As an Orthodox Jew who observes the Sabbath every week, while sometimes finishing up work and preparations beforehand can be stressful at times, there's no feeling like turning off all phones/laptops/etc Friday evening and leaving it all behind. There's a supreme serenity that comes with the knowledge of "I can't do anything about it, so there's no point in worrying". As soon as Sabbath starts I'm totally focused on the now -- I can't do anything to prepare for what comes after, and due to the restrictions of the day I've done all my preparations for Sabbath before it begins. There's a saying in Judaism that Sabbath is "me'ein olam haba", meaning "of the next world", and it rings true every week when I can't wait for it to begin and feel sadness when it ends and I have to return to the mundaneness of work and logistics and emails. It's just the right amount of a great thing.
I am Jewish and don't observe but know a lot that do and also talk about how great it is to be able to leave everything behind on the Sabbath. I can definitely see the value in disconnecting one day a week. However, they also do a lot of really weird things that I can imagine creates even more stress, just for the sake of interpreting religious law as strictly as possible. For example, my friend's cousin accidentally left groceries in the trunk of her car, but since opening the trunk would cause the trunk light to go on, she couldn't do it (nor any jewish person with her apparently) and so food was left to rot in a hot car. I have countless stories like this being around observant Jews my whole life and it seems that is way more stressful, at least to me. Do people really believe God is maintaining a database of all the times someone is technically breaking Shabbat law?
My oven has a Shabbat mode: when you activate this mode, touching the controls doesn't make any sound anymore, opening the oven door doesn't trigger the light, and when touching a button the effect is delayed by a few seconds so you're not technically getting any result from touching the button while still getting the effect from touching the button.
God is not tricked. There is no restriction against cooking on Shabbat. There are restrictions against eg. making a fire and building. If you can somehow cook without doing any of those things, then there is nothing wrong with it.
I was talking about this: "when touching a button the effect is delayed by a few seconds so you're not technically getting any result from touching the button while still getting the effect from touching the button."
The concept is called Grama and its not universally accepted for these ovens and the like. For the reason you stated, if something is going to happen, just we are not 100% sure exactly when, then some don't consider it grama.
Grama really only helps you for rabbinically prohibited actions. (i.e. man made law, man made loophole). Not law that is considered biblical in nature.
Most people who wonder about all the "loopholes" don't realize that its talking about what jews considered rabbinic law.
to make an analogy, congress can't legislate a loophole around the constitution, they can legislate loopholes around their own laws.
If I recall, some of these modes activate a random timer, so you don’t directly trigger an action. More like indicating that an action should occur, without directly starting it.
Whatever action it is, it's triggered by your intention and your button press. You close a circuit for a very specific action and this tells a microcontroller to start counting a (random) number of seconds before initiating the exact action you intended. This is how all electronics work. In this case you don't start the device, you just start the electronic timer of the device.
At least start that timer the day before.
Maybe if your oven just turned itself on randomly and you quickly ran to put the pot in... It would probably be served a lot better by a digital assistant that you could tell to do things, as long as that's not considered a "slave".
This just feels like a "trick". As it stands today you turn on one device instead of another. And you certainly do the "work" part of the "you shall not do any work".
Yes, the delay is random. According to the manual, this was validated with experts Rabbis and is congruent with the way things should be done on Sabbath.
People will always interpret the words of their God to better fit their own needs. They're having a hard enough time as it is to keep people close to religion. This means artificially taking down some of the barriers that no longer fit in today's world view is a must.
I mean breaking this commandment in particular is punishable by death. So I guess there isn't much choice if the religion is to have any followers.
But I'm waiting for the first person that, after consulting with expert clergy, comes at the conclusion that all they did was press the trigger. The gun and projectile did the rest, with great assistance from the target who decided to be in the line of sight :).
I'm Jewish but not religious anymore, and I know a lot of people that keep Shabbat that talk like this.
Frankly, I don't buy it. If we have a problem with detaching from technology, then, stopping all usage of it only one day a week is maybe 90% as unhealthy.
It would be like saying you have a healthy relationship with smoking because you don't smoke at all for one day a week, but after that you can chain smoke 24/6.
Now, I definitely don't think that social media/technology/<modern_thing> is nearly as bad as smoking. But if we accept the premise that maybe we're using it too much, then I think it's delusional to believe that stopping it for just one day a week is going to do anything substantial.
> If we have a problem with detaching from technology, then, stopping all usage of it only one day a week is maybe 90% as unhealthy.
> It would be like saying you have a healthy relationship with smoking because you don't smoke at all for one day a week, but after that you can chain smoke 24/6.
I don't buy this at all (sidenote: interesting that you decided to use a throwaway for this comment?) - taking a vacation from distractions and a smartphone even for a week helps me for months afterwards because it allows me to realize that the pull isn't important - daily use builds up the idea, being able to not use it without consequences stops the FOMO.
Simplifying this to a dichotomy basically only functions inside of arguments. It's like saying "if laughter is so great, why not do it constantly?"
It's possible that both being connected and disconnected are happy, functional states for humans, and finding the right balance is the topic under discussion.
> Frankly, I don't buy it. If we have a problem with detaching from technology, then, stopping all usage of it only one day a week is maybe 90% as unhealthy.
I think you're letting the perfect become the enemy of the good.
Also, very intentionally keeping a day per week free of technology may help cultivate the skills necessary to keep it under control for the other six days. It would certainly keep it from becoming an all-consuming habit by providing regular opportunities to re-evaluate.
I'm reminded of a story a landlord told me: he didn't typically offer his tenants yearly leases. Instead he'd provide a six-month lease that would allow them to continue month-to-month without any extra fees. Why did he do this? Because the ritual of regularly renewing a lease prompted his tenants to reflect on if they wanted to continue to live in his building at all, and many would leave for places that suited them better. Removing that ritual encouraged his tenants to coast and stagnate, so he had to do much less work less to keep is building full and the rent checks flowing.
Unlike smoking, which all humans can survive without, society hasn't yet been configured in a way where we can survive and improve our lot without work.
So, even if your point -- that disconnecting one day a week is still 90% as bad as disconnecting all the time -- were to be true, it's also moot because that's not an option.
If your point is conditioned upon technology, rather than work, I would ask you to determine how to disentangle the two. It's not like working into the weekend is a new phenomenon (since, as we know, the concept of a weekend was only recently won).
Yes, but it was only recently “won”: that is, most of western society has had two days off per week (to varying degrees) for just over 100 years if my recollection is right.
Overall silly, but that history and location are important to understanding the ground in which a person grew, so to speak. There are some quips about "the God an atheist doesn't believe in" that have a point -- a person's worldview is shaped by ambient society and the philosophy they were exposed to as a child.
It is weird how culture and religion become decoupled and religious actions become cultural markers.
>I’ve heard about converting to Judaism. If it is an ethnicity how can that be possible?
I am not qualified to offer an opinion on Judaism specifically, but people have been "converting" to different ethnicities for all of recorded history.
I personally have a Scottish last name; but that branch of my family is catholic, which is a little unusual, but not impossible. Tracing back the paperwork, my "Scottish' ancestor arrived in America on a boat that came from Ireland during the famous famine in the mid 1800s. Now... maybe it was a Scottish person who just happened to be living in Ireland... but it seems a lot more likely to me that it was an irish dude who looked around, saw the difference in how people were treated, and gave his landlord's name to the immigration agent. I'm imagining the guy running around new york hamming up a brogue James Doohan style. But, I mean, today? I get to claim I'm as Scottish-American as anyone else, and there's not a lot you can say otherwise.
But there are countless stories like that where a person integrates themselves into another ethnicity to the point where they are accepted and they (or their children) become indistinguishable from other members of that ethnicity.
This is one of those major problems of racialism; most people define ethnicity by "looks like X" which often doesn't really line up with, well, anything.
Scots are a people group, Irish Scots are a thing. Indeed, my understanding is that Irish Scots invaded Gwynedd in N.Wales after the Roman departure. The Tudors -- the English Royal family, Henry VII & VIII -- hail from Gwynedd, so they're Welsh English Irish Scots (from Scandinavia before that I imagine?).
Anyway, lying and converting seem different. Assuming an identity as a Jew and being a Jew are surely different.
sure, but my point is, who decides what ethnicity you are? I mean, your average man on the street, when asked to identify ethnicity is still pretty much with Blumenbach; "what do you look like?"
Functionally, there is what ethnicity you say you are, and what ethnicity other people see you as.
I don't have a complete picture of my genealogy, and even if I did, even if I could say I was descended from some ur-scott and you could say the same of all of my other ancestors, you're still just pushing the problem back in time. People migrate. People have been migrating for as long as people have been people; You could, with enough work, figure out that some of my ancestors were in country X at time Y... but I don't think that is going to line up with your common definition of ethnicity.
If I think I'm ethnicity X and if most people perceive me as ethnicity X... well, then I very clearly am ethnicity X... regardless of what my great great grandparents may or may not have been.
It's more complex if I think I'm X but others perceive me as Y... but it's still all about perception, as far as I can tell.
I was down-voted until I’ve lost all karma points! I wonder what harm or disconvert I may have caused by asking a simple question about a users comments.
"It would be like saying you have a healthy relationship with smoking because you don't smoke at all for one day a week, but after that you can chain smoke 24/6."
What?
No.
You need food, but you can overeat.
You need exercise, but you can do too much.
It's not an irrational argument to indicate we need a day off, moreover, it's not irrational to suggest we do it at the same time.
FYI - have a look at your activity logs. Whatever business you're in, I'll bet a lot that it's down on Sunday. All our charts show a huge drop them. So we already are a little bit conditioned for this behaviour. It's worth considering nudging in a given direction.
That's completely absolutist thinking, and more likely to be wrong.
Exercise is good, if we get our rest in between rather than do it to excess in which case we burn out and grow weaker.
Eating is good, if it supplies us nutrients and we don't overdo it in which case we become obese and suffer health problems.
Sleep is good, if we use it to function in the world well rested and don't spend all our time in bed or it can develop into slothfulness and depression.
Leisure can be good, if we don't do it all the time otherwise we likely become parasites on others doing all the work.
Stress can be good, if its in healthy amounts that stimulate rather than destroy us.
Even using smoking as in your example. Lets accept it as bad.
Lets pretend we have a friend and he's managed to cut back to smoking less than he use to.
We have two attitudes we can take:
- Berrate him as a failure because he hasn't managed to quit (saracasm: I'm sure that will be very productive and helpful)
- Congratulate him on making an improvement and support him in his decision and effort.
I think it's ore to do with how our brains work. Constant distraction is not what we evolved for, so to take a break from it on a regular basis might well be "recharging" your brain's limited attention management resources. I know I always feel refreshed after time away from things.
That is a recommendation on public health initiatives, not individual consumption.
"When it comes to policy recommendations, it is notable that the authors recommend public health measures to reduce total consumption at a population level, such as “excise taxes on alcohol, controlling the physical availability of alcohol and the hours of sale, and controlling alcohol advertising”. There is no mention of information campaigns or targeting heavy drinkers, which may be less effective ways of reducing average consumption."
The risks they found are actually very small.
"Let’s consider one drink a day (10g, 1.25 UK units) compared to none, for which the authors estimated an extra 4 (918–914) in 100,000 people would experience a (serious) alcohol-related condition.
That means, to experience one extra problem, 25,000 people need to drink 10g alcohol a day for a year, that’s 3,650g a year each.
To put this in perspective, a standard 70cl bottle of gin contains 224 g of alcohol, so 3,650g a year is equivalent to around 16 bottles of gin per person. That’s a total of 400,000 bottles of gin among 25,000 people, being associated with one extra health problem. Which indicates a rather low level of harm in these occasional drinkers."
Specifically with regard to smoking, I imagine if you can go one day without smoking, you're probably not chain-smoking the other six days. You have to adjust your habit so that it's not onerous to go without for a 24-hour period. That's going to put the brakes on a bit.
Since I'm mostly ignorant of such practices, what _can_ one do on the sabbath?
I assume it's not the case that your entire day is consumed by worship/ceremony/Judaism? Do you spend any time pursuing hobbies? Are there gray areas, where it is open to interpretation whether or not an activity constitutes work?
Perhaps you unplug completely and do no computing or telecommunication for the entire sabbath, but is that universal?
For those who are more traditional, the norm is to not use any electricity, from lights to microwaves to cellphones.
Part of the time is spent with worship (usually about ~45 mins Friday evening, ~2 hours Saturday morning, and ~15 minutes Saturday evening). It is traditional to have a large meal with family/friends for dinner Friday night and Saturday lunch, and often these meals can go on for 3-4 hours (as a side note, meals without phones with everyone fully engaged in the conversation are great, my wife and I instituted a no phones at meals initiative outside of Sabbath as well).
As for Saturday afternoon, I personally get a lot of reading done and when it's nice I'll go for walks with family/friends or hang out with friends indoors. Lots of my friends get together for board game groups as well. Because those who observe Sabbath don't drive, everyone in the community lives within walking distance of the synagogue and therefore walking distance of each other as well.
This was especially great in middle/high school -- most of my closest friends are still my friends from my neighborhood growing up. We spent so many hours on Sabbath together talking and hanging out without the distractions of phones or movies or video games and grew so close over that time spent together.
Edit to clarify the electricity comment: you can leave stuff such as lights on or use a timer set beforehand, so you're not stuck in the literal dark for a lot of the time :p
It also sounds like the perfect antidode to social isolation, eg having to meet with people who live nearby, nobody on a hard schedule, common activities and practices, etc.
In Germany almost every shop is closed on Sundays, with a similar idea behind it. Only the most necessary jobs are done (firefighters and hospital workers) and there is free time for everyone to relax. Now just to tone down the electricity usage.. (but actually Sundays is a good day to use electricity in your home because the commercial use is so much lower)
My problem is laws dictating it. Perhaps I want to open my store on Sunday: why is it government’s business? Shouldn’t freedom matter? When I was in France, mandatory closing was horrible. It isn’t like I can go to the French equivalent of Home Depot during the work day. There is always Saturday, but effectively limiting by law to one shopping day per week is ridiculous. It should be the choice of the business owner and the consumer what they’d like to do.
There is more than just the owner and consumer involved here. it also includes any staff that the owner employs.
If you, as an owner, decide that you want to open 7 days a week, and you have staff that are happy to do 6 days and want/desire the 7th day off, what do you do in relation to those staff? Sack them? Employ others for that 7th day who are willing to work on that day and keep the others on for the other 6 days? Pay penalty rates for the privilege of having your business open 7 days a week?
I have come across many owners that would have no problems just straight up sacking people who are not interested in killing themselves for the business owner. They expect you to work under all and every condition that the business owner puts in place - seeing that since they have given someone a job then that employee is owned by the owner. I have even worked for some such people.
As the business owner, are you willing to work 7 days a week in your own business at the expense of your family life, health, relaxation, etc? These questions need to be carefully considered in a very personal way for there are much broader consequences than you may think.
It's not like the population will buy more things if you open one more day though (not sure how online shopping plays into this). So your revenue will just be spread out over more time, and your costs will be higher since you have to keep the shop open one more day. </speculation>
This is not just speculation. I live in a US state that recently allowed liquor stores to be open on Sundays. Biggest opponent of the law change? Liquor store owners. No increase in revenue, increase in employee and operating costs -- no win for them. That pressure to open if the neighbor shop is open means almost every liquor store is now open on Sundays.
True in part but there are still a significant number of employers that do not do this and expect you to comply to their whims and directions.
In terms of a mandatory closed day, how does the historical information align with the current information in relation to unemployment or under-employment?
Ridiculous argument. There are laws governing how many employees can work a week and no employee can be made to work 7 days per week. The only solution for an employer is to arrange shifts between different employees and this is how it works in practice.
Yes, there are laws that govern this. My point is that the person I was responding to was implying that only he, as the owner, and the customer were affected by his choice to be open. The effects are much larger than just him and the customer. So it is not a ridiculous argument as such. What works in practice will vary quite considerably to your idealised view. I have worked for such owners and was glad to see the last of them.
Irrespective of any laws that are in place, there are still many owners who will threaten sackings if people do not obey the owner's whim and decisions as to the hours the employee is to work. If that means that the employees are expected to be there 7 days a week then there are many owners who will sack their staff for only wanting to work 5 or 6 days a week. There are many employees who do not feel that they have any control over this and simply comply because they feel powerless and locked in. But that is a side issue here.
Just to play devil's advocate, why shouldn't the decision be up to the community that provides land and infrastructure to the business on the terms of following local regulations?
I'm not sure it's so cut and dry to assume that the individualist "free" "market" approach is always optimal. What are we optimizing for? If we're optimizing for freedom, freedom for who to do what? Freedom from what?
Ultimately it is up to government to set the rules by which businesses operate, because market forces (and shitty business owners) tend to maximize profit at the expense of everything else. Government dictating certain bounds means that businesses which want to do things that don’t maximize short-term profit - like paying employees a living wage, not dump pollutants into rivers, or manufacturing non-contaminated foods and drugs - aren’t competing against businesses which are willing to burn down the world for profit.
I'll advance a more American/Individualist comment for perspective.
Government should be limited in what it can control. Let the people and social norms make the decisions. The problems with government are worse than those of the free market in the long run, because they create friction and power imbalance between what people want and what another entity tells them is OK.
If your core value is the Government is too strong a force to be allowed to do much anything, then this makes sense. (Personally, it makes some sense to me -- limit the power of the gov't then the worst thing a Trump administration can do is deadlock. Imagine if he had more power?)
what right do they have to decide which day you can work or not? Asia has thriving commerce in comparison with Europe precisely because there is no fixed day to close and you can always go out and find something open.
> When I was in France, mandatory closing was horrible.
You get used to it. It's not like French people can't buy stuff the other 6 days of the week.
> It should be the choice of the business owner and the consumer what they’d like to do.
Not that simple as there are several externalities. Suppose you're a business owner and your competitor opens on Sunday. You suddenly have no other choice than opening on Sunday as well.
I appreciate the convenience of shops being open all the time when I travel to the US or Asia. But I believe it makes a lot of people miserable and it's not a necessity.
It's not even remotely true that "[o]nly the most necessary jobs are done" on Sunday; restaurants have no restrictions whatsoever, just to pick one example.
Electrical power stations, security guards, newspapers (they work on Sunday to print the news for momray mornkng), tv and radio, isps, hotels, airports, trains, small shops.
It's basically just big shops that close. Anachronistic practice that makes no sense.
Go to Jerusalem on a Saturday and you'll see what "not working" means. Still plenty of people working though.
Unless you need to do something on a Sunday which depends on other people being available (I was delayed checking out of a hotel because reception opened late, without it being mentioned, which made me miss my train, and then flight since there wasn't a backup train on a Sunday).
> In Germany almost every shop is closed on Sundays, with a similar idea behind it. Only the most necessary jobs are done (firefighters and hospital workers) and there is free time for everyone to relax.
This was how it was in the UK when I was growing up in the 70s and early 80s. Not much traffic on the roads and a noticeably slower pace of life.
I don't want to go back to that, because with hindsight there were downsides to it, but as an adult I miss that simplicity for myself and my children.
There's nothing stopping you starting your own tradition in your own family, before your children get too old.
When my daughter was younger, and got her own phone we made a point of telling her (and observing) that there should never be a phone out while you are eating with people. And that it was rude to ignore people and be on your phone when in company.
She's now in her early 20s, and is hardly glued to her phone at all. She'll arrive a a persons house (or back to our house) and just dump it and her keys etc. on a table and ignore it unless it sounds a notification. It's so refreshing to see that when you know that most 20-somethings are welded to their phones 24/7.
Everything you teach kids shapes their view of the world going forward. Make Sunday a quiet day again. Create quality family time. Your kids may protest now, but they'll thank you when you are older.
NB. Also from UK, and I too miss the quiet Sundays we used to have.
> There's nothing stopping you starting your own tradition in your own family, before your children get too old.
We kind of do. Saturday has emerged as the "getting things done around the house" day, and for individual stuff. Then we eat together in the evening (something that isn't always possible Monday to Friday) and play board games or watch a film together. We try to make Sunday a day for family, go out somewhere or do things together at home. Doesn't always work out that way - children's homework, the weather, internet distractions, etc. But I agree that it is important to try.
Is reading a book on a Kindle or iPad fundamentally different than on paper? Is talking to Grandma who lives across the country on Facetime wrong while not talking to her at all is “better?”
It seems like mindfulness of what you are doing is more important than the means by which you do it.
As a Seventh-day Adventist (we observe the Sabbath by going to church on Saturday -- but that can lead to an entirely another discussion), I personally view it as a time to disconnect from work, and focus on God, relationships, and the nature around us.
In terms of hobbies, this is interesting a point of debate with many Adventists. Some are more 'conservative' where they won't do anything close to resembling work or hobbies (similar to some Orthodox Jews), and you have the other spectrum of people who more liberal in a sense where they will still do their hobbies (like going to movies, playing sports etc).
I think it is a personal thing to each person, but the overarching themes is really taking a day out of the week to disconnect from the trials of the world and spend a day for a mental reset however you choose to accomplish this.
Another Adventist here. One of the best things about living in a community of Adventists is observing Sabbath together. It's still meaningful and refreshing alone, but doing it with all your friends and the neighborhood is incomparably better.
My friends had a whole spectrum of things that were acceptable to do on Sabbath, but the common thread was connection. I miss that intensely, living in the Bay Area.
In my experience, whomever would normally do it. Many of us would meal prep ahead of time and leave the dishes for later. I often fail at this level of preparation and just make really simple meals.
Gentile here -- what's not available on the sabbath is probably easier to define. IIRC it mostly consists of things considered to be 'work', but depending on your orthodoxy it is usually the most "active" things that are barred. e.g. cooking w/oven barred, but preparing something to eat is not necessarily barred. Activating a light switch barred, but passively enjoying the light emitted (if it were already on) is not.
> Are there gray areas, where it is open to interpretation whether or not an activity constitutes work?
Yes, but humorously (IMO) there are those who go to great lengths to create devices or methods that dodge the rules.
I was tasked at one point with certifying some aspects of a line of samsung ovens. One of the features that took the longest to validate was the sabbath mode. Normally the oven would turn off if left untouched for 12 hours. With Sabbath mode activated the oven just stay on in perpetuity until turned off. Had to try it once with it off to make sure it turned off, and once with it one, to ensure it didn't.
This way you could set the oven friday morning, and then use it all day long on the Sabbath, without having done anything that fits their definition of work. Then just turn it off once the Sabbath is over.
As far as I'm aware, starting a fire is what is actually prohibited, and certain modern Jews refuse to activate electric devices on the theory that electricity is a form of fire.
How do Jews justify wasting so much energy to get around a daft religious rule? If they don't want to observe it, don't observe it, don't just pretend.
One example of “cheating” is the sabbath elevator. As you said activating switches is barred, and that goes for the floor buttons in an elevator as well. So on the sabbath there are elevators that will visit every floor and thus has its buttons disabled.
I find it a fascinating view of ethics. Christians usual try to reason about why a law was made, and see their thoughts and intents as the primary means of wrongdoing, but while Jews appear to be much more beholden to the letter of the law. Basically Christians believe that sin comes from within and Jews believe sin comes from the outside world through their actions. As I understand it.
You asked this question when it was shabbat for most people but shabbat recently ended for me.
There are many things you can do on Shabbat. You can go on a walk, have a family meal, play board games (I only play board games on Shabbat), take a nap, read a book, etc. There are some gray areas, such as if you can carry something outside. Most people figured out a way to do it. No computing and telecommunication is universal with exception for life critical activities like with doctors and fire fighters.
I very strongly object to this approach... but I don't disagree with the intent. In the modern world people tend to have absolutely terrible work/life balance, we need to help fix that and it will take a really strong effort. In japan there are already programs and incentives setup to help people avoid working themselves to death but in America there's this stupid romance surrounding the idea of working over time and an expectation that if 100 hours of labour is how much you need to do to keep a roof over your head then you better put your head down and do it.
I'm not certain how we fix this but we need to make it okay to step away from work, for vacations... and to let the mind relax and recharge over weekends. We need to disallow the ability to hire yourself out for 24 hour on call - nobody actually needs to do that, your company could just hire more people and spread that responsibility around. And, lastly, we need to kill overtime dead, it's stupid, it hurts productivity, it hurts your body, it's never efficient... If your workday lasts for more than ten hours realize that a nice meal, some downtime and a good night's sleep will make you more efficient and make sure your boss knows that as well.
But, to do this, we don't need to revive a religious holiday, we need to empower people to feel like they can say no and disconnect from work and let them recover their leisure time. And just to be clear, it is theoretically possible that I could get a phone call at any hour to deal with a critical issue, but I don't watch anything when I'm off the clock, I don't let worrying enter my mind.
It's kind of the same thing, it's just the terminology that changes. What is "sacred" if not something to be respected. I am not religious, but I consider my disconnect time sacred.
My wife is Messianic Jewish. I presume they are more liberal in their approach than most Jewish sects, but as they all seem to use their phones during Sabbath (even posting videos from services to Facebook)
On the one hand, I don't really want to criticize other people's religion. On the other hand, by all general criteria, your wife is at least as much a Christian as a Mormon or a Jehovah's Witness is, and very few non-adherent Jews would describe her as an observant Jew.
Messianic Jewish are generally not considered Jewish by the community, as their beliefs violate basic tenets of the religion. There is a lot of evidence towards these sects being used to manipulate non-religious Jews into conversion to Christianity. They are still welcome, but considered Christians.
