A right hand in providence
Greetings to the rabbi.
First, I must say that I more or less accept your concept of providence. It’s one of the things that cleared up my mind about the questions I had about religion.
And the actual matter is still not clear to me. Let’s say there is an exceptional case like the Six-Day War, right? It’s not a clear miracle, but it still makes sense to say that God intervened in it. Isn’t it better to do what we do with a sense of right (if there is reasonable data, it is better to discuss right and not duty and not with a crooked mind, as we know) to prefer the option that God intervened, let’s say in a war, because it is more consistent with faith (and it is more likely that God will perform a miracle for Israel, that they return to their land, etc.) I would love to hear your opinion.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Is a palm of righteousness a psychological indulgence and not the truth?
It depends on the context. If you have a consideration in favor of the claim, then it's not a matter of arguing for the merits but of making a logical argument. But if you don't make claims but demand to be argued for the merits, it's clearly just psychological gratification.
The attitude that if I feel “wow” it is evidence that God intervened is problematic.
A wise Jew once said, either everything is a miracle or there is no miracle.
And if you want to believe in miracles, then your ”wow” is probably very limited.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
