If it helps to imagine, rather than proof god doesn't exist (and consider my version an add-on to GD's so I don't undercut him), how about if you received proof that god exists but you were completely wrong about its fundamental nature.

Say, it shows up, offers convincing evidence of who it is but says "Yes, I invented the universe but I moved on to other projects immediately afterward. There is no afterlife and all religions founded on earth have been entirely human constructions. Nothing you all do matters in the slightest to me, I was just cleaning a closet and stumbled across this old project so I thought I'd drop in. Boy did evolution go in a completely different direction than I expected. Anyway, ta ta for now, might stop by again some day."

What does that do to your moral behavior.

You keep opening the door.

Query, though. Which is worse? Adhering to a moral code that is not necessarily self-evident out of a belief that it was commanded by a God that you believe to exist, or deriving a sense of community by hopping on one foot at prescribed times of the day and pretending that doing so was commanded by a God in which you don't believe?

I believe your premise would most likely be dismissed as a temptation.

Where did I ever say I'm pretending that doing so was commanded by God?

You say it with every Baruch atah that you don't really mean.

GD to answer your re-posed question:

My sense of right and wrong is occasionally in conflict with my religious beliefs, or rather, cause me to question whether my understanding of right and wrong is off, or whether the world is wrong about the nature and desires of God. In the end, I go with my conscience, and hope that if I'm wrong I will be forgiven.

Oh, you mean pretending for other people. In that case, I personally consider neither a good option, but yes I consider the former worse because the latter does not require accepting magic as truth. For the most part, I do not lie about the reasons I continue to take part in Jewish rituals. I'm fairly open with (or at least I would be if they asked) most of my family that I do so simply for tradition's sake rather than belief. And the negative reaction I'd anticipate would be purely because of the break in tradition and the fear that it would distance them from their grandchild, not because of some concern for my eternal soul.

With the exception of a select few for whom that truth would cause more family strife than it's worth. In that sense, yes there is pretense there. But the harm that would cause by being honest is not worth it to me.

Sure, said rituals do involve voicing certain supernatural beliefs. But I don't consider taking part in that "pretending to believe in god" any more than I consider reading The Giving Tree "pretending to believe that trees have human-like emotions." It's just a story framework to teach and reinforce certain lessons. And as soon as my child is old enough to understand that, that's what they'll learn.

All right, I'm back. Had to go say the Lord's prayer with the family at tuck-in time.

Where were we?

Or when requested by friends, ie: eating Gefilte Fish. ;)


well, it was almost a ritual....

:rolleyes: If you're trying to provoke me you're doing a piss poor job of it. I'm really not sure where you're going. I don't think I can say any clearer where I stand. Given the choice I'd prefer to do a forklift replacement of Judaism for an entirely secular set of traditions and rituals to connect me and my child(ren) to my family. That option being an impossibility, I'm settling for the less preferable, unftunately impefect, but only-avenue-available option of retaining the ritual while puttiing it in context of being a matter of family, fable, and myth with the intended purpose of teaching some moral lessons, and not of divine magical origin.

Because I find the admitted pitfalls of that route preferable and more easily overcome than the pitfalls of the alienated family route. Their support is too important to me.