Proof of Hashem and Torah for Children

Mommyg8

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 10:38 pm

amother wrote:

None of the standard proofs is totally perfect. Some work perfectly for some people, but none stands up to rigorous argument. We don't have to go through them one by one. I think that's been done already.

It's fine to say, I believe because (insert favorite proof here) but at the end of the day it's a leap of faith.

"Totally perfect" and "flimsy" are quite some distance apart, don't you think? So please don't write FLIMSY when you mean, like I said, not 100%.

We will never have a 100% proof, because like I said, we can't SEE G-d. He's invisible.

amother

Dodgerblue

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 10:55 pm

Mommyg8 wrote:

Either a proof works or it doesn't. There's no in between. An umbrella with a small hole also lets in the rain.

Since we agree that no proof is one hundred percent, what's the point of using a proof that isn't really convincing? Why not just say that logical proofs don't apply here?

Mommyg8

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:03 pm

amother wrote:

I'm completely not getting your logic. Why can't we say, borrowing the name of a title I have heard, that we have "Permission to believe?" There is no PROOF that the stars that we see in the sky are actually suns, that molecules are made of atoms, that black holes exist, or that antibiotics work. Yet no rational person will call these "flimsy proofs". Science has made excellent arguments that these things exist. Antibiotics work most of the time, so we say that it works. We don't say - "well, antibiotics don't always work, so maybe it was just random that the antibiotics worked those other times". We don't completely understand how electricity works, yet we know that it exists, nevertheless.

We may not understand the hows and whys of how the world was created, but we do see a world that WAS created, so we know that there must be a Creator. It's as simple as that.

shyshira

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:04 pm

Mommyg8 wrote:

we see that a world exists - we don't see that it was created.

edited to add... we may conclude that since the world that we see is so incredible and complex, it must have been created.

Last edited by shyshira on Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:06 pm; edited 1 time in total

Mommyg8

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:06 pm

shyshira wrote:

we see that a world exists - we don't see that it was created.

Maybe YOU don't, I do.

We see intricate ecosystems, cells and atoms of breathtaking complexity, etc. We see plan and purpose.

Just saw your edit - it seems our minds worked along the same lines Confused

...

amother

Dodgerblue

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:09 pm

Mommyg8 wrote:

Maybe YOU don't, I do.

And that's exactly the point. Not everyone is convinced by the proofs that convince you. And if you present those proofs as absolute truths, the child who is (reasonably enough) not convinced will now have no reason to believe anything at all.

Mommyg8

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:11 pm

amother wrote:

I have yet to meet ONE child who was not convinced by GOOD proofs, I don't mean make believe proofs. I'm sorry, but I'm calling your bluff.

shyshira

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:11 pm

Mommyg8 wrote:

...

perhaps.. maybe...

But you see - its a convincing argument, but its not a proof - and that's the point ima dodger is trying to make.

shyshira

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:17 pm

Mommyg8 wrote:

I have yet to meet ONE child who was not convinced by GOOD proofs, I don't mean make believe proofs. I'm sorry, but I'm calling your bluff.

I think we've met different children.

amother

Dodgerblue

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:21 pm

Mommyg8 wrote:

I have yet to meet ONE child who was not convinced by GOOD proofs, I don't mean make believe proofs. I'm sorry, but I'm calling your bluff.

Go ahead. I didn't find the "perfect" proofs compelling when I was a child. I found great comfort in realizing that I could just believe. There are inquisitive, questioning children out there, and I was one of them.

Mommyg8

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:23 pm

amother wrote:

I'll bet you didn't read Rejoice O Youth or Sing You Righteous when you were a kid. Read them, and then come back to me.

amother

Dodgerblue

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:37 pm

Mommyg8 wrote:

I'll bet you didn't read Rejoice O Youth or Sing You Righteous when you were a kid. Read them, and then come back to me.

Actually, we had them at home. And no, they didn't do it for me.

To repeat, if there were really one perfect proof, the whole world would believe. I'm glad these books worked for you, but don't assume that we all think alike.

tichellady

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:40 pm

I think this is more about a chinuch style. I’m gonna be honest and open with my kids when we get to these conversations. I am not afraid of Christianity and am happy to explain things without feeling like I need to be an expert.
I know people feel differently than me and so they will do things differently. It’s hard to tell the op what to do without knowing more.

In terms of the details, op, you can tell your daughter that there are all types of Christians and some who believe in the priest’s role in forgiveness but plenty who felt uncomfortable with the whole concept and that there was too much room for priests to abuse their power.

We have similar concepts of having an intermediary for the Teshuva process, we had karbonat that the cohanim did and the Yom Kippur avodah service. It would be nice to have a more physical way to feel atoned and forgiven. Some people feel that fasting does that, or tashlich. We do daven for the beit hamikdash and the return of Karbanot. Davening is our avodah today. We also daven in the plural form ( we have sinned etc) because we do believe that as a nation we are more powerful than as individuals

Mommyg8

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:43 pm

amother wrote:

You were a kid when you read them? Both books? All the pages? How old? Sorry, I'm not buying.

shyshira

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:44 pm

Mommyg8 wrote:

Did you read either of those books I mentioned earlier?

No. But just scanning what they cover - they doesn't contain proofs, "Rational Approaches to God's Existence and the Torah's Divine Origin" Which I'm fairly certain that I've heard/read.. because if it was a meritful approach - it would have been repeated.

Mommyg8

Sun, Jan 14 2018, 11:49 pm

shyshira wrote:

Some books have to be read, not scanned.

I think I said earlier that it is not possible to have proof, as G-d is not visible. But amother called these proofs "flimsy", we are having an argument over what the word flimsy means.