Tag Info

New answers tagged

0

The problem of defining God is that a definition is a border that describes the object of being only from here and until there. Every definition is giving boundaries. When you "grasp" a concept, you surrounded it with boundaries and you know where it comes in, where it ends, what is before, and what is after. God is endless, and therefore indescribable. He ...


-1

God exists in a different way than we do. Imagine in your mind a blue elephant. Now lift that elephant in your mind. Is that considered an act of might? maybe to the elephant, but to you it is not. so too, every attribute we ascribe to God is relative to our plane of reality, not His. this elephant analogy is not so far off as the Tanya Shaar Yichud ...


1

They are not so much something we know about G-d as behaviors we know G-d wants us to emulate. This is the thesis of Moreh Nevuchim 1:54. He then uses this to explain the 13 Attributes of Mercy that Hashem revealed to Moshe and concludes, "We have gone too far away from the subject of this chapter, but we have shown why it has been considered sufficient to ...


1

the shaar yichud ch.10 says it is impossible for us to grasp God as He is. so really He cannot be discussed in any kind of meaningful way. but we can know a bit about Him (for example that He possesses wisdom) by what He reveals to us on our level. Therefore, you should exert your mind until you know the Creator through the evidences of His works and ...


3

Rambam famously adopts the approach of negative-theology (see Rabbi Meir Triebitz's lengthy article about it here). That is, Rambam opines that we cannot speak about God in terms of what he (it) is, but rather what he (it) is not. That is, we can speak of God not being corporeal, not being limited, etc. Also noteworthy, is the Gemara Megillah 18a אסור ...


-1

The Rambam seems to hold it's permitted to "give a definition of G-d": consider that he spends much of chapter 1 of Y'sode Hatora doing so.


8

I have also thought about the same question and have come up with seems most logical to me. I too think that talking about "God living" in the Beit HaMikdash causes many unnecessary misconceptions, So I think a better way of explaining it is like this: The Temple was not a house but rather a meeting place, like an office where the "CEO sitting on the other ...


5

The sources are vast, ranging from the Tanakh itself, through Tannaitic and Amoraic eras, and into the Geonic era (since you specifically asked for sources pre-rishonim). The Shema (Devarim 6:4) is of course the flagship statement of Jewish monotheistic faith (see also Devarim 4:35 and others). See also Yeshayahu 44:24 and 45:12; Tehillim 135:6; Daniel ...


4

The shema? But seriously, see hagiga 15a. Acher's heresy was stating that metatron was a power equal to hashem. Upon seeing metatron sitting in heaven, he proclaimed "There are indeed two powers in Heaven."


1

The song is a wonderful song. I don't think that it poses any theological problems. Actually, it expresses one of the tenets of Torah Judaism. Children understand very well that there are things that are true that they don't understand. They understand that lack of understanding does not take away from a truth expressed. On the topic of the words of ...


2

The Shulchan Aruch rules that one should always be in the habit of saying, "Everything the Merciful One does is for the best." (Orach Chaim 230:5; Berachos 60b). So we should say that throughout the day, whenever something happens. A shorter equivalent would be "gamzu l'tovah" from the Talmudic story of Nachum Gamzo. (Ta'anis 21a). Similarly, the Yerushalmi ...


2

some suggestions strengthen your faith in God and His torah. study books which teach on the subject that God is in charge of everything such as the chovos halevavos shaar bitachon. avoid reading things written by those who don't believe in these things



Top 50 recent answers are included