tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9267923.post114616776239584822..comments2024-01-04T19:35:00.635-08:00Comments on ThanBook: Chabad, the Rebbe, and Godthanbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06197564008203120013noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9267923.post-34352813937325589882018-07-28T00:41:23.630-07:002018-07-28T00:41:23.630-07:00Every person should believe in the existence of th...Every person should believe in the existence of the one and only Creator of the world. He creates the world and every person and knows all our actions and thoughts. So we should believe in the laws of the creator.<br />Read <a href="http://www.chabadofuk.com/7-noahide-laws/" rel="nofollow">7 Noahide Laws</a>Chabad Of UKhttp://www.chabadofuk.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9267923.post-6708793063366780802008-08-20T12:45:00.000-07:002008-08-20T12:45:00.000-07:00However, the result does parallel Buddhist descrip...However, the result does parallel Buddhist descriptions of Buddha. (Although Buddha Nature, the fundamental unity, is not considered a Deity.)<BR/><BR/>As for "joining intermediary", isn't that what memutzah hamechabeir means? And in the common eye -- when Reuven Alpert published a book titled "God's Middlemen: A Habad Retrospective" no one blinked at the title.<BR/><BR/>-michamichahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13610506439687098313noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9267923.post-88129985196389208902008-08-03T07:45:00.000-07:002008-08-03T07:45:00.000-07:00Understood. Which is why this Chabad idea is not ...Understood. Which is why this Chabad idea is not itself equivalent to post-Nicene Christian theology.<BR/><BR/>There are those who call some Lubavitchers "neo-christians" for their belief in a Second Coming, and/or the Rebbe never having died but being "in hiding" until the right time. That more closely reflects the anti-Nicene "early Christians" who were still mostly misguided Jews.<BR/><BR/>The danger is that some less-sophisticated Lubavitchers may confuse this concept of the Rebbe as a "joining intermediary" with the Christian concept of God Made Flesh. And it remains an open question if the concept of a "joining intermediary" is itself a legitimate Jewish concept, or is just an updating of "none may approach the Father except through Me [Jesis]." If the Rebbe's intervention is an occasional aid in communing with God that's one thing. Praying to the Rebbe as the only authorized, and necessary, representative of God is entirely another. And when some Chabadniks pray with a picture of the Rebbe next to the prayerbook, it looks like that, and may even be that.thanbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06197564008203120013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9267923.post-87557519795935171912008-08-03T07:17:00.000-07:002008-08-03T07:17:00.000-07:00In Christianity Jesus is not merely G-d clothed in...In Christianity Jesus is not merely G-d clothed in a body he has a bodyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9267923.post-1152643323072874142006-07-11T11:42:00.000-07:002006-07-11T11:42:00.000-07:00I like your understanding, on the right track, how...I like your understanding, on the right track, however you are only thinking of a "tzadik" not a "rebbe" - which in the Chabad lexicon is a whole 'nother thing.Editorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12953020477427374440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9267923.post-1150327459670941872006-06-14T16:24:00.000-07:002006-06-14T16:24:00.000-07:00I found myself here after following the link on yo...I found myself here after following the link on your comment to Gil's quote of my post on the ruby gmach.<BR/><BR/>If YGB is R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer, then that is my brother you are referring to. To clarify: my mother is descended of parents who hail from Lithuania. My maternal grandfather attended Telz. He and a number of his children adopted the Lubavitch practice when my mother was over 18. So she was never a Lubavitcher. My father hails from Germany --the Frankfurt area. So we were brought up waiting 3 hours between meat and milk in the great Yekke traditon. <BR/><BR/>BTW: I had to fill out tons of info to add my name to blogger just to leave this comment. My blog: Kallah Magazine is a Word Press one, hosted by by webhosting co. You can access it from my website: Kallahmagazine.com or from jrants.comAriella's bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09409352047101582583noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9267923.post-1147791414685591552006-05-16T07:56:00.000-07:002006-05-16T07:56:00.000-07:00I think "illusory" is an unwarranted exaggeration....I think "illusory" is an unwarranted exaggeration. Rather, we're dealing with a matter of perspective and relativity (not the Einsteinian sort).<BR/><BR/>Relative to a air, a rock is solid. But we know that a rock is actually made up of mostly empty space. Relative to a piece of neutronium (collapsed matter without all that space), a rock is virtually without substance.<BR/><BR/>The issue of panentheism vs. acosmism has a parallel outside the realm of religion. Substitute "existence" for Hashem, and see what happens.<BR/><BR/>Existence covers everything. In fact, everything that exists does so within existence, and as part of existence. But that doesn't mean my keyboard <I>is</I> existence. Rather, it is an instantiation, or actualization, of existence, in one aspect. It has no effect on existence itself. Were it to cease to exist, or be converted into something else (say, a doorstop), existence would not be changed thereby.<BR/><BR/>Most people can understand this. But put "God" in where you had "existence", and all of a sudden, it becomes a theological crisis.Lisahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18104724066252254654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9267923.post-1147713464984850562006-05-15T10:17:00.000-07:002006-05-15T10:17:00.000-07:00In Chabad's case, not pantheism (the universe *is*...In Chabad's case, not pantheism (the universe *is* God), but panentheism (the universe is *part of* God), or acosmism (there is no physical cosmos, the whole thing is illusory and part of the unitary God).thanbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06197564008203120013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9267923.post-1147091514668267852006-05-08T05:31:00.000-07:002006-05-08T05:31:00.000-07:00>Rather, the world is in some way a part of God. I...>Rather, the world is in some way a part of God. I am part of God, you are part of God, the trees and rocks are parts of God, the PC is part of God, etc. That is the reality of the Universe from God's perspective. It is only from our perspective that we imagine the rock to have physical existence, that I have physical existence, that the PC has physical existenceI raelly don't understand this whole concept. I don't think anybody else does without seeing pantheism. I have read Tanya and other chabad writtings (torah Ohr)even attended a shiur By R.Steisaltz on the latter and I believe that they have a pantheistic approach which they deny minei ubei. I prefer staying with rambam's approach that HKBH does not occupy Makom, and we just don't understand His Mahus therefore cannot understand His interaction with the physical.David Guttmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07668302013143561290noreply@blogger.com