What is the vision for improving your Further Education grounds over the next 5 years?
AMV Playgrounds are a full service design, manufacture and installation company working exclusively within the education sector.
With over 30 years trading history we are the ideal partner to help your further education college design and deliver a multi-phased plan to develop your outdoor facilities over a number of years.
Our knowledgeable staff are experts in advising schools on how to best develop their external spaces in order to achieve improved learning outcomes and encourage healthier more active lives and better facilities for all students.
If you would like to find out more, please take advantage of our no-obligation site survey & design service by filling out the form to the right or call on the number above.
With our in house design team and two large manufacturing facilities, AMV have a proven track record in providing made to measure, safe, high quality outdoor structures that are matched to each schools exact requirements. All our structures come with a 25 year metalwork guarantee against structure failure and 35 years against rust.
Providing opportunities on the school premises for students to gather, whether it's to socialise, to learn or even to enjoy lunch are all proven ways to enhance the school day experience and pupil satisfaction overall. Whether it's a small playground shelter, an outdoor classroom or a large covered seating area to act as an outdoor canteen, AMV can provide the right solution at the right price.
AMV are recognised as supplying the most durable and well-designed multi-sport goals within our industry. Whether you want to cater for football, hockey, cricket, basketball or netball our value packed goal units do it all. And don't forget our unique steel tennis nets and popular outdoor table tennis tables.
Encouraging students to be able to cycle to school has numerous benefits including fitness & health, reducing congestion on the school run and of course the environment, reducing the schools carbon footprint as part of its overall journey to school plan. Whether its two tier cycle racks and small scooter shelters up to large capacity cycle compounds, AMV can deliver the future proof cycle storage solution your particular premises needs.
We pride ourselves on the fact that most of our work comes from repeat business or recommendations between schools and have an extensive list of references from schools and local authorities who can attest to the quality of both our products and our service.


Welcome to home of Pension House Hotel. A sweet vacation doesn't have to be luxury. We devote this website to introduce the best pension houses at popular vacation destinations for those who are looking for basic low cost accommodation. Be it Cebu, Melbourne, Paris, Jeju or Busan, you can find a pension house or hotel that fit your travelling budget and needs.


text:
The Collaboration of Jackson and Jones in "A Good Year for the Roses"
"A Good Year for the Roses" depicts the thoughts of a man as his wife who is preparing to leave him. The song is also an example of George Jones' ability to perform with great and emotional vocals. It seems realistic as the song conveys sadness and bitterness consequently from a broken marriage. It is more intense with the assistance of Alan Jackson. Their collaboration can pierce your hearts. Undoubtedly, their duet can make your eyes water.
https://www.facebook.com/163858780682279/photos/a.191236127944544/191236134611210/?type=1&theater
George Jones initially recorded and released the song in 1970. 24 years later, in 1994, Jones collaborated with Jackson to cater the song to their country music supporters. However, their collaboration did not receive much reception compared to Jones' solo performance. It did not even top the country charts. Nevertheless, in 1995, Jones and Jackson received "Vocal Collaboration of the Year" at the Music City News Country Awards.
https://www.pinterest.ph/pin/465841155183463008/
Despite the low reception, the accolade both received was proof of how great their collaboration was. It only proved the impact of Jones and Jackson's vocals to touch the people as well as the critics.
A Good Year for the Roses
Jerry Chesnut wrote the words and lyrics of "A Good Year for the Roses." George Jones recorded and released the single in October 1970. It was part of his album "George Jones with Love." His version peaked at number two on the Billboard Hot Country Singles, which is now the Hot Country Songs chart.
People might agree that George Jones' performance of "A Good Year for the Roses" is one of his best. His clenched-teeth vocal style was the core of the track making it so intense and emotional. The words and lyrics were genuinely connected with Jones. With this, he was able to deliver a painful, expressive, and sensitive song.
Not only is the song intense, but also George Jones. He always drowned himself to each of his songs' lines. When recording, he made sure he was connected and made it his own.
Alan Jackson, George Jones
Remembering The Death of Ernest Tubb, The Texas Troubadour
Elvis Presley Praised the Lord on his Hit "Who Am I"
"The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas:" A 1982 Comedy Film Starring Dolly Parton
Meet John Denver's Children: Where are they now?
CHECK OUT: Alan Jackson's Upcoming 2020 Tour
Watch: "IT'S FIVE O'CLOCK" Dance Moves of a Young Cowboy
Meet Alan Jackson's Family And How Their Faith Made Them Strong Over The Years
CMA Fest 2019's Exciting Line Up: Luke Bryan Kane Brown, Maren Morris and More
"Valentine:" A Great Duet by Jim Brickman and Martina McBride
Country Fans Were Pleased With The Rendition of "Who's Gonna Fill Their Shoes" By Mo Pitney
Here Are Some Facts About Trisha Yearwood, Country Music's Leading Lady
David Allan Coe Meets Up With The Ghost Of Hank Williams In "The Ride"

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Python character name First I assigned a variable
character_name = "Patrice"

On the print function, I wrote
print( " Patrice does a wonderful job at his workplace ")

Instead of writing Patrice on the print function, I wanted to declare the variable that would print Patrice, How would I do it?

A: There's various ways to achive this, you might want to look at Pythons f-strings:
print(f'{character_name} does a wonderful job at his workplace')

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Home/Cricket/'Substantial improvement' in Rishabh Pant's condition, says close family aide | Cricket News
'Substantial improvement' in Rishabh Pant's condition, says close family aide | Cricket News
Atiq Ur Rehman Follow on Twitter Send an email December 31, 2022
DEHRADUN (U'khand): There is substantial improvement in the condition of cricketer Rishabh Pant and doctors are yet to decide if he has to be shifted to some other facility, according to his family friends and others who visited him at the hospital here on Saturday.
Pant's mother Saroj Pant and his sister Sakshi, who arrived from London on Saturday morning, are with him at the hospital, they said.
DDCA director Shyam Sharma and Bollywood actors Anil Kapoor and Anupam Kher were among those who met Pant at the hospital.
"There are no immediate plans to shift him anywhere as his condition has improved substantially since yesterday,' said Umesh Kumar who has been constantly with the family at the Max Hospital here.
"A plastic surgery on his forehead had been performed on Friday itself. Its first dressing was also done today," he said
The 25-year-old, who was on his way to his hometown Roorkee to surprise his mother, suffered injuries on his head, back and feet in a road accident on Friday morning, according to police. Hospital authorities have said that his condition is stable.
His condition is improving but the BCCI doctors who are constantly in touch with the doctors at the Max Hospital will take a call on whether or not he should be taken elsewhere for the treatment of his ligament injury, Umesh Kumar said.
Watch: How Rishabh Pant's car rammed into a road divider
IPL player Nitish Rana who plays for Delhi also met Pant at the hospital on Saturday.
After visiting Pant, DDCA director Shyam Sharma told reporters: "He is being looked after well by the doctors here. The BCCI is also in touch with them taking updates on his condition. As of now, he will be kept here only"
Replying to a question, he said Pant told him it was dark and the mishap occurred when he was trying to negotiate a pothole.
Pant had a miraculous escape when his luxury car hit a road divider near Roorkee on Delhi-Dehradun national highway and burst into flames early on Friday.
Watch: Localities come to Rishabh Pant's rescue
"He (Pant) is doing fine. We met him as fans. Let us pray that he recovers soon and we see him playing again," actor Anil Kapoor told reporters after coming out of the hospital.
Anupam Kher, who accompanied Kapoor, said: "Everything is fine. We met Pant, his mother and relatives, they are all fine. We made him laugh a lot."
Peach Bowl 2022: Georgia vs. Ohio State live stream, watch online, TV channel, kickoff time, prediction, odds
"They Deserve Bad to Happen to Them!": Shaquille O'Neal Once Revealed Unrelenting Opinion on 'Rule-Breakers'


Welfare fraud laws are covered under California Welfare and Institutions Code 10980. In basic terms, welfare fraud is the criminal offense of unlawfully receiving welfare benefits. Typically, this white collar crime occurs when the welfare recipient or employee intentionally provides false information in order to receive benefits, food stamps or Medi-Cal benefits. In Los Angeles County, welfare fraud has been a major problem for many years, where an investigation revealed millions of dollars in overpayments. The majority or welfare fraud cases are known as a "wobbler." This means the Los Angles County prosecutor has the discretion to file the case as either a misdemeanor or felony crime. If you are convicted of welfare fraud, you can expect large fines, probation, community service, and potential jail time. In addition, you should also expect to be ordered to pay back the benefits you unlawfully received. It should be noted that you may have the chance of getting your charges reduced or dismissed if you pay back all or a significant part of the benefits you received. When you ask for welfare benefits, you are legally required under the penalty of perjury to provide accurate information, including your income, dependents, and living situation. Therefore, it's a crime to receive benefits after giving false, misleading, or inaccurate information. In most cases, there is a thorough investigation before criminal charges are actually filed. The most common reasons people find themselves facing welfare fraud charges includes situations where they failed to report income or property, falsely claimed dependents, received benefits from multiple states, failing to report a child moved out of their home, and providing other false information to receive benefits. If you have been accused of welfare fraud, you need to consult with a Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer at Eisner Gorin LLP. We have extensive experience is all types of welfare fraud cases, Now that we have covered a general overview of welfare fraud, let's take a closer look at the different types of welfare fraud cases, legal definitions, penalties, and defenses below.
As you can see above, California Welfare and Institutions Code 10980 covers a broad range of fraudulent behavior in order to receive welfare benefits. If you have been charged with committing welfare fraud, the Los Angeles county prosecutor must be able to prove, beyond any reasonable doubt, every element of the crime to convict you. In other words, they must be show you knowingly made false statements, failed to provide relevant information, or submitted a fraudulent claim with the specific intent to obtain welfare benefits you were not entitled to receive.
The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office has a dedicated division that investigates allegations of welfare fraud. It's called the Welfare Fraud Prevention and Investigation Unit (WFP&I) and they are responsible to "discover, investigate, and prosecute" welfare fraud. Their main function is to collect information and provide prosecutors with sufficient evidence to pursue criminal charges of welfare fraud. The unit has 110 field investigators who work on active and closed cases. These investigators receive welfare fraud referrals from different sources that include a public welfare fraud hotline, and from Los Angeles County social services employees who have the responsibility of distributing the welfare benefits.
They will typically start their investigation by speaking directly to the recipient of the welfare benefits to ask them questions about the information they submitted in order to receive benefits. In this manner, they are attempting to confirm if their information was accurate. The investigators will also speak with their family, friends, co-workers, in an attempt to uncover information that would support allegations of welfare fraud. After they complete their investigation, they will provide their findings to a Los Angeles County prosecutor who will need to determine if there is sufficient information to file criminal charges of welfare fraud under Welfare and Institutions Code 10980. In some cases, they might decide to pursue charges under a related offense (see below). The prosecutor may ask the investigator to collect more information before they make a decision. In other situations, the prosecutor could determine there is simply not enough evidence to pursue criminal charges, or they even have the option of putting the case into a welfare fraud diversion program. If you are under criminal investigation for welfare fraud, contact our Los Angles criminal defense attorneys to review the details and options.
Under California Welfare and Institutions Code 10980, welfare fraud can be filed as either a misdemeanor or felony crime. This is commonly known as a "wobbler," and the type of charges you will face will depend of the specific value of benefits received and your criminal history. If you are convicted of making false or misleading statements to receive benefits under WIC 10980(a), the legal penalties include up to six months in a Los Angeles County jail, and a fine up to $500.
If you file a fraudulent application under WIC 10980(b), it's a "wobbler" and can be charged as a misdemeanor or felony offense. You will typically be convicted for filing a false application if you filed multiple applications, applied for benefits under a fake name, or used a false identification. If you are convicted of a misdemeanor offense of false application, you could receive up to one year in county jail, and/or a fine up to $1,000. A felony conviction for false application carries a penalty of 16 months, two or even three years, and/or a fine up to $5,000.
If you are convicted of obtaining or receiving false welfare benefits under WIC 10980(c), it's a misdemeanor crime if the benefits you received were $950 or less. A conviction carries up to one year in county jail, and/or a fine up to $500. However, if the welfare benefits you received were greater than $950, the legal penalties include up to three years in jail, and/or a fine up to $5,000.
If you are convicted of activity under Welfare and Institutions Code 10980(d) with unauthorized blank authorizations in order to participate in the food stamp program, you are guilty of a felony offense. The legal penalties include 16 months, two or three years in jail, and/or a fine up to $5,000.
If you are convicted of food stamp fraud under WIC 10980(f), it can be either a misdemeanor or felony crime. Again, if the total value of the benefits received was $950 or less, it's a misdemeanor offense carrying a jail sentence of up to six months and a fine up to $1,000. If the value of welfare benefits was more than $950, it's a felony crime that carries up to three years in jail and a fine up to $5,000. It should be noted you could face additional penalties if you committed welfare fraud using electronically transferred benefits. The additional penalty includes up to four years in a California state prison.
In some cases, you might be eligible for a diversion program, which means you can have your fraud charges eventually dismissed after you have paid back the benefits you receive. You could even set up a payment plan for a specific monthly amount. The diversion program is designed to lessen stiff legal penalties for first time offenders. In some welfare fraud cases, successfully completing a diversion program can keep them from serving time in jail. Typically, you will have to plead guilty in court and make an agreement to repay all the welfare benefits you were not entitled to receive. After you have paid back the entire amount, you will then go back to court and the judge will dismiss the charges. If you fail to honor the agreement, the Los Angeles County court judge will then return to your guilty plea and sentence you. This type of diversion option is good for defendants will little or no criminal history, which are not facing other criminal charges, and didn't receive a large amount of money in benefits. If you need more information about a welfare fraud diversion program, call our Los Angeles criminal defense law firm.
No fraudulent intent – All fraud related cases require proving intent to obtain a conviction. This is the key element of the crime that must be proven. In some cases, our criminal lawyers might be able to successfully argue that you had a reasonable belief you submitted a legitimate claim for welfare benefits. We might be able to show that any incorrect information you submitted was not on purpose or you simply didn't realize you needed to update the status about your children becoming ineligible. If you are accused of submitting multiple claims, we might be able to argue it was an accident. If our attorneys are able to cast some reasonable doubt about your intent, you could have a good chance of avoiding a conviction.
False accusation – In certain cases of welfare fraud, our lawyers may be able to present an argument that the accusations against you are false. For example, perhaps another person used your name and identification to submit for welfare benefits and you are victim of identity theft. In other situations, we might be able to prove administrative clerical errors were the cause of the accusations, when in fact; you were not involved in any fraudulent attempt to unlawfully obtain welfare benefits.
If you have been accused of any type of welfare fraud in violation of California Welfare and Institutions Code 10980, you should call the Los Angeles criminal defense lawyers at Eisner Gorin LLP. A conviction will typically result is harsh legal consequences which will impact your future opportunities. Early intervention into your case by our law firm can have a tremendous impact of the outcome of your case. Contact us at 877-781-1570.


This entry was posted in Photographs, Poems 2016, Ranch Journal and tagged Acorns, Drought, gods, Monarch Butterfly, Redbud, signs, weekly-photo-challenge. Bookmark the permalink.
John, a nice interpretation of this week's challenge both in words and picture.
Thanks, Tim. I didn't realize at the time that the last (4th) hatch of Monarchs in October live for 8 months or so to over-winter or migrate to warmer locations to insure their survival. The warm monsoon rains confused the redbud, strange colors for October, truly beautiful but difficult to photograph.
I think many plants are confused. We've got a daylily by the front door that is trying to bloom.
Kinda like people, always someone confused.
I'm glad. As I look back at the beginning of our drought years, the bumper crop of acorns after two wet winters and all these Monarchs may have been a superfluous sign of leaner times to come. Who knows?
Beautiful image and memories of better times. Hoping you get some rain soon.
I hesitate to say we've turned the corner, but gentle rains have come on a regular basis to start and keep the grass coming. After four dry years, we're a little gun shy, not sure whether to trust this turn of events after being under the gun for so long.


text:
Ксавье Тшиманга Камалуба Мбуямба (; род. 31 декабря 2001, Маастрихт, Нидерланды) — нидерландский футболист, защитник клуба «Волендам».

Карьера
До 2019 года играл в академии родного города МВВ Маастрихт. В августе 2019 года перешёл в «Барселону» U19. Через год перешёл в молодёжку английского «Челси».

В августе 2022 года перешёл в основную команду «Волендама». Дебютировал в Эредивизи 9 сентября в матче с «Гоу Эхед Иглз». 14 января 2023 года забил дебютный гол в чемпионате в ворота «Валвейка».

Примечания

Ссылки

Футболисты Нидерландов
Игроки ФК «Волендам»

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


An unbroken chain links the Jews who heard those words from Moshe and those who will hear them in the synagogue this week. Orthodox Jews, of whatever stripe, hold fast to the belief that God spoke to Moshe and gave him the Torah. We believe that we were founded as a people by Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, that we went down to Egypt and were enslaved there, that God took us out and brought us to Mount Sinai. There, a truly mysterious event took place, which we shall never understand and none of our ancestors understood. The Infinite met the finite, Heaven and earth touched and God transmitted His words and His will to the Jewish People.
That is the source and origin of Hamisha Humshei Torah. They are not a product of inspiration or 'channelling the Divine,' in a way that later biblical books or even the rabbinic literature might be described. We believe that 'this is the Torah which Moshe placed before the Children of Israel, by the mouth of the Lord, by the hand of Moshe'.
That is my faith as an Orthodox Jew and it is what took me to the Orthodox beit midrash of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah Rabbinical School (YCT). It is the belief I will teach as an Orthodox rabbi, just as I have been taught it by my rebbeimin the yeshiva. If some graduates of the yeshiva take a different view, that is a matter for them, though we should respect the integrity of an honest struggle. Like any yeshiva, YCT can only be held responsible for what it teaches and the beliefs and conduct of its current students – just ask Gateshead Kollel about Louis Jacobs.
This is not the place to rehearse the rabbinic literature on Torah Min Hashamayim. Suffice it to say that Hazal took it as given that there was a Revelation on Sinai. Their main concern was that people might argue that while Moshe went up the mountain he brought down a forgery, and they declared that anyone who claimed that Moshe wrote the Humashof his own account would have no place in the World to Come. This is a very serious statement considering that in general every Jew has a portion of the Afterlife. It certainly never entered the heads of Hazal that Moshe is a fictional character and that the whole text, both its sources and its current form, dates from much later than his supposed lifetime.
Indeed, until relatively recently no-one at all thought that. From Moses Maimonides in the twelfth century to Moses Mendelssohn in the seventeenth, there was unanimity that the Torah's status as the product of unmediated revelation was the basis of the whole of Jewish life and belief. Even some early proponents of the academic study of Jewish literature, for example Nachman Krochmal and Zacharias Frankel who were otherwise fairly radical, drew the line at Higher Criticism of the Humash itself. In recent times, even David Weiss Halivni, whose view of the composition of the Humash as we have it is novel, would not abandon the commitment to the revelation at Sinai.
Must We Accept the Documentary Hypothesis?
Of course that is not a good argument for Torah Min Hashamayim. An idea is either true or it is not. However, the claims of the Documentary Hypothesis have been thoroughly dealt with by traditionalists like Rabbi David Tsevi Hoffman, moderate traditionalists like Umberto Cassuto and radicals like Benno Jacob. The Documentary Hypothesis proceeds from the premise that the text is human, and then concludes how it could have been assembled as a human text. It is driven by its starting assumptions. Furthermore, it is the product of hyper-modernity, in which everything can be dissected, including literature, using methods that were described as 'scientific.' Scholars of literature and of history would be embarrassed to use such a term today. Literary theory and historical practice have both come a long way since then, but simply accepting the Documentary Hypothesis takes none of that development into account. It is odd that sometimes we are more concerned about the Documentary Hypothesis than the academy, many parts of which concentrate on more interesting and fruitful literary questions.
As we well know, the problems that bible critics have identified have been dealt with by traditional scholars for millennia. The explanations of Hazal, the Rishonim and Aharonim have all addressed the same questions of different accounts of events or expressions of laws. There has been no diminution in the brilliance or insight of these explanations in recent years. Two examples of this approach are Rabbi J.B. Soloveitchik's explanation of the two accounts of the creation of man in Lonely Man of Faith and Rabbi Mordecai Breuer's entire approach. More recently, the work coming from the journal Megadim, Aviva Zornberg, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks or Rabbi Shalom Carmy all assumes the unity and Divine nature of the text of the Humash.
As these scholars, and their predecessors, have shown, the Humash is a far from simple text. There are also many questions to be asked about which parts of the Humash are to be taken literally, which are allegorical or might be dreams, although we should note that those question go to its meaning not its authorship or its authority. The Talmud discusses how it was communicated to Moshe and compiled by him. Did it come in one revelation or was it given piece by piece and then collated at the end of forty years? Is Devarim different in some respects from the earlier four books? Did Moshe write the account of his own death or did Joshua? Were there some small sections added later, as Rabbi Yehuda HeHassid and the Ibn Ezra thought? It is possible to say that about some other parts, as Rabbi Yuval Cherlow and others have suggested? Has the text been corrupted over time or must we believe that it was transmitted entirely without scribal error, as Rabbi Yehiel Yaakov Weinberg thought? These are all ideas to explore and they have a place in Orthodoxy because they are authentic elements of our Mesorah. We have to resist any attempts to narrow our intellectual vision by expelling them or their advocates.
Acceptance of the Documentary Hypothesis is therefore unnecessary and a radical break with Jewish tradition. But does it matter? Classical Torah Min Hashamayim may have become one of the recognized boundaries between Orthodoxy and non-Orthodoxy, but should it be? Surely if we come to the conclusion that the text is Divine, the mechanics of its writing and editing are immaterial. I think that is an error. This is a dogma we should care about andhalakhic Jews should not delude themselves that they can abandon Torah Min Hashamayim and maintain the Judaism they cherish. Their attempts to do so fail even on their own terms, both in theory and practice.
The rejection of Torah Min Hashamayim makes a nonsense of both parshanut and the Gemara. The varied explanations of the traditional commentators might be inspiring but they do not give us an insight into what the words were meant to convey. We can only hope to uncover their meaning through the study of authorship and context, like any other text. Traditional and modern exegesis cannot exist alongside each other. It would make no more sense to devise a devar Torah based on Vayikra than on the Code of Hammurabi. In the realm of Talmud, for one who accepts the Documentary Hypothesis, when Hazal seeks sources in the Humash for halakhot, they are on a wild goose chase, because to a modern critic the words of the Torah never meant what the Rabbis took them to mean. The entire halakhicliterature becomes an elaborate intellectual folly. It might be interesting or valuable in the study of a particular people in order to understand how they constructed their spiritual life, but it cannot be taken as a real explanation of the biblical text.
This has profound implications for halakhah. Judaism stands on its belief in heteronymous law, the idea that we are commanded by Another (God) and His law is unconditionally binding. He communicated His will to Moshe in the form of the Torah shebikhtav (Humash) and the Torah shebal peh (oral explanation) that accompanied it. Once we come to the view that the Humash is, as a matter of history, a human work, it might well be an attempt by a series of writers in the ancient near east to reach out to God, but how do we know He reached back? Some parts are very challenging but we keep faith because we believe it represents the direct Divine will. If we cease to believe that we are mandated by the Divine Will how is Humash any different than the Koran, the Gospels or the Baghavad Gita, all of which contain parts we like and parts we don't?
The founders of the Conservative Movement claimed that although critical scholars were correct about the composition of the Humash, the authority of the mitsvot was unaffected. They argued that a human text could receive the Divine imprimatur through its survival and acceptance. history legislates. However, they failed to persuade their followers to lead halakhic lives, because while an individual might feel that, they cannot transmit that belief. Furthermore, that total commitment sooner or later gives way even in its advocates. Louis Jacobs who at first claimed that under 'halakhic non-fundamentalism' all mitsvot were Divine and binding, later found he could not justify institutions such as themamzer. All who have rejected Torah Min Hashamayim have come to the view that the Humash contains higher as lower parts, and have therefore broken its binding nature. It is not a chance of history that Reconstructionism came out of the Conservative Movement and lived for a long time within it. It is the logical outcome of the process which begins with rejecting Torah Min Hashamayim.
Finally, supporters of progressive Orthodoxy should also be extremely wary of accepting the Documentary Hypothesis. If God did not speak directly to us, but has rather endorsed whatever we happen to construct for ourselves, then we create a Panglossian world in which 'whatever is, is right.' If I have heteronymous, authoritative texts and traditions which I can study, investigate and probe there is room for development on issues as diverse as relations with non-Jews and non-observant Jews, the role of women and family law. If history is the voice of God, if the status quo is always what God wants us to live by, where is the capacity for change, which has always been a feature of the Mesorah? We come to pick and choose based on whatever feels right at any particular time, or the halakhic process is frozen. Neither is the way of traditional Judaism.
I am Open Orthodox. I do not want to throw anyone out of Orthodox communities. We have to provide a home for people of varying levels of observance as well as those wrestling with difficult theological questions. Nevertheless, I am clear that accepting the Documentary Hypothesis, or any similar theory, is not only a breach with tradition, it is also unnecessary and harmful. There is a great deal to discuss and debate and the study of Mikra is becoming richer every day. I am lucky to have access to master teachers of Tanakh, whose insights are innovative and compelling, all within the bounds of tradition. We must continue to live in the knowledge that when we pick up a Humash we hold in our hands the word of God. It contains a sacred gift He gave us 3,000 years ago, and because that revelation is pure and direct, it contains infinite wisdom, beauty and goodness. That is the way for modern and open Orthodoxy to flourish, and any alternative would be a tragic error.
 I will address later in this essay which parts of the Torah were given, and when. I acknowledge it is not necessary, or even sensible, to believe that the entire Torah was given on Sinai.
 I am aware that this verse does not have that expansive meaning in its original context. However, that is the way the verse is used in our liturgy. It expresses our belief in the nature of the entire Torah, as it is lifted up and we look at it.
 Leopold Zunz and of course Abraham Geiger did accept the Documentary Hypothesis.
 If one holds that the Humash is a single text then it follows that there must have been an oral accompaniment, because otherwise it makes no sense. There is a great deal of debate among the classical authorities about how expansive that original Oral Law was, but that is not a question for now.
 Louis Finklestein may be an exception.
This entry was posted on Friday, July 26th, 2013 at 2:30 AM and is filed under Contemporary Issues, Modern Orthodoxy.	You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
This isn't a question of "some graduates". This is a question of YCT's only dayan, and respecting an honest struggle does not mean accepting that he is still within the boundaries of Orthodox Judaism. And the more YCT people make such lame excuses for him, the more it becomes clear that YCT is not an Orthodox institution.
Remember, even the Conservative movement started off with leaders who believed in Torah miSinai and kofrim who didn't. But those who did believe were willing to accept those who did not, and as a result, today, none of them do. Every single excuse we've heard from YCT is something we heard previously from JTS. Except that JTS acknowledged it was not Orthodox. Why can't YCT display the same honesty?
The Manchester-Louis Jacobs analogy does not fit, as YCT accepted Farber as a semicha student and awarded him semicha knowing what his views were on the divinity of Torah.
twice over? what do you mean?
Yoreh yoreh and yadin yadin. He's the only one they've ever given the latter to.
Shlomo and Lisa's points border on the absurd given the same comments were made about YU and Rav Soloveitchik by the people who then considered themselves "the real Orthodox".
Sorry, but I did not follow why you felt my comment absurd, nor what the quotation you brought had to do with what I wrote.
Ben felt that YCT was in no way responsible for the views of a former student, no more than Gateshead was with Louis Jacobs.
My comment was that given that they granted him two semichot while fully aware of those views renders the comparison invalid.
As for the comparison you brought, I also don't see the parallel, as in the YCT case, Ben tells us that YCT themselves reject his views, albeit that not being so evident from R' Yssocher's version..
Shlomo – In both cases, the innovative institution is being defamed with the emotive charge of aiding and abetting apikorsut. What goes around, comes around.
So are you claiming there is no apikorsut? That because someone once falsely or mistakenly accused someone else of apikorsut, no such accusation can ever be true? We have Farber's writings before us. They are clearly apikorsut, he is clearly passul le'eidut, nochrim who are converted by him and two others (be the other two as kosher as Moshe Rabenu) remain nochrim, and yet YCT has not declared that he is outside their camp, and the IRF has not removed him from his position.
Gateshead did not have to distance itself from Jacobs; he publicly distanced himself. If Farber were to resign from the IRF and announce that he is no longer an Orthodox Jew, if he were for instance to become a Buddhist or a Reformer, then there would be no need for YCT to distance themselves from him. But he hasn't, so there is such a need.
If that is what they believe, I would worry about their own kashrus too. At least, I'd worry enough not to rely on their certification that something was witnessed by kosher eidim.
By the way, Yuter's argument from the existence of copyists' errors is simply nonsense. It refutes itself. "This Torah that is in our hands" refers to the text as a whole, not to any specific copy of it. The Rambam can't have meant that every single copy in the world is exactly as Moshe transmitted it from Hashem, for the obvious reason that not every copy in the world agrees with all the others. And in the Rambam's day, before printing, this was much more obvious; no two sifrei torah could be expected as a matter of course to agree with each other letter-for-letter, because they were all written by fallible sofrim. And to this day we find mistakes in sifrei torah and correct them. That doesn't make us question the authenticity of the text itself, we just recognise that the text is correct but any specific copy is only an imperfect instance of that perfect text. That is all, and it's so obvious that it's hard to imagine how Yuter (and others who make the same silly argument) can have missed it. It's his desperate desire to be metaher es hasheretz that blinds him so.
WADR, if you think Eliyahu is not LWMO, you need to check your premises. He may not be as out there as people like Avi Weiss, but he's definitely LWMO. As for Josh… he has to tread lightly lest he step on the toes of someone who is LWMO.
1. R Farber has stated he did not express these views while at YCT. It is therefore pure mischief to assert he was given semikha though the yeshiva knew about these views.
2. Louis Jacobs did claim to be Orthodox at the time he made his views public and for some time afterwards: http://louisjacobs.org/about/what-stand.php. By the way, even so Lord Jakobovits זצ'ל wanted to find a way for him to rejoin the United Synagogue.
3. On the basis of today's comments here and elsewhere it is plain to me we have moved from genuine concern about where YCT stands on TMHS to old-fashioned YCT bashing. The articles by Morai veRabotai R Helfgot, R Katz and R Lopatin have made the yeshiva's position abundantly clear. Without using harsh language they have stated that they disagree with R Farber, whose interpretation of TMHS contracts their own and that of the yeshiva. Those who are not satisfied will never be satisfied because they do not want to be satisfied.
Sorry, Ben, but Asher's post was פוסח על שני הסעיפים. He said that Farber's position is in the outer boundaries (but no further) of Orthodox Judaism. Are we also not supposed to take his position as representative of YCT?
YCT is philosophically opposed, it seems, to labeling anything as outside of Orthodoxy. By not simply stating, "This is outside the bounds of Orthodox Judaism", YCT has indeed made their position abundantly clear.
I appreciate the intensity of the debate, but people are only entitled to their own opinions, not to the their own facts.
As a rebbi at YCT Rabbinical School for the last 13 years who both was part of the admissions committee over ten of those years and has been at the yeshiva on a daily basis, to the best of my knowledge, R. Farber never publicly expressed any views similar to the ones he recently expressed in print. He began his acdemic Bible studies a number of years after he left the yeshiva and received his doctorate this past year a good number of years after completing his semicha at the yeshiva. The first public statement of his views was a few weeks ago on the TABS webiste.
I apologize for a slight error in my last comment and offer this correction to my previous comment.
R. Farber began his academic Bible studies in Israel prior to coming to returning to America, during the period when he was working and learning at the branch of Yeshivat Bnai Torah (R. Chait's yehsiva) that existed at that time in Israel.
After a six year hiatus during which he studeid at YCT Rabbinical School and received semicha, and following another few years, he then began a doctoral program at Emory University completing his PHd this past year.
Thank you for the clarification, R' Helfgott.
However, my point was not whether R' Farber expressed his views publicly, but whether he expressed them PRIVATELY, to those who granted him semikha.
R' Farber says that his turning point was when he did his Masters at Hebrew U — and he entered your program AFTER that point.
Contrary to what IH thinks I said, I never accused R' Farber of heresy or anything else, nor did I attempt to trash YCT, which O happen to think has some attractive aspects to it.
All I wished to do was clarify that YCT accepted R' Farber into its program knowing how he held as regards to Torah min HaSHamayim and granted him two semikhot knowing how he held regarding Torah min HaSHamayim.
Are you prepared to say, R' Helfgot, that neither you nor the other members of the senior faculty were aware of R' Farber's personal views, as opposed to his public view at that time?
Again, I am not accusing anyone of anything or trashing anyone or any institution.
That doesn't exempt YCT from making a clear statement that those views are outside of Orthodox Judaism.
R' Farber acknowledged in his essay that he had already made this break while studying at Hebrew and and acknowledged that he has shared these views with his colleagues, only not expressing them in public forums.
And that is why I would assume that among the colleagues he shared this with were those at YCT who gave him his two semikhot.
WHy should I not take R' Farber at his word?
You will note that R' Helfgot as well only speaks of what was said publicly, not what was known to YCT itself.
Ben and R. Nati, I'm not a student at YCT, but I have numerous friends who are (including I'd consider you Ben). Last week I discussed with another mutual friend / (talmid of your's R Nati) and he seemed to surprised that this was blowing up now, as nothing had changed and this seemed to be well known about Zev.
I have no clue if this is true or not, but why would a student within the yeshiva think his views were well known if that wasn't the case? my only ability to dan l'zechut it is that perhaps it was simply scuttlebutt that the came up once this became public and someone made it up and the student (or others) took it as fact.
One think I'm wondering about, R. Nati says he completed his semicha years ago at YCT, that would be accurate re yoreh yoreh. what about yadin yadin? was that smicha not from YCT?
You have made your position clear, viz. that you accept the Divine origin of the Torah. That being the case, will you cooperate with any movement which grants legitimacy to those who believe that the Torah is not of Divine origin but rather just "divinely inspired". Specifically, will you become a member of the IRF or will you continue supporting Yeshivat Maharat, both of which movements Farber is a member of?
I think it is clear that when R Nati said R Farber did not express his views publicly he also meant within the yeshiva. What R Farber told individual friends is a different matter. Yeshivoy do not know the content of every private conversation of their students.
I certainly did not know about R Farber's views until the current series of events. Even when thetorah.com was launched on Erev Shavuot, YU and other people were involved. It was not clear exactly how it would evolve or the view of everyone on it. R Farber did not write for the website for a little while.
I think R Nati's distinction between dealing with private doubts and making public conclusions is a very valid one. While he was working out his way it would have been wrong to condemn R Farber.
As I said, I don't want to make this an endless conversation, so this will be my final comment.
If I understand you, you are saying that although Dr. Farber's views were well-known to his fellow students, they were not known to the YCT faculty that awarded him two semikhot.
You say this not because you asked them, but that is what you infer from what R' Nati wrote above.
R' Nati has already offered one clarification to that posting.
Perhaps he could offer one on this point as well, given that there seems to be some confusion as to what he meant.
R' Nati, thank you in advance!..
Thank you for writing a thoughtful post. There are many points I'd like to address here, but I'll limit myself to just one.
>> The rejection of Torah Min Hashamayim makes a nonsense of both parshanut and the Gemara.
I respectfully but wholeheartedly disagree. As someone who does not believe in Torah min hashamayim, I nonetheless derive a great deal of meaning and insight from the classical mefarshim. Their sheer intimacy with the text gives their commentary much validity even at the pshat level. And with regard to drash, once one is out of the "min hashamayim" frame, ALL drashot effectively operate at the level of "asmachta", where teachings from the Oral Tradition (aggadic and halachic) are hooked onto the Chumash text (as opposed to being viewed as a "level" of the text per se which the Divine author preprogrammed from its inception). From a non-theistic point of view, drash serves as an excellent pedagogical mnemonic device for delivering key teachings, and there is nothing the Documentary Hypothesis or any other academic theory can do to invalidate that.
And yes, one could theoretically present a devar Torah based on Hammurabi's Code – or the Koran or the Baghavad Gita. But why? They're not our text, not the one which is so dear to us, not the one we've been grappling with for thousands of years, not the one which has shaped our thoughts, ethos and practices as a people throughout our long and tumultuous history. The Torah doesn't have to be "perfect" or "Divine" in order for us to fall in love with it. Drashot on the text do not have to be min hashamayim in order for us to learn from them, or to use them as a basis for living a meaningful life as a practicing Jew.
I can understand your concerns about maintaining the commitment to Torah observance if the "min hashamayim" notion is tampered with. That is indeed something which needs to be addressed. But to refer to Parshanut or Gemara as "nonsense" without the supernatural back-story? As if they contain nothing inherently worthwhile? As if their teachings are not robust or relevant enough to stand on their own? As if they are meaningless without the Divine "stamp" on them? That strikes me as tragic, and I want to think you're using a bit of rhetorical hyperbole here, because I find it hard to imagine that anyone seriously immersed in Torah study could ever really believe that.
Shalom From Camp Stone. To the best of my recollection, (I have four little children so lots of life has happened since the mid 2000's), R. Zev never expressed his views, whether in inchoate form or as finished products to me, either publically or privately during his years at the yeshiva or beyond.
I have aboslutely no knoweldge of what he expressed to other people in private on these issues.
Thanks for your reply, R' Nati.
Perhaps the rest of the faculty could reply to this query as well — as could Dr. Farber.
Surely it is material to know whether his semikhot was obtained under false pretenses (concealing his non-traditional views from those from whom he wanted Orthodox semikhot) or whether he was open and honest about his views and his teachers did not see them as a reason to not give him two Orthodox semikhot.
Rabbi Helfgot, now that Farber's views are well known, YCT is obligated to revoke his smicha. No excuses for being passive.
Rav Nati and Ben – I appreciate and respect your clarifications regarding YCT's position on this issue but I think that by focusing on "what did YCT know and when did they know it" the larger real difficulty is not being addressed.
When the yeshiva was started the intent (I believe) was to create a more open minded institution that would have a healthier attitude towards other denominations and would be more progressive in its halachic approach while remaining firmly in the Orthodox camp. Its detractors on the right claimed, and its supporters in the more Centrism camp feared, that Open Orthodoxy would ultimately have no borders and that fidelity to halacha (and/or mesora) would be sacrificed and that in the guise of inclusiveness, lines in the area of core hashkafic beliefs would be blurred as well .
It is against this backdrop that the writings of Rabbi Farber and the yeshiva's response to them are being scrutinized. Let us be candid and acknowledge that Rav Zev is not merely another graduate of YCT. He is the most illustrious graduate to date and deservedly so. He is a brilliant talmid chachom, the only YCT musmach to receive Yadin Yadin semicha and a key figure in the IRF. As such his writings do reflect powerfully on the institution and YCT's responses all the more so.
Let us now examine three different issues that have arisen and the yeshiva's response to each three. While you – Rav Nati – wrote a touching declaration on how the Orthodox community should respond to Homosexuals (one that was signed by numerous rabbis beyond merely the YCT staff) Rabbi Farber wrote an article that went much further and in a novel approach tried to give halachic backing to homosexuals leading active sexual lives. What was the official response of YCT to his position? I may be mistaken but I am not aware of any response.
Next we have the issue of Partnership Minyanim. To date I believe that the yeshiva has not taken a position on this development; Rav Zev clearly did – he was decidedly in favor of them – putting him at odds with mainstream Orthodoxy.
Finally, we have the critical issue of Revelation and authorship of the Torah. Once again we need to be candid. While many of us resent the witch hunt mentality that grips segments of the Orthodox world, had Rabbi Gordimer not written his article would there have been any response on the part of YCT to Rabbi Farber's writings? Would his position in the IRF been at all compromised by the views that he expressed? I highly doubt.it. It is sadly telling that the strongest condemnation of his views came not from either Rabbis Katz or Lopatin (the former's statement was, at best, timid) who are members of the hanhala but from Ben, a present talmid.
Now I appreciate the difficulty involved as you all know Zev to be a fully committed individual who is genuinely searching for truth. However, to the outside observer one is left wondering – what does YCT really stand for? At the end of the day, is there a limit to inclusiveness? Can there be an acknowledgement that I love all my fellow Jews but certain positions they espouse- be they halachic or hashkafic – are simply incorrect? Is there any point where the yeshiva says that halacha does not have felxibilty to allow certain behaviors even if they are socially acceptable?
I think that these are the questions that really need to be answered. Hopefully the YCT administration can take a step back and be introspective and examine if the yeshiva's vision is being successfully implemented or if perhaps, most unfortunately, their critics have valid points that require a reevaluation.
Yes, indeed, it is the responsibility of every semicha granting institution and individual to review all those who they have bestowed semicha on and immediately stop being passive and revoke the semicha of anyone and everyone who does not pass muster. Of course, I'm sure the some 2,000 rabbis the Rav granted semicha to will all pass muster.
Shlomo, Avraham, Ben Dov — Let's turn this around. There are no lack of Rabbis who advocate things with which many normative Modern Orthodox Jews disagree, either in terms of theology (e.g. Meshichist Chabad, anti-Zionist Satmar) or praxis (e.g. R. Belsky on Mesirah in the Kolko case, or R. Schachter on an OU Webcast saying "to have the women sit [in] a separate section of the bus [is] not such a bad idea"). While people may strongly disagree, there are few voices militating for their ouster from the Orthodox Rabbinate.
What specifically is so threatening about having an honest conversation about Bible Scholarship within Modern Orthodoxy that brings all these calls for renouncing and defrocking R. Farber? And, more importantly – and in all seriousness — what is hoped to be gained by removing him (and others: e.g. Kugel) from identifying as Orthodox, whereas other are tolerated for their"foolish beliefs"?
But Farber's views fit exactly the definition of apikorsus. He says Torah is not literally from Heaven. He says humans (not even Moshe!) made up not just one pasuk but the whole thing!
Not only that, but he doesn't even claim that the Torah was written by nevi'im, because he denies that there is such a thing as nevu'ah at all. He says nevi'im are not the targets of a direct communication from Hashem, whose meaning cannot be mistaken, but rather "tapping into" some impersonal "stream", and taking from it what they can or will, in a completely fallible manner.
In addition, he denies not only that Moshe's nevuah was of a different and higher quality, he denies that Moshe even existed!
That is not one but three ikkarim he rejects out of hand. If he is not an apikores, pray tell me who is.
As for what is to be gained by drumming him out, it's very simple: he is taking goyim and purporting to turn them into Jews. If he is an apikores, then those people remain goyim, but they honestly think they're Jews, and others think they're Jews, so they will be treated as such and they will mix into the Jewish nation creating irreparable damage. How can there be any more urgent need than that? At the very least, the IRF must remove him from its beis din.
No one is an apikorus according to these people. And no one is a kofer. Because there is no objective truth. All opinions, if arrived at in a spirit of honest intellectual curiosity are legitimate, even if one might disagree with them.
We're not talking about disagreements. You honestly don't get that academic biblical scholarship is antithetical to Judaism. That it is predicated on the axiom that the Torah is not miSinai.
This is kefirah. This is not a disagreement. It is opposition to the single most core belief in Judaism. V'zot haTorah asher sam Moshe lifnei bnei Yisrael al pi Hashem b'yad Moshe. If you dispute that, you're not an Orthodox Jew. No one needs to "oust" you — you've ousted yourself.
The problem here isn't that there's a Jew who is a kofer. It's that there's a Jew who is a kofer who has dayanut from YCT, and YCT refuses to condemn his position and label it as the obvious kefirah that it is.
YCT has tried to sit on the fence for some time now. But this is a situation where that's no longer an option, much as they might want it to be. So long as they were only pushing maharats and partnership minyanim, which are halakhically untenable, but nowhere near kefirah, it could be argued that they were still within Orthodoxy, albeit on the far fringes.
But kefirah is qualitatively different. And you know it.
the DH or form critics or Mod Biblical Critics do not ask the question of whether the Torah is divine or not. They ask the question: was it written at one time by one author — or over hundreds of years with the input of several.
They don't have any interest in its divinity or lack there of.
Tuvia, you're mistaken. They only ask whether it was written by one *human* author or multiple authors. That question excludes the possibility of divine authorship.
Breathlessly and endlessly repeating your fundamentalist opinions with no substantiation does not make them fact, any more than your insistence that Seder Olam Rabbah is historically accurate.
Have you read http://kavvanah.wordpress.com/2012/10/06/prof-joshua-berman-returns-for-a-follow-up-interview-on-biblical-law/ for example? Or is he too a kofer?
Good post and keenly awaited. History will tell, but this may yet be another case of a Jew who has greatly erred with the right intentions. In any event, YCT will need to draw a line in the sand regarding their own position (which they have done), for posterity. The YCT leadership must ensure that in the main, their talmidim understand and champion their cause. Otherwise, they may be surprised by an ideological coup d'etat they did not foresee. (read: the Rabbinical Congress paskening travelling to shul on shabat, against JTS. Once Shaul Lieberman passed away, they were unrestrained.) One day the talmidim of YCT will emerge as a critical mass, an identifiable community, self sufficient and autonomous, and YCT leadership need to ensure they are aligned at heart, with the YCT mission and values.
They have not drawn any line in the sand. By continuing to maintain that Farber's views on this are within Orthodoxy, which Asher Lopatin said explicitly, YCT is saying that while it may not hold that position, it accepts it as being part of Orthodoxy. I don't know how much more clear this can be.
Either they declare, once and for all, that rejecting Torah miSinai (and that means real Torah miSinai, and not Zev Farber's cynical redefinition of the term) is outside of Orthodox Judaism, or they themselves are outside of Orthodox Judaism.
They don't have to condemn the idea stam. After all, they don't condemn Conservative or Reform or Reconstructionist. But they recognize that those movements are outside of Orthodoxy. They must do the same for this kind of kefirah. Or they will pay the price.
I don't know, Lisa. Is there a meta-ikkar that one must believe that the ikkarim are that? If someone believes all that a Jew must believe, but thinks that these beliefs are optional, is he therefore automatically outside Orthodoxy? And how many levels will you take that? What about one who believes not only in the ikkarim but also that they are mandatory, and that Farber is an apikores, but that YCT is entitled to disagree on that point; is that too apikorsus? That's a pretty radical position to take, I'd think.
I don't think it's radical at all. We aren't talking about individuals here. If an individual thinks it's okay for someone else to be a kofer, that's bad, but it's not the end of the world. If an institution such as YCT accepts it as legitimate, it renders everything having to do with that institution suspect. You're not making the distinction between individuals and leaders/institutions. Is it fair that they're held to a higher standard? Ask Moshe Rabbenu.
I agree with Avraham that an honest conversation is in order.
So far, it has not happened, save for some of the commentators here and a YCT student.
Not that the YCT admin needs to respond to every comment and question, but if an honest conversation is what they have in mind, they should participate in it by replying (substantively) to the many substantive questions that have been posed here and basically ignored.
The comparison between Gateshead and YCT is flawed. Gateshead and their leadership rejected Louis Jacob's teachings and disassociated themselves from him. Rabbi Farber remains a board member of the IRF, and YCT will most probably continue to promote him as a YCT success story. Furthermore, YCT has yet to publish condemnation about his statements. Unless, you count Rabbi Nati Helfgott's piece, which if anything, seemed to justify Rabbi Farbers view!
1) YCT not drawing a line in the sand, is only following RCA precedent in not throwing out R' Avi Weiss as they tried to do in 1990-92.
2) Milhouse, kedarko bakodesh, treads the fine line between his pet issues, defending Chabad while at the same time attacking Zionism and Modern O with the same brush, and going after YCT.
Milhouse is also the only one who actually uses terms correctly: R' Farber's ideas cross into the Rambam's definition of "apikoros", but not heresy or denial of Torah.
3) Witch Hunter: exactly. He's not teaching there, IRF is a different institution and even they say he isn't sitting on any batei din. Is RIETS, or Gateshead, or Lakewood or Chabad obligated to revoke anyone's smicha after an inquisition of every one of their rabbis who have gone OTD?
4) R Gordimer and RYA go overboard in their criticisms.
a. I don't see RZF denying the Oral Law one bit. Not even its divine origin – that remains, even though the Written Law's origin is demoted to the same prophetic level.
b) RYA quotes a Gemara and Rashi saying that denying that resurrection is from the Torah makes one a kofer – but I don't see RZF denying either resurrection or its origin. And I don't think even the Mishnah requires that one see it as coming from the Torah. I've never understood this need for it to be sourced in the Torah, which Rashi and (for political reasons) Rambam demand – it's not a mitzvah, which would have to be present in the Torah, it's a prediction of future events, which the Neviim are full of. So what's wrong with it being sourced in the Neviim, where it's explicit?
Why does Rabbi Gordimer go overboard? There were few adhominem attacks, and nearly every accusation was backed by a quote from a YCT Rabbi.
I can't answer for R Gordimer's internal motivations. I was talking specifically about his accusations against R' Farber. R' Farber is over the line, but R' Gordimer and RYA attack him as if he were even farther (farber?) over the line, on these two issues (denial of Oral Torah, denying Resurrection), without pointing out sources in his articles.
will this incident affect the curriculum at YCT?
The issue here is that biblical criticism is not as troubling to many Jews as it appears to be for R Farber. In contrast to the great questions of emunah – evil in the world, God's omniscience, etc – it ranks pretty low in content and depth. Unfortunately, R Farber's current presentation appears to lend more weight to the biblical critic, in a manner which dismisses Orthodox theology, and even if the validity of Orthodox theology is obvious to him, because of the articles and style of presentation, it will not be to his talmidim.
an honest and enlivening post.
However, as with many orthodox academics, I could name Rabbi Sacks as an exemplar, you seem to resist a true engagment with the subject matter. You note Cassuto, who died in 1951..1951!…it's the last 25 years of scholarship that needs to be contended with. Why not properly contend? After all, Biblical and ANE studies have nothing mystical about them, the work of the academy is just the work of a group of clever people, very few of them I doubt any cleverer than you. Read their papers – spend a few weeks, evaluate them, give a reasoned evaluation. By analogy, if a relative has a serious disease, I'm not a doctor, but I know what a standard deviation is, I go on PUBMED and I get an idea of what the evidence says. Sure the analogy is not exact, but it's close enough, this stuff is understandable, it can be evaluated, especially by clever people who are already part of the academy, and also by those who are not. Give us a real argument based on the actual substance of what biblical scholars say.
You are expecting the impossible.
Might as well ask the orthodox community to hear the traditional and academic sides both make their case and show their evidence. Try to understand WHY the academics seen a document made by many hands over hundreds of years. Maybe vote at the end of a six month debate where the rabbis share a lectern with the academics. See where audience winds up.
This is unacceptable, because this debate is not about evaluating evidence. It's not about using your rational or critical faculty. Above all, it is not about whatever answer you may arrive at by doing the above.
The "debate" actually is predicated on NEVER taking a sustained, unflinching look at the academic case.
And calling someone a heretic is frequently an easy way to AVOID confronting the serious issues they are raising.
you are of course correct when it comes to much of the debate.
inter alia I think it is a legitimate position to say, this world is not my world, I take my truth from my fathers and my community, in other words when the charedi world says we won't hear this, it is not even on our radar, I do think that is in fact a reasonable intellectual position. The problem is for MO, which wants to have a foot in both worlds.
But my main response would be that Dr Elton is a scholar of very considerable ability, who does have a foot in both worlds, so I legitimately call on him to engage in a full intellectually honest debate.
I hope you could sense I was being a bit sarcastic. I am not orthodox. But what I find appalling is that the orthodox want to make very serious claims about the origins of the Torah, but also explain that no one among them can investigate these claims.
They will mock the DH or form criticism or whatever they call it these day. They will mock and snicker at the goyim and how they believe in JC, or how seculars are fooled by the DH. They will tell us seculars with a straight face we are in for bad times for not being orthodox – in this world and the next. They will claim mesirah on reporting crimes. They are often very poor and condemn their children to even more poverty and a life on welfare.
It is all about control, and not much else. I don't see how a world that does not permit open inquiry in general can see itself as functioning well. I don't see how the orthodox world can claim to be so firm in its convictions and yet so afraid of a sustained encounter with outside ideas and thinking.
It reminds me of the former Soviet Union – "communism is obviously superior and the truth," and "the West is decadent and materialistic and classist." But they did not have the confidence to permit their people to travel abroad. And in the terrible West? You come and go as you please.


Beer in Liverpool is on the up, and Neptune, which only opened in 2015, has already won the local CAMRA award for best brewer. There's a slight haziness to this bottle-conditioned amber ale, which is a bold and well-devised showcase for Sorachi Ace hops. Initial aromas are of zesty clementines, then a perfumed floral note, reminiscent of heather, takes over. This continues alongside grapefruit in the mostly bitter, pithy taste, which is pleasantly spritzy, thanks to the raised carbonation. With the gentle supportive sweetness fading fast, the finish is floral and, once again, laced with bitter citrus fruit.
The 4% bottle-conditioned beer has a pale bronze color with a big fluffy collar of foam. There's a big hit of cinnamon spice on the nose from the hop, with lightly toasted grain and a hint of lemon fruit. Hop bitterness, spice and sweet grain are in fine balance on the palate while the finish is hoppy and bitter with continuing spice notes and mouth-puckering lemon. Sweet malt provides an essential balance to the bitterness and tart fruit.


I love a clever online retailer and Hunting for George is the newest contender to make it to our "highly selective" bookmarks bar. The brain-child of Melbourne-based sister duo Lucy Glade-Wright and Jo Harris, Hunting for George is a fabulous edit of fashion, homewares and accessories, all delivered with just the right amount of street style. I'm a sucker for a good sense of humor too, and the Dudes gift ideas section, with categories including I've only got 20 bucks to spend, help a brother out, She bought me something and now I feel bad and My sister tells me my presents are lame, has me totally sold. Their range of one-off, original artwork is impressive too. You know what to do. Now get clicking.


text:
Dreampad founder think Shark Tank Investors under value good sleep
by Kirk Taylor | Feb 4, 2018 | Bethany Frankel, Kevin O'Leary, Lori Greiner, Mark Cuban, Robert Herjavec, Shark Tank, Shark Tank Season 9
Everybody is into politics as the makers of Dreampad say "The Sharks think we overvalue the importance of good sleep. We politely Disagree." The problem with that statement is the Shark Tank investors loved the Dreampad, but the valuation made it impossible for them to see a reasonable return on their investment.
Sharks Loved Dreampad during pitch
Again, the Sharks loved the Dreampad, which helped drive significant sales to the company after their episode. I am sure when Shark Tank airs on CNBC, that the deals will peak again given the Shark Tank effect.
Dreampad vibrates music directly into your ear through your pillow, allowing you to hear the music, without disturbing anyone else in the room. The Sharks experienced this when they all jumped into the bed on the set.
Four different styles of Dreampad exist, with two of them being a feather, and one is memory foam. The transducer
delivers the music peacefully helping you to get a great night of sleep. It connects wirelessly to your phone through the app offering ten music choices as well as accessing your library.
The Dreampad sells online and has a thirty-day money back guarantee.
Company: Dreampad
Entrepreneur: Randall Redfield
website: https://dreampadsleep.com/
Ask: $800,000 for 10%
Episode: Season 9 Episode 8
Sharks: Mark Cuban, Bethany Frankel, Kevin O'Leary, Lori Greiner, Robert Herjavec
The Pillow runs average at $159, which he calls a relaxation tool. They have $600,000 in sales over the last half year, and he is projecting $1.2 million in sales through direct to consumer and Amazon. The company will make $120,000 on $1.2 million.
Randall and his partner have put in $1.25 million in the last five years.
What do the Sharks say about Dreampad?
Mark Cuban says the challenge is you have to convince people that you are so far better than they are going to invest. He is out.
Robert Herjavec claims his valuation is so far out there, so he's out.
Bethany Frankel loves the product, but the valuation is so far out that she is out. She is so frustrated because he's so far off on the valuation.
Lori Greiner asks him, what would you offer me to put this in the pillows that I already make. He comes back saying he can go up to 15%. Lori wants to be in with him, but she has to be out.
Kevin O'Leary pounded the valuation, and he's out.


text:
Q: How to set a ref when using React.cloneElement on a Function component? I'm writing a Tooltip component and came across the following problem -

Function components cannot be given refs

My code looks like this
Component that includes the Tooltip:
<Tooltip title="Title" description="Description">
   <Selection value={copy.value} label={copy.label} />
</Tooltip>

Tooltip component:
import React, { useRef } from 'react'

const Tooltip = props => {
   const myRef = useRef()

   const child = React.cloneElement(props.children, {
      onMouseEnter: () => { /* placeholder */ },
      onMouseLeave: () => { /* placeholder */ },
      ref: myRef,
   })

   const TooltipOverlay = () => {
      // will be a div wrapped in react Portal
      return null
   }

   return (
      <>
         {child}
         <TooltipOverlay />
      </>
   )
}

export default Tooltip

My goal is to not have a visible wrapper in the DOM like div/span or similar.
I need the ref to be able to relatively position TooltipOverlay in the Tooltip component.
All solutions are welcome as long as long as goals above are fulfilled.
I saw this done in rsuite library, not sure how.

A: Had the same issue and couldn't find a way to do what you wanted.
As a workaround and I guess the usual way is to let the user of the Tooltip pass the ref down and then you can intercept it with forwardRef.
const Tooltip = forwardRef((props, myRef) => {
  // now you can clone without a ref and have access to the ref.
})

The user of the tooltip needs to pass a ref however:
const childRef = useRef()

<Tooltip ref={childRef}>

</Tooltip>

A: If the child you are passing to the Tooltip is a component, You should pass props to the tag of that Component.
// NOTE: Selection is a Component
<Tooltip title="Title" description="Description">
    <Selection value={copy.value} label={copy.label} />
</Tooltip>

// NOTE: Selection
const Selection = (props) => {
  // NOTE: in your code, props will be onMouseEnter, onMouseLeave
  // return
{props.children}

  return

            {props.children}

}

maybe this will work for you.


The promotion will only be available for a certain number of weeks. It includes unlimited data, talk and text. And Sprint is promising no future price hike for people who sign up. The deal goes live on June 8th.
If you've ever wanted to try Sprint, now is a good time. Starting tomorrow, the mobile carrier is offering a $15 per month unlimited data, talk and text plan to new customers who switch over to the network.
However, the promotion won't last for long. Sprint executive Allan Samson told CNET, the company plans on offering the deal for "weeks, not months."
Of course, the $15/month per line promotion has its conditions. New customers will be limited to video streaming at 480p or DVD quality; gaming streams will be restricted to 2Mbps. The deal also doesn't include access to hotspots.
Another stipulation: the promotion only applies to customers who bring their phone number from an existing carrier. So no luck for existing Sprint customers or people looking to register with a new number.
Whether Sprint will one day hike up the $15 price also isn't clear. The company is trying to complete a merger with T-Mobile. However, the same Sprint executive told USA Today: ""Once you're on the promotion there is no step up."
"You get in during this limited time window, you are going to enjoy that rate for a very, very long time," he added.
Starting on Friday, the $15 promotion will be offered online and over 1-800-SPRINT1. Customers who sign up can bring their own smartphone to the network or buy a new one. In addition, Sprint is promising no annual contract with the deal.
The $15 deal is certainly enticing. However, when it comes to speed, Sprint's wireless network does appear to lag against the competition, according to PCMag's testing; last year, the carrier came in fourth, behind AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon.
"While we saw the same spectacular peak speeds on Sprint that we got on the other carriers, they were far less consistent; Sprint's speeds would shoot up and then plummet within cities more often than other carriers, creating lower averages," we wrote at the time.
That all said, Sprint plans on investing more in expanding its mobile coverage, and is slated to launch its 5G mobile network in the first half of 2019.


socaltech50: Your Mobile Networking Guide To The Winners!
Support Our News Coverage - Become A Member Today!
The socalTECH 50 is aimed at identifying and highlighting the top 50 people in the technology industry here, who are most likely to create the next big thing, produce the next big exit, or influence the industry in a significant way. These nominees came from (many) reader suggestions; suggestions by a wide range of industry insiders who served as an informal nominating committee; and our own and other editorial coverage. Congratulations to our third class of the socalTECH 50!
Woodland Hills-based Key Information Systems said Friday morning that it has acquired IT colocation and hosting company ISWest. Key Information Systems is a major, IT systems integrator focused on business continuity, virtualization, security, storage, and other related areas. As part of the acquisition, Key Information Systems said it is moving its corporate headquarters from Woodland Hills to ISWest''s corporate and data center facility in Agoura Hills.
Key Information Systems (www.keyinfo.com) Providing IBM Storage Solutions. Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth (www.sycr.com) Sponsoring socalTECH's Orange County High Tech Report. Sponsoring socalTECH's Executive Moves section. Thanks to all of the sponsors and advertisers, who allow us to keep you updated on Southern California's high tech news and companies. They include: Sponsors. Redpoint Ventures (www.redpoint.com).
Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth (www.sycr.com) Sponsoring socalTECH's Orange County High Tech Report. Sponsoring socalTECH's Executive Moves section. Key Information Systems (www.keyinfo.com) Providing IBM Storage Solutions. Thanks to all of the sponsors and advertisers, who allow us to keep you updated on. Southern California's high tech news and companies. They include: Sponsors. Redpoint Ventures (www.redpoint.com).
Help us keep delivering you the news and information you need to grow your business and keep on top of Southern California's technology industry, by becoming a member of socalTECH.com. Tags: sponsor post socaltech Do you find our news coverage useful? Are we making a difference by keeping you in the loop on what is going on with your clients, customers, contacts, and competitors? Have you benefited from our news coverage?
Sponsoring socalTECH's Executive Moves section. Key Information Systems ([link]. Thanks to all of the sponsors and advertisers, who allow us to keep you updated on. Southern California's high tech news and companies. They include: Sponsors. Redpoint Ventures (www.redpoint.com). Backing Southern California's next great technology companies. Silicon Valley Bank (www.svb.com). Helping entrepreneurs succeed. Binary Pulse Technology Marketing (www.binarypulse.com).
To that end, another, local high tech startup-- Slipp --created a mobile slideshow which shows a photo and some information on our socalTECH 50--so you might congratulate them in person tomorrow night! Click below to browse the socaltech 50 on your mobile browser!
For sales reps, stop wasting your time with information about companies outside your territory--get the inside scoop on companies and deals here. Information is key to understanding how to get funded, and socalTECH is the best source for this information in Southern California. Dear readers: Like keeping up to date on Southern California's latest venture funding, high tech deals, and more? Looking to better track your clients, customers, partners, and local companies?
By becoming a member of socaltech! Not only do you get to support our news coverage, but you also get access to our big database of Southern California companies, venture investors, service providers, and deal information, and many other resources. We often get asked--how do we pay for our news coverage and our publishing efforts? That's simple -- it's a combination of our sponsors and YOU. How can you make sure you continue to get news on Southern California's technology industry?
www.collective-genius.com) Media Sponsor: SOCALTECH - High Tech News and Information for Southern California. Welcome to Tech Scenes where we explore what makes tech founders and the cities they live in thrive.
Media Sponsor: SOCALTECH - High Tech News and Information for Southern California www.socaltech.com. Welcome to Tech Scenes where we explore what makes tech leaders and the cities they live in thrive.
With our Insights and Opinions section on socalTECH, we're trying to help the startup and high tech community, including including hints, tips, and other education on the world of high tech startups.
Beverly Hills-based Nash Information Services, the company behind The Numbers , a data information service providing the latest movie industry box office information, said today that it has launched a new service, OpusData. According to Nash, OpusData allows users to access financial data information on over 15,000 movies, including budgets, domestic and international box office, domestic DVD sales, and biographical information.
Some of the highlights from this week from socalTECH's video section , where we're currently featuring community videos from and about local startups: Peter Pham of Science Inc.
Irvine-based Autobytel , which runs an online information site for automotive information and a corresponding automotive leads business, said this morning that it has acquired substantially all of the assets of Cyber Ventures, Inc. There had been indications yesterday that Autobytel was about to make an acquisition, based on regulatory filings reported on by socalTECH.
Please let them know how much you appreciate their support of socalTECH! Key Information Systems (www.keyinfo.com) Providing IBM Storage Solutions. Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth (www.sycr.com) Sponsoring socalTECH's Orange County High Tech Report. It's time again for us to thanks all of our sponsors, who make our coverage of Southern California's technology industry possible. Sponsors. Redpoint Ventures (www.redpoint.com).
11.65mm in Series C – Investors: not announced – likely an inside round; previous investors: Redpoint and JAFCO – Read more: : SEC Registration Form D , peHUB , SoCalTech. Swipely can even append transaction data with relevant information such as menus or store catalogs.
eNom said the deal would provide it with trustworthy information regarding the illegal sale of pharmaceutical drugs. The deal had originally been uncovered by socalTECH in Demand Media's latest amendment of its IPO filing last week.
We were all struggling with information overload, but the mood was upbeat (apart from a few hangovers caused by the YT party at the Standard). SocalTech recently highlighted eight partners in our area: Socal YouTube Content Partners. John Greathouse of Rincon Ventures told me the YouTube ecosystem was "the Wild West." " That was the understatement of the week, as I learned by attending YouTube's Premium Partner conference, YouTube Access 2012.


text:
# media statement
FAS media statement on K Kannan
The Football Association of Singapore (FAS) understands that there was a social media post on the Facebook page of Jose Raymond dated 17th August 2021 which alleged that K Kannan, an ex-international, "had received a letter from the FAS after
Media statement on withdrawal from hosting of AFC Cup 2021
SINGAPORE, 27 MAY 2021 – The Football Association of Singapore (FAS) has informed the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) that it will withdraw as host for Groups H & I of the AFC Cup 2021 Group Stage.
Media Statement on Young Lions Head Coach Nazri Nasir
The Young Lions are set to kick-off their 2021 AIA Singapore Premier League (SPL) season this Sunday under the stewardship of Coach Philippe Aw as 2020's head coach Nazri Nasir continues his rehabilitation process following a medical procedure late last
FAS media statement on Singapore as host venue for AFC Cup 2021 Groups H and I
"We would like to thank the AFC for its confidence in Singapore.
FAS MEDIA STATEMENT ON WINSTON LEE'S WITHDRAWAL FROM AFC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Former Football Association of Singapore (FAS) General Secretary, Winston Lee informed the FAS of his decision to withdraw his candidacy for the AFC Executive Committee (Asean Zone) in the 29th Asian Football Confederation (AFC) Congress and had submitted the withdrawal
FAS' media statement on inaccurate information on an incident involving referee in ICC 2018 match
On Sunday 29 June, a media report was published online on Mothership.
FAS MEDIA STATEMENT ON BENJAMIN DAVIS' NS DEFERMENT REQUEST
The FAS strongly supported Benjamin Davis's request to defer his National Service (N.
The FAS has noted and acknowledges Mr.
FAS Media Statement on FAS Council Member Yakob Hashim's comments about the Disciplinary Case involving Yishun Sentek Mariners FC and SAFSA
Media Statement On The Passing Of Mr S. R. Nathan
SINGAPORE, 23 AUGUST 2016: The Council, management and staff of the Football Association of Singapore (FAS) are deeply saddened by the passing of former President S.


YAMIU Travel Shoe bags / Golf Shoe Bags is good design for home and travel use. Keep your shoes separated from clothes in the luggage during the trip. Also great for keeping your favorite shoes from getting dusty in the closet!