Download Science and Religious Belief Reflection Points Action Points

25
Science and Religious Belief
Reflection Points
Chapter 1 outlines the fundamental beliefs of traditional Judaism. As we have seen, these
are all rooted in the conviction that God is both transcendent and imminent. He has
created the universe and guides humanity to its eventual fulfilment. Within this context,
Jewish sages formulated theories about a wide variety of theological topics. The Jewish
liturgy echoes these basic religious convictions: through prayer Jews have expressed their
deepest spiritual longings. Yet, what are we to make of modern challenges to religious
belief? Today we live in a world dominated by the science. In the light of the scientific
world-view, the Biblical writers appear primitive. Inevitably the cosmological assumptions
of those who composed the epic of creation in the Book of Genesis were ill-informed
about the nature of the universe. In a word, the Bible is replete with misunderstanding
about the formation of the cosmos as well as biological evolution.
Today, in the light of archaeological discovery we have gained an understanding of the
nature of the ancient Near East. The myths of the Babylonians have supplied us with
extensive knowledge of the religion of the Sumerians and the Akkadians. Against this
background, we can appreciate the ways in which the surrounding culture and civilization
of Babylonia profoundly influenced the biblical writers. In addition, our knowledge of
ancient Egypt has illuminated various aspects of our understanding of the development of
ancient Hebrew culture. The implications of such modern knowledge are far reaching. In
the past Jews accepted the mythology of Scripture as inerrant because of its divine
source. Today, however, we need to look afresh at the religious assumptions of the past.
Pondering all this, you should ask yourself if it makes sense to believe in the God of
Scripture and the rabbinic tradition. Or, has science undermined the central tenets of the
faith?
Action Points

Go to Google. Look for websites dealing with the science and religion. You should
search for websites defending religious belief as well as critics of religious faith.

Go to Amazon.com. Look for books dealing with religion and science.

If possible, speak to scientists about religion. Ask them if what they do inevitably
undermines religious commitment.
26
The Problem of Evil
Reflection Points
The problem of evil is an inherent difficulty for modern Jews. The theological dilemma
arises from the fact that evil in both moral and physical terms is an essential element in
the universe. This issue does not arise in connection with every concept of God. For
example, in the Greek religion where the gods were viewed as limited in both goodness
and power, there was no inconsistency in asserting that they were responsible for the
suffering that befalls humankind. Yet if there is only one God in the universe who is both
all-good and all-powerful, there appears to be an inconsistency in believing that He could
be responsible for human suffering.
One way of attempting to resolve this issue is to deny any one of three propositions: (1)
God is omnipotent; (2) God is all-good; (3) evil exists. One approach is to assert that evil
is an illusion — it is nothing more than a deprivation of good and thus has no being in
itself. This was essentially the view of the 12th century Jewish philosopher Moses
Maimonides. But arguably, this solution is nothing more than a semantic distinction. Can
one really believe that the terrible events of the Holocaust were not a manifestation of
evil?
An alternative approach is to limit God’s power. As a consequence, there would be no
inconsistency in believing that God is wholly good, but lacks the power to overcome evil.
The difficulty here is that on this view God would be incredibly feeble. Certainly, such a
view is far removed from the traditional biblical and rabbinic understanding of God’s
nature. A third approach is to assume that God is not wholly good even though he is
omnipotent. Obviously, however, if God had the power to eradicate evil but failed to do so,
he would be malevolent — again, a view at odds with traditional Judaism.
Is there a solution to this seemingly intractable problem? Judaism Today surveys the ways
in which a number of Jewish theologians — Bernard Maza, Ignaz Maybaum, and Emil
Fackenheim — have struggled to make sense of the tragedy of the Holocaust in religious
terms. Do you agree with any of these writers? Or do you think that Richard Rubenstein is
right in After Auschwitz that traditional Jewish theology must be reformulated in the light of
the terrible events of the last century?
Action Points

Go to Google. Look for websites dealing with the theological problem of evil as well as
Jewish theological responses to the Holocaust.

Go to Amazon.com. Look for books dealing with Holocaust Theology. A good starting
point might be my book: Holocaust Theology: A Reader, University of Exeter Press,
2002.

If possible, speak to a local rabbi. Ask how he or she is able to reconcile the traditional
understanding of God with the tragedy that befell the Jewish people during the Second
World War.
27
Theism and Naturalism
Reflection Points
Through the ages, Jews believed that God formed the universe, chose the Jews as his
special people, and guides the Jewish nation to its ultimate fulfilment in the messianic age.
In modern times, however, a number of writers have challenged such a theological
outlook. In their view, it is not God who created human beings, but human beings who
created God. The sociologist Emile Durkheim, for example, argued that the gods of
religion do not exist. Rather they are fabricated by society as instruments of control. In his
view, supernatural beings are symbols of society itself. God, he argued, is simply a
reflection of society’s absolute claim upon individuals. On this view, the religious practices
of Judaism are rooted in the needs of the community. Such an interpretation has no
reference to God as an external Deity. What do you make of such a claim? Was Durkheim
right? If not, what is wrong with his theory?
Again, Sigmund Freud in The Future of an Illusion maintained that religion is used by
human beings as a psychic defence against the threats to human life. Nature, he argued,
is frightening and terrible. In the face of such danger, religious belief serves to protect us.
Such a psychological interpretation of the origin of religion has had a profound influence
on modern Jews. Within the Jewish community there has been an increasing
disenchantment with traditional theism as reflected in the growth and development of
Reconstructionist Judaism. Reconstructionist as well as Humanistic Jews and others
have found it impossible to embrace the theological assumptions of traditional Judaism.
What do you make of this development? Do you think Mordecai Kaplan was right to call
for the reconstruction of Judaism along the lines he proposed? If not, why not?
Action Points

Go to Google. Look for websites dealing with the naturalistic interpretation of religious
belief.

Go to Amazon.com. Look for books dealing with the subject, including the writings of
Emile Durkheim and Sigmund Freud as well as Mordecai Kaplan’s Judaism as a
Civilization.

If possible, speak to either Reconstructionist or Humanistic Jews in your community.
Ask them why they have abandoned traditional theism.
28
The Torah and Biblical Scholarship
Reflection Points
The belief in the divine origin of the Torah has been a central principle of Judaism
throughout the ages. Yet, as we have seen, this belief is firmly rejected by modern biblical
criticism. In its place both Jewish and non-Jewish scholars maintain that the Torah is a
composite work consisting of a variety of sources which have been woven together into a
single narrative. The contributions of textual analysis as well as biblical archaeology have
served to undermine any claim of Mosaic authorship.
The implications of this shift in perspective are profound. In the past Jews were convinced
of the truth of the Torah because it was God’s word. As a result the narratives in the Five
Books of Moses were viewed as revealed truth, and the 613 commandments in the Torah
as binding for all time. This theological underpinning provided a secure framework for
Jewish belief and practice. Anyone who denied the doctrine of Torah MiSinai was
regarded as a heretic. Thus in the 12th century Moses Maimonides declared: ‘When a man
breaks away from any of these fundamental principles of belief then of him it is said, “he
has gone out of the body of Israel”, and he denies the root of Judaism. In consequence,
such individuals will be doomed to everlasting punishment: ‘Each one ... even if he is an
Israelite, has no share in the world to come’.
However, if the Torah is in fact a variegated collection of material composed by Hebrew
authors in the history of ancient Israel, modern Jews are under no obligation to accept the
Bible as God’s revealed word. In all the non-Orthodox movements we have surveyed,
there is considerable uncertainty about Jewish belief. By denying the revelation of the
Torah, it is unclear which if any of the central theological principles of Judaism should be
regarded as true. How is one to know? Similarly, there is widespread confusion about
which traditional Jewish practices should be upheld: today the vast majority of Jews have
not incorporated the Code of Jewish Law into their lives. Pondering this fundamental
change in Jewish life, you should ask yourself whether Judaism as a living faith can
survive such a transformation.
Action Points

Go to Google. Look for websites dealing with the doctrine of Torah Mi Sinai. Also look
for websites which explain about the nature of modern biblical scholarship.

Go to Amazon.com. Look for books dealing with modern biblical scholarship and the
Torah.

If possible, speak to an Orthodox rabbi about this issue. Ask him what he thinks about
the findings of modern biblical scholarship. Probe as to why he rejects the view that
the Torah is a composite work of many hands.
29
The Dissolution of Belief and Practice
Reflection Points
As we have seen, many Jews today find it increasingly difficult to believe in the traditional
concept of God. Mordecai Kaplan, the founder of Reconstructionist Judaism, for example,
argued that modern Jews must jettison the traditional belief in a supernatural Deity. God,
he argued, should not be conceived as a providential creator. Instead, he proposed a
redefinition. In The Meaning of God for the Contemporary Jew, he wrote: ‘We learn more
about God when we say that love is divine than when we say that God is love. A veritable
transformation takes place ... Divinity becomes relevant to authentic experience and
therefore takes on a definiteness which is accompanied by an awareness of authenticity’.
For Kaplan, God is a ‘trans-natural’, ‘suprafactual’, and ‘super-experiential’ transcendence
which does not infringe the laws of nature. Of course such a conception is far removed
from the biblical and rabbinic notion of God as the creator and sustainer of the universe
who chose the Jewish people and guides humanity to its ultimate destiny. Such an
interpretation of the nature of God calls for a reformulation of the spiritual dimension of the
faith. What do you make of this? Is Kaplan’s reconceptualization of God credible? Will it
sustain Jewry and provide a basis for Jewish living in a new age? Similar questions should
be asked about the Humanists’ rejection of God. Is a non-theistic understanding of
Judaism viable?
Turning to Jewish practice, you need to consider the difficulties faced by Jews today in
determining which traditional practices should be adopted. The legal system of traditional
Judaism is vast, encompassing prescriptions regarding all aspects of living. How is one to
decide which of these mitzvot are relevant in the modern world? As I noted, most Jews do
not adopt a consistent and coherent set of criteria in deciding which observances to follow.
Instead they arbitrarily choose which commandments have spiritual meaning in their lives.
What do you make of this situation? Is this healthy? Or is it ultimately unsatisfactory?
Action Points

Go to Google. Look at websites dealing with Jewish belief and practice within the
different branches of Judaism.

Go to Amazon.com. Look for books dealing with this topic.
30
Jewish Peoplehood
Reflection Points
In the past, the Jewish people were united by common beliefs and practices. Today,
however, Jews are deeply divided. Across the religious spectrum there are a wide range
of divergent groupings with contrasting ideologies. As a result, there now exists a variety
of different approaches to Jewish identity. Orthodox Jews adhere to the traditional
understanding of Jewishness: a person is Jewish if his or her mother is Jewish, or if an
Orthodox conversion has taken place. A person who deviates from this definition of
Jewishness is not regarded as a member of the community. In recent years the Reform
movement accepted individuals as Jewish if either parent were Jewish as long as Jewish
timely acts were observed. Humanistic Jews, however, regard a person as Jewish if that
individual identifies as such — neither descent nor conversion is required.
What this means in practice is that there are a growing number of individuals today whose
Jewishness is questionable. This situation is further complicated by the Law of Return in
Israel which states that a Jew is one born to a Jewish mother or who has been converted
to Judaism. As we noted, in subsequent years the religious parties in Israel have sought to
amend this law so that only those who were converted according to halakhah are deemed
Jewish and thereby eligible to settle in Israel. Because such an alteration would render
invalid all conversions undertaken by the Reform and Conservative movement, there has
been considerable resistance to such a change. What do you make of this situation? The
Jewish people have been in existence for nearly 4,000 years. Yet in the modern world the
Jewish community cannot unequivocally determine who is a Jew.
As we noted, Orthodox Jews insist that there is only one true path: Orthodoxy. The current
British Chief Rabbi, Lord Jonathan Sacks, has appealed to all Jews to become Torah
observant. In his view, the Jewish people are united by a common inheritance. What he
seeks is the union of Torah, the Jewish people, the land Israel, and God. Yet, for most
Jews there is no possibility of such a return to traditional Judaism. Do you think the Chief
Rabbi is misguided? Or is his the only solution to Jewish survival?
Action Points

Go to Google. Look for websites dealing with the problem of Jewish identity. Search for
websites posted by Orthodox organizations as well as alternative approaches to the
question: Who is a Jew?

Go to Amazon.com. Search for books dealing with this issue.

If possible, ask an Orthodox rabbi what he thinks about the alternative definitions of
Jewishness found within the Jewish community. See what he makes of Israel’s
Supreme Court’s ruling about the Law of Return.
31
The Problems of Contemporary Judaism
Reflection Points
Chapter 6 in Judaism Today begins with a number of criticisms of the major Jewish
religious movements today beginning with Orthodox Judaism. Here I make a number of
charges:
1. Orthodox Judaism has not faced up to the challenges posed by science.
2. Orthodox Jews have not taken seriously the findings of contemporary biblical
scholarship.
3. Orthodox thinkers have failed to recognize the fundamental theological problems
raised by the Holocaust.
Do you agree? Or are such criticisms unfair?
Turning to Hasidism, I made similar points:
1. Hasidism has failed to come to terms with the findings of biblical scholars.
2. Hasidic sages do not take seriously the discoveries made by science.
3. The elevation of the zaddik to a position of spiritual superiority is anachronistic in
the modern world.
4. Like the Orthodox, Hasidim have not grappled with the serious religious
implications of the Holocaust
5. The lifestyle of Hasidic Jews is outmoded relic of a bygone age.
Do you think such an assessment is valid? If not, why not?
Regarding Reform Judaism, I argued that:
1. Reform Judaism is incoherent because there is no common consensus about
religious practice.
2. Reform Jews also cannot agree about the central doctrines of the faith — this is a
major weakness.
Is this fair?
Turning to Conservative Judaism, I made similar claims:
1. Like Reform Jews, Conservative Jews are unable to agree which observances are
binding.
2. Conservative Jews are also deeply divided about the fundamental belief.
Do you think these are valid criticisms?
Reconstructionist Judaism also suffers from a number of serious defects:
Reconstructionist Judaism has jettisoned a belief in a personal supernatural Deity.
Yet, at the same time it has retained God-language in its liturgy. This is arguably a
major inconsistency.
2. Religious observances in Reconstructionist Judaism are not perceived as divinely
revealed. It is unclear, therefore, why they are adopted.
1.
Again, do you think these are legitimate claims?
Finally, I made the following points about Humanistic Judaism:
Like Reconstructionist Jews, Humanistic Jews reject the concept of a supernatural
Deity. Arguably such a non-theistic approach does not provide an adequate
spiritual basis for modern Jews.
2. A Humanistic approach to religion ignores the horrific events of the Holocaust.
1.
Are such observations valid?
Action Points

Go to Google. Look for websites dealing with all these branches of Judaism.

Go to Amazon.com. Search for introductory guides to the various branches of
contemporary Judaism.

If possible, ask Orthodox, Hasidic, Reform, Conservative, Reconstructionist and
Humanistic Jews what they think of these criticisms.
32
Pluralistic Judaism and Divine Unknowability
Reflection Points
Given the deficiencies of the various major religious movements within the contemporary
Jewish world, in the final chapter I advocated a new vision of Judaism. Today, I maintain,
there should be a Copernican revolution in our understanding of religion. Rather than
accept the traditional Jewish beliefs as outlined in Chapter 1, Jews should recognize that
the Jewish view of Divine Reality is rooted in human experience. In other words, there
should be recognition that there is a fundamental difference between Divine Reality as it is
in itself and the Jewish conception of God.
In defending this view, I pointed out that in the history of the faith there has been a
conscious awareness of such a distinction. The Bible, for example, cautions against
describing God in human terms. Similarly in rabbinic literature, Jewish sages suggested
that human beings should refrain from attempting to describe God. Carrying on this
tradition, medieval Jewish philosophers insisted that care should be taken in ascribing
attributes to God. In Duties of the Heart, for example, the twelfth-century Jewish
philosopher Bahya Ibn Pakuda argued that the Deity is neither substance nor accident.
Thus we cannot know God as he is in himself.
Arguing along similar lines, Moses Maimonides maintained in the Guide for the Perplexed
that no positive attributes can be predicated of God since the Divine is an absolute unity.
Hence when God is depicted positively in the Bible, such ascriptions must refer to his
activity. The only true attributes, Maimonides contended, are negative ones — they lead to
a knowledge of God because in negation no plurality is involved. Each negative attribute
excludes from God’s essence some imperfection. Therefore, when one says that God is
incorporeal, this means that He has no body. Such negation, Maimonides believed, brings
one nearer to a knowledge of the Godhead.
The kabbalists too were anxious to stress that God’s nature is unknowable. Referred to as
En Sof (the Infinite), God is incomprehensible. It is only through the sefirot (divine
emanations) that human beings can gain knowledge of the Divine. According to the Zohar,
the first sefirah is so elevated that it can only be represented by negation. What do you
make of such an approach? Were these medieval philosophers correct in asserting that
God’s nature is unknowable? Were Jewish mystics right to emphasize that the En Sof is
beyond human comprehension? If so, do you agree that the Jewish tradition provides a
basis for a reorientation of religious thought in the way I suggest?
Action Points

Go to Google. Look for websites dealing with the concept of divine unknowability.

Go to Amazon.com. Search for books dealing with the history of Jewish philosophy
such as Collete Sirat, A History of Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages, Cambridge,
1995.
33
Jewish Pluralism and Jewish Identity
Reflection Points
As we noted previously, the Jewish world is divided about the issue of identity. For
thousands of years, it has been accepted that a person is a Jew if born of a Jewish mother
or converted through the standard halakhic process. In contemporary society, however, a
number of non-Orthodox movements have redefined the criteria for inclusion. In 1983, for
example, the Central Conference of American Rabbis decreed that a child of either a
Jewish father or a Jewish mother should be deemed as Jewish, assuming that this
presumption is confirmed by timely and appropriate acts of identification. In addition, the
Reform movement modified the process of conversion. As a result of such changes, there
is considerable uncertainty in the Jewish community as to who should be regarded as
legitimately Jewish.
In the final chapter of Judaism Today I proposed a solution to this dilemma concerning
Jewish status. Given the shift away from the religious absolutism of the past, I argued that
Pluralistic Judaism (as I defined it) would be able to offer a new definition of Jewishness
for the modern age. According to this new philosophy, Jews should not view the doctrines
of their faith as the true expression of God’s will. Rather, modern Jews should adopt a
more open stance. They should view God as He is in the centre of the universe of faiths.
On this basis, the Jewish conception of the Deity should be understood as one among
many ways of interpreting Divine Reality.
On this basis, the traditional commitment to Jewish belief and practice should be set
aside. In its place, Jews should feel free to select those elements of the tradition which
they find spiritual meaningful. In other words, the authoritarianism of the past should give
way to personal autonomy in which all Jews are at liberty to construct for themselves a
personal system of religious observance relevant to their own needs. Such a theological
reorientation provides a religious framework for redefining Jewishness. With Pluralistic
Judaism’s non-dogmatic reinterpretation of religious doctrine, there is no need to regard
the traditional legal understanding of Jewishness as binding. Instead, a pluralistic
approach would welcome as Jews all those, regardless of ancestry, who desire to be
identified in this fashion. This, I noted, is the outlook of Humanistic Judaism. What do you
think? Is such a reformulation of Jewish identity plausible? Or do you think it is too
extreme a position? If so, why?
Action Points

Go to Google. Look for websites dealing with the question of Jewish identity.

Go to Amazon.com. Search for books concerned with this issue.

If possible, talk to a local rabbi of any denomination about this new philosophy of
Judaism. Ask whether he or she thinks that such openness is viable.
34
Jewish Belief Today
Reflection Points
Across the religious spectrum, Jews have embraced various aspects of traditional Jewish
belief. In all cases believers have regarded their understanding of God and his activity in
the world as objectively valid. The philosophy I outlined in the final chapter, however, calls
this assumption into question. What I have attempted to demonstrate is that there is a
fundamental distinction between God as He is in himself and God as perceived in human
experience. Hence, it is no longer credible to assert that one’s religious beliefs are
objectively true. In advocating such a radical break from the past, I drew on the various
streams of the Jewish tradition which emphasize God’s unknowability. Of course, in
emphasizing the impossibility of knowing God’s nature, Jewish philosophers and mystics
did not believe the Deity was completely unknown. On the contrary, the revelation of the
Torah provided a basis for understanding God’s intervention in history. By revealing
himself to Moses on Mt Sinai, God had made himself known to his chosen people.
Nonetheless, these earlier thinkers perceived the distinction I have stressed throughout
the final chapter of Judaism Today: Divine reality transcends human comprehension.
Such a shift from the absolutism of the past calls for a radical shift in perspective. No
longer should the various branches of modern Judaism (including non-theistic
movements) advance universal truth claims about spiritual reality. Instead, they should
accept that Jewish religious beliefs are grounded in human reflection. In other words,
Judaism in its various forms is no different in principle from all the other world’s religions
— it is rooted in human experience and conceptualization. On this basis, contemporary
Jews should acknowledge the inevitable subjectivity of religious belief and adopt a tolerant
attitude to the views of others. In considering this change in outlook, you should ask
yourself whether such a pluralistic stance is a plausible option for modern Jews.
Action Points

Go to Google. Look for websites dealing with Jewish belief in the modern world.

Go to Amazon.com. Search for books dealing with this topic.

If possible, ask a local non-Orthodox rabbi whether today there are basic beliefs that
should be accepted by all Jews. If so, what are they?
35
Jewish Practice in a New Age
Reflection Points
In Chapter 6 of Judaism Today I stressed that since the Enlightenment, there emerged a
variety of subgroups espousing different approaches to the tradition. Strictly Orthodox
and Hasidic Jews remain committed to observing both biblical and rabbinic ordinances as
interpreted by generations of Jewish sages. Conservative and Reconstructionist Jews
seek to preserve the central features of traditional Judaism while allowing for modifications
of practice. Reform and Humanistic Jews actively encourage the reformulation of the
Jewish heritage to meet contemporary circumstances. Beyond these major movements,
the subgroups we surveyed in Chapter 4 interpret the tradition in a wide variety of ways.
As a result of the proliferation of approaches, the Code of Jewish Law has lost its binding
character. Instead, Jews across the religious spectrum feel free to discard observances
which they no longer regard as relevant. While the strictly Orthodox bitterly condemn this
change in Jewish life, the vast majority of Jews (including many who affiliate with
Orthodox synagogues) feel completely justified in charting their own paths through the
tradition. As I explained, Pluralistic Judaism celebrates such a reorientation of Jewish
existence. By advocating the principle of personal autonomy, this new philosophy of
Judaism is in accord with the spirit of the age — its endorsement of individual decisionmaking is consistant with the nature of modern Jewish existence. As I stated, its advocacy
of individual liberty and freedom of choice reflects the actual conditions of Jewish living in
the twenty-first century.
As a radical alternative to the more structured models of the Jewish faith, this new
approach to Jewish living provides a non-dogmatic foundation for integrating Jewish belief
and practice into the modern age. Arguably such a fluid system, attuned to the realities of
everyday life, provides a comprehensive vision of Jewish existence for the future. What do
you make of this new philosophy of Judaism? Am I right in thinking that the future of
Judaism is more secure if Jews freely admit that we have ceased to be a unified
community with core beliefs and practices. If you object, what is your vision of the Jewish
future?
Action Points

Go to Google. Look for websites dealing with the future of Judaism.

Go to Amazon.com. Search for books that deal with this issue.

If possible, ask Jews you know if they think Judaism will survive into the future given
the current problems facing the Jewish people. What form do they think it will take?
36
Global Theology
Reflection Points
Judaism Today began in Chapter 1 with a description of the basic beliefs and practices of
traditional Judaism. The remaining chapters highlighted the various changes that have
taken place in Jewish life since the Enlightenment in the eighteeenth century. No longer
are the Jewish people unified by belief and practice. Rather, the community has
fragmented into a wide variety of subgroups, each with its own ideology and interpretation
of the Jewish past. In the last chapter, I argued that Jews today need to recognize that
human religious doctrines in all the world’s faiths — including Judaism — are human
attempts to understand the nature of the Divine.
This change of perspective calls for the development of what I have called a ‘Jewish
global, interreligious theology’. Jewish thinkers, I explained, should strive to enter into the
subjectivity of other religions and engage into religious encounter with those who hold
totally dissimilar truth claims. Through this process, Jewish partners should acknowledge
the limitations of their own heritage, and as a consequence make a conscious effort to
discover common ground with other faiths. A pluralist standpoint in which all faiths are
recognized as authentic paths to Divine Reality would encourage the believers —
including Jews — to engage in common religious activity. Pluralistic Judaism — as a new
ideology for the future — thus not only provides a basis for reformulating the Jewish faith
in the light of contemporary religious reflection, it also serves as a framework for positive
interfaith encounter.
What do you make of this suggestion? Do you think Jews would be prepared to engage
on inter-religious encounter on this level? And, most importantly, you should ask yourself
whether I am right to think that Jewish living in the future would be more secure if Jews
adopted the degree of openness that I recommend. Or, do you think the British Chief
Rabbi, Jonathan Sacks, is right in thinking that Jews can only have a secure future if they
return to the fold. Is Torah Judaism the answer? Or is a radically new vision of the Jewish
future in which Jews acknowledge and accept the plurality of Jewish living a better option?
Action Points

Go to Google. Search for websites dealing with interfaith dialogue and encounter.

Go to Amazon.com. Look for books that deal with Judaism and other faiths.