 |
|
 |
 |
|
|
Forum
-> Interesting Discussions
TammyTammy
|
 Tue, Aug 07 2007, 7:37 am
| shalhevet wrote: | | HindaRochel wrote: | I think a lot of people here are misunderstanding Tammy. She is not arguing against the Torah, she is arguing against the idea that there is an uncontestable proof that Hashem exists and that we received Torah m'Sinai. And I happen to agree with her. She is correct; most proofs can be invalidated, which is why I think they shouldn't be begun. A wise child will in fact question the proofs which will simply lead to greater questions.
My feeling is it is best to simply tell a questioning child that we haven't any proof that G-d exists, that these and these are strong evidence for a creator, but there is, at least not yet, any absolute proof of Hashem's existence. This is where faith comes it.
It is internal, and many times people who believe in Hashem will question G-d.
There is also no real proof, despite detrators, that G-d doesn't exist. I know some of the supposed proofs, but I find logical faults with them as well. |
The Torah disagrees with you. The pasuk says
וידעת היום והשבות אל לבבך כי ד' הוא א' בשמים ממעל...
And you shall KNOW today ... that Hashem is G-d in the heavens above and the earth beneath. There is no other.
We have an obligation to KNOW about G-d's existence, not just to believe. |
Notice that the pasuk says "today." That's because it was speaking to a group of people who were either at Sinai personally (as many of them were) or else had plenty of external evidence that it occured (I.e. eyewitnesses). Today, there is no one alive who was physically present at Sinai and there are no living eyewitnesses to give testimony.
Tammy
| |
|
| Back to top |
 0
|
HindaRochel
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 7:39 am
[url]The Torah disagrees with you. The pasuk says
וידעת היום והשבות אל לבבך כי ד' הוא א' בשמים ממעל...
And you shall KNOW today ... that Hashem is G-d in the heavens above and the earth beneath. There is no other.
We have an obligation to KNOW about G-d's existence, not just to believe.[/url]
Isn't it a little hard to command someone to know something? Imagine my trying to command someone to "know" math, or that atoms exists. I'm not sure the term is being used as you are thinking of it. Moreover, even if that were so, and we have an obligation to prove within ourselves that Hashem exists, the proofs you and others have been suggesting are logically flawed, and could by many be seen as flawed and leading to less beleif in Hashem rather than more; aren't they not then a stumbling block. Should they then be used?
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
HindaRochel
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 7:45 am
| TammyTammy wrote: | | shalhevet wrote: | | HindaRochel wrote: | I think a lot of people here are misunderstanding Tammy. She is not arguing against the Torah, she is arguing against the idea that there is an uncontestable proof that Hashem exists and that we received Torah m'Sinai. And I happen to agree with her. She is correct; most proofs can be invalidated, which is why I think they shouldn't be begun. A wise child will in fact question the proofs which will simply lead to greater questions.
My feeling is it is best to simply tell a questioning child that we haven't any proof that G-d exists, that these and these are strong evidence for a creator, but there is, at least not yet, any absolute proof of Hashem's existence. This is where faith comes it.
It is internal, and many times people who believe in Hashem will question G-d.
There is also no real proof, despite detrators, that G-d doesn't exist. I know some of the supposed proofs, but I find logical faults with them as well. |
The Torah disagrees with you. The pasuk says
וידעת היום והשבות אל לבבך כי ד' הוא א' בשמים ממעל...
And you shall KNOW today ... that Hashem is G-d in the heavens above and the earth beneath. There is no other.
We have an obligation to KNOW about G-d's existence, not just to believe. |
Notice that the pasuk says "today." That's because it was speaking to a group of people who were either at Sinai personally (as many of them were) or else had plenty of external evidence that it occured (I.e. eyewitnesses). Today, there is no one alive who was physically present at Sinai and there are no living eyewitnesses to give testimony.
Tammy |
This is actually a better answer than mine and more directly tied to the text.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
shalhevet
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 8:06 am
| TammyTammy wrote: | | shalhevet wrote: | | HindaRochel wrote: | I think a lot of people here are misunderstanding Tammy. She is not arguing against the Torah, she is arguing against the idea that there is an uncontestable proof that Hashem exists and that we received Torah m'Sinai. And I happen to agree with her. She is correct; most proofs can be invalidated, which is why I think they shouldn't be begun. A wise child will in fact question the proofs which will simply lead to greater questions.
My feeling is it is best to simply tell a questioning child that we haven't any proof that G-d exists, that these and these are strong evidence for a creator, but there is, at least not yet, any absolute proof of Hashem's existence. This is where faith comes it.
It is internal, and many times people who believe in Hashem will question G-d.
There is also no real proof, despite detrators, that G-d doesn't exist. I know some of the supposed proofs, but I find logical faults with them as well. |
The Torah disagrees with you. The pasuk says
וידעת היום והשבות אל לבבך כי ד' הוא א' בשמים ממעל...
And you shall KNOW today ... that Hashem is G-d in the heavens above and the earth beneath. There is no other.
We have an obligation to KNOW about G-d's existence, not just to believe. |
Notice that the pasuk says "today." That's because it was speaking to a group of people who were either at Sinai personally (as many of them were) or else had plenty of external evidence that it occured (I.e. eyewitnesses). Today, there is no one alive who was physically present at Sinai and there are no living eyewitnesses to give testimony.
Tammy |
NO!!!
The Torah is talking to every Jew at every time.
I haven't checked this pasuk, but see the Rashi on the word hayom in the Shema, that it means we should regard these words as new every day.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
TammyTammy
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 8:14 am
| shalhevet wrote: | | TammyTammy wrote: | | shalhevet wrote: | | HindaRochel wrote: | I think a lot of people here are misunderstanding Tammy. She is not arguing against the Torah, she is arguing against the idea that there is an uncontestable proof that Hashem exists and that we received Torah m'Sinai. And I happen to agree with her. She is correct; most proofs can be invalidated, which is why I think they shouldn't be begun. A wise child will in fact question the proofs which will simply lead to greater questions.
My feeling is it is best to simply tell a questioning child that we haven't any proof that G-d exists, that these and these are strong evidence for a creator, but there is, at least not yet, any absolute proof of Hashem's existence. This is where faith comes it.
It is internal, and many times people who believe in Hashem will question G-d.
There is also no real proof, despite detrators, that G-d doesn't exist. I know some of the supposed proofs, but I find logical faults with them as well. |
The Torah disagrees with you. The pasuk says
וידעת היום והשבות אל לבבך כי ד' הוא א' בשמים ממעל...
And you shall KNOW today ... that Hashem is G-d in the heavens above and the earth beneath. There is no other.
We have an obligation to KNOW about G-d's existence, not just to believe. |
Notice that the pasuk says "today." That's because it was speaking to a group of people who were either at Sinai personally (as many of them were) or else had plenty of external evidence that it occured (I.e. eyewitnesses). Today, there is no one alive who was physically present at Sinai and there are no living eyewitnesses to give testimony.
Tammy |
NO!!!
The Torah is talking to every Jew at every time.
|
How do you know that? There are parts of the Torah that are meant for only a specific time and place and then have no practical applicability beyond that scope. How do you know that this isn't one of those places?
| Quote: |
I haven't checked this pasuk, but see the Rashi on the word hayom in the Shema, that it means we should regard these words as new every day. |
That's right -- but that "hayom" doesn't equal the other "hayom." Or are you going to argue that every instance of the word "hayom" really means everyday instead of today? Just becuase in one instance it is interpreted to mean that (although, in reality, the basic meaning of the verse is that HaShem only commanded us on THAT day -- even if the application of those commandments continues to apply through the ages), it doesn't mean that you can start saying that every "hayom" has to mean that it is talking about everyday throughout history.
Tammy
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
Nicole
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 8:40 am
I don't really have patience to read through this whole thread, so I don't know if what I'm about to say has already been said, excuse me if it has. But I once heard the argument from a different direction:
How do you know that George Washington existed? (along the lines of whoever said that we can't prove ANYTHING, really!) We have "documents" and "history books" etc- but they could have all been fabricated. But basically, since all of the USA, or even all of the world discusses George Washington and believes that he existed, he must have.
Obviously, there are probs with this- as there are tons of ppl who believe that yoshke was the messiah, and we know that he WASN"T. But one way to solve this is that I've never (yet) met anyone who doesn't believe that Washington existed. Nobody's denying him. Why, then, do ppl deny G-d?
While Washington was alive, thousands of ppl saw/knew of him- and his existance has been passed down through the generations. Also - thousands of us "saw" and "knew of" Hashem at har sinai, and we've passed that knowledge down.
What's to deny?
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
TzenaRena
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 8:41 am
| Tammy wrote: | No, of course I don't doubt it. But that's because there is far more external evidence that the Magna Carta was signed in 1215, that the Roman Empire existed, that the Inquisition happened and that Queen Elizabeth reigned than one book simply saying it was so. However, for the claim that there were 600K men at Sinai, there is NO external evidence outside of the Torah.
And again, I want to stress, (especially for the amother above), I DO believe in Sinai and Torah Min HaShamayim. But the Kuzari proof does not stand up to logical scrutiny. Saying I don't believe in the proof does not equal saying that I don't believe in the Torah. |
Tammy, I'm mammash impressed with your Yiras Shomayim.  (ever heard of the big Yarei Shomayim who was makpid not to make a brocho with Hashem's name, in case He {ch"v} doesn't exist, it might be a brocho l'vatala!)
If you believe in Torah min haShomayim, then you believe what it says in Torah She'bal Peh, that everything that a talmid vosik will be mechadesh, was given to Moshe from Sinai. Someone like the Kuzari, who's work was accepted bchol tefutzos Yisroel, and one of the Rishonim "rishonim k'malachim" is beyond doubt a "talmid vosik". His words are min hashomayim, and if you have doubts about that, they are doubts in Toras Hashem.
as it says Devarim 32:47"ki lo davar reik hu mikem" "it is not an empty teaching for (lit. from) you. " that is, if there is a davar reik - an empty teaching, it is "mikem" from you! the emptiness is within/from the person who can't accept it, doubts it.
Now, your point that what the Kuzari writes about the 600,000 Jews, who witnessed the giving of the Torah and you need external evidence to be proof: that IS the external evidence that you claim it's not. The proof is the very existence of the Jewish nation, all keeping the same mitzvos, and having the same Torah.
The Jews of certain communities were isolated from the rest of Jewry for hundreds, even thousands of years, as the Jews of Yemen. when the world became more accessible through travel, they found that the Sifrei Torah in those places, (aside from external things as how the Torah is wrapped or covered) were identical to the ones on the other side of the world, down to the last letter, there are more than 350,000 letters in the Torah. This was before the age of printing presses, when Chumashim could be mass-produced and distributed, during an age when every sefer was inscribed and copied by hand from another, and the possibility of error creeping in, changes being made would be strong.
Yet, the very same, identical Torah, down to the last letter!
Btw, the Lubavitcher Rebbe does cite this Kuzari as a proof in an answer to a college students who asked a certain question. I think you will agree that if the Rebbe uses this proof, it cannot be that it's on a shaky premise rationally speaking, that it's not a "take it or leave it, either you believe it or don't believe" kind of answer.
Last edited by TzenaRena on Tue, Aug 07 2007, 8:57 am; edited 1 time in total
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
TammyTammy
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 8:56 am
| TzenaRena wrote: | | Tammy wrote: | No, of course I don't doubt it. But that's because there is far more external evidence that the Magna Carta was signed in 1215, that the Roman Empire existed, that the Inquisition happened and that Queen Elizabeth reigned than one book simply saying it was so. However, for the claim that there were 600K men at Sinai, there is NO external evidence outside of the Torah.
And again, I want to stress, (especially for the amother above), I DO believe in Sinai and Torah Min HaShamayim. But the Kuzari proof does not stand up to logical scrutiny. Saying I don't believe in the proof does not equal saying that I don't believe in the Torah. |
Tammy, I'm mammash impressed with your Yiras Shomayim. (ever heard of the big Yarei Shomayim who was makpid not to make a brocho with Hashem's name, in case He {ch"v} doesn't exist, it might be a brocho l'vatala!)
|
Ha ha.
| Quote: |
If you believe in Torah min haShomayim, then you believe what it says in Torah She'bal Peh, that everything that a talmid vosik will be mechadesh, was given to Moshe from Sinai. Someone like the Kuzari, who's work was accepted bchol tefutzos Yisroel, and one of the Rishonim "rishonim k'malachim" is beyond doubt a "talmid vosik". His words are min hashomayim, and if you have doubts about that, they are doubts in Toras Hashem.
|
I don't want to get into an argument of what was given at Sinai and what is Torah Min HaShamayim. That argument exists in another thread. Suffice it to say that I don't hold that the Kuzari was given at Sinai.
All of this is really beside the point. You're just attacking my statement that I believe in TMS, and not the issues I raised. If you think that I am an apikorus and don't believe in TMS, fine, it's your perogative to believe it. But, again, that doesn't make it true.
| Quote: |
as it says Devarim 32:47"ki lo davar reik hu mikem" "it is not an empty teaching for (lit. from) you. " that is, if there is a davar reik - an empty teaching, it is "mikem" from you! the emptiness is within/from the person who can't accept it, doubts it.
|
Again, what are you talking about? I'm not doubting the Torah, I'm simply pointing out that the Kuzari "proof" is false. Since when does that equate to saying that I don't accept the Torah??
| Quote: |
Now, your point that what the Kuzari writes about the 600'000 Jews being the proof is the external evidence that you claim it's not. That is the very existence of the Jewish nation, all keeping the same mitzvos, and having the same Torah.
The Jews of certain communities were isolated from the rest of Jewry for hundreds, even thousands of years, as the Jews of Yemen. when the world became more accessible through travel, they found that the Sifrei Torah, (aside from external things as how the Torah is wrapped or covered) were identical to the ones on the other side of the world, down to the last letter, there are more than 350,000 letters in the Torah. This was before the age of printing presses, when Chumashim could be mass-produced and distributed, during an age when every sefer was inscribed and copied by hand from another, and the possibility of error creeping in, changes being made would be strong.
Yet, the very same, identical Torah, down to the last letter!
|
Actually, you're wrong. The Yemenite sifrei Torah *are* different than the "standard" ones in nine places.
| Quote: |
Btw, the Lubavitcher Rebbe does cite this Kuzari as a proof in an answer to a college students who asked a certain question. I think you will agree that if the Rebbe uses this proof, it cannot be that it's on a shaky premise rationally speaking, that it's not a "take it or leave it, either you believe it or don't believe" kind of answer. |
Just because a Rebbe accepted something as a formal proof doesn't mean that I have to. I have objections -- I think the proof is flawed. Or are we simply to close our minds and pretend that the flaws don't exist? Perhaps the Rebbe didn't think of my objections?
(And I don't want to get into an argument on whether or not the Rebbe was infallable or not... I'm working on the assumption that he wasn't. If you believe that he was, then fine, for you it's a proof. But it's not for me.)
Tammy
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
greenfire
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 9:03 am
| TzenaRena wrote: |
Btw, the Lubavitcher Rebbe does cite this Kuzari as a proof in an answer to a college students who asked a certain question. I think you will agree that if the Rebbe uses this proof, it cannot be that it's on a shaky premise rationally speaking, that it's not a "take it or leave it, either you believe it or don't believe" kind of answer. |
not everybody follows the Lubavitcher Rebbe ... so how are you gonna bring that as proof of anything ?!?!?!
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
TammyTammy
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 9:22 am
| Nicole wrote: | I don't really have patience to read through this whole thread, so I don't know if what I'm about to say has already been said, excuse me if it has. But I once heard the argument from a different direction:
How do you know that George Washington existed? (along the lines of whoever said that we can't prove ANYTHING, really!) We have "documents" and "history books" etc- but they could have all been fabricated. But basically, since all of the USA, or even all of the world discusses George Washington and believes that he existed, he must have.
Obviously, there are probs with this- as there are tons of ppl who believe that yoshke was the messiah, and we know that he WASN"T. But one way to solve this is that I've never (yet) met anyone who doesn't believe that Washington existed. Nobody's denying him. Why, then, do ppl deny G-d?
While Washington was alive, thousands of ppl saw/knew of him- and his existance has been passed down through the generations. Also - thousands of us "saw" and "knew of" Hashem at har sinai, and we've passed that knowledge down.
What's to deny? |
Nicole, I answered this objection on this very page.
I don't believe that George Washington existed because I was told about him in a textbook. I know that he existed because there is plenty of evidence from multiple sources that he existed. There are birth and death records. There are records from his military service. There are presidential notes and papers. There are congressional records. There is correspondence from him and to him from his contemporaries. There are accounts of him written by people who knew him personally, and there are probably several other sources that I can't think of off the top of my head. The amount of evidence from a multitude of sources that George Washington existed is overwhelming.
On the other hand, the only source of information on Matan Torah is... in the Torah itself.
Tammy
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
shalhevet
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 9:26 am
| greenfire wrote: | | TzenaRena wrote: |
Btw, the Lubavitcher Rebbe does cite this Kuzari as a proof in an answer to a college students who asked a certain question. I think you will agree that if the Rebbe uses this proof, it cannot be that it's on a shaky premise rationally speaking, that it's not a "take it or leave it, either you believe it or don't believe" kind of answer. |
not everybody follows the Lubavitcher Rebbe ... so how are you gonna bring that as proof of anything ?!?!?! |
Oh come on, all the rest of TR's post was excellent, logical and correct. She didn't use his words as a proof, just added that he also cited the Kuzari.
(Is there anyone here who thinks that I follow the Lubavitcher Rebbe?  )
Oh, and TR, your joke was just  .
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
TzenaRena
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 9:40 am
| Quote: | | Actually, you're wrong. The Yemenite sifrei Torah *are* different than the "standard" ones in nine places. | really? Wow, you got me! (Not!) Perhaps you can cite them for us.
there are other places besides Yemen, btw. And even if only nine differences were found amid 305,000 some letters, is it still not the strongest proof?
| Quote: | | I'm simply pointing out that the Kuzari "proof" is false. Since when does that equate to saying that I don't accept the Torah? | ? Since the Rambam wrote that in HILCHOS TESHUVA 3:8.
Tell me, if you had a kuzari, that was worn and tattered, would you put it into sheimos for genizah, or throw it in the trash (ch"v)? Do you have to say birchas haTorah before you learn Kuzari, or not?
And now you're saying openly that it's false!  But remember, davar reik hu mikem.
| Quote: | | Just because a Rebbe accepted something as a formal proof doesn't mean that I have to. I have objections -- I think the proof is flawed. Or are we simply to close our minds and pretend that the flaws don't exist? Perhaps the Rebbe didn't think of my objections? | A person with Yiras shomayim asks: I don't understand how this proof works, when such and such appears to contradict it. Can anyone explain this to me?
Saying that you have objections is pathetically arrogant. Can you and your puny logic (sorry, but I mean any of us, you included) really account at all in comparison to the giant Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi, author of the Kuzari, composer of piyutim in our tefillos, one of the greatest sages of our nation, Divinely inspired with Ruach HaKodesh?
Yes. Questions are fine, objections are not.
To say that perhaps the Rebbe didn't anticipate your questions reveals profound ignorance of who the Rebbe is. It can be safely assumed that you haven't learned even one of his sichos, or explanations on any part of the Torah. From someone who has broad knowledge in such a variety of subjects, especially history, Jewish and secular, that's quite surprising.
Last edited by TzenaRena on Tue, Aug 07 2007, 9:46 am; edited 1 time in total
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
amother
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 9:46 am
Tammy, I don't know you and you don't know me, but something tells me that you're a believer. You're probably a believer because of something. What is that something?
Personally, I have many doubts as a result of the death and destruction of the Holocaust, etc., and I follow the Torah, as best as I can, because I was born into it and I personally enjoy the practice of Judaism.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
TammyTammy
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 9:58 am
| TzenaRena wrote: | | Quote: | | Actually, you're wrong. The Yemenite sifrei Torah *are* different than the "standard" ones in nine places. | really? Wow, you got me! (Not!) Perhaps you can cite them for us.
|
I'm not a sofer, so no I can't. But if you google for it, you'll find numerous references to it, including sources such as Aish.
| Quote: |
there are other places besides Yemen, btw. And even if only nine differences were found amid 305,000 some letters, is it still not the strongest proof?
|
No, it's not. You based it on being the same letter-for-letter.
In any event, the fact that something is faithfully copied from one generation to the next does not mean that the contents of it are necessarily true.
| Quote: |
| Quote: | | I'm simply pointing out that the Kuzari "proof" is false. Since when does that equate to saying that I don't accept the Torah? | ? Since the Rambam wrote that in HILCHOS TESHUVA 3:8.
Tell me, if you had a kuzari, that was worn and tattered, would you put it into sheimos for genizah, or throw it in the trash (ch"v)? Do you have to say birchas haTorah before you learn Kuzari, or not?
|
Lo Bashamayim hi. We can now add things to the Torah.
Or, let me put it this way... if you think that everything was given at Sinai, do you think that young R. Tarphon was learning Mishna in the Beis Midrash one day and came across a mishna where he argues something with R. Akiva that he said to himself - "Oh! I guess I'm going to have to hold like this when I get older!"
Furthermore, in another thread, Motek made the point that historical narratives and the like that are included in the Mishna/Gemara, etc. were NOT given at Sinai. Since the Kuzari purports to be a discussion, it's a historical event and therefore was not given at Sinai.
| Quote: |
And now you're saying openly that it's false! But remember, davar reik hu mikem.
|
I'm saying that I don't find the proof convincing and that I find it flawed. If you think that that makes me an "empty person," then that's your prerogative. However, that doesn't make it true.
| Quote: |
| Quote: | | Just because a Rebbe accepted something as a formal proof doesn't mean that I have to. I have objections -- I think the proof is flawed. Or are we simply to close our minds and pretend that the flaws don't exist? Perhaps the Rebbe didn't think of my objections? | A person with Yiras shomayim asks: I don't understand how this proof works, when such and such appears to contradict it. Can anyone explain this to me?
|
Isn't the point of a proof that it should be understood? If not, then what's the point. A proof that can't be understood is worthless.
| Quote: |
Saying that you have objections is pathetically arrogant. Can you and your puny logic (sorry, but I mean any of us, you included) really account at all in comparison to the giant Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi, author of the Kuzari, composer of piyutim in our tefillos, one of the greatest sages of our nation, Divinely inspired with Ruach HaKodesh?
|
Obviously, if the proof hasn't convinced me, then I have objections. Or do you suggest that we just shut off our minds when we observe something that is contrary to what is written? I'm sorry, I can't shut off my intellect like that... and asking young people to do so will simply turn them away from yiddishkeit in the future.
| Quote: |
When you write that perhaps the Rebbe didn't anticipate your questions, you are revealing profound ignorance of who the Rebbe is. It can be safely assumed that you haven't learned even one of his sichos, or explanations on any part of the Torah.
From someone who has broad knowledge in such a variety of subjects, especially history, Jewish and secular, that's quite surprising. |
Well, not being a member of Chabad, I'll state upfront that, no, I haven't read any of his sichos. Unfortunately, I can't follow every theological branch that has sprouted from Judaism... there just isn't enough time in the day. If you want to point me to where the Rebbe brings up the Kuzari proof and where he defends it, I'll be more than happy to give it a read.
In any event, just because someone is wise and intelligent, that does not mean that they are infallable or have thought through every single thing that they ever uttered. It is entirely possible that the Rebbe quoted it without thinking it through completely.
Tammy
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
TammyTammy
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 10:02 am
| amother wrote: | Tammy, I don't know you and you don't know me, but something tells me that you're a believer. You're probably a believer because of something. What is that something?
|
Despite what some in this thread think, I believe in Hashem. I believe in the Torah. I believe in Klal Yisroel's mission to the world. Just because I don't accept a proof that fails to stand up to logical scrutiny doesn't change that.
| Quote: |
Personally, I have many doubts as a result of the death and destruction of the Holocaust, etc., and I follow the Torah, as best as I can, because I was born into it and I personally enjoy the practice of Judaism. |
Having doubts is perfectly normal. Don't let anyone ever tell you otherwise. I have doubts about lots of things. But sometimes, as others have stated in this thread, you just have to make a leap of faith. I believe that God exists; even though I also believe that His existence is unprovable. I believe in Matan Torah, even though I have yet to find a solid logical proof for it.
Tammy
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
TammyTammy
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 10:11 am
Oh, and BTW, Tzena...
The ad hominem attacks really don't prove anything. The Kuzari proof stands or falls on it's own merits, regardless of whether or not I'm an "empty person," arrogant, or lack Yiras Shomayim.
I would appreciate it if you stick the issues and not attack me personally.
Thanks,
Tammy
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
HindaRochel
|
Tue, Aug 07 2007, 10:26 am
| TammyTammy wrote: |
| Quote: | | Just because a Rebbe accepted something as a formal proof doesn't mean that I have to. I have objections -- I think the proof is flawed. Or are we simply to close our minds and pretend that the flaws don't exist? Perhaps the Rebbe didn't think of my objections? | A person with Yiras shomayim asks: I don't understand how this proof works, when such and such appears to contradict it. Can anyone explain this to me?
|
| Quote: | | Isn't the point of a proof that it should be understood? If not, then what's the point. A proof that can't be understood is worthless. |
Just a small quibble. A proof needs to be intelligibly constructed, and stand up to falsification, it doesn't need to be understood, at least by everyone. It is possible for you to not understand a particular proof and the proof still stand. 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.
| Quote: |
Saying that you have objections is pathetically arrogant. Can you and your puny logic (sorry, but I mean any of us, you included) really account at all in comparison to the giant Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi, author of the Kuzari, composer of piyutim in our tefillos, one of the greatest sages of our nation, Divinely inspired with Ruach HaKodesh?
|
| Quote: | | Obviously, if the proof hasn't convinced me, then I have objections. Or do you suggest that we just shut off our minds when we observe something that is contrary to what is written? I'm sorry, I can't shut off my intellect like that... and asking young people to do so will simply turn them away from yiddishkeit in the future. |
And I think this is the crux of the matter. Tammy, much to the angst and anger of many, has shown that the proof is flawed. Others will have the same questions and reasoning skills and will also remain inconvinced of the matter.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
| Related Topics |
Replies |
Last Post |
|
|
Who typically pays for phone service for teen cell phone?
|
24 |
Fri, Apr 19 2024, 11:54 am  |
|
|
Best kosher phone for teen
|
2 |
Fri, Apr 19 2024, 6:43 am |
|
|
Help! Still need Yom Tov shoes for my young teen!
|
13 |
Fri, Apr 19 2024, 6:23 am |
|
|
Teen Shabbos shoes - Amazon or online
|
4 |
Tue, Apr 16 2024, 10:13 am |
|
|
Shabbos robe for teen dd
|
17 |
Tue, Apr 16 2024, 3:40 am |
|
|
Imamother may earn commission when you use our links to make a purchase.
© 2024 Imamother.com - All rights reserved
|  |
 |
|
 |
|
|
