User talk:Tgeorgescu/Archives/2024/July

Article: Fornication

May I ask you, with all due respect, why you consider a roman catholic lecturer a greater authority on jewish law than Maimonidies, on whom jewish law is based...?

In the meantime, I took myself the liberty to undo your change. You are free to change the christian view on pre-marital sex according to your source... ZucherBundlech (talk) 20:46, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

@ZucherBundlech: Being a Roman Catholic is irrelevant: he does not kowtow to Catholic dogma, he is a modern Bible scholar.

Modern Bible scholarship/scholars (MBS) assumes that: • The Bible is a collection of books like any others: created and put together by normal (i.e. fallible) human beings; • The Bible is often inconsistent because it derives from sources (written and oral) that do not always agree; individual biblical books grow over time, are multilayered; • The Bible is to be interpreted in its context: ✦ Individual biblical books take shape in historical contexts; the Bible is a document of its time; ✦ Biblical verses are to be interpreted in context; ✦ The "original" or contextual meaning is to be prized above all others; • The Bible is an ideologically-driven text (collection of texts). It is not "objective" or neutral about any of the topics that it treats. Its historical books are not "historical" in our sense. ✦ "hermeneutics of suspicion"; ✦ Consequently MBS often reject the alleged "facts" of the Bible (e.g. was Abraham a real person? Did the Israelites leave Egypt in a mighty Exodus? Was Solomon the king of a mighty empire?); ✦ MBS do not assess its moral or theological truth claims, and if they do, they do so from a humanist perspective; ★ The Bible contains many ideas/laws that we moderns find offensive; • The authority of the Bible is for MBS a historical artifact; it does derive from any ontological status as the revealed word of God;

— Beardsley Ruml, Shaye J.D. Cohen's Lecture Notes: INTRO TO THE HEBREW BIBLE @ Harvard (BAS website) (78 pages)

Morals: Just because you are a Jew and I'm not, it does not mean that you have special editing rights about Judaism. I'm telling it nicely, and I advise you to never again claim that Gentiles have no right to study and publish WP:SCHOLARSHIP about Judaism. As implied by the quote provided at Talk:Fornication, one of Ehrman's colleagues is an Israeli Jew and he is an expert in American fundamentalist Christianity, another of his colleagues is an Israeli Jew and he is an expert in Roman Catholicism. I assume that neither of these three scholars is a Christian. There is no requirement that an expert in Christian theology should be a Christian.

Maybe you work under the assumption that you should only trust scholars of Judaism who are male and halachically Jewish. But Wikipedia is not affiliated to such arrangements. You have to adapt to working at an encyclopedia based upon mainstream WP:SCHOLARSHIP, the Wikipedia Community does not have to adapt to your own requirements.

A WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality (us vs. them) is not appreciated here. Wikipedians have to collaborate upon positive statements based upon WP:RS. tgeorgescu (talk) 09:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I was too harsh, but what I meant was not to dispute his or your view on the Bible based your non Jewishness, or any other factor; you both may be experts on the subject; my problem is that Jewish Halachical lawbooks say something else.

It may very well be a legitimate understanding of the Bible; but it is not the Jewish view; definitely not the orthodox view Saying that "Traditional Orthodox Jews are opposed to premarital sex" is not true; they consider it forbidden, and they derive it from the Bible. If you want, you can remove the whole "Bible" section and just state Maimonides or the Shulchan Aruch's view (which would be a distortion); or you can divide it in parts: The Jewish Orthodox; The Conservatives; The Reform, etc.

You can start a new header titled "Modern Bible Scholarships view on what the Bible says about premarital sex and what the Jews should really believe", but it doesn't belong in Judaism's view on premarital sex. ZucherBundlech (talk) 15:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@ZucherBundlech: You do not make the call. Wikipedia listens to modern mainstream WP:SCHOLARSHIP, not to Ancient or Medieval scholars. You are in the wrong place: this isn't Orthodox Jewish Wiki. Obey our WP:RULES or take your business elsewhere. tgeorgescu (talk) 15:23, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

May I ask which rule you are talking about? ZucherBundlech (talk) 15:27, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@ZucherBundlech: WP:RNPOV and WP:FRINGE for a start. Then read about performing WP:OR on Medieval writings.

If you're seeking to be helpful here, do not WP:CITE any work written before the 21st century. You should do that at least till August 2025. tgeorgescu (talk) 15:36, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm really sorry; maybe I'm just stupid, but all the pages you directed me to actually support my edit...

I request you answer one simple question: when trying to prove what the law in the UK is in a particular case; would you trust an expert on law, or the Public General Acts of the United Kingdom Parliament, even if it is 500 years old (which it isn't)?

My point is, he might be an expert in the bible, it might be what modern academia thinks about the subject, but it is not what Orthodox Jews think about it. Traditional Orthodox Jews, wether you like it or not, follow an old, outdated, book called Shulchan Aruch. So you can state that todays academia thinks the (Orthodox) Jews are wrong; but it doesn't change the Jews opinion about it.

And I quote, directly from the page you linked: "Some adherents of a religion might object to a critical historical treatment of their own faith because in their view such analysis discriminates against their religious beliefs. Their point of view can be mentioned if it can be documented by relevant, reliable sources, yet note there is no contradiction. NPOV policy means Wikipedia editors ought to try to write sentences like this: "Certain Frisbeetarianists (such as the Rev. Goodcatch) believe This and That and consider those to have been tenets of Frisbeetarianism from its earliest days. Certain sects who call themselves Ultimate Frisbeetarianists—influenced by the findings of modern historians and archaeologists (such as Dr. Investigate's textual analysis and Prof. Iconoclast's carbon-dating work)—still believe This, but no longer believe That, and instead believe Something Else." "

I hope I'm not coming across too harsh; but I feel this is a commonly perpetrated mistake,and it's bothering me for a long time already.

If you really want, I can look now for a newer source that supports what I claim. ZucherBundlech (talk) 15:57, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@ZucherBundlech: Pretending that nothing has changed for more than 800 years is absurd. My take isn't that Maimonides is "wrong", but he is not the type of authorities Wikipedia listens to. So you are proclaiming the POV of one sect of Judaism as WP:THETRUTH, and that's incompatible with WP:NPOV. tgeorgescu (talk) 16:01, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tgeorgescu: That one sect of judaism is quite big... basicly, all I have to do is prove once that Orthodox Judaism follows the Shulchan Aruch (actually "only" 500 years old) and then I can quote him as much as I want. ZucherBundlech (talk) 16:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@ZucherBundlech: You listen to Shulchan Aruch, Wikipedia doesn't. tgeorgescu (talk) 16:14, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tgeorgescu: No. Orthodox Judaism follows Shulchan Aruch. Please don't distort their views.

See Halacha. ZucherBundlech (talk) 16:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@ZucherBundlech: Again: Orthodox Judaism does, Wikipedia doesn't. See WP:SYNTH. Medieval or early modern texts are not WP:RS for making claims in the voice of Wikipedia.

At [1], under the heading Judaism, four rabbis are still WP:CITED. They are not Orthodox Jewish rabbis, but they are rabbis nevertheless. Yup, women can be rabbis, too. tgeorgescu (talk) 16:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Are you insinuating that I refuse to accept her view because of her being a woman???

I only said that Wikpedia has no choice other than quoting what Orthodox Judaism says when talking about Orthodox Judaism.

Please don't mix in any of your negative feelings about Feminism in Judaism. Thanks ZucherBundlech (talk) 16:53, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:APPNOTE

Please keep in mind that notifications must be polite, neutrally worded with a neutral title, clear in presentation, and brief. This notification is not polite or neutral. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:52, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish: You may trim it as you please. tgeorgescu (talk) 17:04, 29 July 2024 (UTC)