Your points are not coherent. My point about Hillel is that you said he could uproot a Torah law - if he did not all we are saying is that one of the rabbanon uprooted a derabbonon. This is not a machloket.

I think you missed the point about the conservative movement - it gave people an out - “I am conservative and so I can drive on Shabbos”. And no one in the movement says a thing about this. Your point about non and anti-rligious people in Israel is really not relevant.

Furthermore if you do not accept the authority of Chazal there is really nothing to debate (Shapiro’s book is so out of the mainstream of Orthodoxy it is not worth debating - there have been many good rebuttals of his conclsuions - you may want to look at them before accepting what Shapiro says as Dogma).

The Messianic Jew has adopted Christian beliefs and by doing so has denied a core Jewish belief (the unity of God)in his belief system; he has read himself out of Judaism. His Christian beliefs also lead to him to reject the divinity of the Torah, which means he doesn’t believe in or follow halakha. There is no halakhic reasoning or kashrut standards to debate.

What does this have to do with Conservative Judaism?

1) Read Marc Shapiro’s book “The Limits of Orthodox Theology” in which he questions whether Rambam’s “top 13″ were ever meant to be the bedrock of Jewish belief and how they (mistakenly) became so. Judaism has always been rather flexible in areas of belief and aggadah, hence we don’t “have to accept the 13 principles” in order to talk about halakha. Similarly, we don’t have to accept the motivations of the framers of the Constitution in order to debate it. It helps to know their positions, but the document exists, as does two centuries of subsequent legislation. As the Gemara in Bava Metziah says, “Lo B’shamayim Hee…” the Torah was given, it’s in our hands. Your belief in the Torah’s divinity is not the litmus test for accepting halakha and grappling with it.

2) There is not an “official position” about this in Conservative Judaism because that would go against the point made above: theology is flexible (within limits, obviously). Also, the scholarly (modern) study of the Bible does not necessarily impact Halakha. The kinds of questions Bible scholars ask do not undermine the legislative content of the Torah. No one believes the verses regarding Mitzvot were textual errors, etc. What modern Bible study does, however, is point to the evolving relationship between God and the Jewish People, how cultural realities impact that relationship, and how our response/understanding of God changed back then and continues to change today. I know this is scary to many Orthodox Jews because they immediately think there will be a “domino affect” - if you question Biblical authorship you’ll immediately stop keeping Kosher. I don’t believe that has happened with anyone I know who is serious about Judaism.

There is way too much evidence to believe that the entire Torah was dictated word for word (or that the text we have was the “original” - which is why the Bible Codes books are such a farce). But Conservative “doctrine” in all of its forms believes there is a divine and compelling nature to the Bible. It’s not a book we have simply chosen to follow; there is a Divine “Commander” behind the Book, even if there were human hands involved in its final form.

Sorry to make this more complicated, but it’s too easy for Orthodox Jews to use simple phrases and sound bytes to try to discredit Conservative Judaism. In my opinion, it’s Orthodoxy that has gone off track (again, read Shapiro’s book…by the way, he’s an Orthodox Rabbi!!!)

1)Whether Hillel’s action uprooted d’oraita or d’rabbanan isn’t the issue. My point was about the ability of the Rabbis to be “active” regarding their own legislation. When it comes to the prosbul they indeed modified their own legislation as time went on. So thank you for making my point. (For an English article check out the Ency. Judaica).

2)Yom Tov Sheni was indeed addressed by the Conservative Movement. And yes, the underlying reason (declaring the new month according to visual verification of the new moon and then notification of the new month by signal flares, took too much time) was acknowledged to be irrelevant. However, the Conservative Movement decided to keep the two days in spite of the “real” reason being null and void because a new reason was found to uphold it: the desire to remind ourselves we live outside of Eretz Yisrael. You see, not every decision leans to the left!

3)Of the 600 plus decisions rendered by the Law Committee, only a handful have to do with Shabbat observance or practices that would lead to intermarriage. In addition, you can’t blame intermarriage or Hillul Shabbat on decisions which are known mostly to the Rabbis (the Law Committee answers questions from Rabbis, not congregants).

Members of Conservative synagogues are a self selected group. Among other things they’ve chosen to do is “not be Orthodox.” Their lack of observance wasn’t caused the Conservative Movement.

If I followed your reasoning I would have to say that the lack of observance among the majority of Israelis is 100% due to Orthodoxy. Why? There’s hardly any Conservative or Reform presence in Israel. It must, therefore, be Orthodox Judaism that is leading them astray. Oh, and by the way, there are a number of Israelis who intermarry. Must be that Orthodox Judaism at work again.

You can’t blame ideology and a few decisions of the Law Committee for intermarriage. Unfortunately, the high intermarriage rate is due to the openness of American society: unlimited housing areas, material wealth, free access to jobs, etc.

Should Conservative Rabbis push observance more? Yes. Should they teach more about the details as well as the beauty of Shabbat and Yontif? Yes. Should they insist on more Jewish education? Yes. Have their decisions on bishul akum or gelatin caused people to intermarry? Think again…

Shabbat Shalom!

A few points -

1) Hillel did not uproot torah law - it only worked because shmitta was mederabbanan at that time (as it is today). In times where it is medorayta - it cannot work.

2) How do you understand the idea that the conservative movement has not abolished the concept of yom tov sheni - the reason clearly does not apply. I f you keep it you are clearly being inconsistant.

3) The conservative movement, by being lenient on almost any issue it can, has not solved any problems of assimilation or intermarriage. And, contrary to an opinion voiced above, most people who attend conservative shuls drive on Shabbos and are not even aware that the conservative movement itself does not sanction driving unless it is to go to shul!! The result: even more chillul shabbos.