Since we are talking about secular zionism vs religious one, modern orthodox jews, haskala and stuff like that I wanted to ask all of your guys here, what you think about dennis prager and ben shapiro.
I am asking cuz they are the most famous religious jews in the english speaking world, they defend israel and zionism unconditionally, talk about judeo-xtian values, cooperate with xtian evangelical xtians who want to convert him, they also rarely quote torah and never the gemara etc.
So whats your impression regarding them and in what spectrum would you place them
They are Modern Orthodox (I think Prager is not even Orthodox) and not very knowledgeable in Torah matters, to say the least. Their RW leaning doesn't seem to emanate from the Torah, even if they sometimes invoke the Torah in support of "traditional values", but from generic American RW culture.
In Prager's wikipedia page (never a very reliable source, but here they quote a more reliable source) it says: "After he left graduate school, Prager left Modern Orthodoxy but maintained many traditional Jewish practices; he remains religious."
I don't know exactly what that means, but I think that he is not Orthodox.
Shapiro is modern orthodox, but I don't think that he had much of Torah education.
Ben Shapiro is much more of an American that anything else, by that I mean his main goal is conserving American values. He openly says he almost never brings Judaism into the discussion since he wants people to relate to what he is saying as objective, and not limited to Jews. Hence, although I like listening to him myself, he can barely be considered any sort of spokesman for the Jewish people. I don't think he would contradict any of that.
Ben Shapiro was propped from the start. He was launched at WorldNetDaily out of the blue as a prodigy wunderkind (he was 17 at the time) and given the same promotion as seasoned and very popular columnists columnists and talking heads like Pat Buchanan and Ann Coulter, who were regularly in the top five, even top three, at WND while I don't think he ever broke the top 20 despite the ridiculous hyper-promotion he received from the start. He never developed an organic audience like they did. He promotes neither American nor Jewish interests. Follow the money.
His claim to fame is "debating" stupid college students (am I repeating myself?) on subjects that are red meat to right-leaning Americans, making him seem like a super-genius by comparison. No.
He graduated from Harvard law with honors. He's a very brilliant fellow.
"His claim to fame is "debating" stupid college students (am I repeating myself?) on subjects that are red meat to right-leaning Americans, making him seem like a super-genius by comparison."
He's debated Cenk Ugyur. And he's gone up against plenty of pundits on TV too. That doesn't prove he's Socrates, but it's more than you make it out to be.
"I am asking cuz they are the most famous religious jews in the english speaking world"
I think that is a very serious overstatement. Perhaps you should have said that they are the most famous Jews in the American conservative talk radio world. Which is a very small demographic.
Ben defends Israel but claimed that he dosent feel a need to live in israel. Hes an orthodox jew but his view of zionism is more secular than those who live here and follow Rav Kooks teachings. He views things on a much more pragmatic level with less idealistic aspirations. The fact that he views America as such an ally proves this. America has pressured Israel into makung terrible concessions. They want us to be financially and militarily dependent on their policies as opposed to allowing us to enjoy full sovereignty.
Both of them are part of a wider movement of pro-religious and traditional values. But on moral-philosophical grounds much more than theological ones. Prager doesn't purport to be Orthodox at all.
Regarding craig and macarthur: I was always wondering: how does shapiro reconcile all the talmudic and shulkhan arukhic prohibitions of sitting with idol worshippers (let alone idol worshippers who actively target jews) with his interviews and even friendships with such people. Did you know andrew klavan is an ex-jew too and that even michael brown writes for the daily wire. Like, what kind of work environment does ben tolerate?
If I were an orthodox jew (an actual one, not like these two fraudsters) I would feel unnerved and annoyed by these constant random comments below every of these videos: "CHRIST IS THE LORD! I always PRAY for the soul of shapiro that he accepts JESUS as his LORD and SAVIOUR...." and similar stuf like that.
And prager: when he justified porn, I was shocked to the core. He even tried to justify it from jewish hashkafa ("we jews have a realistic view of human nature, we don't demonize sexuality like catholics" etc)
And then in one video he criticised the hijab. Like, have you ever noticed that orthodox jewish women wear that, too. But again, he seems to want to see as little clothes on strange women as possible.
Raphael, I think you need to ask mechila from the people you have slandered here. you seem like a good bloke, but woefully uneducated. I wish you well.
He may or may not be a heretic, but he is a fraudster, and has been from the start. I know things about him Rabbi Yaron Reuven doesn't.
Vox Day: "I once had a conversation with a fellow [WorldNetDaily] columnist [Ben Shapiro, who he names later in the blog post] who was undergoing a crisis of conscience. He admitted that for three years, he had engaged in no independent thinking or research and instead had simply followed the quasi-official consensus that happened to prevail at the time he was writing. That he had done so did not surprise me, that he was candid enough to admit it to himself, let alone to me, certainly did."
FRAUDSTER. You can be sure that today, close to 20 years later, he wishes those emails to Vox didn't exist.
This makes no sense. Andrew Klavan (not an "ex-Jew" as Rafael says but a Messianic Jew) is on the staff of the Daily Wire. He missionizes too. Ben cares about one thing...Ben.
I mentioned Ben's launch at WorldNetDaily. What I didn't mention is that early on, he wrote Vox Day (also a columnist there, who was regularly in the top five) about the crisis of conscience he had that he was just spewing talking points and not expressing original or personal thoughts. This didn't last long, obviously. The reason he doesn't "think about it at all" is because he couldn't handle the guilt he would feel for selling his people out. The result is what you see today. A man without conscience or moral compass, who happens to be right on a few issues (like abortion), but otherwise aids and abets our enemies, regardless of what he professes to believe.
Vox has written and spoken about this many times since, though never publicizing the emails he received.
I have the speech of the Belzer Rebbe's brother in total and anyone reading this knows what he said and what he meant, we don't need a "rashi" to give us a rational which makes no sense. He was very clear..... "Hitler will never come to Hungary" is what he said! For you to now sugar coat this is a lie that you want to perpetuate. Your entire premise is a word salad with no meat or substance!
What in the world are you talking about? Nobody is sugar coating anything. I'm sorry your family was killed in the Holocaust. So was the Belzer Rebbe's. So was mine. So were most people's, probably. As you know, there is a lot of blame to go around. Who you blame is nothing more than an ideological Rorschach test.
Calling him a Zionist is a mischaracterization. Have you read the book?
Hungarian Jews largely believed that their devotion and piety would save them. This seemed to be the case for years.
Probably the worst that could be said about the Belzer Rebbe is that he was speaking to a very receptive audience. Even were R. Teichtal present to object, he would not have been listened to.
I have no problem believing that the Belzer Rav made a mistake. I have somewhere a copy of the uncensored speech, and it didn't bother me at all.
But to say he told people not to leave is just not true. He told them that he wasn't leaving because he believed the Nazis would come, because he didn't believe the Nazis would come. He was wrong. What does that say? That he wasn't a Navi? I never thought he was.
understood. i don't think it'll be that controversial. but of course of course, i trust you guys will make sure it's appropriate. no lachatz to publish even if i send, and no lachatz to publish as is either
yes. the person saying the statement in context is important even if the statement itself wasn't necessarily incorrect. it's like if slifkin would say that we have to do hishtadlus in a certain situation. he may sometimes be correct in that specific case but since his statement came with obvious incorrect undertones, that statement is to be called out as anti-Torah
I believe this is actually even closer to the question discussed by the Rambam, Ramban, and others why Mitzrayim was punished even though it was Hashem's plan for Bnei Yisrael to be oppressed by them. See Ramban Bereishis 15:14. By the way I think your question applies to hashgacha in general, not just pratis.
Another thing I just came across, Radak II Shmuel 12:11
יש לשאול איך גזר האל על אבשלום שיחטא וישכב עם נשי אביו ואם לא חטא דוד לא היה חוטא אבשלום והנה נענש דוד בדבר חטא אבשלום יש לפרש כי האל לא גזר בפירוש על אבשלום ולא הזכירו בשם ואף על פי שידע האל כי אבשלום יהיה החוטא בעבור תאות נפשו לחטוא לא שהאל גזר עליו לחטוא ואם לא חטא דוד היה האל מונע נשי דוד מהמכשול על ידי עבירה אף על פי שאבשלום סופו לחטוא מפני תאות יצרו לא היה חוטא עם נשי אביו ועוד כי לא היה חטא גדול בזה כי פלגשי אביו היו ומפותת האב מותרת לבן אלא לפי שהיו פלגשי מלך אסורות לכל אדם וכ"ש כי לבנו מכוער הדבר ורבי' סעדיה ז"ל כתב כן כי אלה הדברים אשר ספר נתן לדוד על שני חלקים אחד מהם מעשה הבורא והוא הגברת אבשלום והשליטו על כל אשר לדוד ועל זה אמר הנני מקים עליך רעה והשני מעשה אבשלום בבחירתו והוא מה שכתב ושכב את נשיך ורצה בהקדמתו להודיע לדוד בחירת אבשלום להראות את לבו בזה
sorry khoker, i don't really understand. why can't it by the very same token that He wants us to be in that very situation, but still pass the test? just coming off your wording...
either way, the ramchal has a very nice analogy to explain this in daas tvunos, that two kids in a class, one smart one not quite so, the smart kid chapps in a few minutes what the not so bright takes an hour. after the hour the dumb kid doesn't chapp it any better than that smart kid did after those few minutes even if he needed more effort. so too when it comes to understanding God, if we sin, we are now further from Him and it takes longer to 'chapp' Him, and now the efforts necessary to explain take longer and are more elaborate, but at the same time it would've come to that very same clarity immediately if we hadn't sinned.
it still begs the question that if the world is supposed t be 6k years there is obviously a very specific plan which includes the sins, but that already borders on yediah bechira as the rest of this conversation proceeded.
Your suggestion is theological inconsistent with free choice. (And BTW so is Hasgacha pratis, at least in the way it is commonly understood, as personified by the author of the confusing article above.)
The concept you brought up is found in dualism. Monotheistic Judaism was and is a polemic against dualism, which was common in the ancient world. Even the Dead Sea sect were dualists. God loves us and gave us a Torah to help avoid sin so that we can refine our character and therefore help to heal this fractured world.
Well said!
As I wrote in the other blog, the השגחה פרטית of the Holocaust is as clearly visible as the positive השגחה פרטית stories we hear.
Since we are talking about secular zionism vs religious one, modern orthodox jews, haskala and stuff like that I wanted to ask all of your guys here, what you think about dennis prager and ben shapiro.
I am asking cuz they are the most famous religious jews in the english speaking world, they defend israel and zionism unconditionally, talk about judeo-xtian values, cooperate with xtian evangelical xtians who want to convert him, they also rarely quote torah and never the gemara etc.
So whats your impression regarding them and in what spectrum would you place them
They are Modern Orthodox (I think Prager is not even Orthodox) and not very knowledgeable in Torah matters, to say the least. Their RW leaning doesn't seem to emanate from the Torah, even if they sometimes invoke the Torah in support of "traditional values", but from generic American RW culture.
In Prager's wikipedia page (never a very reliable source, but here they quote a more reliable source) it says: "After he left graduate school, Prager left Modern Orthodoxy but maintained many traditional Jewish practices; he remains religious."
I don't know exactly what that means, but I think that he is not Orthodox.
Shapiro is modern orthodox, but I don't think that he had much of Torah education.
Ben Shapiro is much more of an American that anything else, by that I mean his main goal is conserving American values. He openly says he almost never brings Judaism into the discussion since he wants people to relate to what he is saying as objective, and not limited to Jews. Hence, although I like listening to him myself, he can barely be considered any sort of spokesman for the Jewish people. I don't think he would contradict any of that.
Ben Shapiro was propped from the start. He was launched at WorldNetDaily out of the blue as a prodigy wunderkind (he was 17 at the time) and given the same promotion as seasoned and very popular columnists columnists and talking heads like Pat Buchanan and Ann Coulter, who were regularly in the top five, even top three, at WND while I don't think he ever broke the top 20 despite the ridiculous hyper-promotion he received from the start. He never developed an organic audience like they did. He promotes neither American nor Jewish interests. Follow the money.
His claim to fame is "debating" stupid college students (am I repeating myself?) on subjects that are red meat to right-leaning Americans, making him seem like a super-genius by comparison. No.
He graduated from Harvard law with honors. He's a very brilliant fellow.
"His claim to fame is "debating" stupid college students (am I repeating myself?) on subjects that are red meat to right-leaning Americans, making him seem like a super-genius by comparison."
He's debated Cenk Ugyur. And he's gone up against plenty of pundits on TV too. That doesn't prove he's Socrates, but it's more than you make it out to be.
"I am asking cuz they are the most famous religious jews in the english speaking world"
I think that is a very serious overstatement. Perhaps you should have said that they are the most famous Jews in the American conservative talk radio world. Which is a very small demographic.
Ben defends Israel but claimed that he dosent feel a need to live in israel. Hes an orthodox jew but his view of zionism is more secular than those who live here and follow Rav Kooks teachings. He views things on a much more pragmatic level with less idealistic aspirations. The fact that he views America as such an ally proves this. America has pressured Israel into makung terrible concessions. They want us to be financially and militarily dependent on their policies as opposed to allowing us to enjoy full sovereignty.
Both of them are part of a wider movement of pro-religious and traditional values. But on moral-philosophical grounds much more than theological ones. Prager doesn't purport to be Orthodox at all.
Regarding craig and macarthur: I was always wondering: how does shapiro reconcile all the talmudic and shulkhan arukhic prohibitions of sitting with idol worshippers (let alone idol worshippers who actively target jews) with his interviews and even friendships with such people. Did you know andrew klavan is an ex-jew too and that even michael brown writes for the daily wire. Like, what kind of work environment does ben tolerate?
If I were an orthodox jew (an actual one, not like these two fraudsters) I would feel unnerved and annoyed by these constant random comments below every of these videos: "CHRIST IS THE LORD! I always PRAY for the soul of shapiro that he accepts JESUS as his LORD and SAVIOUR...." and similar stuf like that.
And prager: when he justified porn, I was shocked to the core. He even tried to justify it from jewish hashkafa ("we jews have a realistic view of human nature, we don't demonize sexuality like catholics" etc)
And then in one video he criticised the hijab. Like, have you ever noticed that orthodox jewish women wear that, too. But again, he seems to want to see as little clothes on strange women as possible.
Raphael, I think you need to ask mechila from the people you have slandered here. you seem like a good bloke, but woefully uneducated. I wish you well.
Since when does a non-jew have to ask mechila from anybody? (If not for Jewish reasons, classic critique not much of a deal.)
He may or may not be a heretic, but he is a fraudster, and has been from the start. I know things about him Rabbi Yaron Reuven doesn't.
Vox Day: "I once had a conversation with a fellow [WorldNetDaily] columnist [Ben Shapiro, who he names later in the blog post] who was undergoing a crisis of conscience. He admitted that for three years, he had engaged in no independent thinking or research and instead had simply followed the quasi-official consensus that happened to prevail at the time he was writing. That he had done so did not surprise me, that he was candid enough to admit it to himself, let alone to me, certainly did."
FRAUDSTER. You can be sure that today, close to 20 years later, he wishes those emails to Vox didn't exist.
It's nearly Yom Kippur. But you know that.
This makes no sense. Andrew Klavan (not an "ex-Jew" as Rafael says but a Messianic Jew) is on the staff of the Daily Wire. He missionizes too. Ben cares about one thing...Ben.
I mentioned Ben's launch at WorldNetDaily. What I didn't mention is that early on, he wrote Vox Day (also a columnist there, who was regularly in the top five) about the crisis of conscience he had that he was just spewing talking points and not expressing original or personal thoughts. This didn't last long, obviously. The reason he doesn't "think about it at all" is because he couldn't handle the guilt he would feel for selling his people out. The result is what you see today. A man without conscience or moral compass, who happens to be right on a few issues (like abortion), but otherwise aids and abets our enemies, regardless of what he professes to believe.
Vox has written and spoken about this many times since, though never publicizing the emails he received.
In case it's not clear, Shockpuppet is me.
In case you were wondering, along with the second great depression Vox announced back in 2008, we're also already in middle of WWIII https://voxday.net/2023/09/06/this-is-wwiii/ Russia apparently started a whole new phase of war back in February, https://voxday.net/2023/02/19/the-offensive-begins-next-week/ and people hate Jews because of our 'legalistic rationalizations for why it’s morally acceptable to rape very young boys and girls.' https://voxday.net/2023/09/26/the-satanic-morality/
Apparently Vox Day doesn't like that Ben admitted his mistakes. https://voxday.net/2022/10/27/the-rehabilitation-of-ben-shapiro/ Vox Day wouldn't make any such silly mistakes, of course in the first place of course. https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-fallacy-of-economic-catastrophism/comment/18182443
I have the speech of the Belzer Rebbe's brother in total and anyone reading this knows what he said and what he meant, we don't need a "rashi" to give us a rational which makes no sense. He was very clear..... "Hitler will never come to Hungary" is what he said! For you to now sugar coat this is a lie that you want to perpetuate. Your entire premise is a word salad with no meat or substance!
What in the world are you talking about? Nobody is sugar coating anything. I'm sorry your family was killed in the Holocaust. So was the Belzer Rebbe's. So was mine. So were most people's, probably. As you know, there is a lot of blame to go around. Who you blame is nothing more than an ideological Rorschach test.
Many Hungarian Jews shared this opinion. Rav Yissachar Shlomo Teichtal HY"D discusses this attitude at some length in his book Eim HaBanim Smeicha.
Shimshon, what opinion?
R.Teichtal became a Zionist.
Calling him a Zionist is a mischaracterization. Have you read the book?
Hungarian Jews largely believed that their devotion and piety would save them. This seemed to be the case for years.
Probably the worst that could be said about the Belzer Rebbe is that he was speaking to a very receptive audience. Even were R. Teichtal present to object, he would not have been listened to.
Yes, I have read the book.
very interesting. i love hearing the other side. looking forward to the response. i imagine zichron can help here. sounds like a he said she said
I have no problem believing that the Belzer Rav made a mistake. I have somewhere a copy of the uncensored speech, and it didn't bother me at all.
But to say he told people not to leave is just not true. He told them that he wasn't leaving because he believed the Nazis would come, because he didn't believe the Nazis would come. He was wrong. What does that say? That he wasn't a Navi? I never thought he was.
https://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=41456
(Joyous, are you interested in conversations of how to talk to atheists (or rather how to feel strong against their arguments)?)
Sure but that can be dicey territory. If it is a guest post you are suggesting, we would probably review it even more rigorously than our usual posts.
understood. i don't think it'll be that controversial. but of course of course, i trust you guys will make sure it's appropriate. no lachatz to publish even if i send, and no lachatz to publish as is either
keep up your good work dude!
yes. the person saying the statement in context is important even if the statement itself wasn't necessarily incorrect. it's like if slifkin would say that we have to do hishtadlus in a certain situation. he may sometimes be correct in that specific case but since his statement came with obvious incorrect undertones, that statement is to be called out as anti-Torah
Nicely done.
This question seems very close to ידיעה ובחירה. Of course, we believe in ידיעה despite this question, and we believe in hashgacha pratis the same way.
I believe this is actually even closer to the question discussed by the Rambam, Ramban, and others why Mitzrayim was punished even though it was Hashem's plan for Bnei Yisrael to be oppressed by them. See Ramban Bereishis 15:14. By the way I think your question applies to hashgacha in general, not just pratis.
There's a long מהלך in דרושי עולם התוהו of the לשם
Another thing I just came across, Radak II Shmuel 12:11
יש לשאול איך גזר האל על אבשלום שיחטא וישכב עם נשי אביו ואם לא חטא דוד לא היה חוטא אבשלום והנה נענש דוד בדבר חטא אבשלום יש לפרש כי האל לא גזר בפירוש על אבשלום ולא הזכירו בשם ואף על פי שידע האל כי אבשלום יהיה החוטא בעבור תאות נפשו לחטוא לא שהאל גזר עליו לחטוא ואם לא חטא דוד היה האל מונע נשי דוד מהמכשול על ידי עבירה אף על פי שאבשלום סופו לחטוא מפני תאות יצרו לא היה חוטא עם נשי אביו ועוד כי לא היה חטא גדול בזה כי פלגשי אביו היו ומפותת האב מותרת לבן אלא לפי שהיו פלגשי מלך אסורות לכל אדם וכ"ש כי לבנו מכוער הדבר ורבי' סעדיה ז"ל כתב כן כי אלה הדברים אשר ספר נתן לדוד על שני חלקים אחד מהם מעשה הבורא והוא הגברת אבשלום והשליטו על כל אשר לדוד ועל זה אמר הנני מקים עליך רעה והשני מעשה אבשלום בבחירתו והוא מה שכתב ושכב את נשיך ורצה בהקדמתו להודיע לדוד בחירת אבשלום להראות את לבו בזה
sorry khoker, i don't really understand. why can't it by the very same token that He wants us to be in that very situation, but still pass the test? just coming off your wording...
either way, the ramchal has a very nice analogy to explain this in daas tvunos, that two kids in a class, one smart one not quite so, the smart kid chapps in a few minutes what the not so bright takes an hour. after the hour the dumb kid doesn't chapp it any better than that smart kid did after those few minutes even if he needed more effort. so too when it comes to understanding God, if we sin, we are now further from Him and it takes longer to 'chapp' Him, and now the efforts necessary to explain take longer and are more elaborate, but at the same time it would've come to that very same clarity immediately if we hadn't sinned.
it still begs the question that if the world is supposed t be 6k years there is obviously a very specific plan which includes the sins, but that already borders on yediah bechira as the rest of this conversation proceeded.
is that at all helpful???
Your suggestion is theological inconsistent with free choice. (And BTW so is Hasgacha pratis, at least in the way it is commonly understood, as personified by the author of the confusing article above.)
Great, God wants you to sin? C'mon, matey.
Cheers
The concept you brought up is found in dualism. Monotheistic Judaism was and is a polemic against dualism, which was common in the ancient world. Even the Dead Sea sect were dualists. God loves us and gave us a Torah to help avoid sin so that we can refine our character and therefore help to heal this fractured world.