Speaking of which, I'll take the opportunity and say as well that I was very impressed. Especially by the intellectual honesty that toward the end the Rabbi (Michael) showed in presenting the rejection of Anselm. I was really impressed by the honesty.

I join the words of the writer of the message. Thank you very much for the trilogy; it truly is a work of art that refreshes one's thinking, a real pleasure. More power to you. (Even though, in my humble but decisive opinion, I don't agree with many things.)

A thanksgiving offering containing 40 loaves, mixed, scalded, and soaked in an enormous quantity of oil, which must be eaten by morning, is indeed the appropriate response to an attempt to slim down our theology. Unfortunately, we have no Temple and cannot bring a thanksgiving offering, but the Hanukkah latkes and his doughnuts—they are what will ensure that "may there be no leanness in the rich fats of our faith" 🙂

With the blessing, "Blessed is the wise one who knows secrets, who uproots cedars," S. M-N

Shai, why don't you agree, and why?

Haim, come on now… that could be insulting.

A.,
Too long. I'm not talking about disagreement with the line of argument (I'm not worthy of that), but with the underlying assumptions. It's simply a different approach from my approach to life.

Shai, then make an accounting of why your approach is different. What are your reasons for a different approach? And check who is right.

Haim,
If I have a different approach from Rabbi Michi's approach, that doesn't mean someone here is right and the other is wrong; these are just different ways of operating and looking at things.

Several inappropriate messages were deleted from here. I ask that you maintain a civilized discussion, and in particular, personal recommendations should please be directed by private email and not here.

How rationality brings out all the emotionality in people here. Doctor, what’s the meaning of this?