1. Make the Declaration

The first requirement of Mikraites is to make the following declaration:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The god of the Old Testament is my god.
The Mikraites are my people.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This will be done in person in the following format:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q.  Who is your god?

A.  The god of the Old Testament is my god.

Q.  Who are your people?

A.  The Mikraites are my people.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mikraites are those who keep the Mikraite requirements.  All people who meet this condition are your people regardless of their nation or ethnicity or religious beliefs.  So for example, I generally detest liberal feminists, but if some liberal feminist actually met the five requirements here, then they would earn my allegiance regardless.  I consider this so unlikely that I don't worry about it.  The five requirements are designed to weed out the wrong kind of people, so we would expect that most people who qualify will be moral people.

Question as to how should one conduct oneself, if you live in a society where people you interact with or around you are not technically allies that you declared your allegiance to, such as in modern America. How should I conduct myself in the work/social environment?

Mikraism does not specify an answer to this question, just the Hebrew Bible doesn't specify an answer to this question.  The main purpose of a religion is to make its members act morally to each other.  How they treat others outside of the religion is entirely up to them.

[1]

The first sentence doesn't sound like it excludes worshipping other gods. Someone can have multiple gods and they can still say "they are all my god". This is a violation of the first commandment.

I suggest modifying to "The god of the Hebrew Bible is my only god."


[2]

You say "You can still have an allegiance to your nation or your ethnicity or people with your religious beliefs.  What you cannot do is not have an allegiance to a Biblic Jew because of their nation or ethnicity or religious beliefs.". My concern with this is that there's no requirement to put Biblic Jew's first. I don't want to give allegiance to someone who's going to give help to others first over me. I only want to deal with people whom have their primary allegiance to us. If Biblic Jews want to help non Biblic Jews that's fine, but that help should only come after we helped Biblic Jews first.

I don't know what to suggest for fixing the declaration. One possibility is changing the last line to: "sincerely are my first people."


[3]

The script will primarily be used for oral recitation. We have not talked about how the script will actually go in person. I think we have two options. The first option is that a person memorizes or writes down the script and then says it. I don't like this because it comes out too casually. Try saying it by yourself and you will see this. The second reason I don't like this is because it doesn't involve anyone else who's there. The point of saying things in person is to involve everyone more. So I suggest as an alternative that we copy the Muslim format of the Shahada. You will see in youtube Shahada's that it always starts one person saying "Repeat after me...." then they go line by line. No memorization is required.

If we want to copy the format of the Shahada then it will be understood better if we break up the statement into stand alone parts that make sense when repeated individually. The first sentence "The god of the Hebrew Bible is my only god." sounds fine by itself. But the second sentence "The people who..." is way too long. I suggest the following script with two people:

A: "Repeat after me, the god of the Hebrew Bible is my only god."

B: "The god of the Hebrew Bible is my only god."

A: "The people who keep the Sabbath"

B: "The people who keep the Sabbath"

A: "and who dress modestly"

B: "and who dress modestly"

A: "and who have no tattoos"

B: "and who have no tattoos"

A: "and who make this declaration"

B: "and who make this declaration"

A: "are sincerely my first people."

B: "are sincerely my first people."

Since "A" is starting with "Repeat after me" they themselves aren't making the declaration.


[4]

I've thought more about locations. Here are two ideas:

- We fly out to a camp location the night before. We camp for the night. The next morning we do allegiance. This is a nice bonding experience. This can be in San Diego or the Bay Area, wherever we find the best camping grounds.

- Another location idea is the beach border in Mexico where wooden poles are. This provides a nice contrast between two different worlds. Any place in Mexico will be exciting for incel American guys.

On #1, "only" is superfluous exactly because it is already in the first commandment.  It also has no practical impact at all since no pagans also accept the god of the Bible.

On #2, I just disagree.  What if someone considers their family first?  An expression of allegiance is enough for me.

On #3, I would accept someone repeating the declaration if that is how they want to do it, but it doesn't appeal to me personally.  Islam is a religion of submission, of following others and doing what one is told to do.  So their style of saying the Shahada makes sense for them.  I would rather read our declaration myself and say it out loud.  This makes it clear that I am saying it of my own free will, not because someone else is telling me to say it.

On #4, I think Peter has found a place he likes.

We can discuss these things tomorrow.

fschmidt wrote

On #1, "only" is superfluous exactly because it is already in the first commandment.  It also has no practical impact at all since no pagans also accept the god of the Bible.

I don't follow your second sentence about pagans. My concern is with Christians who think Jesus is their god instead of Jehovah, or who people believe in the "holy trinity" thing.

fschmidt wrote

On #2, I just disagree.  What if someone considers their family first?  An expression of allegiance is enough for me.

Considering family first is reasonable. My issue is with people who will put me far down the list because I'm not a rabbinic Jew, a Karaite Jew, a "Jew", some ethnicity like an Egyptian or because I'm not a friend. A low level allegiance offers no value. The point of an alliance is exclusivity. If you have an alliance with everyone in the world then what value is this?

fschmidt wrote

On #3, I would accept someone repeating the declaration if that is how they want to do it, but it doesn't appeal to me personally.  Islam is a religion of submission, of following others and doing what one is told to do.  So their style of saying the Shahada makes sense for them.  I would rather read our declaration myself and say it out loud.  This makes it clear that I am saying it of my own free will, not because someone else is telling me to say it.

I don't understand why you think this is a form of submission. Either you memorize the statement in your head, you read it from a piece of paper or you hear someone say it. In each case your referencing the text and then saying the exact same thing, so there's no independent thought or word deviation involved. They all seem equally submissive to me. The CoAlpha approach to allowing everyone to say the oath differently was much less submissive. Having everyone say the statement differently makes the event less impressionable.

fschmidt wrote

On #4, I think Peter has found a place he likes.

We can discuss these things tomorrow.

Okay

The first part of the declaration seems like it requires belief in God. Perhaps changing it to some variation of "I shall worship no other gods than God" would work better? Or are you using the word "God" in a more figurative sense, such as a sense of order in the universe, so that even atheists or agnostics can profess a belief in God?

"I shall worship no other gods than God" isn't enough.  The main point is to affirm a commitment to what the god of the Old Testament represents, which is the ethics of the Old Testament.  Saying "The god of the Old Testament is my god" doesn't define what a "god" means.  You may define "god" as being a natural thing or as being a fictional character.  It doesn't matter as long as the god of the Old Testament is your god, the god that you are committed to.

Do you consider the God of the Old Testament to be the the same as the God of the New Testament and the God of the Koran?

Andromeda07734 wrote

Do you consider the God of the Old Testament to be the the same as the God of the New Testament and the God of the Koran?

Yes I do, but many other people don't which is why it must be specified.