Home
Log in / Sign Up
    Private Messages   Advanced Search   Rules   New User Guide   FAQ   Advertise   Contact Us  
Forum -> Interesting Discussions
Best way to answer a teen about H's existence?
  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10



Post new topic   Reply to topic View latest: 24h 48h 72h

Ruchel




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Aug 13 2007, 5:53 pm
TammyTammy wrote:
I can't just pretend that the objections that I have with the proof just magically disappear. They either have to be addressed or acknowledged that they are weaknesses.

Tammy


Here I agree totally with you.
Back to top

shalhevet




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Aug 13 2007, 5:54 pm
TammyTammy wrote:
Ruchel wrote:
Quote:
Many times people find themselves in circumstances in which observance of the mitzvos are difficult or impossible.


Capable doesn't mean you'll have to do it. It means, if it was the case, you would.


Fair enough.

But I could also apply the logic further then. God created me and gave me my strengths and weaknesses. He's the one who gave me the ability to think critically and logically. He's the one who knows that when I see the Kuzari proof, for example, that I'm going to find objections with it. Perhaps if He created me with the ability to just "turn off my mind," then perhaps I could just accept it, just as when he created my brother without a brother, He knew that he would never perform the mitzvah of Yibum. But since he created my brother that way, He doesn't expect him to do the mitzvah -- sure he would do it if he could, but he can't. The same applies to me -- I can't just pretend that the objections that I have with the proof just magically disappear. They either have to be addressed or acknowledged that they are weaknesses.

Tammy


The two cases are not the same at all.

There are plenty of mitzvas which do not apply to everyone. Some only to men (tefillin, tzitzit); some only to women (nidda, childbirth offering); some only to kohanim (to bless the Jewish people and many mitzvas to do with the Beis Hamikdash). Some mitzvas only apply in a particular time (when most or all of the Jewish people are in EY) and others only in a particular place (EY). Only someone getting divorced has a mitzva to give his wife a get and only someone in the particular circumstances of yibum is obligated in it...

But if a person is obliged in a mitzva (and you can check in Sefer haChinuch or any halacha sefer that mitzvas such as knowing there is a G-d, and loving Him and fearing Him apply to every Jew and Jewess in every time and place) then every teenager of bar or bat mitzva age is capable of fulfilling it. Otherwise it would have been a mitzva only for tzaddikim or people of a certain age or certain type of mind.

When you referred to people unable to keep mitzvas in certain circumstances (eg they lived in Europe 300 years ago and were unable to obtain an etrog) that is a halachic category called backside (forced) and what can you do? That is not a category that ever applies to mitzvot which do not require any outside 'props' outside our own minds.

I didn't mean you would be convinced by the Rambam. I meant that the Rambam explains how to know there is a G-d (look at the creation etc - the source was quoted earlier by Motek or TR; I don't remember).
Back to top

TammyTammy




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Aug 13 2007, 6:00 pm
shalhevet wrote:
TammyTammy wrote:
Ruchel wrote:
Quote:
Many times people find themselves in circumstances in which observance of the mitzvos are difficult or impossible.


Capable doesn't mean you'll have to do it. It means, if it was the case, you would.


Fair enough.

But I could also apply the logic further then. God created me and gave me my strengths and weaknesses. He's the one who gave me the ability to think critically and logically. He's the one who knows that when I see the Kuzari proof, for example, that I'm going to find objections with it. Perhaps if He created me with the ability to just "turn off my mind," then perhaps I could just accept it, just as when he created my brother without a brother, He knew that he would never perform the mitzvah of Yibum. But since he created my brother that way, He doesn't expect him to do the mitzvah -- sure he would do it if he could, but he can't. The same applies to me -- I can't just pretend that the objections that I have with the proof just magically disappear. They either have to be addressed or acknowledged that they are weaknesses.

Tammy


The two cases are not the same at all.

There are plenty of mitzvas which do not apply to everyone. Some only to men (tefillin, tzitzit); some only to women (nidda, childbirth offering); some only to kohanim (to bless the Jewish people and many mitzvas to do with the Beis Hamikdash). Some mitzvas only apply in a particular time (when most or all of the Jewish people are in EY) and others only in a particular place (EY). Only someone getting divorced has a mitzva to give his wife a get and only someone in the particular circumstances of yibum is obligated in it...

But if a person is obliged in a mitzva (and you can check in Sefer haChinuch or any halacha sefer that mitzvas such as knowing there is a G-d, and loving Him and fearing Him apply to every Jew and Jewess in every time and place) then every teenager of bar or bat mitzva age is capable of fulfilling it. Otherwise it would have been a mitzva only for tzaddikim or people of a certain age or certain type of mind.


Or it could be a mitzvah that we are to strive to do our best in and continue striving to do better over the course of our lives.

Sometimes, it's about the journey, not the destination.


Quote:

I didn't mean you would be convinced by the Rambam. I meant that the Rambam explains how to know there is a G-d (look at the creation etc - the source was quoted earlier by Motek or TR; I don't remember).


And that's fine. Looking at creation is actually one of the main reasons that I *do* acknowledge that He exists. I look at the majesty of the universe and everything in it, and posit that the odds of it happening by themselves are infinitesimal. But infinitesimal != 0, and so I *still* don't have 100% knowledge.

And even if I grant that Creation could have come about ONLY by God and that it is utterly impossible to have come about otherwise, it still doesn't validate the Kuzari's proof.

Tammy
Back to top

Motek




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Aug 15 2007, 9:43 pm
HindaRochel wrote:
What some here seem to be suggesting is if you don't accept the proof you are either a)stupid b)keneged Torah.


Since the rejection of the proof is absurd, then yes.

But the proof about Mattan Torah is not the only thing discussed in this thread.

There is the Chovos Ha'Levavos and how he writes about how we know G-d exists (the original thread question), which glad to see, nobody disputed.

Quote:
You really want to argue, go find a skeptic and try some of your proofs on them. Honestly, you'll be laughed silly.


Somebody who doesn't want to believe, won't believe if it happens in front of his face. If someone is intellectually honest, then what the Chovos Ha'Levavos, Kuzari, and Rambam write, will be accepted.

Still waiting to hear from you when the chain broke since you claimed it did. You claimed it, you back it up.

I told you the chain exists till this day, unbroken, with millions transmitting it to millions, with Pesach sedarim etc. occurring in every single generation.

Since I asked for Torah sources to support your points, and you have failed to provide any, well, I think your posts are highly presumptuous and offensive.
Back to top

Motek




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Aug 15 2007, 10:35 pm
TammyTammy wrote:
if you knew of millions of people who witnessed Matan Torah -- that would be one thing -- but you don't know them. You know of some people who have told it from other people (and who knows if they didn't embellish details along the way) and so on.


You can keep on denying the validity of millions of people transmitting something they witnessed to millions of people, an unprecedented happening, but having read your (and hindarochel's) reasons for dismissing it, I'll resort to hindarochel's line:

Quote:
You really want to argue, go find a skeptic and try some of your proofs on them. Honestly, you'll be laughed silly.


tammy wrote:
You still can't command someone to *know* something. If you have some method by which I can *know* that God exists, please tell it to me.


The word "know" in Lashon Ha'Kodesh means to understand. The mitzva is to think about these topics, from every angle, until you understand why the existence of Hashem, the divinity of Torah, etc. are true. It's a mitzva that one fulfills over a lifetime of study.

Quote:
Actually science deals with theory and hypotheses.


Not in a vacuum of course. The theories and hypotheses are formulated based on observation of the facts.

Quote:
But we're not dealing with science here... we're dealing with history, so let's not confuse the issue. Whether or not Mattan Torah occurred is a function of history, not science.


I don't care what you call it. The point is there are methods by which we determine the facts.

Quote:
To it's minutest detail? Can you tell me what color robe Nachshon ben Aminadav was wearing that day?


Is that a detail of Mattan Torah?!

Quote:
It was transmitted *exactly* the same way from one generation to the next? Every parent in every generation told it over to their children in *exactly* the same way? Not a single detail of the event was ever altered in a single re-telling at any time?


As far as I know, no. Do you have any evidence to the contrary? Since you are challenging the Jewish tradition, transmitted by millions to millions over the millenia, back it up. Furthermore, it's hard to understand why you observe any mitzvos when your Torah is not authenticated.
Back to top

Motek




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Aug 15 2007, 10:38 pm
Quote:
by the time of the Gemara, they weren't even sure what *date* Matan Torah happened on -- there is a dispute as to whether it was on the sixth of Sivan or the seventh.


So glad you brought that up as an example to support your questions since it shows you are ignorant of the sources and perhaps it will encourage you to do some serious studying before posing silly questions.

The discrepancy of the 5th and 6th have nothing to do with not being sure about a vital detail of Mattan Torah like when it took place. All agree that the Giving of the Torah took place 50 days after the Exodus. This is why we count 49 days of Sefira from the 2nd night of Pesach and Shavuos is celebrated on the 50th. The question about the day in Sivan is a calendar question, how it worked out that particular year.

Quote:
Please don't tell me that it was faithfully passed down in every detail from father to son unchanged for thousands of years -- it's just not possible.


I am sorry to hear that on a frum forum, you don't believe this.

Quote:
If what you're saying is true, then there can never be two contradicting midrashim about Matan Torah, no two facts in anyone's account can possibly differ.


There are contradictory Talmud sources regarding numerous things that millions of people experienced, for example - "a new king arose" - was Pharaoh a new king or not. There are two opinions.

That's a different discussion about "these and these are the words of the living G-d."
Back to top

Motek




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Aug 15 2007, 10:38 pm
Quote:
Anything I eyewitness is certainly far more credible than something handed down orally through the filters of thousands of people and hundreds of generations.


Is it? And just what filters are you claiming have tainted our tradition?

The study of how people recall events was initiated at the turn of this century by the Harvard psychologist Hugo Munsterberg (1863-1916). In his work he found that people tend to remember events as slightly different from how they actually happened. One of his experiments, conducted during a scientific meeting, involved an incident in which a clown from a passing carnival rushed into the room followed by a man with a revolver. There was an argument followed by a skirmish and several shots, after which both individuals left.

The stunned audience was asked by the group leader, the only one there who had prior knowledge of the experiment, to write down all they could remember about what had just happened. Analysis of the information gathered showed that only one individual out of the forty present was able to recall the event with any accuracy. More than half of those present could manage no better than a 60% recollection.

TammyTammy wrote:
Can we know for *sure* that Washington existed? No. I grant you that it's possible that all the evidence for his existence is faked. But the odds on it are so remote, the conspiracy necessary to create it so large, that it's extremely, extremely, extremely (I can't put enough extremelys in this sentence) that it's a fake and a fraud. The odds on Washington having existed are better than 99.9999999999999999%.

Mattan Torah, OTOH, has only one source of information -- that's it - one.


There you go again, repeating the same nonsense. Quite obnoxious. The source of information is millions of people, a far more credible number than the number of people who saw Washington, and yet you think the odds of the evidence being faked about Washington are so remote, the conspiracy theory so large etc.

This is intellectual dishonesty.

[quote="TammyTammy"]
Motek wrote:
HindaRochel wrote:
1. You can't command someone to know something. Period. Rambam was a great deal wiser than me; great. I accept that. You still can't command someone to know something.


The Rambam thinks you can. You think you can't. And your Torah source is?


Quote:
So, tell me how to know.


If you care about observing this mitzva, you should be on the phone with your rabbi asap.

Quote:
You're the one asserting this chain exists. The burden of proof is on you to document it.


You tried that trick in another thread, and I ain't buying it. Millions of people have told millions of people. We observe the Torah in 2007 for this very reason. Hindarochel thinks the chain broke, let her tell us when it broke.

Quote:
I posited that the word "hayom" in the pasuk that you quoted could possibly have the same limited application.


How dare you? Who are you to posit anything about pesukim in Torah? You have a thought that you think has validity, that's fine - before publicizing it, the proper thing to do is to research it and find support for it in Torah sources.

You dare to deny our tradition transmitted by millions of people with phony assertions, you also dare to deny mitzvos of the Torah such as knowing G-d, loving G-d b'chol levavcha, etc.

This website is for frum women and you led Yael to believe that you are a frum woman. What branch of Judaism do you belong to that allow you to make up your own ideas about pesukim and mitzvos? It's certainly not Orthodox!
Back to top

HindaRochel




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Aug 16 2007, 12:38 am
Quote:
Quote:
You're the one asserting this chain exists. The burden of proof is on you to document it.


You tried that trick in another thread, and I ain't buying it. Millions of people have told millions of people. We observe the Torah in 2007 for this very reason. Hindarochel thinks the chain broke, let her tell us when it broke.




I don't observe the Torah because a million told a million. A million can say a lot of stuff that is not true. I believe because in my heart I KNOW the Torah is true. Why? I guess my soul tells me it is so.

I never said the chain was broken. I said it doesn't exist--which was perhaps inaccurate. The chain does not exist as you are describing it, or as I was understanding your telling of it. You need to connect the dots, not tell me that you read it at the Pesach seder. Again, where do we get the command to keep the Pesach? From the Torah. The form to do that has been passed down, but there is no proof that the form began at the time of Matan Torah, or that there was a Matan Torah. Proof, I KNOW there was Matan Torah, but I don't see you offering real proof.

Also, as Tammy said,the burden is on you to establish the chain to begin with. This is your proof. You need to have some evidence from the start, not that it occured, to prove your point, because there is so archaelogical evidence that a people marched through the desert and stood on two hills and various other markers that support the Torah scenario, at least in some aspects, but you need to prove this chain exists and has been continous. And you can't refer to a text that was written after the chain began, but need to show the unbroken quality of the chain.

Neither Tammy or I area arguing against the Torah. Please don't try and make this about our belief. What we are questioning is the form of proof that you are trying to assert is incontestable; and what I at least am saying is the proof isn't incontestable. I also think it is a fools errand to try an prove it is incontestable, and that we can prove G-d. I also don't need it. Not sure why anyone must have proof of G-d. The argument that you are asserting seems to be that we must accept this as proof and if we don't we are either stupid or apikorises. How do you know we haven't spoken to our Ravs or to someone with Torah knowledge? That really is obnoxious.

I can pick up a New Testement and see how everyone saw yeshki rise as well, and using the same criterion then, it has been passed down from one generation to another. Do I believe he did anything? Frankly I don't believe there was a single entity after whom the current yeshki mythos was created, but rather that he is a compilation of various men who existed around that time period, as well as having, implied to his character, mythological or quasi-mythological people from centuries before.

The proof rests on the assumption that at some point someone would say "Hey this didn't happen to me!" But the tradition the of Mitsiat Mitzraim depends on a parent passing on the info to the child. A small band of thirty or forty adults could tell the story of fleeing Egypt with G-d's help, and here are the laws, and then their children could tell their children, but add a bit, just as Adam added to what Hashem told him when he told over the law to Chava. And each generation tells over till the story is codified and memoraized nearly perfectly, and then written down and distributed. Copied word for word, and done in the exacting manner to which it is copied, would preserve it at that point, but there isn't an way to establish numbers etc.

And as I said, ad infinitum, I DO NOT CARE. I KNOW G-d exists, no one has to prove it to me. I KNOW Matan Torah and Mitziat Mitzraim existed...and I KNOW my neshama was there. Why do you need to prove it if you were there? My soul remembers and informs the rest of me.

Does this sound like I believe that in any shape or form the Torah is made up? So what is the reason for your ire? That we don't accept the proof you are trying to give? Where is our obligation to accept the proof you offered? Who are you to require anyone else to accept this particular proof? Maybe another proof would make more sense to me; or perhaps I understand the word know in a totally different fashion than you, which I do, making any proof, such as you offered, counterindicated.[/I]
Back to top

TammyTammy




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Aug 16 2007, 11:50 am
Motek,

Keeping up with you in several different posts is just too much for me and my limited, frail, non-Orthodox (by your definition) mind. So, I'm going to combine them for the sake of convenience.

You seem to have taken my position to be that God doesn't exist and Mattan Torah didn't happen. I don't know why you think this is my position when I've made it fairly clear that I believe in God's existence and I believe in Mattan Torah at Har Sinai. However, I have not found a proof to either fact that stands up 100%. It's as simple as that. The thread began with the question of what you would tell a teen who has questions. What would I tell a teen? The truth. I would tell them that based on all available evidence, I have come to conclusion that God exists and that He gave us the Torah on Har Sinai. Do I have proof of it? No -- and I don't think any teen will leave the derech simply because I don't have a proof. It's far better to tell your children that you don't know something rather than lie and state that you do.

It would also seem that we've spent four pages arguing about the mitzvah of knowing God while, in the end, we probably agree more than we disagree. I defined "know" as have 100% certainty of (I.e. have a logical proof for). You define know (based on your recent posts) as "to understand." That's fine... under that definition, I think we probably agree. As I've said, I believe, based on observation and analysis, that God exists. In short, I understand it. I may not have absolute proof for it, but I certainly believe it based on a preponderance of the evidence.

As far as logical proofs are concerned, I don't think either of us are going to convince each other. I find it hard to believe that you actually believe that an oral tradition, handed down by different people in different settings throughout a thousand year period without being written down could remain intact word-for-word without anyone changing a single detail in the retelling. Does your DH tell over the story of yetziyas mitzrayim at the seder the *exact* same way his father did (referring to the portions outside the text of the hagaddah)? Of course not. Each individual person brings their own focus, agendas and ideas to the telling. Considering the fact that it's never been shown that any text (even a written one) could survive multiple generations completely unaltered (there are variations in the text of Mishnayos, the gemara, etc. -- even the Chumash itself -- the Yemenite Torahs are off from the standard ones in several places -- and how do you spell dakah?), I find it highly improbable that an oral text could survive intact without changes, embellishments and alterations -- and that holds for a fixed text. If the Oral Torah isn't a fixed text, then the idea holds all the more so.

Does that mean that I don't hold of the Oral Torah? Of course not. I certainly believe in the Oral Torah. I live my life by it (though you may not believe it). But I don't have to believe that every thing written in the gemara or midrash has to be taken at literal face value. I don't have to beleive that the science in the gemara was handed down at Sinai -- I can believe that the gemara contains medicine and science that were simply the products of the day. And I'm well within my rights to believe this -- if you feel that this makes me no longer Orthodox, that's fine -- you can believe what you like -- but I still live my life according to the mitzvos and don't you dare tell me otherwise.

You ask me why I keep the mitzvos and yet you accuse me of presumptuousness. You assume that I'm so hard-wired that I don't do anything if it isn't proven 100%. How dare you? How dare you question my loyalty to the Torah and the mitzvos? You seem to feel that because I find a given proof to the Torah lacking that I shouldn't be keeping the mitzvos. At least I don't have the hubris to think that I know everything. I have acknowledged in this thread that there may be absolute proofs to the Torah -- I just haven't come across them yet. But you know what? I don't *need* to have the Torah proven to me. I keep it anyway, out of a love of God and a desire to serve Him. I will try to know Him as best as I can. If that's not good enough to meet *your* standards, go ahead and call me non-Orthodox. Call me an apikorus. It doesn't matter.

Lastly, I ask you to please not set up strawmen. You said:
Quote:
You dare to deny our tradition transmitted by millions of people with phony assertions, you also dare to deny mitzvos of the Torah such as knowing G-d, loving G-d b'chol levavcha, etc.

This website is for frum women and you led Yael to believe that you are a frum woman. What branch of Judaism do you belong to that allow you to make up your own ideas about pesukim and mitzvos? It's certainly not Orthodox!


*Nowhere* did I deny that millions witnessed Sinai. *Nowhere* did I deny that that fact wasn't handed down throughout the generations. *Nowhere* did I deny that there is a mitzvah of loving God or knowing God.

What I said was that the only source of the first fact was in the Torah itself. What I said was that the second fact wouldn't stand up in court and would count as "proof" to people who are looking for one. What I said was that you can't command someone to "know" something as in a 100% proof. I never said at all that there was no mitzvah to love God.

You say "how dare you" to me? I say it back to you! How dare you take things that I've said and so twist them out of context to attribute to me the position that I don't believe in God or the Torah or the Mitzvos. How dare you judge whether or not I am Orthodox? I have emunah in HaShem, I believe in the Torah and I observe the Mitzvos. I'm sorry if that's not good enough for you.

When I joined here, I didn't see anywhere in the rules where it said that in order to join I have to be "Orthodox to Motek's standards." So, kindly don't accuse me of dishonesty and lying to Yael.

I think we've reached the end of the road on this one. Once you start denying the fact that I am a shomer Torah U'Mitzvos, I really don't think that there is any more to be said. I'm deeply saddened that you felt the need to take everything I've said and twist it into positions of absolute kefira, to the point where you accuse me of not believing in Torah MiSinai. Perhaps in your mind my emunah is not sufficient, but in my mind it is just fine thank you.

Tammy
Back to top

Ruchel




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Aug 16 2007, 3:54 pm
Quote:
the Yemenite Torahs are off from the standard ones in several places


where?
Back to top

HindaRochel




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Aug 16 2007, 5:10 pm
According to my dh, who layns, there is a difference, in one or two places, he doesn't know where though, between the Ashkenazi and Sephadi Sefer Torah.

In addition the gemara relates that when the Jews came back from Bavel they found three Sifrei Torah which did not agree with each other in three places. In each case two of the Sifrei Torah ahd it one way and the third another. In each case the Rabbi's went with majority rule, however, the final outcome is that the "kosher" proper text for the Sefer Torah did not match any of the other three Sifrei Torah.
Back to top

TammyTammy




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Aug 16 2007, 6:07 pm
Ruchel wrote:
Quote:
the Yemenite Torahs are off from the standard ones in several places


where?


I don't know the places off the top of my head. I'll have to do some research.

However, there is the famous difference in the word "Dakah" in Devorim. Some sifrei Torah spell it with an aleph at the end, others with a heh.

Tammy
Back to top

HindaRochel




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Aug 16 2007, 11:39 pm
btw, to the best of my knowledge, none of the differences make a sense difference in the Torah...that is the word meaning doesn't change.
Back to top

cip




 
 
    
 

Post Fri, Aug 17 2007, 12:01 am
btw, I don't know if someone already mentioned (I did not read the whole thread, I just skimmed) but their is a new book that came out that discusses this topic in depth.
I'm not sure what it's called but it's the slager edition, 13 principles of the rambam - principles 8&9 by kol menachem (same as the gutnick chumash) with a light brown leather like cover.
Back to top

sheindelnomi




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Oct 17 2007, 6:37 pm
chocolate moose wrote:
WE JUST HAD THIS DISCUSSION FRIDAY NIGHT! I talked about random life on other planets. That if our world was so random, how come it doesn’t appear anywhere else?

She bought it.


But how do you know that there is no life on other planets elsewhere in the universe ?

In reality, someone should have received Torah on that other planet too, because there is no purpose in life without our holy Torah, and since there is no mentioning of other planets life in the Torah, then they don't exist.
Back to top

sheindelnomi




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Oct 17 2007, 6:39 pm
HindaRochel wrote:
According to my dh, who layns, there is a difference, in one or two places, he doesn't know where though, between the Ashkenazi and Sephadi Sefer Torah.

In addition the gemara relates that when the Jews came back from Bavel they found three Sifrei Torah which did not agree with each other in three places. In each case two of the Sifrei Torah ahd it one way and the third another. In each case the Rabbi's went with majority rule, however, the final outcome is that the "kosher" proper text for the Sefer Torah did not match any of the other three Sifrei Torah.


Do you basically saying that the Torah which we have now is not the Torah which was given on Har Sinai ? This sounds like apikores in my opinion.
Back to top

TammyTammy




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Oct 17 2007, 6:53 pm
sheindelnomi wrote:
HindaRochel wrote:
According to my dh, who layns, there is a difference, in one or two places, he doesn't know where though, between the Ashkenazi and Sephadi Sefer Torah.

In addition the gemara relates that when the Jews came back from Bavel they found three Sifrei Torah which did not agree with each other in three places. In each case two of the Sifrei Torah ahd it one way and the third another. In each case the Rabbi's went with majority rule, however, the final outcome is that the "kosher" proper text for the Sefer Torah did not match any of the other three Sifrei Torah.


Do you basically saying that the Torah which we have now is not the Torah which was given on Har Sinai ? This sounds like apikores in my opinion.


Well, there *are* variant texts in the Torah we have today. The most famous of which is the word "dakah" in Ki Taitzay, which is spelled in some Sifrei Torah with a heh on the end and in other with an alef on the end.

Furthermore, Yemenite sefarim have some differences from ours. In most cases, it's a malei/chaser issue where the meaning and pronunciation is not changed. However there is one place where such a change makes a real difference... that's in the pasuk of B'raishis 9:29. Our texts says "V'yhei y'mai Noach..." while the Yemenite version has "Vayihiyu y'mei Noach..." Interestingly enough, if you search for this pasuk on Machon Mamre's site, they have the Yemenite version!! shock

Lastly, there is a halacha that if a sefer torah is incorrect in a matter that is a malei/chaser and the meaning/pronunciation is not altered, the sefer is not pasul (although it still needs to be corrected). The reason for this is because we not baki (expert) in malei/chaser. IOW, it's possible that in some small ways the Torah we now have is *not* identical to the one that Moshe got on Har Sinai.

Tammy
Back to top

Ruchel




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Oct 17 2007, 6:54 pm
life on other planets

http://www.askmoses.com/articl.....60775
http://www.chabad.org/library/.....e.htm
Back to top

amother


 

Post Wed, Nov 07 2007, 6:30 pm
TammyTammy wrote:
amother wrote:
Tammy, you said you accept historical events such as George Washington being the first president, etc., as fact, because we have many sources to verify his existence and his actions, not just one. But if we apply the same skepticism toward George Washington as you seem to be applying toward the events surrounding Matan Torah, we can debunk him too, I am sure!! All of those documents were forgeries, for all we know! The so-called "primary sources" that corroborate his existence are biased, or fabricated, or misunderstandings, or just plain delusional! His face on the dollar bill.... just some artist's fantasy! So why do we accept that he lived at all, that he was the first president of the United States? It's all hearsay. WE weren't there. WE have no proof. WE have to rely on faith alone. We can't trust our own history, our own tradition. Nothing is for certain... we should really tell history students that while we BELIEVE George Washingon existed, we cannot KNOW this for sure..............


Can we know for *sure* that Washington existed? No. I grant you that it's possible that all the evidence for his existence is faked. But the odds on it are so remote, the conspiracy necessary to create it so large, that it's extremely, extremely, extremely (I can't put enough extremelys in this sentence) that it's a fake and a fraud. The odds on Washington having existed are better than 99.9999999999999999%.

Mattan Torah, OTOH, has only one source of information -- that's it - one.

Tammy


Quote:
Take, for example, the Egyptian Dynasties and the invasion of the Hyksos. The hieroglyphics are useless mythology. The account we rely upon is from Josephus in his Contra Apion--a refutation of an anti-Semite Greek writer of Egyptian origin named Apion who cites a history provided several hundred years earlier by an Egyptian priest named Manetho, who had his own agenda and axe to grind. Of course, we don't have Josephus' original work, we have several different and discrepant versions, copied over many times. Yet every public school, college and museum will list that succession of dynasties as though it is historical fact and discuss the Hyksos invasion as a major event of history. Why? Because a copy of a copy of a copy of a book cites an opponent who cites an earlier, admittedly biased author who says it's true. No other evidence whatsoever.

Not going into all the details here, but when it comes to the Peloponnesian Wars, Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar, things aren't much better. Multiple, conflicting and often spurious accounts abound. There are no contemporary accounts, scant evidence from archeological digs and little if any consensus on major issues.

Now compare this to the Sinai event. We have a single account, uncontested for millennia. It presents its carriers in a not too favorable light. It is cited and confirmed in many of the later books of the Bible. And we have an entire nation that understands this as their history--including cynics such as the Sadducees and early Christians.

If we were talking about any other event, all historians would accept this as standard ancient history. There's only one reason why they don't: Because they don't wish to believe it.

All we can say is, let's be fair: If the rest is history, this is history as well. Further, as I pointed out in my article that you mention, the alternatives lead down ludicrous paths similar to conspiracy theories.

http://www.chabad.org/library/.....h.htm
Back to top
Page 10 of 10   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 Recent Topics




Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Interesting Discussions

Related Topics Replies Last Post
Teen weekday skirt help
by amother
0 Yesterday at 8:46 am View last post
Preteen/teen weekday shoes
by amother
6 Tue, Mar 26 2024, 10:34 pm View last post
Help me find every day tops and skirts for teen
by amother
1 Tue, Mar 26 2024, 10:44 am View last post
Anyone want to help me design a teen bedroom?
by amother
27 Wed, Mar 20 2024, 6:55 am View last post
Affordable girls/teen clothing?
by amother
1 Mon, Mar 18 2024, 7:23 pm View last post