Timeline for Do we believe there’s 100% proof Hashem exists
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
34 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 12 at 2:49 | comment | added | LFE | What is your definition of "proof"? What is an example of proof in mundane matters? Do you mean like in a court of law? In science? | |
| Sep 11 at 15:53 | comment | added | Curious Yid | @MosesSupposes thanks! That’s what I would assume, but a lot of these comments and answers don’t seem to address that | |
| Sep 11 at 9:18 | comment | added | Moses Supposes | I think this is a great question! Wouldn't 100% proof impinge on our free will? | |
| Sep 10 at 21:53 | answer | added | RCW | timeline score: 0 | |
| Sep 8 at 12:49 | answer | added | Micha Berger | timeline score: 1 | |
| Aug 19 at 16:10 | comment | added | Double AA♦ | @N.T. I don't understand why you are telling me what kind of proof you propose to have (or what it means to have "kinds" of proofs). There either is or isn't a proof. I don't see anything in Halacha 6 about if there is or is not a proof, just that there is a Deity. He never says מצות עשה להאמין שיש דרך להוכיח במאה אחוז מציאת האלוה הזה. | |
| Aug 19 at 15:57 | comment | added | N.T. | @DoubleAA Try reading what I wrote again. The proof is historical. | |
| Aug 19 at 15:55 | comment | added | N.T. | @RabbiKaii In addition, see the Frankel edition of Rambam that the Rambam in Sefer Hamitzvos was mistranslated, and the Arabic word used by Rambam is more accurately translated as "to be convinced". | |
| Aug 19 at 15:54 | comment | added | N.T. | @DoubleAA So is the Rambam. See Halacha 6. And see his listing of mitzvot in the beginning of the sefer: library.alhatorah.org/… | |
| Aug 19 at 15:51 | comment | added | N.T. | @RabbiKaii See also library.alhatorah.org/… Where Ramban says the Bahag has a negative commandment to not forget Hashem, which corresponds to Anochi. While there he uses the term Emunah, the Ramban writes at the end of his dispute with the Church (and also in his work Emunah uBitachon) that Emunah requires intellectual knowledge as a prerequisite. | |
| Aug 19 at 15:47 | comment | added | Rabbi Kaii | @N.T. we are discussing Mitzvot. | |
| Aug 19 at 15:42 | comment | added | N.T. | @RabbiKaii sefaria.org/… | |
| Aug 19 at 13:06 | comment | added | Rabbi Kaii | @N.T. Rambam defines that mitzva as "believe" not "know" (according to Abarbanel - who does clarify that we are ment to believe in that which we already know because of mechuyav hametzius) and Ramban agrees in his Hasagos. Halachos Gedolos doesn't even count it as a mitzva, and explains that the belief in God is something not commanded, but rather deduced from the signs and wonders He performed for our ancestors. The Zohar in Raya Mehemna Vayera 25a brings up the point about knowing and defines it more specifically etc. | |
| Aug 19 at 11:52 | comment | added | Double AA♦ | @N.T. Straw man. Stay focused. We're discussing if there is a proof, not if He exits | |
| Aug 19 at 5:01 | comment | added | N.T. | @DoubleAA If there was a halacha to believe in geocentrism, then the halacha and Judaism would be wrong, ch"v. As there is not, the opinions that were geocentric were wrong about a material fact, not Judaism. There is a halacha to believe Hashem exists, at a minimum from the historical evidence. This is universally agreed to, and spelled out clearly in Deuteronomy ch. 4-5. That is by definition Judaism. One who argues is disagreeing with Judaism at a fundamental level, and likely would have the halachic status of a heretic. See Mishneh Torah Laws of Repentance 3:7. | |
| Aug 18 at 20:05 | comment | added | Double AA♦ | @N.T. Whether a proof exists is also a fact about nature. | |
| Aug 18 at 19:21 | comment | added | N.T. | @DoubleAA Geocentrism is not a halacha; it's a description of nature. | |
| Aug 18 at 17:42 | comment | added | Double AA♦ | @N.T. geocentrism too. Interesting definition you've got there | |
| Aug 18 at 17:41 | comment | added | N.T. | @DoubleAA It's a universal opinion among Rishonim and early Acharonim. That is by definition Judaism. | |
| Aug 18 at 17:39 | comment | added | Double AA♦ | @N.T. many rishonim had opinions, that doesn't mean Judaism has an official position | |
| Aug 18 at 17:37 | comment | added | N.T. | @DoubleAA Look at any of the Rishonim who define the mitzvah of Anochi Hashem Elokecha. | |
| Aug 18 at 17:37 | comment | added | N.T. | @YDJ That is a non-sequitur. | |
| Aug 18 at 17:22 | comment | added | Double AA♦ | Like most empirical questions, Judaism doesn't have an official position on this TTBOMK | |
| Aug 18 at 16:50 | answer | added | Maurice Mizrahi | timeline score: -1 | |
| Aug 18 at 13:49 | comment | added | Y DJ | @N.T. I also try to exclude proofs when I walked to shul on Shabbos and driving by people stopped by to express excitement and tell their kids that G-d exists because i was walking to shul. | |
| Aug 18 at 12:14 | comment | added | Y DJ | @N.T. well there is a difference between proofs. My proof includes my personal experience. But it is not universal. If it was everyone would be a believer. Nobody would be an evil doer. | |
| Aug 18 at 6:47 | comment | added | N.T. | @YDJ According to almost all opinions, the first mitzvah is to know that Hashem exists based on the revelation at Sinai. According to many opinions, it includes an obligation to know intellectual proofs for Hashem's existence. | |
| Aug 18 at 6:46 | comment | added | N.T. | Your question is a false dichotomy. The people of the midbar had 100% proof, so we have historical proof, which is far more than blind faith. | |
| Aug 18 at 5:17 | comment | added | Mider2009 | I don’t think one can “prove” God, if one chooses to believe they will, I’d not they won’t | |
| Aug 18 at 4:52 | comment | added | Yehuda | Hashem is all-powerful and fundamentally unfalsifiable. There is no proof that there is a Hashem, and (by dint of His omnipotent ability to create a world in any fashion) there is no proof that there is no Hashem. Our belief in Hashem is exclusively a choice, made exclusively on faith. | |
| Aug 18 at 4:21 | comment | added | Y DJ | I think the 1st commandment interpreted as to know that there is Hashem shows there may not be 100% proof. Also the first Ani Maamin to be accepted on faith. | |
| Aug 18 at 4:12 | comment | added | Curious Yid | @YDJ thanks I just briefly read it and yeah that was part of our debate. Basically we were debating whether proofs like that (that something can’t come from nothing) constitute 100% proof of Gd and it’s a mitzvah to rationalize them in your head, or whether they’re simply compelling proofs but not 100% and therefore we simply rely on blind faith | |
| Aug 18 at 4:04 | comment | added | Y DJ | Chovos haLevavos, Gate 1, sections 5-6 tried to bring the proofs, but it might not be sufficient for the modern standards of rigor. | |
| Aug 18 at 3:53 | history | asked | Curious Yid | CC BY-SA 4.0 |