Abigail

"As for the negative connotation of "lawyering", that was Oakspear's characterization of the term. Lawyers are supposed to bend the letter of the law as far as they can to perform a requested function. Describing similar tactics outside of the legal profession as "lawyering" is descriptive, but not necessarily derogatory. "

Then the same goes to my anamchara :)-->. Regardless of who said it first, I still find the term offensive.

Additionally, lawyers are not supposed to "bend the letter of the law" (though I know there are those who do). Lawyers are suppose to present their case according to the letter and spirit to the best of their ability so that the judge or jury can make the best decision possible with the ultimate goal of fairness and justice prevailing. I am thankful I have not had to work for any attorneys thus far which have left me feeling over all jaded towards the legal system.

Zix,

"Believing what Jesus taught is nice, but it doesn't bear directly on the question of his lordship"

So, if I understand you correctly according to your definition of Christianity, one must believe Jesus is Lord (and then we could argue as to the various definitions of the term Lord, but I'm assuming based on the rest of your post you understand it to mean at least something very similar to what we were taught in TWI) in order to be considered a Christian? And if one does not believe Jesus is lord one has rejected him?

Under those terms and conditions, I flat out deny being a Christian and reject Jesus as lord and do so with no hestitaion but great conviction.

"You know what Christianity entails, or should at least have a good idea since you were once in TWI (even with all its flaws). "

Well, I was holding out hope that at least SOME who consider themselves Christian, understand Christianity as being something very different from what we were taught in TWI. (I still am, despite your own apparent opinions to the contrary).

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but is there any record in the New Testament in which it was okay to quit believing and return to a former religion?"

Correct me if Iam wrong, but even within the scope of Christianity, there are a number of different interpretations of what the NT means and how it is to be applied in ones life. And I am NOT returning to a former relgion. I come from a Jewish family but was never raised to be a religious Jew. I am simply exploring, growing, learning, continuing in the quest I have been on since I was a child.

Additionally, I don't read the Bible literally or entirely as THE WORD OF GOD, nor do I limit myself simply to what the Bible says or what other men claim it all means. THAT was one of my HUGE mistakes in TWI, a lesson I have learned and do not wish to repeat.

"you were convinced at one point, and then you said "no more". "

At the point in my life when I was "convinced" I had a very different understanding of it all, via a TWI which ceased to exist some five years before I actually left them. I stayed the additional five years for reasons which are far to lengthy and off topic to go into here.

Originally I wasn't going to post this here at all. Then I considered posting it on Roy's thread regarding the return. Now I think it deserves a thread of its own.

This is my interpretation and understanding of an article I read very early this morning.

Perhaps nothing has been as detrimental to the people as the idea of religion. If we are a religion, then some more holy, others less holy and many not holy at all.

It's a lie. We are all one. If one transgresses we all transgress along with him. When the same one stretches out his hand to give to a needy soul, all of us stretch out our arms together.

We are not a religion. We are a soul. A single soul radiating into many bodies, each ray shining forth on its unique mission, each body receiving the light according to its capacity, each embodiment playing its crucial role. Together, we compose a symphony with no redundant parts, no instrument more vital than another. And our path back towards that original source of light is through every other ray that extends from it.

A healthy body is one where every part works in harmony. A healthy people is one big, caring family where each individual is concerned for the other as for his own self. Where one faces rough times and the others hold his hands. Where one meets good fortune and all of us celebrate. Where no one is labeled or alienated for his or her beliefs, or background. Where each runs to do an act of kindness for the other and shuts his eyes and ears to the other's shame.

Roy was speaking of the timing of Christ's return. Perhaps the return is a sort of allegory. We all have spirit/soul within us and the "return" we are all looking for will occur when we apply/live/learn/understand what is written above.

Perhaps. . .

"Christianity is an exclusive faith"

This is one of my major issues with Christianity and why I do not call myself Christian. It excludes too many wonderful and Godly people.

"Look, genius, if you WERE once a Christian, and now AREN'T, no amount of self-delusion will alter the fact that you REJECTED it."

There is a difference between rejecting it and questioning/doubting/revamping/reconsidering.

I was once a Christian, I no longer consider myself to be one - at least not in the common understanding and sense of the word as I understand its definition in our society and per mainstream Christianity.

Have I out and out rejected Christ? I don't think so. I have and continue to question and reconsider what I was once taught and believed about Christ. I no longer pray to him or in his name. However, I do believe in much of what I understand to be what he taught. And I have a different perspective from mainstream Christianity regarding what I think some of what he taught means.

I also continue to reconsider and revamp what I believe about God, our purpose in this life, and many other matters as well. This does not mean I have rejected God or believe we have no purpose.

Zix and Def, when you left TWI did you reconsider, revamp or reject any of what you were taught by TWI? If so, did you ever, after again reconsidering and revamping decide some of what you had rejected from TWI might have some nugget of truth to it afterall? Perhaps saw it in a different light?

Does that mean you rejected it or simply came to a different understanding of what it means? Or perhaps on some things, you are still in the process of considering and are simply not sure what it means?

BTW Zix,

I resent the negative connotation to "lawyering". Lawyers, although currently holding a bad rap, do serve a very needful purpose in this society. Ever been in need of one? It is good that lawyers can see many different perspectives and all sides of an argument, if they can't they won't be very good at their job.

Jesus was a "new age" guru. Much of what he is quoted as saying in the Bible comes not from Jewish Law but Jewish Mysticism. It is probably why those overly steeped in the law, without an understanding of the spirit, feared him so greatly.

Wow, I can see I'm going to have my reading cut out for me this week! I'm looking forward to it. I have never really done an indepth study on angels, just run into bits and pieces as I've studied other subjects.

Sir,

"My belief is that the 7 spirits of God = the 7 chakras = the 7 days of Genesis = the first 7 manifestations = Christ, which is the shape of the universe. In other words, the entire universe is the same basic organic/living shape, which shape (logos) is called Christ, which each of us manifests as a being in the form of 7 "churches." Our relationship with the very essence of light itself can be a full-spectrum experience, not white and black."

EXACTLY! I've never "seen" it laid out quite the way you put it, particularly with the angels, but I have often thought this about Jesus. I see his story as an allegory and have often thought the entire Bible is an allegory, (if that is the right word) though I've never been able to piece it all together.

One of the principles I've come across in studying Judaism and Kabala is that the tree in Kabal is just that, an allegory. It is not an image to be worshipped and even the allegory itself is not perfect. If one takes the allegory literally, one falls into idolotry.

All of these terms, like the human terms applied to God in the Bible, are just ways to communicate ideas, the ideas are sparks of the light. We hinder the light when we try to see the ideas in a literal way.

Cynic,

"I prefer a "teeny tiny heart" Ya know, I bet in your own unique way your heart is as big as anyone elses is in their own unique way. I apologize for the insult, because it was the mental image (which could have been of anyone) in connection with Sirs statement which struck me so funny as I was drinking that first cup of coffee.

" openly accosting its various particular and general classes of opponents "

Who are your opponents? Why are they your opponents?

Vert,

"Love your enemies...."

A very wise statement. What does it mean to love thy enemy? And can we love them, or anyone, if we don't first love ourselves? Can we know what it means? Can we see ourselves in them or them in us?

Also, in some of the reading I have done - Jewish folklore says that in Genesis when God says "let us make man" it is literally plural. God was consulting with the angels to get their opinions. The angels under Michael and Gabrial disagreed with God and did not want Him to create man, so God destroyed them. In other versions God cast them down to earth.

Additionally, Jewish folklore has between seven and twelve archangels, depending on if one studies Kabala or not.

I've not done much study in this area, but I have come across it a number of times as I was studying other subjects.

Anyway, I thought this might interest some of you. . . .

Archangels are generally taken to mean "chief or leading angels" (Jude 9; 1 Thes 4:16), they are the most frequently mentioned throughout the Bible. They may be of this and other hierarchies, such as the Archangel Michael, who is a princely Seraph, Gabriel among the seraphim, and Raphael among the ophanim (Cherubim), while all these three are sometimes named as the ruling princes of the Virtues.

The Archangels have a unique role as important mediators between God and mankind; they are God's Messengers to the people at critical times in history and salvation (Tb 12:6, 15; Jn 5:4; Rv 12:7-9) as in The Annunciation and Apocalypse. A feast day celebrating the Archangels Michael, Gabriel and Raphael is celebrated throughout the Church Sep 29. A special part of the Byzantine Liturgy invokes the "Cherubic Hymn" which celebrates these archangels and the guardian angels particularly.

The archangels are believed to command the heavenly army in an ongoing war with Satan and his legion of angels. They are the special emissaries of the Principalities, transmitting the good intentions that the Angel Virtues bring from the Powers to humanity. They have a protective and special love for all the persons of earth, intervening in crises and times of need to protect and guard nations, cities, airports, churches, houses, and families. They bring great goodness and much happiness to those they aid.

One source says that an Archangel can travel from one end of the universe to the other in a second, and can be in many places at one time, even though these places may be millions of miles apart, like the light of the sun - appearing in several places at one time without it's power lessened in any of those spots.

The word archangel has often been misapplied, used as a generic term that refers to all angels above the order of Angels. In most angelic hierarchies, they are one step above the Angels (the second order of the third division).

The Koran of Islam (Arabic: al-Qur'an) mentions four archangels, naming only Jibraiil (Gabriel, who is said to have revealed the Koran to Muhammad) and Mika'il (Michael) - the other two being Azrael (another form of Raphael, Angel of Death), and Israfel, Angel of Music who plays the flute at the end of the day and will sound the trumpet that wakes the dead on the Day of Judgment. These angels were not created at the same time. Israfel was first, Mika'il was created 5000 years later, Jibra'il after another 500 years and and perhaps Azrael later still.

Judaism and Christianity recognize seven archangels: Raphael, Gabriel, Michael, Uriel and three others whose names are uncertain - a source of debate by theologians for centuries. They are thought of to be three from the following list of possible candidates: Raziel, Remiel, Sariel, Metatron, Anael, Raguil, Barakiel, Barbiel, Chamael, Jophiel, Zadkiel, Jeduhiel, Simael, Zaphiel, and Aniel.

One post-Talmudic source increases the number to twelve, linking them with the signs of the zodiac, while kabbalists name, with Metatron named first and then repeated as a tenth.

Some new age angelologists also believe there to be twelve archangels instead of the traditional seven: Anthriel, Aquariel, Chamuel, Gabriel, Jophiel, Michael, Omniel, Perpetiel, Raphael, Uriel, Valeoel, and Zadkiel.

The Book of Enoch (or Henoch) names seven archangels:

Uriel, who rules the world and Tartarus;

Raguel, who takes vengeance on the world of the luminaries;

Michael, who is set over the most part of mankind and over chaos;

Saraquael, who is set over the spirits;

Gabriel, ruler of paradise, the serpents and the cherubim;

Ramiel, whom God set over those who rise; and

Raphael, who rules the spirits of men.

Enoch places only four around God's throne, backed up by their followers: Michael, Raphael, Gabriel and one named Phanuel (possibly synonymous with Ramiel) who is responsible for overseeing the repentance of sinners.

The seven angels which the Book of Revelation describes standing before God are also usually interpreted as archangels.

Michael, Uriel, Gabriel and Ramiel have all been credited with defeating the 185,000-strong Assyrian army of Sennacherib in 701 B.C. The syllable 'el' or 'it' at the end of angel and of so many angel names means bright', 'shining' or 'shining being'.

"Nine Choirs of Angels," Catholic Online (which includes sections on Seraphim, Cherubim, Principalities, and Archangels), plus individual articles on angels, St. Michael, St. Gabriel, and St. Raphael.

The Archangels Themselves

The Archangel Michael, whose name means 'who is as God', is generally considered to be the foremost of the seven archangels and the leader of the Host of Heaven. He derives originally from the Chaldeans by who he was worshiped as something of a god. He is the chief of the order of virtues, Prince of the presence, angel of repentance, righteousness, mercy and sanctification: also ruler of the 4th Heaven, tutelary sar (angelic prince). According to the Book of Daniel, Michael is one of the chief princes' and the one responsible for the defense of the nation of Israel which makes him at least of the higher order of principalities. He is also described as the leader of the forces of heaven in their triumph over Satan and his followers. According to the Book of Revelations, Michael and his angels' are described as fighting the dragon and his angels. Hence Michael is often shown fighting or overcoming a dragon armed with spear or sword as God's Warrior.

St. Michael has been invoked as patron and protector by the Church from the time of the Apostles. The Eastern Rite and many others place him over all the angels, as Prince of the Seraphim. St. Michael is the patron of grocers, mariners, paratroopers, police and sickness.

Source: The Archangels Page (off-line as of August 2004), Catholic Online Saints

The Archangel Gabriel, whose name means 'God is my strength', was an important figure in the Bible, and appears first in the Book of Daniel (chapters 8 and 9) as a messenger and revealer announced the prophecy of 70 weeks (Dn 9:21-27). Gabriel explained to Daniel his vision of a ram and a billy-goat foretelling Alexander the Great's conquest of Persia and a prophecy foretelling the freeing of the Israelites. In both these cases the archangel is mentioned by name but it has also been suggested that Gabriel is the angel who wrestles with Jacob in the form of a man and that he was involved in the destruction of Sodom and Gommorah. Enoch says that Gabriel was sent to destroy the giant children of the fallen "watchers" and did so by turning them against each other In 'Paradise Lost'.

In the New Testament he appeared to Zechariah to announce the birth of St. John the Baptist (Lk 1:11). It was also Gabriel which proclaimed the Annunciation of Mary to be the mother of Jesus (Lk 1:26). In the Book of Enoch, part of the pseudepigrapha, he is one of the seven archangels who stand close to God. Later Christian tradition made him the trumpeter of the Last Judgment. A popular figure in art, Gabriel is often pictured appearing to Mary or with trumpet raised. In Islam he is Jibril, the principal of many tales, who revealed the Koran to Muhammad.

St. Gabriel is the patron of communications workers.

Sources: The Archangels Page (off-line as of August 2004), Anthony J. Salsarini, Catholic Online

The Archangel Raphael, In Hebrew this means 'God Heals'. The angel Raphael first appeared in the apocryphal Book of Tobit (Tobias) Tb 3:25, 5:5-28, 6-12. He appears as the companion and guide of young Tobiasto whom he eventually reveals himself saying: "I am the Angel Raphael, one of the seven who stand before the throne of God." (Tb 12:15). In the Book of Euoch he is the guide to Sheol, the Judaic underworld and it was he who was sent to bind the fallen "watcher" Azazel, burying him under rocks in a desert place on earth. Raphael is not named in the canonical books.

Raphael's name means "God heals." This identity came about because of the biblical story which claims that he "healed" the earth when it was defiled by the sins of the fallen angels in the apocryphal book of Enoch. Raphael is also identified as the angel who moved the waters of the healing sheep pool. He is also the patron of the blind, of happy meetings, of nurses, of physicians and of travelers.

Source: The Archangels Page (off-line as of August 2004), Catholic Online.

Camael (Camiel, Camael)

One of the 7 Archangels who attend the throne of God, as stated in Enoch I. He is described as "one of the holy angels whom God has set over those who rise". He is the same angel who, in the apocalypse of Baruch, destroys the army of Sennacherib.

Source: The Archangels Page (off-line as of August 2004)

Raguel (Raguil, Rasuil, Rufael, Suryan, Akrasiel -"Friend of God")

One of the 7 Archangels listed in the Enoch writings. Raguel is an angel of earth, a guard of the 2nd (or 4th) Heaven. He 'takes vengeance on the world of luminaries," which is interpreted to mean that, for cause, he brings other angels to account.

Source: The Archangels Page (off-line as of August 2004)

Saraqael (Sarakiel)

The prince of ministering angels, officiating when these angels convene at judgment councils. Although Saraqael usually appears as a holy angel, he is sometimes mentioned as one who has fallen from grace. He has even been known as the angel of death.

Source: The Archangels Page (off-line as of August 2004)

Uriel

One of the leading angels in noncanonical lore, and ranked variously as a seraph, cherub, regent of the sun, flame of God, angel of the presence. Presided over Tartarus (Hades), archangel of salvation. In the latter work he acts as heavenly interpreter of Ezra's visions. In Enoch I, he is the angel who "watches over thunder and terror." In The Book of Adam and Eve he presides over repentance. Uriel "is supposed to be the spirit who stood at the gate of the lost Eden with the fiery sword." The Book of Adam and Eve designates him as this spirit. He is invoked in some of the ancient litanies. He has been identified as one of the angels who helped bury Adam and Abel in Paradise. He is known as the dark angel who wrestled with Jacob at Peniel; as the destroyer of the hosts of Sennacherib ; as the messenger sent by God to Noah to warn him of the impending deluge, all of which feats or missions have been credited to other angels, as elsewhere noted. In the view of Louis Ginzberg, the "prince of lights" in The Manual of Discipline refers to Uriel. In addition, Uriel is said to have disclosed the mysteries of the heavenly arcana to Ezra; interpreted prophecies, and led Abraham out of Ur. In later Judaism we find Uriel instead of Phanuel" as one of the 4 angels of the presence. Uriel is also the angel of the month of September and may be invoked ritually by those born in that month. The Magus claims that alchemy "which is of divine origin" was brought down to earth by Uriel, and that it was Uriel who gave the cabala to man, although this "key to the mystical interpretation of Scripture" is also said to have been the gift of Metatron. Milton describes Uriel as "Regent of the Sun" and the "sharpest sighted spirit of all in Heaven"

Source: The Archangels Page (off-line as of August 2004)

"I just wish Christianity would change for the better and do some atoning and explore its roots a bit deeper"

I think people would be very suprised at what they learned if they simply did this one thing. In a sense it is exactly what I have been doing, though it wasn't what I set out to do, and it has been very enlightening. Gives one a very different perspective on Jesus, Paul, and the writings of the N.T.

Well said, Vert!

I know this in no way contributes to this thread in a productive manner, but I'm still drinking my first cup of coffee for the day and I just don't have the will power to resist. . . .

"Cold hard cynicism (not the poster) is the antithesis of compassion. Odd thing is, both come from the same place - the heart. One is full, the other is empty. "

When I first read this line I almost fell off the chair laughing cause I had this mental image of Cynic as the Grinch. You know the scene where they show his teeny tiny heart. . . . :D-->

Excerpts from here which I thought were really inspiring . . .

"There comes a point in the life of all faithful Jews when we face the fact that what the Torah says, just isn't so. . . .

The Torah is not a science text book, but uses the knowledge of its time to illustrate the various ways in which God, the Creator, interacts with creation. Nor does it happen when we first note the differences between the Torah's use of history and modern academic historical work and journalistic reporting. The Torah's concern is not objective reporting but rather is interested in using historical events to describe the evolving relationship between God and God's people. . .

The rabbis of old used the occasion of the tragic death of a young boy who had fallen from a tree while collecting eggs in accordance with the Torah's directive to chase the mother bird away before taking the eggs (Deuteronomy 22:6-7) as the critical event in Elisha ben Abuyah's, one of their colleague's, rejection of traditional faith. After witnessing the accidental death of the child, Elisha ben Abuyah uttered the powerful cry of despair - "There is no justice, there is no Judge." Despite the Torah's promise of length of days to all who follow this commandment, the child came to an early death (Kiddushin 39b).

There is no answer to the question of theodicy but there are responses How we respond, gives meaning and purpose to our faith. We may respond like Elisha ben Abuyah and deny purpose and direction in this world and, out of despair, embrace the apparent chaos of existence? We may also choose to respond like Job's 'friends' and deny our experiences and reject the reality of what we know in favor of a mistaken piety? We can also respond like Job and submit before the vastness of the God of All Creation? But as faithful Jews we have another choice besides apostasy, blindness and submission. It is action -- the deeds of love and kindness we perform when we read the words of Torah as a prophetic vision of what the world might be tomorrow rather than a description what the world is today. In a perilous, unfair world, we can hear the Torah directing us to make the world safer, fairer, kinder and more just? We need to ask ourselves, "How can we ensure that the Torah's promises are true?" We respond to promises of the Torah by binding Job's wounds, by consoling the child's bereaved family - by standing with those who suffer and by learning to give and to accept comfort. We are to turn theory into reality (Bold added by me)

Sky,

"The first house my wife and I rented after we got married was an unusual brick house which included (at the end of the doorway hall) a stone Buddha statue

Invisible Dans comment, (thanks Dan)

I told yah I told yah I told yah"

Yeah, and many of the Christian churches have huge Crosses, statues of Jesus, etc. Does that mean the Christians are also worshipping statues? Or do they perhaps simply use them as reminders of something?

"In that it's the same God. In a sense, it's asking God to be treated according to the Law instead of the New Covenant. I don't see why He wouldn't accede, but I haven't given it extensive thought."

By your definition - those who in some way stem from OT promises, the Muslim's too would be in the same boat. They stem from Hagar's son who was also promised to bring forth a great people. And who knows what was promised to people of other religions which were not recorded in our modern version of the Bible.

Zix, if you ever studied Judaism in depth as opposed to limiting yourself to the OT, you would find that there are many writings and oral traditions which have been passed down that were not cannonized into the Bible but are very much believed by the Jewish people. You will also find that the interpretation and application of those laws in the Pentatuche will vary quite a bit. There is much writing on the various arguments of what it all means.

"Abigail: Interesting point if you're Jewish. Hadn't really considered that one before."

Interesting how?

"They want God to be "all-caring" and "all-loving", but they want him to toss being "all-just" when they screw up. Pretty "conveeeenient", as the Church Lady would say."

Well that is sort of the God TWI promised us isn't it? At least when we first signed that little green card?

I don't think agnostics want god to be a wish-fulfilling Genie anymore so than the rest of us do. They are just looking at things from a different place than those who are convinced there is a God are looking from.

"Suppose that due to an accident, you were exposed to a lethal dose of radiation and despite the doctors' best efforts, you have less than 24 hours to live. (like George Mason in the second season of "24".) Would you turn back to Christ on your deathbed in case you might have been wrong in your earlier rejection?"

I'm not an athiest so maybe I don't qualify for your hypothetical - but I'm not Christian either, so perhaps I do?

Would I call on Christ? No. Would I call on God? Yes.

"Oh, so it would be ok if God were someone who made a bunch of rules and then didn't really care whether any of them were followed or not?"

There is a difference between "caring if your rules are followed" and having forgiveness and understanding for when your rules are broken. As a parent, I have rules my children are expected to follow. As children, my kids break the rules. As a LOVING parent, I forgive them even though I am upset that they broke the rules. In addition, when handling a situation of broken rules, I take into consideration their reasons for having broken them - which are on occasion valid. As an imperfect human, if I can do this for my children, how much more so can God for His?

Zix,

How do you define "renounce Jesus Christ"? What would have to do/say to meet that requirement in your mind?

Do I believe Jesus Christ once lived? Yes, I believe in all likelihood he did. Do I believe he taught some fantastic stuff? Yup. Do I believe he was the son of God? Sure, in the same sense we all are. Do I believe God raised him from the dead? Depends on how you define that - I believe we all rise again after death. Do I believe I need salvation and Jesus is that salvation? nope.

Sky,

"With respect to TWI, take a personal inventory and ask yourself what was it in you that motivated you to join. I aint saying it was all your fault. It just it always was my view that doctrinally they kinda wanted to appeal to the flesh by saying a lot of stuff was ok when it really wasnt."

I joined TWI because I wanted to learn more about God. I was raised by non-practicing Jewish parents in a predominantly Christian, very small town. So when I wanted answers about God, naturally I turned to Christianity. TWI specifically, because at the time, the PFAL class made a lot of sense to me. Also, because at the time, I didn't feel pressured to accept that which did not make sense to me.

Over time, as I contemplated what I had learned, what once made sense stopped making sense. And there was more and more pressure to blindly accept and apply what was taught, etc. etc. you know the drill.

"The other thing is bitterness. Are you folks sure your not just angry at God because he wouldnt do what you thought he oughta? Personally, I kinda think you are. "

No, not particularly angry at God, though there certainly are moments when I am. I think that is okay, many of the OT prophets argued with God.

Bitter? Again, not particularly, but wiser for sure. I harbor no ill will against Christianity or Christians in general, though there are some I don't like, just as there are those in every "group" I wouldn't like. I simply found another path, which for the time seems to be where I belong. I will probably never stop questing and searching, even if it means "changing religions" over and over again.

Def,

"What are the flaws in the Christology or theology?"

Well, to begin with - I simply have not found a Christian group I have been comfortable with since leaving TWI.

But even greater than that, I reject the notion that I was born in sin. I reject the notion that I need a savior. I reject the notion that a loving father would set up a system which required his son to be so brutally murdered. I believe we are all pretty much where we are supposed to be. We are here to learn and we all have different paths and choices which lead us to that which we need to learn. Not quite predestination - we certainly have free will. I suspect when we reach a fork in the road, ultimately both paths are right and will lead us to learn something new.

The sin of idolatry has never been completey wiped out. I'd dare say all of us are idolatrous at some point or another in our lives.

Yes many Jews have recanted their faith, so have many Christians, Muslims, Buhdists, Pagans, etc.

What I got out of the article is that we all have moments of doubt - sometimes years and years of doubt. But many of us, when placed in a tight spot, will find a faith inside of us which we weren't even aware existed.

Very rarely do I read such articles from a completely literal perspective. If I did, I would reject most of what I read out of hand and walk away feeling like I wasted my time. In fact, I may just give up reading and researching all together. I try to see beyond the literal and find a positive lesson from it which I can apply in my life. In this case, the lesson being we all doubt at times and should not be ashamed of that doubt when our faith returns. And also that our faith often does return.

Def, I'm not sure how to answer your question because I am not entirely sure what you are asking me.

In MY Jewish tradition - there would absolutely be room for "Jews for Jesus", Messianic Jews, Christians, Pagans, whatever. I believe we all have our path to walk in this life. My focus is in walking my own path, it is not my place to tell someone else where to walk. Likewise, while it is my desire to expose my children to the Jewish tradition, faith, and ethics, if at some point they chose another path in life I would not have a problem with that.

Within the reconstructionist group, which I am seriously considering joining, there is also room. They will welcome anyone who wants to become a part of the community, whether they wish to convert or not. Their goal is to do what they can to make this world we live in a better place, not convert people. In fact, 1000Names came to services with me last Friday and was very welcomed.

Within other groups the answer will very depending on the movement and the individual community. For example, many orthodox groups would reject my children because their father was not Jewish. Some would likewise reject me because I was once married to someone who is not Jewish or because I am currently with someone who is not Jewish.

So I hope, somewhere in all of that I answered your question.

"But as far as the religion itself goes, surely you must see a difference in the religions, else why would you decide to study Judaism rather than Shintoism? Don't you make any distinction between the two?"

Absolutely, there are differences, Laleo. I'm sorry if I came across too aggressively in making my point. :)-->

I look at this world we live in and the history of it, and it saddens me to see how much hatred, anger, and fear there is regarding religious differences. We kill each other every day over these differences. Yet the truth is, despite the differences there are also so many similarities. So, I guess I tend to think, why focus on those differences which so often bring about fear and/or anger? Why not focus instead on how much we have in common?

So why did I choose Judaism instead of something else? First, even though I am of Jewish heritage, I grew up in a Christian community in a largely Christian society. So initially, it was Christianity I looked to when I sought answers about God. However, eventually I rejected Christianity for a number of reasons, which by and large have already been discussed here. One which has not, I suppose, is that TWI pretty much left a bad taste in my mouth in terms of my own Christianity. This is not to say I reject Christians. It simply means that it no longer is the path which meets my needs and interests.

After leaving TWI, I spent two years or so researching various religions, including Native American and the new age movement. Then finally it dawned on me. I have this heritage I know very little about, so I began to study it.

There is much about Orthodox Judaism I reject and my initial researching was one more of curiosity than of a quest for God. However, eventually I stumbled upon a wealth of information about the reform and reconstructionist movements. I have found a great deal of depth to their teachings as well as a great deal of history I never knew existed. Many of their ethics sit well with me. I find their parables to be rich with beautiful imagery I also enjoy. Additionally, because much of Judaism is about ethics and behavior and not about defining God, there is much freedom to believe what you wish about God. The spectrum is full from those who are full of faith to those who do not believe in the existence of God at all, and all are accepted.

I like the tradition, particularly the weekly lighting of the Shabbat candles. I like the sense of connectedness I receive, knowing that all over the world there are people who are also lighting their candles. I want to pass this heritage, tradition, and sense of connectedness on to my children.

Finally, I find within Judaism the blend of religion, tradition/ritual, and respect for an individual's beliefs and faith, etc. which suits my needs and personality very well at this time in my life.

In reading the why Christianity and why not Christianity threads, I got to thinking, why God?

I found this on a Chassidic website and thought it was rather interesting. It is written from the perspective of Jewish teachings, but I think one could eliminate the references to "Jewish people" and apply it to people of any faith.

I'm not going to quote the entire article because it's rather long, but you can find it here

"Remember what Amalek did to you on the road, on your way out of Egypt. That he encountered you on the way and cut off those lagging to your rear, when you were tired and exhausted; he did not fear G-d. Therefore... you must obliterate the memory of Amalek from under the heavens. Do not forget.

Deuteronomy 25:17-19

The Jewish people had just experienced one of the greatest manifestations of divine power in history. Ten supernatural plagues had compelled the mightiest nation on earth to free them from their servitude. The sea had split before them, and manna had rained from the heavens to nourish them. How could they possibly question "Is G-d amongst us or not"?

Yet such is the nature of doubt. There is doubt that is based on rational query. There is doubt that rises from the doubter's subjective motives and desires. But then there is doubt pure and simple: irrational doubt, doubt more powerful than reason. Doubt that neutralizes the most convincing arguments and the most inspiring experiences with nothing more than a cynical shrug.. . . . .

Amalek "knows his Master and consciously rebels against Him." Amalek does not challenge the truth with arguments, or even with selfish motivations -- he just disregards it. To the axiom, "Do truth because it is true," Amalek says "So what?" Armed with nothing but his chutzpah, Amalek jumps into the boiling tub, contests the incontestable. And in doing so he cools its impact.. . . . .

Faith is not something that must be attained; it need only be revealed, for it is woven into the very fabric of the soul's essence. Faith, continues Rabbi Schneur Zalman, transcends reason. Through faith one relates to the infinite truth of G-d in its totality, unlike the perception achieved by reason, which is defined and limited by the finite nature of the human mind. Thus Rabbi Schneur Zalman explains the amazing fact that, throughout Jewish history, many thousands of Jews have sacrificed their lives rather than renounce their faith and their bond with the Almighty, including many who had little conscious knowledge and appreciation of their Jewishness and did not practice it in their daily lives. At their moment of truth, when they perceived that their very identity as Jews was at stake, their intrinsic faith -- a faith that knows no bounds or equivocations -- came to light, and overpowered all else.

The Jew's response to Amalek is to remember. To call forth his soul's reserves of supra-rational faith, a faith which may lie buried and forgotten under a mass of mundane involvements and entanglements. A faith which, when remembered, can meet his every moral challenge, rational or not."

"Christianity, and maybe Buddhism, too, seem the most malleable, maybe because they tend to be missionary religions, reaching out to the four corners of the earth, absorbing other cultures. Ethnic religions, like Judaism and Hinduism, for instance, tend to be a little more fixed, but that's not to say there isn't a lot of variety within them. "

True, Jews do not prosyletize. Perhaps this is one of the things which appeals to me about Judaism - no door to door witnessing! :D-->

But seriously, the Jewish people have been scattered all over the world and taken on the culture of others. Certain traditions remain fairly steadfast. This is because the Jewish people see those traditions as what connects all of us, despite our many differences. However, there is also tremendous diversity.

I cannot speak much for Hinduism, because I've never studied it.

"There are very fundamental differences among the religions regarding the nature and definition of reality, which translates into passivity and detachment in some religions, not so in others. "

Even within Christianity, you have those who believe things are fated and cannot be changed and those who believe the individual has choice and can change their path.

"Since the concepts of good/evil, right/wrong form the basis of this religion, and it follows that humans are required to do what is good/right, then any evil/wrong can be corrected, unlike the concepts of karma or fate, which have the gods determining the outcomes in life, no matter their moral value. In other words, as I understand it, Jews believe that morality is a human endeavor, powered (not thwarted) by God, therefore able to be accomplished"

Yes, this is correct. However, there are also Jewish people who believe much of it is up to God and there is little they can do to change it. Again, it comes down to what individuals within a group believe and what movement of Judaism you are speaking of. The Orthodox Jews often believe they individually must choose to do good, but there is little they can do to improve the world at large. Whereas on the other end, the reconstructionists believe individually and as a group, there is much which can be done to improve the world.

"Plus, since the story of Judaism (almost) begins with the children of Israel in slavery to the Egyptians, empathy for the politically oppressed, and a strong belief in justice, seems rooted in Jewish culture. "

This tpp varies. Jewish people are as capable of racism and oppression as any other people.

"In fact, suffering (oppression) for a Jew is something which can be corrected or avoided, rather than accepted, because it is a human condition, brought about by humans who do not act ethically, rather than a spiritual condition that is mandated by the gods. "

Again, it is an individual thing. There are those who would say their suffering is the will of God and there is nothing they can do to change it, just as there are those who believe they are in charge of their lives and can change things.

Dmiller,

"Suppose you asked a Pharisee "What is Torah"? they would have given you an entirely different answer than what Jesus did. Pharisees knew the letter of the law, Jesus knew the heart of it all. The Pharisees saw what was written, but had no idea as to the concept behind it all. Jesus also knew what was written, but He saw the underlying factors that made it so.

Christianity is no different."

I wholeheartedly disagree with you here.

1. All of the Pharasee's would have agreed as to "what is Torah" though there would have been much arguing about what it all meant. As there have been since the days of Moses and still are today.

2. Not all Pharasee's were like those depicted in the gospels. If you ever have an opportunity to puruse a section of Midrash of even a Torah with commentaries in it, you would be very suprised at the different perspectives/interpretations of just the first five books of the Bible. These thoughts and arguments were passed down orally for centuries and eventually placed in writting. They still to occur even today.

3. I don't believe for one minute Jesus had some sort of inside track on the "heart" behind the letter of the law. Much of what Jesus taught comes from Kabalah (Jewish mysticism), but not as it is somewhat commercially known today.

"Blame whomever you want, say what you will, but the fact is -- deliverance is available, and speculating about all the why's and wherefore's won't fill that bowl."

Deliverance from what? I'm very interested in finding out what it is I need deliverance from because I have no idea.