On 6 Sep 2006 at 22:10, Richard Baker wrote: > Andrew said: > > > Again, Jews believe there are universal standards for good and for > > righteousness (and that the most certainly don't need to be a Jew to > > be righteous) - and further, the Bible states that the Law of the > > Land is the Law. > > So is that an argument from the authority of the Bible, an argument > from the authority of the people who wrote Bible, an argument from > the authority of the traditions of the ancient Jewish people or > something else?
The exact Hebrew phrase; "Dina de-malchuta dina," is a paraphrase of several passages from the Bible by Samuel (3rd century Babylonia). It is accepted by basically every Jewish Rabbi outside the (tiny) Reconstructionism movement. It's also probably not a blanket cover and is linked to a whole host of other statements, but for Western counties you can assume that there are very few, if any, conflicts. I'd also note that that line is also inappropriately quoted quite frequently by the American burocracy... > > No. You're commiting the basic theological falicy (again, in Jewish > > terms) of thinking of G-d as a Human. To eff the ineffible. Which is > > understandable (especially since Christians HAVE adopted a Human > > aspect to their G-d) but from our POV the question is meaningless in > > context. > > Well, that sounds awfully like you're saying that these things are > true because an all-powerful and ineffable God said so but that we > shouldn't really look too closely into such matters. Which, to me > (although presumably not to others), sounds awfully like an argument > from the authority of one's imaginary friend. Nope. There is a clear answer - to try to attribute Human restrictions to G-d is to limit what he can do. Dawn Falcon _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
