Timeline for Mi Yodeya Glossary
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 2015 at 19:36 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | @Fred - I agree. And since the point of the glossary is to provide short, simple definitions, it makes sense to keep things as brief as possible. If someone needs to know about the Noachide laws, this is not the place they'd come to. They can just google it and the first result will be the Wikipedia page for the topic; the other results will provide more information from Jewish sources.. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 19:33 | comment | added | Fred | I don't really think it's problematic to leave the description as is ("sexual immorality"), since, from the perspective of Judaism, it is immoral to violate the law (and moreover, the Torah and Tanach in general use language regarding forbidden liasons that suggests that prohibited sexual relationships specifically are immoral). So a legal judgment regarding the nature of a particular act essentially implies a moral judgment regarding the fundamental nature of that act in that Judaism considers it immoral to willingly violate God's laws. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 19:20 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | @Fred We're both being too congenial to come to a decision. :) | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 19:19 | comment | added | Fred | I think the value of including the basic seven laws probably outweighs comparatively minor concerns over the best language to use to express the idea (though it could be a bit of a minefield, I guess). | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 19:14 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | @Fred - ignore the chat invite, it was unintentional. The other option is to remove the description of the laws, and limit the answer to the actual definition. That would be less informative, but it would circumvent the issues of wording. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 19:08 | comment | added | Fred | I'm also concerned that it might be begging the question (in the colloquial sense of the expression, for you sticklers out there), but this is an issue with all seven to a certain degree. You can't properly understand the parameters of any of the laws without going into details (though #4 might be even more vague when stated generally). And while "forbidden sexual relationships" might beg the question more glaringly, it doesn't really provide less information than does "sexual immorality." But I'm okay with either choice, I suppose. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 19:03 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | I'm obviously not asking if sexual immorality is a problem for you. I meant to ask if the term "sexual immorality" is problematic for you. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 19:00 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | @Fred - That might be begging the question. Do you see a problem with "sexual immorality"? I'm willing to be proven wrong. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 18:54 | comment | added | Fred | Would you prefer "forbidden sexual relationships"? | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 18:52 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | @Fred - Since the law covers bestiality, pederasty, adultery, and homosexuality, I think the best umbrella term is "sexual immorality". It accurately and comprehensively reflects the intent of the law. I don't agree that homosexuality is immoral, of course, but my sensibilities are irrelevant here, the only thing that matters is the law as described in the Torah. For the sake of succinctness, "sexual immorality" seems to be the best option. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 18:49 | history | edited | Fred | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
corrected #1 per Sanhedrin 56b
|
| Aug 20, 2015 at 18:48 | comment | added | Fred | I understand. If you think it best, you can edit it to replace "sodomy" with "homosexual relations." Either that, or the current formulation is okay, I think. But the definition obviously can't be so accommodating as to give an inaccurate picture of the law by enumerating several specifics while leaving one conspicuously absent. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 18:46 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | @Fred - The problem is that the word "sodomy" is now seen as highly offensive to the LGBTQ community, and although Jewish law isn't supportive of homosexuality, I don't want to be unnecessarily offensive to anyone, including the LGBTQ community. I think "sexual immorality" is borderline offensive, but it is better than the alternatives, and is broad enough to cover all the bases. I don't think "sodomy" is necessary to describe the law in question, but if others feel differently, I would like to have my name removed from the entry. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 18:43 | comment | added | Fred | I wasn't certain whether that term would be construed as offensive or merely technical, so I consulted a dictionary, and it did not indicate that the term is offensive. (My intention was merely to describe the act concisely, but a different way of putting it is fine if you think it would be less offensive). Certainly, it is not necessary to use that term to describe the act, but, regardless of the term that is used, it is a more accurate description of the law compared to the previous edit. You can decide if you wish to edit it further, or leave the more general form of the law. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 18:38 | history | edited | Wad Cheber | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Broadest definition possible, less potentially offensive (if the word "sodomy" is necessary, please remove my name from the answer)
|
| Aug 20, 2015 at 18:35 | history | edited | Fred | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Corrected to more broadly encompassing prohibition, per Sanhedrin 58a and Rambam Hil. M'lachim 9:6
|
| Aug 20, 2015 at 16:29 | history | edited | Wad Cheber | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 45 characters in body
|
| S Aug 20, 2015 at 16:16 | history | answered | Wad Cheber | CC BY-SA 3.0 | |
| S Aug 20, 2015 at 16:16 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Wad Cheber |