For an enlarged, easier to read index click here . To "google search" this site, scroll to the bottom of this page. (This site is best viewed with "Firefox")

(Tips: F11 key enables full screen viewing & Ctrl-F to search the index)


FACTIONS-----conservative 2


mevaseret Posted - 28 August 2000 14:11

the conservative movement never abolished shatnez or niddah halacha.
about jesus as the failed messiah, read the writings of rav sadia gaon about the messiah.

and, shunamit, what makes the rambam's 13 principles Judaism? Why should Judaism be defined by one person 2000 or so yrs after mattan torah? and the conservative movement as much as any other non-extreme movement in Judaism stresses the coming of the messiah.

shunamit- do you believe in 2 isiahs? if not, how do you explain the break in form style and chronology? how do you explain bereshit perek aleph and beit? or the notion "ein mukdam oh meuchar batorah?" prove that God wrote the Torah and that Spinoza was completely wrong with his documentary hypothesis of JEPD.

MODERATOR Posted - 28 August 2000 14:40

“the conservative movement never abolished shatnez or niddah halacha.”

That's like saying the Christians never abolished the Torah, they just "reinterpreted" it. Conservativism has some rules that they refer to as shatnez and nidah, but there is not much more similarity between theirs and ours.

“about jesus as the failed messiah, read the writings of rav sadia gaon about the messiah.”

I have. There is nothing there that defends Greenberg's statement.

“and, shunamit, what makes the rambam's 13 principles Judaism? Why should Judaism be defined by one person 2000 or so yrs after mattan torah? “

This is a good question and I will, IYH, address it shortly because it's clear that we need to clearly understand the distinctions between Orthodoxy, Modern orthodoxy, reform, etc.

“and the conservative movement as much as any other non-extreme movement in Judaism stresses the coming of the messiah.”

The Christians, too, stress the "coming" of the messiah, albeit a second coming. The "messiah" that the Conservatives believe in is not the same Messiah that we believe in. Same sounding word, two different things. The way we define messiah, they do not believe in it.

“shunamit- do you believe in 2 isiahs? if not, how do you explain the break in form style and chronology? “

G-d uses many styles and chronologies since He is capable of all. If you believe in 2 Yishayas how do you explain the fact that the Torah Shebal Peh says there was only one??

“how do you explain bereshit perek aleph and beit? “

What needs to be explained?

“or the notion "ein mukdam oh meuchar batorah?"“

the Torah is not a history book but a book of instructions. Nobody ever said it was chronological.

“ prove that God wrote the Torah and that Spinoza was completely wrong with his documentary hypothesis of JEPD.”

That's easy. In the "proofs to the Torah" forum we have some. There have been many more. That the Torah was written by G-d has already been proven. Been there done that.

MODERATOR Posted - 07 September 2000 17:09

Conservative Judaism is clearly heresy, and not Judaism at all. They create their own baseless rules and policies and incorporate those fairytales into what they call Judaism.

As far as “Halachah” goes, they make call it “Halachah”, but it is nothing close.

Solomon Schechter concocted, as part of the Halachic process a baseless and nonsensical concept called "Klal Yisrael" (yes, Klall Yisroel) which means that decisions on Jewish Law are largely determined by the practices of Klal Yisrael.

In other words, instead of people having to follow the law, the law follows the people. Of course, it is more complicated – and more messed up – than that. They have something called the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards (CJLS), that decides Halachah. Sometimes this pseudo-Sanhedrim hagadol will give people a choice of what they can do, and each conservative rabbi (sic) can decide on his own.

Who gave these people authority, I have no idea. And what authority they think they have – over all Judaism, over the Conservative movement – is not clear. Do they believe that the Conservative movement is correct? Then everyone should be bound to the decision of these lawmakers, since they represent the correct Torah view. But for some reason, they only claim to speak for the Conservative Movement – in other words, we’re not saying we’re right, but if you want to have our label, you have to listen to us.

That’s why Conservative Judaism is not defined. What is the status of someone who is not part of the Conservative Movement? Is he practicing Judaism? Is he wrong? Is he a heretic? Answering these questions based on Conservative philosophy generates irreconcilable contradictions and dead ends with no answers. But what can you expect? One cannot expect a coherent philosophy when you try to remake Torah in your own image.

You want to call it a new religion, call it a new religion. But calling it Judaism just doesn’t work.

The CJLS also has something called “standards”. These are more “chomur” than just plain laws.

The CJLS decides, not based on any legitimate Halachic grounds, what is considered a “standard.” But don’t worry – they only have 4 of them in the entire Torah! They are:

1. Rabbis cannot officiate at intermarriages.

2. Rabbis cannot officiate at a remarriage where the previous marriage has not been terminated according to Conservative laws

3. Rabbis cannot act as if Jewishness depends on having a Jewish father (not mother).

4. They cannot do any conversions without what they call Milah and Mikveh.

People can get thrown out of the Conservative movement (whatever that means – again, how does this effect him in any measurable way, besides a label?) for doing these things. What makes these things so special is the random, non-halachic decision of the lawmakers. Rabbis can not keep Shabbos and still be Conservative rabbis. But if they perform a conversion without a Mikveh, they can get thrown out. Go know.

They also believe - don’t ask how they got this – that “revelation” (like Har Sinai) in the form of prophecy, can happen today. I am not kidding.

mevaseret Posted - 08 September 2000 9:52

moderator "Conservative Judaism is clearly heresy" is a pretty heavy statement. I am now respectfully giving you the opportunity to retract it.

1. the onus is on the people who challenge conservative Judaism

2. the reason that conservative Judaism has a law body is because Rabbi Zechariah Frankel believed that history depicted how Jewish law has been changed for the community (like the case of prozbul), and he wrote about it

3. about taharat hamishpacha: please read "This Is My Beloved, This Is My Friend: A Rabbinic Letter on Intimate Relations", by the Rabbinical Assembly. interpretation is that the conservative movement endorses the idea that "Conservative Jews believe that God, in some way, revealed His will to Moses and to later prophets. Records and traditions relating to such events were transmitted in various forms for centuries, until the Torah was redacted into its final form, sometime around the time of Ezra (450 B.C.E.).

Thus, Conservative Jews are comfortable with the findings of archeological and linguistic research and critical textual study; these reveal that the Torah was redacted together from several sources, coming from different times and places. In fact, Conservative Jews make use of literary and historical analysis to understand how these texts developed, and to help them understand how they may applied in our own day. Thus, they see no conflict between modern biblical scholarship and adherence to Jewish law." /bookexc/gillman_conservativej/chap2/index.shtml
"True, Judaism demands religious activity, but the people is not altogether mere clay to be molded by the will of theologians and scholars. In religious activities, as in those of ordinary life, it decides for itself. This right was conceded by Judaism to the people." --Zechariah Frankel

6. as for mourning the beit hamikdash, the conservative movement does, but in contrast to many orthodox movements, they see the state of israel as a miracle, as part of the double nechama promised in ishayahu.

7. don't make fun of the cjls. we don't have a Sanhedrin today. the rabbis of orthodoxy have no real power, only if they are poskim, or if they feel like giving a man a heter meah rabanim. look at heter meah rabanim. that is a disgusting abuse of power. I know of a woman whose husband got a heter from rabbis who never even met her (yet they concluded she was unfit. how do you justify that moderator? or the scandal in israel with one of the chief rabbis and a certain shmita issue?

8. I respect the conservative movement. I don't happen to be conservative, but I would not mock it. it is not heresy. I would rather be an irreligious Jew than a naval bereishut hatorah(bigot).

MODERATOR Posted - 08 September 2000 10:19


Why in the world would I want to retract? It's pretty simple and obvious that Conservativism is heresy.

1) The onus has more than been fulfilled by those who reject as heresy ("attack" is less precise) Conservativism.

2) I know of Frankel's writings. They're so haphazard, baseless, and messed up it's pathetic. Pruzbul changed nothing; it means Bais Din takes over the debt, which was always an option, merely never instituted in an organized fashion. There are no changes, and there is no reason their law body has any authority. The entire thing is a fabrication out of thin air falsely attributed to Judaism.

In fact, I think I am the one who should be making the laws for Conservative Judaism. I am Jewish, too. So what right do they have more than me to make laws for people? The first law I am going to enact is that anyone who says they respect Conservative Jewry is in cherem.

Second, everyone has to post to this site 3 times a day instead of praying, since the Internet is much more in the "spirit of the times" than a shtiebel.

3) I just saw the RA letter on what they refer to as Taharas Hamishposhchah. Nothing there that changes anything. It's not real Taharas Hamishpochah.

4) There is no such archaeological evidence that the Torah was, G-d forbid, completed in the days of Ezra. Without subjective, wishful thinking twisting and stretching of the facts, no such evidence exists.

5) Quoting Zechariah Frankel to confirm what Conservatives of say does not defend his position. And it is, really, a pretty stupid thing for him to say. The people are not molded by the "wills of theologians and scholars", but by the will of G-d. Frankel, in true Conservative form, was scared to admit that G-d is in charge, but doesn't say clearly that He is not.

6) You are completely ignorant of what a heter meah rabbonim is. It is actually a relinquishing of power rather than an employment of it.

By Torah law, a man may have more than one wife. About 1,000 years ago, most of Klall Yisroel accepted the ban of Rabbeinu Gershom not to marry multiple wives. That was a new rabbinic restriction. However, that restriction is suspended under a handful of circumstances, that may qualify under heter meah rabbonim. Don't forget, objectively, a man can marry 2 women if he wants; it was a self-imposed restriction not to. Therefore, the HMR is merely a codicil of this restriction, suspending it under certain circumstances.

And no, sorry, all 100 rabbis do not have to meet your friend. In fact, it will almost be impossible to do so, since the 100 rabbis have to come from a number of different places, as per the rules of HMR. Only the Bais Din itself needs to rule on your friend's "fitness".

The whole conservative thing is a political club rather than an interpretation of Judaism.

ShevachviShira Posted - 10 September 2000 2:37

why is there even an intellectual argument about conservatives...they drive on Shabbos! is that not enough to prove their heresy even if they started with good intentions.

MODERATOR Posted - 10 September 2000 20:26

Of course Conservatives don’t keep Shabbos, the problem is they think they do! So do the Christians, and the Moslems. They just re-define what Shabbos is. This has been the history of all deviant religious movements. They won't say we reject the Torah, they will say we just have a different hashkafa of what it means! My intent therefore is to demonstrate on their terms that their religion (Conservative Judaism) is stupid.

A7885 Posted - 11 September 2000 5:41

I'm really surprised at the way you all are attacking conservative Jews. I'm not saying everything they do is right but what about people that are orthodox? Are you trying to say that everything you do is right? I doubt it. You'd be surprised that a lot of conservative Jews keep a lot of things - some even keep shabbos.

MODERATOR Posted - 11 September 2000 5:46

Yeah, well, no big deal about ramah and shechter. The Rambam says that Christianity did good in introducing monotheism to the goyim. But it's (Christianity) still idolatry. And Conservative Judaism (sic) is still heresy, even if there is worse out there.

MODERATOR Posted - 11 September 2000 5:59


We're not talking about Conservative Jews, we're talking about Conservative Judaism. I am saying that it is not at all Judaism, but rather a freewheeling, Monty Python type of religion with no rhyme or reason, never mind any resemblance to anything that can reasonably be referred to as Judaism.

ker Posted - 14 December 2000 20:16

where I live the most of the by girls think that people from my school aren’t so religious bc we don’t go to by. when every they see me or my friends they give us these looks just bc some of us wear pants. I think its wrong bc if they looked at there school they would realize that actually most of the girls aren’t so "frum" and the girls from my school are. they daven all the time and are much more "frum" then the by girls. what wrong with them...

MODERATOR Posted - 15 December 2000 12:44

Well, I have no idea who's more frum or who isn't, but it is absolutely prohibited for girls to walk in public in pants. The fact that you daven all day does not make that any better. In terms of priorities, better you shouldn't daven all day (which is not mandatory) but wear skirts (which is) than to wear pants and daven all day.

No comments: