R
Rabbi
Guest
I see, I was worried you were going to close it down totally, haha! Thanks!
- Status
A
Atreju
Guest
This is a good example. The comprehensibility of the universe is not logical proof that it was created by a person. Nor is mathematics a proof of the creation of the universe by a person.
R
Rabbi
Guest
Nope. Mathematics, you can boil it down, is ultimate reality. Everything boils down to pure numbers, are words are just constructs to symbolize them.
Can I ask you something? Are you an atheist? If so, as many of your people parade the “I don’t know this, I don’t know that…” thesis… can I ask you: HOW DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING! How do you know there is no G-d? How do you know there is no after life? Did you receive a postcard lately from a guy saying, “Hey, they ain’t no after life”?
If you don’t know, it is better to ask someone who does. And the only reason we know is because of revelation, we did nothing special to earn it.
Can I ask you something? Are you an atheist? If so, as many of your people parade the “I don’t know this, I don’t know that…” thesis… can I ask you: HOW DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING! How do you know there is no G-d? How do you know there is no after life? Did you receive a postcard lately from a guy saying, “Hey, they ain’t no after life”?
If you don’t know, it is better to ask someone who does. And the only reason we know is because of revelation, we did nothing special to earn it.
A
Atreju
Guest
Numbers and mathematics are human constructs to describe reality.
I’m not an atheist, I have merely been cursed with the ability to understand what people are actually saying and so can represent atheist positions I think fairly honestly.
So I think most atheists would say they think God doesn’t exist for the same reason you dont think Thor exists, or that Valhalla exists. I mean, do you KNOW those dont exist? Have you gone to Utgard and checked? Maybe you should ask a pagan who does know.
I’m not an atheist, I have merely been cursed with the ability to understand what people are actually saying and so can represent atheist positions I think fairly honestly.
So I think most atheists would say they think God doesn’t exist for the same reason you dont think Thor exists, or that Valhalla exists. I mean, do you KNOW those dont exist? Have you gone to Utgard and checked? Maybe you should ask a pagan who does know.
N
niceatheist
Guest
And here we run up against the core problem with these debates. I pretty much reject your notion that there is an intent behind the way the human mind works. I don’t think our brains ever evolved for “truth” in any but the most immediate sense of the word (i.e. assessment of the local environment for risk and opportunity). Some of the most successful organisms on Earth don’t have brains at all. The sheer biomass of E. coli bacteria alone outweighs all animal life. intellect is one solution to a problem, nature has plenty of others.
And that’s likely where the two of sit. You approach the issue with a basic set of beliefs, and I approach it with another. I hope I can make you understand my world view, and that’s all I ask. But I think when you basically throw something like “atheism is an emotional state” at me, my most charitable interpretation is that you think I’m a rather silly and emotionally overwrought person. I certainly don’t feel that way about you, and I certainly wouldn’t throw something like that at you as if that were in fact a critique of your worldview.
And that’s likely where the two of sit. You approach the issue with a basic set of beliefs, and I approach it with another. I hope I can make you understand my world view, and that’s all I ask. But I think when you basically throw something like “atheism is an emotional state” at me, my most charitable interpretation is that you think I’m a rather silly and emotionally overwrought person. I certainly don’t feel that way about you, and I certainly wouldn’t throw something like that at you as if that were in fact a critique of your worldview.
R
Rabbi
Guest
Let me explain something to you. There was a Christian monk who chopped down that tree of Thor’s long ago and guess what… he wasn’t zapped by his thunder hammer! Wow, what a miracle, I guess!
No, we reject those gods because they were silly inventions. The Torah is not a silly invention. The Torah is truth, and not just because it says so, but because it’s obvious.
The point that Pythagoras was making is that numbers DO represent everything.
Even then, let’s switch it around: how does an atheist again knows that G-d doesn’t exist? Where does he get that secret knowledge from? Truth is subjective, to me, truth is different than it was to Hitler, or Obama, or Donald Trump. Everyone has his own truth! The Torah says that there is one truth, but it is relative based on the circumstances in arrives at.
And by the way, you are not cursed, it’s a blessing. G-d has granted you a mind like the Rambam, to analyse things. That’s a good thing! The Talmud teaches us to question everything, even G-d!
No, we reject those gods because they were silly inventions. The Torah is not a silly invention. The Torah is truth, and not just because it says so, but because it’s obvious.
The point that Pythagoras was making is that numbers DO represent everything.
Even then, let’s switch it around: how does an atheist again knows that G-d doesn’t exist? Where does he get that secret knowledge from? Truth is subjective, to me, truth is different than it was to Hitler, or Obama, or Donald Trump. Everyone has his own truth! The Torah says that there is one truth, but it is relative based on the circumstances in arrives at.
And by the way, you are not cursed, it’s a blessing. G-d has granted you a mind like the Rambam, to analyse things. That’s a good thing! The Talmud teaches us to question everything, even G-d!
R
Rabbi
Guest
My point is simple. There are many layers to reality, mathematics happens to be just one of them.
A
Atreju
Guest
lol, I like the way you talk, by the way.
Numbers do represent things (probably not everything), but just like words represent things. That doesn’t mean everything is words.
The Torah/Bible are not silly, I agree. But considering stories like Noah’s Ark, the 6 day creation, the Tower of Babel, God commanding genocide and the killing of non-virgin brides, and especially the popular literal interpretations of such things, it is quite natural to conclude that they are human inventions just like any other religion.
I don’t know anything about Thor’s tree, but wasn’t the temple in Jerusalem destroyed? People of all religious stripes have ways of explaining these things away.
Numbers do represent things (probably not everything), but just like words represent things. That doesn’t mean everything is words.
The Torah/Bible are not silly, I agree. But considering stories like Noah’s Ark, the 6 day creation, the Tower of Babel, God commanding genocide and the killing of non-virgin brides, and especially the popular literal interpretations of such things, it is quite natural to conclude that they are human inventions just like any other religion.
I don’t know anything about Thor’s tree, but wasn’t the temple in Jerusalem destroyed? People of all religious stripes have ways of explaining these things away.
N
niceatheist
Guest
Mathematics represents reality. It is not reality. It’s the old “is a rose a rose by any other name?”
As to your second question, I can only answer for myself. I don’t know God doesn’t exist. I have come to a personal conclusion that such a being is probably not necessary, but I can’t prove such a being does not exist, and fully concede I may very well be completely wrong.
As to your second question, I can only answer for myself. I don’t know God doesn’t exist. I have come to a personal conclusion that such a being is probably not necessary, but I can’t prove such a being does not exist, and fully concede I may very well be completely wrong.
R
Rabbi
Guest
No, let me explain again. This is pure nonsense here, you can’t compare the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash (the First Temple) to Thor’s little stump. They are totally different and were destroyed for very different reasons, and to prove different points.
Funny that you mention it, but Kabbalists do believe that Hebrew was the blueprint for all creation!
I explained above why traditional Judaism never viewed the flood as global. The 6 day creation is also a metaphor. Jews have never took it literally, not once in our history. And G-d doesn’t command genocide, you, out of all people should know this, but you haven’t read Tanakh! Opps! No wonder. Those who don’t read, don’t know. Joshua gave the people many options:
See? These biblical critics just never opened a page, that’s why they don’t know anything!
Funny that you mention it, but Kabbalists do believe that Hebrew was the blueprint for all creation!
I explained above why traditional Judaism never viewed the flood as global. The 6 day creation is also a metaphor. Jews have never took it literally, not once in our history. And G-d doesn’t command genocide, you, out of all people should know this, but you haven’t read Tanakh! Opps! No wonder. Those who don’t read, don’t know. Joshua gave the people many options:
- Convert to Judaism and stay,
- Leave the land peacefully
And lastly, 3) Fight for your evil ways.
See? These biblical critics just never opened a page, that’s why they don’t know anything!
R
Rabbi
Guest
Let me ask you this: what’s consciousness? Seriously? Where do we get it from? How? Is it neurons buzzing around in your head? No, that’s just a myth, and many neuroscientists, those who are honest at least, admit it. So what’s really in your brain? Four things, Iet me list them for you…
So its obvious there is a G-d, because where did this thing, consciousness, come from? Do you want me to prove to you it isn’t mere neuron functions? Ok, I’ll demonstrate that by a simple experiment and it’ll take no more than about ten seconds to prove it.
For ten seconds, I want you to do something very simple. Mentally, I want you to be totally silent. Don’t move, don’t behave. Just be aware of what’s coming to you. Ten seconds.
…Now, with tremendous confidence, I can assure you, if you indeed did this little exercise of mine, that what you’ve just experienced was not simply a way of talking about the brain… because you weren’t talking. This exercise wasn’t a way of behaving… because you didn’t behave. It underlines those. It is… that which comes before the talking, that which comes before the deliberate conscious behaving, etc. The West has overlooked this. They pretend as if the mind-body problem is already solved, but they’ve really just talked their way out of it for the past two centuries and it’s because of one reason…
Mind.
Behaviorists study the mind indirectly because they study patterns of behavior, so do brain scientists, cognero scientists, psychologists, etc. Where in the West is there a mainstream academia in which students and teachers alike study rigorously and religiously, the only observable substance we have direct access to? Where is it? I’ve searched, still search, and yet, I cannot find it. And the answer is simply because they haven’t done it, they’ve only studied things relating to mind, and perhaps the only place close to having done it correctly is… Asia, for the past 5,000 years, in a practice known the world over as… Buddhism, for the past 2,500 years. Now I’m not here to suggest that the Eastern method has done better than the Western one in trying to outweigh and understand this problem, because no one understands it, and to say that the West somehow understands mind is nothing more than plain egotism. So we can’t say that the study of consciousness is simply another way of talking about the brain, because it isn’t.
Of course, we all know that Buddhism came out of Judaism. Our traditions are clear about that. But one thing is sure: you have to seriously confront this, not run from it, because the Eastern method has created rigorous methods and refined first-person inquiry into the mind, which complements the glorious and enduring achievement of objective science, the legacy of the West
So if there is no G-d, where does consciousness come from? You have any idea? You have the revelation which will stun the scientific word?
- Fat
- Water
- Protein
- Electricity
So its obvious there is a G-d, because where did this thing, consciousness, come from? Do you want me to prove to you it isn’t mere neuron functions? Ok, I’ll demonstrate that by a simple experiment and it’ll take no more than about ten seconds to prove it.
For ten seconds, I want you to do something very simple. Mentally, I want you to be totally silent. Don’t move, don’t behave. Just be aware of what’s coming to you. Ten seconds.
…Now, with tremendous confidence, I can assure you, if you indeed did this little exercise of mine, that what you’ve just experienced was not simply a way of talking about the brain… because you weren’t talking. This exercise wasn’t a way of behaving… because you didn’t behave. It underlines those. It is… that which comes before the talking, that which comes before the deliberate conscious behaving, etc. The West has overlooked this. They pretend as if the mind-body problem is already solved, but they’ve really just talked their way out of it for the past two centuries and it’s because of one reason…
Mind.
Behaviorists study the mind indirectly because they study patterns of behavior, so do brain scientists, cognero scientists, psychologists, etc. Where in the West is there a mainstream academia in which students and teachers alike study rigorously and religiously, the only observable substance we have direct access to? Where is it? I’ve searched, still search, and yet, I cannot find it. And the answer is simply because they haven’t done it, they’ve only studied things relating to mind, and perhaps the only place close to having done it correctly is… Asia, for the past 5,000 years, in a practice known the world over as… Buddhism, for the past 2,500 years. Now I’m not here to suggest that the Eastern method has done better than the Western one in trying to outweigh and understand this problem, because no one understands it, and to say that the West somehow understands mind is nothing more than plain egotism. So we can’t say that the study of consciousness is simply another way of talking about the brain, because it isn’t.
Of course, we all know that Buddhism came out of Judaism. Our traditions are clear about that. But one thing is sure: you have to seriously confront this, not run from it, because the Eastern method has created rigorous methods and refined first-person inquiry into the mind, which complements the glorious and enduring achievement of objective science, the legacy of the West
So if there is no G-d, where does consciousness come from? You have any idea? You have the revelation which will stun the scientific word?
Last edited:
A
Atreju
Guest
So I’m going to answer as an atheist would, just to demonstrate that there is an argument to be had and that things are not patently obvious.
It is not irrational for someone to read this and conclude that the God described is not one worth worshiping or even really looking into.
The specific is less important than the ability of humans to explain away unfortunate events.
“Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’”
It is not irrational for someone to read this and conclude that the God described is not one worth worshiping or even really looking into.
A similar offer made in Germany circa 1930s
God commanded Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. Granted, he withdrew the command at the last moment, but it is noteworthy that Abraham did not think that command was out of God’s character. And certainly it is a strange logic to say “these people kill their children, and are therefore evil, let us go and kill them and their children”.
I think you misunderstood the point, which was about commandments in Leviticus to execute women who are found not to be virgins on their wedding night.
It seems the opposite may be the case.
Last edited:
A
Atreju
Guest
This is the fundamental problem with this and every logical argument for the existence of God. There is a gigantic jump in logic here. This is called a “god of the gaps” argument and it is a logical fallacy. You can’t just say “I don’t know why X, happens, therefore it must be God”.
And to someone with some very basic logical training, as many in math and science have, it is very obvious. It is in fact exactly like finding your car keys in an unexpected place and saying “I don’t know why my car keys are here, God must have moved them over here.”
Probably 90% of the “logical arguments” for the existence of God make this exact mistake. Bill O’Reilly famously made it, “Tide goes in, Tide goes out, you can’t explain that, therefore God.”
R
Rabbi
Guest
First, I want to know where this offer from Germany came from. Please tell me. 6 million Jews died. Where was this great “peace offering” of the Nazis?
It wasn’t there. Period. As far as the Amalekites are concerned, you’ve again showed yourself to be another… let’s just say another one to take things out of context. Fair? Well, you can’t do that! Do you know what the Amalekites did to the Hebrews in the Torah? And no matter its G-d’s voice or our’s, or Moshe’s… so what. When Japan attacked America at Pearl Harbor, what did the Americans do? They dropped a bomb. When a whole people is bent on your destruction, the Torah says we should destroy them back, if they won’t make peace. You HAVE to understand this!
As far as the destruction of the First Temple, again, read the context. You can’t know what the Bible teaches by reading a single verse, I’m sorry. Many have tried… haha, and we know where they ended up! In the funny farm.
Now, do you know anything about the near death of Yitzhak? Of course not. That’s why you think G-d “ordered” his death. You don’t understand that it was a test. I must admit, I thought you’d know more of the Bible before you attack it, but I guess what can I expect from someone who doesn’t read it in Hebrew whenever time allows? The point with Avram is that he followed his faith, he was willing to do what it takes to please G-d, who wouldn’t! Of course G-d didn’t want him to kill his son, of course, that’s just common sense. So you can’t blame either of them.
If you’re so right, ask an electrophysiologist how the sinoatrial note knows to create the first electrical impulse in the heart to start life. No one knows, it isn’t intrinsic, and though one could argue that we’re using the wrong vocabulary in “know,” life isn’t akin to me starting my car and then suggesting that the car just “knew” to start, we’re talking about life, not immaterial objects.
One last thing, and I’m going to use a Buddhist example because it highlights my point.
It wasn’t there. Period. As far as the Amalekites are concerned, you’ve again showed yourself to be another… let’s just say another one to take things out of context. Fair? Well, you can’t do that! Do you know what the Amalekites did to the Hebrews in the Torah? And no matter its G-d’s voice or our’s, or Moshe’s… so what. When Japan attacked America at Pearl Harbor, what did the Americans do? They dropped a bomb. When a whole people is bent on your destruction, the Torah says we should destroy them back, if they won’t make peace. You HAVE to understand this!
As far as the destruction of the First Temple, again, read the context. You can’t know what the Bible teaches by reading a single verse, I’m sorry. Many have tried… haha, and we know where they ended up! In the funny farm.
Now, do you know anything about the near death of Yitzhak? Of course not. That’s why you think G-d “ordered” his death. You don’t understand that it was a test. I must admit, I thought you’d know more of the Bible before you attack it, but I guess what can I expect from someone who doesn’t read it in Hebrew whenever time allows? The point with Avram is that he followed his faith, he was willing to do what it takes to please G-d, who wouldn’t! Of course G-d didn’t want him to kill his son, of course, that’s just common sense. So you can’t blame either of them.
If you’re so right, ask an electrophysiologist how the sinoatrial note knows to create the first electrical impulse in the heart to start life. No one knows, it isn’t intrinsic, and though one could argue that we’re using the wrong vocabulary in “know,” life isn’t akin to me starting my car and then suggesting that the car just “knew” to start, we’re talking about life, not immaterial objects.
One last thing, and I’m going to use a Buddhist example because it highlights my point.
R
Rabbi
Guest
There is a very famous parable about the blind men and the elephant. According to the parable, a king gathered together a group of blind men, and he took them to the elephant; such a creature these men have never touched before, nor heard about, and they respectfully touched the head, ear, tusk, trunk, body, tail, etc. Then each man described to the king personally what he thought he had felt, and the answers varied for each one. One said he thought it was a pot, another a plow, yet another a winnowing basket, a granary, a brush, etc. Each man perceived something differently based on the knowledge (touch), which he used empirically to deceiver what he was feeling. As the story goes, the men began to quarrel with each other, accusing each other of deception and misunderstanding as to what an “elephant” really is! Finally, they came to blows over the matter. So what was the point? The Buddha said that these men, conditioned by ignorance of sight and true knowledge of the matter, saw reality differently, but nonetheless, true… and this is EXACTLY the problem of today’s mathematicians, cosmologists, and physicists! They all think they’ve got the only truth and that there’s no room for the supernatural… but they’re wrong.
And if you think for a moment that these silly Bible critics no more than me… haha, just ask them to explain to you what Jeremiah was talking about when he mentioned the “lying pen of the scribe.” Have fun, because I’ve read their “scholarly” articles, and they proves themselves to be complete idiots; you’ll be shocked to learn how little they understand.
P.S., you need to do more than gloss over biblical history. Read the Talmud, it says that there was hardly EVER a stoning. Hardly ever. Why, I also wrote extensively on this issue and will get back to you on it later. Just know for know that no one was ever stoned for anything because the mountain of evidence to prove a sin (to stone a person) was just to high, but that, of course, only matters if the Talmud matters anything to historical data, which we, as Jews, think it does.
And if you think for a moment that these silly Bible critics no more than me… haha, just ask them to explain to you what Jeremiah was talking about when he mentioned the “lying pen of the scribe.” Have fun, because I’ve read their “scholarly” articles, and they proves themselves to be complete idiots; you’ll be shocked to learn how little they understand.
P.S., you need to do more than gloss over biblical history. Read the Talmud, it says that there was hardly EVER a stoning. Hardly ever. Why, I also wrote extensively on this issue and will get back to you on it later. Just know for know that no one was ever stoned for anything because the mountain of evidence to prove a sin (to stone a person) was just to high, but that, of course, only matters if the Talmud matters anything to historical data, which we, as Jews, think it does.
A
Atreju
Guest
I think if America killed purposely killed every man, woman and child in Japan in retaliation for Pearl Harbor, we would be seen as the one of the most evil nations in the history of the world.
R
Rabbi
Guest
This is the fundamental problem with this and every logical argument for the disproved existence of G-d. There is a gigantic jump in logic here. This is called a “no god of the gaps” argument and it is a logical fallacy. You can’t just say “I don’t know why X, happens, therefore there must be no G-d”.
I’m afraid its not that simple. We don’t just jump to conclusions, but why did generations contemplate G-d for centuries? The simply reason they did, means something.
I’m afraid its not that simple. We don’t just jump to conclusions, but why did generations contemplate G-d for centuries? The simply reason they did, means something.
R
Rabbi
Guest
And America killed 80,000 men, women, and children.
R
Rabbi
Guest
And if you believe the Bible’s just a book, what’s the big deal? It is more than that, and I have to go now, will be back later to finish this.
And no, they will never discover what consciousness is, so what is it?
And no, they will never discover what consciousness is, so what is it?
K
kainosktisis
Guest
Genesis 10 NABRE - USCCB (Part 1 of 2):
32 These are the clans of Noah’s sons, according to their origins and by their nations. From these the nations of the earth branched out after the flood.
Commentary Following Ch. 10:
“This chapter classifies the various peoples known to the ancient Israelites; it is theologically important as stressing the basic family unity of all peoples on earth. It is sometimes called the Table of the Nations. The relationship between the various peoples is based on linguistic, geographic, or political grounds (v. 31). In general, the descendants of Japheth (vv. 2–5) are the peoples of the Indo-European languages to the north and west of Mesopotamia and Syria; the descendants of Ham (vv. 6–20) are the Hamitic-speaking peoples of northern Africa; and the descendants of Shem (vv. 21–31) are the Semitic-speaking peoples of Mesopotamia, Syria and Arabia. But there are many exceptions to this rule; the Semitic-speaking peoples of Canaan are considered descendants of Ham, because at one time they were subject to Hamitic Egypt (vv. 6, 15–19). This chapter is generally considered to be a composite from the Yahwist source (vv. 8–19, 21, 24–30) and the Priestly source (vv. 1–7, 20, 22–23, 31–32). Presumably that is why certain tribes of Arabia are listed under both Ham (v. 7) and Shem (vv. 26–28).”
32 These are the clans of Noah’s sons, according to their origins and by their nations. From these the nations of the earth branched out after the flood.
Commentary Following Ch. 10:
“This chapter classifies the various peoples known to the ancient Israelites; it is theologically important as stressing the basic family unity of all peoples on earth. It is sometimes called the Table of the Nations. The relationship between the various peoples is based on linguistic, geographic, or political grounds (v. 31). In general, the descendants of Japheth (vv. 2–5) are the peoples of the Indo-European languages to the north and west of Mesopotamia and Syria; the descendants of Ham (vv. 6–20) are the Hamitic-speaking peoples of northern Africa; and the descendants of Shem (vv. 21–31) are the Semitic-speaking peoples of Mesopotamia, Syria and Arabia. But there are many exceptions to this rule; the Semitic-speaking peoples of Canaan are considered descendants of Ham, because at one time they were subject to Hamitic Egypt (vv. 6, 15–19). This chapter is generally considered to be a composite from the Yahwist source (vv. 8–19, 21, 24–30) and the Priestly source (vv. 1–7, 20, 22–23, 31–32). Presumably that is why certain tribes of Arabia are listed under both Ham (v. 7) and Shem (vv. 26–28).”
Last edited:
- Status