidding, the archaeologist who was supervising us was great. Amit, but I can't remember his last name, maybe Dagan.

The last few days of the week were more of the brushing archaeology rather than the hard physical labor of the first few days. In the area I was in, we found a tabun (a sort of oven-area used for cooking), a bunch of pottery shards (though pottery was basically all over the place anyway, not very exciting to find one), a floor, and I think that was about it in my little 5 by 2 meters rectangle (which is not easy to dig out. Digging out a hole is a lot easier than digging out a rectangular hole with 90 degrees angle sides). Other people in the site found an arrowhead, an intact decorated bowl, a wine press, a ceremonial sculpture and obviously a lot of broken up pottery. There were other tabuns as well, and I'm sure there are a bunch of other things that I have either forgotten or don't know about.

During the second week I joined the Weizmann team, which was a totally different experience than the first week. We looked at the different layers and tried to ask what happened here, what's the difference between the layers, what's the significance of it etc. And then we analyzed the findings- some right there on site, and some back at the lab. It was interesting to ask those questions and to have the opportunity to consult with the excellent scientists from the Weizmann institute and find the answers using CSI-like techniques (Infra-red spectroscopy, phosphate analysis, microscopes for geological and botanical observation).

It was an amazing experience to stand in a place where the last person to stand was a Phillistine, about 3000 years ago…
Yael

(YaelB, Ra'anana, Israel)

2009.08.09, 1950  Y^әrushâlayim Universal Time

Required Book

Pâqid Yirm^әyâhu ha-Tzadiq,

I wanted to take a moment and thank you for your website. It has opened a whole new world of understanding for me. I have been between two worlds for quite awhile now and haven't been able to reconcile the two in any meaningful manner. I left mainstream xtianity a number of years ago and joined a group that keeps Shabbat and the Yom Tov in their unique xtian way, but I still continued to have questions and doubts, especially in light of two verses, the first in Matthew which states (in xtian Bibles) that the Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat, and the second in Acts where it indicates that Moses is taught every Sabbath in every city. To me those verses always seemed to indicate we're to look to the Jews for instruction and direction on how to live a proper life, but that's considered heresy, as you well know. I eventually left xtianity as I discovered some of the things you talk about in the History Museum on your website. That has left me with a serious void in my life as I truly desire to seek HaShem. Eventually I started to look into Judaism and have been drawn to Orthodox Judaism for a couple of years now. I started looking into conversion and have been studying and slowly implementing practices in preparation for contacting a Rabbi. Finding your website has been a true blessing for me! I purchased WAN and ABNC from Schueller House and am currently reading The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, which I thought you might like to know is available for free in various formats, including .pdf download, at this address.

Tod•âh′ for the URL to the free copy of Conflict. I've thought for a long while it should be free but I wasn't sure about the copyright. For a while, scalpers were trying to charge hundreds of dollars for a copy so I made it available for slightly more than the paperback price to encourage buyers to obtain legitimate copies while ensuring that, if the other sites went out of business or something, scalpers couldn't charge more than I was offering. Glad that episode seems over. I've added the link to our Judaica Shop entry.

Being between 2 worlds, though difficult, is a sign you're on the right path. Every N^әtzâr•im′ has experienced that. Indeed, most still are. While our tal•mid•im′ who qualify (not disqualified by a marital barrier to one who won't follow Tor•âh′) are required to try to convert under an Orthodox rabbi, it is very difficult to find a willing Orthodox rabbi. So, while you would be expected to try, you must [a] realize that it is now premature to interrelate in the Jewish community (you're likely to make blunders that could undermine your eventual acceptance or integration; we'll tell you when we think you're ready) and [b] the reality is that you may well not be able to convert and will have to spend your life serving י--ה according to His Tor•âh′ and Orthodox Ha•lâkh•âh′ as a non-Jewish geir•âh′.

We don't perform conversions. We only educate those who so desire to keep Tor•âh′ according to Orthodox Ha•lâkh•âh′. So we don't promise a rose garden; only the thorns, the narrow and difficult path. But it does lead to serving י--ה according to His Tor•âh′ and Orthodox xHalakhah—whether as a Jew or as a non-Jew.

What I can advise you is that the faster you proceed through our basic and advanced on-line courses, the faster you'll transition between the two worlds; at least able to navigate the Orthodox Jewish community, even if you aren't accepted as a Jew, and to build a local group—after our Beit-Din has formally recognized you, of course. (This requires completing our basic on-line course and petitioning our Beit-Din, including the commitment to live a Tor•âh′ life according to Orthodox Tei•mân•i′ Ha•lâkh•âh′, whether as a Jew or a non-Jew.)

Tod•âh′ for the kind words. Keep up the good work.

Thank you so much for all your hard work in presenting this information and making it available for those who are truly seeking HaShem!!

(DeenaA, Lynnwood, WA, USA)

	Response to Islam in The Economist

2009.08.07, 1105  Y^әrushâlayim Time




Which, of 3 Intractably Contradictory "Bibles," Is Legitimate?

Please find my response (and please click "recommend") to the article, Islam and heresy; Where freedom is still at stake, in The Economist.

Here's the first message, which The Economist deleted:

Dear Sir,

The attached comment, posted under the pen name Paqid Yirmeyahu, has been deleted from Economist.com. The comment was removed because it breaks our comments policy:
http://www.economist.com/about/terms_and_conditions.cfm#8

We ask that future comments be made in the spirit of good-natured debate. Repeated violation of our comments policy will result in your being blocked from posting comments on Economist.com.

Yours sincerely,

Comments Moderator
Economist.com

Your comment:
----------
It is astonishing in the modern era where knowledge is so accessible to so many that so many millions continue to blindly accept their own "Bible," without questioning why "my Bible" is true while "their Bible" is nonsense. The "faithful" of both Christianity and Islam continue to do this without objectively and rationally investigating the historical development of the three intractably contradictory "Bibles"--for no reason other than their parents, clerics and peers tell them so. When the blind lead the blind…

Any historical investigation immediately demonstrates that the Christian and Muslim "Bibles" are premised on the validity of the accounts in the Hebrew and Aramaic Jewish Bible. Yet, neither Christian nor Muslim ever questions how their "Bible" can supersede and displace the Jewish Bible--which explicitly prohibits such supersession or displacement as apostasy (e.g., Dt. 13.1-6).

Both Christian and Muslim "Bibles" depend upon the veracity and Truth of the Jewish Bible while simultaneously arguing that the Jewish Bible is wrong and corrected by their respective supersessory and displacement "Bibles." These intractable contradictions are held despite their basic doctrine that G-d doesn't contradict Himself or make mistakes. So... was G-d right in the Jewish Bible or the Christian NT or the Muslim Quran?

If the Jewish Bible is legitimate and valid, then the NT and Quran are invalid. Yet, if the Jewish Bible is invalid, both the NT and Quran are built on a false foundation and the NT and Quran are STILL invalid. Either way, in all cases, the NT and Quran are false by their very definition.

Neither Christians nor Muslims dare address the historical question of accepting the historical validity of the Jewish Bible, on the one hand, while simultaneously remaining wholly dependent for their own validation to regard the Jewish Bible as wrong (in order to supersede and displace it with their own "Bible")--the engine that has always driven misojudaism in both Christianity and Islam.

Consequently, they have no alternative but to simply make up their own "history"--entirely devoid of historical documentation whatsoever--in its place.

It is no wonder that Christians and Muslims deny and defy history. Their religion depends entirely and irreparably upon distortions of history and lies. Confronting the historical documentation invalidates their religion and exposes their adherents as irrational and ignorant.

Few clerics are going to invalidate their own religion; particularly in the Islamic world where it ensures one's own assassination. The only possible solution is on an individual basis: YOU, reader, study the historical documentation and answer these questions out in the world beyond your own religion and clerics, YOURSELF; and make up your own mind. I did. I'm a former Baptist preacher who abandoned Christianity and converted (Orthodox) to follow Torah. You can too.

Paqid Yirmeyahu
Paqid 16, The Netzarim, Ra'anana, Israel
Israeli Torah-keeper & Orthodox Jew
Advocate for Logic as Halakhic Authority
Welcoming Jews & non-Jews
www.netzarim.co.il

(Pâqid Yirm^eyâhu, Ra·ananâ(h), Israel) 

2009.08.06, 0324  Y^әrushâlayim Universal Time

Understanding Judaism

Pâqid Yirm^әyâhu ha-Tzadiq,

Understanding Judaism: The Basics of Deed and Creed, By Rabbi Benjamin Blech was a very helpful book to me. I have very little knowledge of Judaism. This book helped me to begin to grasp some of the principles upon which Judaism is based.

The importance of the emphasis on deed instead of emphasizing creed may not seem to be a big deal to some but to me the emphasis is very important. In practice, I believe that this emphasis is minimized in Christianity. By that I mean: In our day and time, as long as you believe in J-e-s-u-s your actions seem to be of no importance. The truth is Yahushua was a Jew and he emphasized the practice of true creed in his deeds as demonstrated by his own actions. The point is HaShem has given us only one system of actions in which He will be pleased with our deeds and that is total Torah Observance. Yahushua never changed this principle. In fact, He taught us to follow the deeds of Torah is to demonstrate belief in Torah.

Indeed, it is one of several watershed differences from Christianity (Xy). It is essential, however, to include the qualifier (doing one's) "utmost," as Tor•âh′ states, since no one can actually achieve total Tor•âh′ observance. Tor•âh′ observance is something to which we aspire while acknowledging we fall short. Yet, each of us can do our utmost, which is what Tor•âh′ requires in order to provide ki•pur′ when this requirement (including t^әshuv•âh′ from a•veir•ot′) is met.

Pay attention to the transliterations (xlits, pronounced translits) we use and adopt them. We use scholarly conventions, which helps immensely when you—soon—will be required to abandon the xlits and use עברית. Correct xlits far more easily lend themselves to correct spelling עברית while continuing in Christian (Xn) misconceptions about spelling and עברית is a barrier to learning עברית. No remnant of Xy can be carried into Tor•âh′ observance.

Similarly, one does not merely change to an Iv^әr•it′ name and continue to worship the same Xn image—nor address their image according to their tradition. You would surely have more respect for a Chief Rabbi than to address him by his first name (misspelled at that), having no respect for his title of rabbi. Do you respect Rib′i Y^әho•shu′a any less? You've probably never thought about these things while in Xy… but, that's what we're here for.

Keep up the good progress.

I will probably read this book a couple of times more as it has been a significant help to me. I actually plan on reading all the books I have read to this point again.

(MertonB, Mulberry, Indiana, USA)

2009.08.05, 0937  Y^әrushâlayim Universal Time

Web Café Bug, Article Graph

Pâqid Yirm^әyâhu ha-Tzadiq,

כבוד השופט

I tried to send a comment concerning the graph but I was given an error message. I don't understand the x-axis except the less religious and more religious. What do the magnitudes of the numbers reflect? Then I suppose the assumption is more religious is better? If it isn't Torah coupled with logic it is still pretty scary.

First, תודה for the "heads up" that our Blogback wasn't working. I wonder how many frustrated inquirers we've missed. The problem was my coding error–a month or so ago. So it's been broken since. I think it's fixed again now.

I also noticed that the graph is inherently ambiguous. But, it wasn't my graph so מה לעשות?

As I understand it (?), the red bar appears to indicate the "going into college" religiosity whereas the blue bar designates the "after college" religiosity. Thus, one can see by general college major that [a] more-religious freshman more often choose science majors, [b] science corroborates absolutes, bolstering previously held absolutes of religious views while [c] less-religious freshman more often choose "humanities" (which includes wrongly-called "soft sciences" like archeology) and [d] non-science majors tend to instill relativism, which argues against religious absolutes, corroborating and bolstering previously-held non-religious (relativist) views; turning out graduates who are even less religious than when they entered college. In other words, science bolsters absolutes and religiosity while humanities instills relativism that erodes religiosity.

So, if I understand the graph correctly, this dichotomy seems to be a general truth that crosses all denominations of the three biggest religions. The lesson for us is: ensure that, in college, our children major in science, not "soft sciences" (including archeology taught in humanities departments) and not major in non-science fields (humanities, arts, music, etc.).

Archeology is an interesting anomaly because it is still being taught in the humanities departments but is slowly flipping to the sciences (as at the Weizmann Institute). In the latter case, archeology could be a great major. יעל is pursuing archeology as a science, aware that it's been a bad joke as a product of the relativist humanities departments.

Readers will likely also find these articles especially interesting: "Promise Keepers'" new campaign to convert Jews (including my comment) and Jerusalem Post article No holds barred: Godly is as godly does (R. Shmuley Boteiakh, sent in by Eliyahu). I'm contemplating responding to this article as well.

(EliyahuK, Y^әru•shâ•lay′im, Yi•s^әr•â•eil′)

	Today's Sâ•tân′

2009.08.03, 0828  Y^әrushâlayim Time

Science (e.g., Physics, Evolution & Archeology) As The Anti-Bible Sâ•tân′…
It's So-o-o 19^th Century

For decades, arguments have raged about whether science invalidates the Bible. A new Univ. of Michigan study (2009.07.31) reveals that today those arguments, which arose in the previous century, have been mostly resolved among the more educated public. The educated public has mostly recognized that the impossible contradictions to known science lie within the impossible interpretations of ignorant, fabulizing—insisting on fantastic interpretations: the supernatural and miraculous—interpreters of the Bible, not the Bible itself.

However, this dragon having been slain, it has immediately been displaced by a new Sâ•tân′ rearing its head against the veracity of the Bible: relativism (don't confuse relativism with the Theory of Relativity).

Often called "postmodernism" (to be deliberately elitist and throw off non-scholars), relativism recognizes no absolutes. According to relativism (postmodernism), there is no authoritative definition of right or wrong, good or evil, etc. An action or event is right or wrong, good or evil, only relative to—within the frame of reference of or compared to—another action or event. Consequently, the inevitable conclusion is what we see in the Middle East: since there is no right or wrong, no historical absolutes, both Israel and Arabs must be treated tit for tat, quid quo pro: requiring an endless stream of which action is in retaliation for what and who did what first rather than the indigenous historical rights—or lack thereof—of either people.

Thus, relativism is the demon that drives political correctness, the continuing war against the Bible, the conflict in the Middle East, an infinite number of other conflicts and arguments and the transformation of the U.S. by the relativist Left, led by Hollywood and Pres. Obama, into the world's largest civilizational train wreck. Moreover, since (according to relativism) there is no absolute moral right or wrong, hedonism—the "me" culture—has become prevalent with its bottomless descent into immorality with the accompanying rise in divorces—and even eschewing marriage altogether for temporary fornication arrangements resulting in single parents, broken homes and fractured and distorted value systems and personalities—and all-consuming depravity, e.g., the "coming out" of homosexuals, pedophiles, oediphiles, serial rapists and serial murderers, etc.

The Univ. of Michigan study corroborates this trend, finding that those who study the sciences (including physics and evolution) in college tend to become more religious while those who study humanities and the "soft sciences" (including, interestingly, archeology, which is not generally taught as a science) which emphasize relativism ("postmodernism") tend to become less religious. This further suggests that, as archeology becomes more scientific, it will follow the other sciences in learning to corroborate with the Bible rather than become intransigent against the Bible's more ignorant interpreters.

According to their study, "College students who major in the social sciences and humanities are likely to become less religious, while those majoring in education are likely to become more religious. This graph shows the predicted change in religiosity six years out from high school for different college majors compared to the predicted change in religiosity if the student had not gone to college. Source: University of Michigan Institute for Social Research, 2009."

"But students majoring in biology and physical sciences remain just about as religious as they were when they started college."

"Education majors are clearly safe havens for the religious," said U-M economist Miles Kimball, who co-authored the study. "Highly religious people seem to prefer education majors, tend to stay in that major, and tend to become more religious by the time they graduate."

"Of those who did not attend college right away, those who were more religious were more likely to attend college eventually…" Thus, whether one argues causality (intelligence & education lead to religiosity; or vice-versa) or not, there is a direct and positive link between education and religiosity—and, conversely, a link between scientific ignorance, on the one hand, and irreligiosity, ignorance, hedonism and resulting immorality on the other.

"For the analysis of impact of college major on religiosity, the researchers used business majors as a reference point. "We wanted a major that was culturally neutral and that attracted a large number of students," Kimball said. "The content of most business courses does not touch on values."

"There are important differences among the college majors in world views and overall philosophies of life," Kimball said. "At the same time, students recognize to some degree the differences among majors and chose a major based, at least in part, on religiosity."

"Our results suggest that it is Postmodernism [i.e., relativism], not Science, that is the bête noir of religiosity. One reason may be that the key ideas of Postmodernism are newer than the key scientific ideas that challenge religion. For example, religions have had 150 years to develop resistance or tolerance for the late 19th century idea of Evolution, but much less time to develop resistance or tolerance for the key ideas of Postmodernism, which gained great strength over the course of the 20th century."

See also my 2005 paper, "Satan, Religion of: Relativism (2005.06.21)" in our Archives (click on icon).

(Pâqid Yirm^eyâhu, Ra·ananâ(h), Israel) 

Help us make a difference.
Put links to
www.netzarim.co.il
in your web pages.

---

Web service isn't always dependable. Even though our forms appear to work fine, occasionally they may not actually send your message to us. If we don't respond to your message within 5 business days (on the Judaic calendar, either in the blog or by email) please advise our U.S. distributor, Schueller House, of the problem.

---

Boost Our Video Ratings in YouTube.com

Sign in (so that you can rate videos), search for "Netzarim," if necessary, and boost the rating for each of our videos in YouTube.com. You can also give the poorest possible rating to the Spanish-language imposter there. While videos remain on our website only during the week of the pârâshâh, all of our pârâshâh videos remain on YouTube.com where you can view them at any time.

"Digg" Our Articles in Digg.com

Most of our postings are only for our blog. Periodically, however, we write an article that is of broader interest (on morality, politics or the like), in which case we post the article to Digg.com and place their icon at the beginning of our article to alert you to please go to digg.com and promote that article.

Digg.com requires that you be logged in to their website in order to vote an article up or down or to add your comments. Consequently, you'll need to make sure that you set your browser to allow cookies for www.digg.com so that your computer can, thereafter, automatically log you in when you go to digg.com.

The first time you visit digg.com, you'll have to register in order to log in. With your browser options set to allow cookies for digg.com, your computer can remember how to log you in automatically in future.

Once you're able to log in to digg.com, you can either search digg.com for our article or return here to our N^әtzârim blog and click any digg logo in our blog to take you to "Paqid Yirmeyahu's Profile," where, if your computer has automatically logged you in (or you log in manually) you can click on "stories submitted" (on the right hand side of their page). Once digg.com has displayed all of our articles, you can click the "digg it" button by each of our articles to promote each article.

There's also a link for you to look at comments about the article that have been posted and add your own comment. Of course, you can also comment in this blog. Just click the orange "Khavrutâ Blogback" button.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

NQ Village Tour —

(Tour begins in the 'N^әtzarim Quarter' Gate)

You Are Here ⇒ N^әtzârim Web Café

We Invite You To Continue As Our Guest
To Our Next Stop ⇒ Israel
(sites)

(Click in panel at left.)

Links to archeological and Biblical / Judaic must-see sites in Israel.

N^әtzâr•im′ … Authentic