No problem, I was happy to participate.
There is a great deal that we agree on. The problem is wresting religion from religious people. For some reason, that base 2 reality is just too appealing.
So, you have to be familiar with your primary sources, and although you’ll never be qualified to make legal rulings, I think there are enough lawyers in the world, and not enough people simply trying to understand themselves and the world.
In Judaism, the door never shuts—regarding what we call teshuvah. English translations never quite get the whole meaning, but very roughly, it means repentance. Literally, it means ‘turning’ or ‘returning’. Paradoxically, the worse you are, the more powerful your teshuvah is.
I think the reason you couldn’t wrap yourself around that part of the argument is because all of the logic building up to that was flawed. It’s predicated on this base 2 notion of reality. It doesn’t consider human consciousness as a force of nature—such as cavanah (Hebrew for Intention), and teshuvah. Frequently we use the metaphor ‘heart’ for these things. Your notion of correct intention is much closer to being accurate than the phrase ‘good intentions’.
You have the ability to correct your intention, you can choose whether you will embark on that journey. And that is the one aspect of each of us that nobody else can judge—because no one else can know. It calls for another paradigm of human behavior and human consciousness.
Politics is another way to embrace a base 2 reality—right or left, Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative. As soon as you take a side, then you have to follow a script. But base 2 is very interesting, in this way. If you embrace it, it will choke you right back.
And we’re not even scratching the surface of this issue.