Best way to answer a teen about H's existence?

Motek

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:05 pm

HindaRochel wrote:

However, you have shown logical flaws in the proof, specifically you have show: that proving an event took place by refering to an unbroken chain stretching back to 6,000 witnesses can be the results of mythos rather than actual events.

It's 2-3 million witnesses, and we know this NOT because the Torah says so, but because, as I said earlier, the people were there and told their children.

Quote:

Tammy, much to the angst and anger of many, has shown that the proof is flawed.

No she hasn't, as I pointed out. Any angst or annoyance on my part is from the foolishness and worse, I've been reading in her posts and yours. This is not meant as a personal attack. It's about the contents of your posts.

TammyTammy wrote:

But how do you know that there were 2-3 million people there? The Torah. That's back to the original point.

You seemed to have ignored my post, only to reiterate your error.

TammyTammy wrote:

It's a bit of a silly question, but it illustrates the point nicely. If you maintain that all of these things were given at Sinai and handed down through the generations, then what did R. Tarphon (or any other Tanna and Amora) think when they came across a Mishna or Gemara that referenced themselves?

The point I'm trying to make is that not everything in every sefer came from Sinai. It couldn't have, or else you have the silly situation I presented above.

Chazal say that everything a "talmid vasik" will innovate in Torah, was given to Moshe at Sinai

Quote:

I would tell them the truth -- that I don't *know* that God exists.

What do you do about Rambam's first mitzva in his enumeration of the mitzvos: to know that there is a G-d?

Motek

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:12 pm

HindaRochel wrote:

I do believe...why? I just do...
Why do I believe in Hashem? I do. It is an internal sensation that seems right...
I don't know if that makes sense. But my belief is quite strong. I don't need proof to keep it alive. I just need to feel my life, good or bad at the moment, and feel a need to connect.

I like this answer Smile

Sure it makes sense.

As I posted in previous threads on this subject (and there have been a few which I just "revived"):

Jews are "maaminim bnei maaminim" (believers, children of believers). Belief in Hashem is not something we acquire. It's innate by virtue of our neshama which is a chelek Eloka. Actually, all cultures have the concept of G-d is some form or another, no matter what they call it, as G-d is the "soul" of the world.

Maybe all the lectures about proof are counterproductive. It makes kids think it's really a question when intuitively, they know the answer. The Chassidic approach is that the fact that G-d exists is obvious. The question is: do WE exist? and what's the proof?

New thread: What best convinced you that you exist? Smile

ah, but then how do we understand the first mitzva in the Rambam, to KNOW that there is a G-d, hmmmm?

TammyTammy

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:13 pm

Motek wrote:

HindaRochel wrote:

It's 2-3 million witnesses, and we know this NOT because the Torah says so, but because, as I said earlier, the people were there and told their children.

Which is hearsay at best. I suppose you'd give equivelant credence to the the Greeks who claimed to be descended from the heroes of the Trojan War, who also received from their parents an account of the fall of Troy and how the gods intervened?

Quote:

I would tell them the truth -- that I don't *know* that God exists.

What do you do about Rambam's first mitzva in his enumeration of the mitzvos: to know that there is a G-d?

As HR pointed out earlier, you can't command someone to know something. Either you know something for certain or you don't and even if I go around saying "I know God exists," I *still* can't prove it and therefore don't *know* it for a certain. Would I bet money on it? Certainly. Would I even put my life on the line for it? Yes. But do I know it with a 100% absolute certainty? No -- and absent a direct revelation to me, I don't think it's possible to know it with absolutely no doubts whatsoever.

If you feel that puts me in violation of one of the commandments, then so be it. But you can't just order someone to be certain of something -- the human intellect just doesn't work that way.

Tammy

Ruchel

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:25 pm

Quote:

the Greeks who claimed to be descended from the heroes of the Trojan War, who also received from their parents an account of the fall of Troy

this could very well be authentic

Quote:

and how the gods intervened?

what about natural phenomena they did witness but misinterpreted?

TammyTammy

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:27 pm

Ruchel wrote:

Quote:

the Greeks who claimed to be descended from the heroes of the Trojan War, who also received from their parents an account of the fall of Troy

this could very well be authentic

Quote:

and how the gods intervened?

what about natural phenomena they did witness but misinterpreted?

Not likely. Read the Iliad -- it's hard to imagine conversations between the gods and mortals as a natural phenomenon that could be misinterpreted.

Tammy

Ruchel

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:30 pm

TammyTammy wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

Quote:

the Greeks who claimed to be descended from the heroes of the Trojan War, who also received from their parents an account of the fall of Troy

this could very well be authentic

Quote:

and how the gods intervened?

what about natural phenomena they did witness but misinterpreted?

Not likely. Read the Iliad -- it's hard to imagine conversations between the gods and mortals as a natural phenomenon that could be misinterpreted.

Tammy

about conversations... dreams?

TammyTammy

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:34 pm

Ruchel wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

Quote:

the Greeks who claimed to be descended from the heroes of the Trojan War, who also received from their parents an account of the fall of Troy

this could very well be authentic

Quote:

and how the gods intervened?

what about natural phenomena they did witness but misinterpreted?

Not likely. Read the Iliad -- it's hard to imagine conversations between the gods and mortals as a natural phenomenon that could be misinterpreted.

Tammy

about conversations... dreams?

Dreams, by their very nature, are single person events. Unless you're positing that many Greeks had the same dream on the same night?

Tammy

TammyTammy

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:36 pm

Ruchel wrote:

by the way the Xtians also think they have conversations with Yoshke or Mary... if you really want to believe something, you can convince yourself I think

Yes, you can convince yourself to believe in something. But that's different from saying that you have proof (and therefore absolute knowledge) of something.

I believe God exists. I don't, however, have proof of it.

Tammy

TammyTammy

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:46 pm

Ruchel,

In any event, even if I were to grant you that you were correct, then what is to stop me from turning around and applying the same logic to Matan Torah -- that our ancestors misinterpreted natural events as God Himself?

The bottom line is that we, ourselves, are not eyewitnesses to the events, and any tradition that we have from our parents on the subject is heresay and would not stand up in any court (including Bais Din). It's not proof that Matan Torah happened, it's simply proof that our parents say that it happened. As such, it's hardly credible as absolute proof as to the historicity of Matan Torah.

Tammy

TammyTammy

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:48 pm

amother wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

amother wrote:

Chassidus gives this example, 1+1=2. It will always equal 2 till infinity or going back to infinity. Nothing will ever change 1+1=2

Except binary. Smile

Tammy

What are you talking about? 1+1 always equals 2!

If I have to explain it, then it's no longer funny.

Tammy

Ruchel

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:51 pm

TammyTammy wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

Quote:

the Greeks who claimed to be descended from the heroes of the Trojan War, who also received from their parents an account of the fall of Troy

this could very well be authentic

Quote:

and how the gods intervened?

what about natural phenomena they did witness but misinterpreted?

Not likely. Read the Iliad -- it's hard to imagine conversations between the gods and mortals as a natural phenomenon that could be misinterpreted.

Tammy

about conversations... dreams?

Dreams, by their very nature, are single person events. Unless you're positing that many Greeks had the same dream on the same night?

Tammy

no, this would be very weird

Ruchel

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:54 pm

TammyTammy wrote:

we all see things from our point of view... they would definitely think their story is right and ours is not, and we think the contrary.

TammyTammy

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 3:57 pm

Ruchel wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

we all see things from our point of view... they would definitely think their story is right and ours is not, and we think the contrary.

And that's fine and well... as long as you're not trying to pass it off as proof of something.

Tammy

Ruchel

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 4:00 pm

TammyTammy wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

we all see things from our point of view... they would definitely think their story is right and ours is not, and we think the contrary.

And that's fine and well... as long as you're not trying to pass it off as proof of something.

Tammy

That's no proof of course. But for example the fact that their "gods" finally allowed them to disappear (as a culture, since they have descendants) is one of the proofs to me.

TammyTammy

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 4:06 pm

Ruchel wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

we all see things from our point of view... they would definitely think their story is right and ours is not, and we think the contrary.

And that's fine and well... as long as you're not trying to pass it off as proof of something.

Tammy

That's no proof of course. But for example the fact that their "gods" finally allowed them to disappear (as a culture, since they have descendants) is one of the proofs to me.

That's not a proof... not unless you are willing to also accept it as a proof to the validity of the Bhuddist, Shinto and other ancient religions of the Far East.

Tammy

Ruchel

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 4:15 pm

TammyTammy wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

we all see things from our point of view... they would definitely think their story is right and ours is not, and we think the contrary.

And that's fine and well... as long as you're not trying to pass it off as proof of something.

Tammy

That's no proof of course. But for example the fact that their "gods" finally allowed them to disappear (as a culture, since they have descendants) is one of the proofs to me.

That's not a proof... not unless you are willing to also accept it as a proof to the validity of the Bhuddist, Shinto and other ancient religions of the Far East.

Tammy

only ONE of the proofs
this one, coupled with many others, shows we are right
One is not enough (although for me I don't need any proof and even thinks some proofs are so silly they are discouraging)

TammyTammy

Thu, Aug 09 2007, 4:23 pm

Ruchel wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

we all see things from our point of view... they would definitely think their story is right and ours is not, and we think the contrary.

And that's fine and well... as long as you're not trying to pass it off as proof of something.

Tammy

That's no proof of course. But for example the fact that their "gods" finally allowed them to disappear (as a culture, since they have descendants) is one of the proofs to me.

That's not a proof... not unless you are willing to also accept it as a proof to the validity of the Bhuddist, Shinto and other ancient religions of the Far East.

Tammy

only ONE of the proofs
this one, coupled with many others, shows we are right

That's fine... but that's not a proof either, it's a conclusion based on a preponderance of the evidence.

Quote:

One is not enough (although for me I don't need any proof and even thinks some proofs are so silly they are discouraging)

And here I agree with you 100%.

Tammy