Is there proof that God is good?

What the Rabbi wrote is that we do good and know how to distinguish between good and evil.
It can be assumed that this is an evolutionary development [which follows from the fact that someone who did evil, for example, would kill, and of course he would also be killed or at least punished, and therefore we are nice and sociable [in a way that is],
and the way back is not only in humans, there are many sociable animals, we are simply smarter and know how to define it better.]
And the Kabbalah – tradition is also a bit difficult. It is written, for example, that the Israelites did not observe Passover, for a period.
It is because they did not say that the’ brought us out of Egypt, especially since they did not say that the’ is so and so, they simply did not receive anything during that period, and all of this in general if we trust the general principle that there was a Torah giving, and the tradition that is more than three thousand years old, there is a lot of pressure here, doesn't the Rabbi think???

They say that God is good just to feel good and that's it.
God is not good. On the contrary. Good is what God says.
God precedes good. Certainly goodness is not an attribute of God.
If God says an eye for an eye. That means it is good. And those who think it is not good are the bad ones. And not the other way around.

Nonsense, it is said in the Torah that there are thirteen virtues,
The example you gave is also not really that moral as simple as that, and the sages determined that it was money, why is it moral?!
There are certainly some things in the Torah that are a little immoral, [slaves and the like] and there is nothing wrong with that since the Torah was given 3500 years ago, and God adapted the Torah to their situation, [meaning the Torah could not change their lives from end to end] [Besides, according to your words that it is not His attribute, it is very difficult to understand how God determined this???
And besides, according to this, God does not change either [I did not say anything] since God has always been good]

Rabbi So I don't understand: So the Rabbi is actually claiming that there is no proof that God is perfect? (It seems to me that the Maimonides claims that there is)
And besides, even if I accept the tradition that God said that He is good, who said that we can really believe Him, because on the side that He is bad He can also lie?
So what proof do I have besides what He says that He is good?

In the above answer, the rabbi replied, “Of course you can continue to ask them why God is perfect. It’s an English-English dictionary. Therefore, this whole discussion is unnecessary in my opinion.” I want to wonder about the crux of this answer, which seems to be conceptual pragmatism.
The answer says that since the premise of perfection does not help us in establishing the claim that God is good, then we will not rely on perfection at all, but on a direct intuition regarding goodness. But it is the intuition that led them to rely on perfection, and what is this pragmatism to accept the intuition that God is good and reject the intuition that it relies on perfection. [Perhaps hinting at a philosophical criticism that everything is founded on assumptions and assumptions].

Elchanan Rain
First of all, you should know that He does not want [with emphasis on the one who wants] He has no desires or needs,
Therefore He is clear and everything they said about the will of He to do good is the intention that His nature is to do good
[with emphasis on His nature] This is not a will apart from Him, as the Maimonides you mentioned proves.

To Alhanan – Hello,

It seems that the’ is very patient and therefore allows you to claim that he is bad and a liar and other vegetables. Such patience indicates a good temperament 🙂

Best wishes,, Endless Elephant

I don't understand how you can talk about God's will, and tell me that He is perfect and good?!
Have you met Him? Do you have evidence for your words?
What you say is written in every Lithuanian newspaper.
Evidence please.
And as for those who have proven from reality that God is patient.
I hope this is a joke. There is no shortage of evidence for God's evil deeds. There is no shortage.

All those who talk about the nature of God are simply impudent and, apparently, also infidels.

Arrogant and infidels, indeed, true, but why ”just”?

I don't understand, you're the one who came up with the Maimonides' proof that He is perfect. What do you write: “I don't understand how you can talk about God's desires, and tell me that He is perfect” That's why I wrote about what you asked in the question:
“When both desires are equally problematic with respect to the statement that He is perfect and omnipotent, let's say the opposite: that He cannot have a desire to do good because it indicates a disadvantage, and He tries to harm us even though we don't understand.?”
And that's what I wrote to you
To answer what you asked, that He is good does not mean that He is perfect, which is not true.
Because it is in His nature. It is very profound, but this is after Maimonides proved that He is perfect does not change.
I took all this from the perplexed teacher, according to whom He is It does not change, as I mentioned in the response to Knowledge and Choice, and the Rambam teaches that all [all] cha are confused, and then you respond and ask who is the one.

All those who talk about the nature of the name are just arrogant and even infidels. The last posk asked you
If you could stop your comments it would really benefit us all.
Every time a different obscure comment

On the 23rd of Tammuz, 5731

To the Lord, peace be upon you,

The strength of God's patience is evidenced by the fact that even when you cover up bad things against your Creator, He continues to give you life, health, and strength, and to operate the sophisticated supercomputer called "Adam." Without the constant help of your Creator, you could not type your words into a computer, send them online, and see them published.

And from this, the greatness of the Creator's "long-suffering" is demonstrated, allowing even those who transgress His will to realize their rebellion against Him.

The divine long-suffering involves temporary suffering in the world, for there are many who abuse it, but in this way the world is perfected and improved. Suffering leads man to strive for goodness and to draw from him powers and abilities of action that he never dreamed of. The rebellion against evil and suffering – infuriates man and the world and marches him rebelliously towards a better future.

With best wishes, Sh”z

I don't know who sent this comment, it's not nice. But the main point of what you said is certainly not true. Maimonides, who speaks on the subject, is neither impudent nor an infidel.

Regarding evolution, see the fourth notebook. Evolution does not produce morality, but actual good deeds. And not bringing us closer together. One can of course doubt that we have a moral obligation and attribute this to an innate tendency (an urge to do good), but this is no different from any other skeptical question.

A disciple asked me about pragmatism, but this is a mistake. When I trust something because I have a feeling that it is true, it is not pragmatism.

But what I answered the questioner is not pragmatic in any sense. I told him that I do not understand how he accepts God's perfection and questions His goodness. What is the difference between the two? If he asks me about morality and I ask him about His perfection. I did not write that I adopt His perfection in order to reach the conclusion that He is good. On the contrary, this is what the questioner suggested.

I'm talking about the mandatory request.

The rabbi answered me this way: Regarding evolution, see the fourth notebook. Evolution does not produce morality, but rather actual good deeds. And not bringing one another closer together. One can of course doubt that we have a moral obligation and attribute this to an innate tendency (an urge to do good), but this is no different from any other skeptical question. ” So.
By asking that it is from evolution, I attribute it to the fact that we have an innate attitude, of course.
In other words, the rabbi is saying that the’ is better because we do good. But this is the question: Who said that it comes from morality?

Dear Yaakov!!! That's exactly the point, I didn't understand what the proof was when I read it about God being perfect, because of course He has great powers but who said He is omnipotent. And also about the fact that you tell me that it is His nature to be good, that is exactly the question, maybe He is in the deepest possible depth of evil.

The questioner suggested deriving good from perfection in order to prove that God is good. You answered him that it is “unnecessary” because we would still need a foundation for perfection itself. In other words, even if the derivation succeeds (perfect entails good), it will not “help” us prove that God is good. And so I asked, assuming that my presentation is correct, what words like “unnecessary” and “will help” do here. I did not understand what the mistake was.

[It seems to me as a mere hypothesis that this is how you see the matter: those who deduce good from perfection think that justification is only by derivation, but direct recognition of some principle (such as God is good) is not legitimate. But if they were to have two hearts that they needed to directly recognize the principle of perfection, then their closed hearts would open and they would return to their quarry and accept as legitimate their direct recognition of the principle of good].

Elchanan, I didn't come to answer whether the ’ is bad or good [if you didn't see I asked the rabbi about evolution,]
I just said that the ’ good does not cause a disadvantage for him [as you asked]: ” that he cannot have a desire to do good because that indicates a disadvantage, and he tries to harm us even though we don't understand.?” And what you asked was who said the ’ is perfect. I already wrote that this is the issue that the teacher Nebuchim refers to [see also part 2] I also sent you to read the answer to Knowledge and Choice, where if you look carefully you will understand the idea.

Maybe I was being overly aggressive, but you can't get into people's arguments, answer and after Jacob rejected you say that it's an argument of infidels and impudent people. And besides, Jacob argued well that it's an ancient argument, to say that they're all impudent and infidels. [But what bothers me most is that you're the one who wrote here that it's not really good if anyone is an infidel, it's you]

Is it a lie?

Of course, after the last posk ruled that it is impossible to discuss the nature of God, then anyone who dares to disagree with our last posk is certainly impudent 🙂

In addition to the words of the last posk, I will note that in the words of the last posk, it is clear that the self is a "thoughtful and comprehensive" thinker. What can be discussed is only the ways in which God leads His world. And in this, the testimony of the Torah is faithful to us, that when there is suffering in the world, their purpose is "to benefit you in your afterlife."

With blessings, Tuvia and Zigud

Yaakov,
I answered that. I myself understand directly (self-examination) that it comes from a moral obligation. If you want to claim that this is an illusion and that it is actually an evolutionary construction, you have the burden of proof. This is a purely skeptical claim. Even if I answer you, you can ask who said that I am not wrong. I see no point in such a discussion.

Shuli, I am sorry, but I really do not understand your babbling.

But that was the whole question, who said that we are good because it is good, we can say that it is an evolutionary process, [and assuming that evolution does not develop morality] so we say that we are designed to do good???
And I, who do not have the self-examination, unfortunately I have to think of another answer.
But even in the opinion of the Rabbi, there is doubt about this and there is no evidence for this [emphasis on the evidence]

Rabbi Michael, thank you. But there is a point you didn't answer:
How can one prove that God is good from the fact that God claims to be good, when on the other hand, he can also lie that he is good?
So is there any external evidence that his will or nature is good and not evil?

It's a shame to miss such a real treat.

After I delved deeper, I understood, and he added a little to the Rabbi's words – with the Rabbi's permission.
The Rabbi's answer is excellent [By the way, Elchanan, I didn't understand what you wanted from the Rabbi. The Rabbi replied that we are good and it's not the God you were afraid might be lying, we see that, but evolution is not too difficult because]
Of course, God also activates evolution. Just as God activates all of nature. And whoever activates evolution is clearly better than ever. [This is a bit similar to the evidence from the world, which I really didn't understand why Elchanan didn't agree with.
After all, since you see a lot of evil in the world, there is a clear reason for this, [that a person murders a person is because God decided to give people a choice, and animals are because of sins, and so on. See Moreh Behumchim Part 3 on this.
But only a fool would deny the good in the world and an evil God would not do this. (That is, the good can do both evil and good [the so-called ’reward and punishment”] but why would your imaginary lying God also do good)
That's how it seems to me, what do you think?

To ”R – Hello,

In order to receive ‘proof from the outside’ that the Creator is good and true – one must go ’outside’, to be in a system that is not under the Creator's control, because as long as you are ‘inside’ – He may implant in you a ‘false consciousness’ about His goodness and truth.

And of course there will be a problem in the wonderful journey to get out from the outside, because we will never know if we really managed to get out or if we are still ‘inside’ and only imagine that we are ‘outside’, and therefore the journey to ’outside’ A little stressed 🙂

With greetings from ‘Kum Arin’, Sh”z Loewengren

Nochi. It's just. There's no sense in it. It stems from stupidity and lack of understanding.

A mandatory request. Indeed so. My responses are cryptic to cryptic.

Amen who continued to be closed to your closed responses, so that nonsense doesn't enter my head.
But really you don't think you are problematic reminded you of what I wrote: “Maybe I was being excessively aggressive, but you can't get into people's arguments, answer and after Jacob rejected you say that it is an argument of infidels and impudent. And besides Jacob argued well that this is an ancient argument, to say that they are all impudent and infidels. [But what bothers me most is that you are the one who wrote here that God is not really good if anyone is an infidel, it is you]”
I think you should apologize to Elhanan Rein and Jacob

I think this is an excellent answer. Go deeper and you will find that it is so.

PS. The topic seems to be settled. I don't think I will write more on the subject [unless there is a good argument]

The last point, I tend to agree that there is no sense there and that it stems from stupidity, but I really don't agree with you at all in claiming that it is related to a lack of understanding.

I didn't see Jacob's response.
Now I see that he decided that he and the Rambam are on the same intellectual level. That's also a bit cheeky.

Of course the ’ is not good. If he were good, it would mean that good preceded the ’.

And even worse. When a person says that God is good, he means that God is guided by that person's deviations regarding the definition of good.

I wrote that God precedes good. If God says an eye for an eye. That means it is good.

Nochi. Of course you disagree. After all, you don't even understand how impudent and stupid it is to talk about the nature of God.
When you understand. You will understand that what you thought before was due to a lack of understanding.

I don't know who you're talking about. But today I saw thousands upon thousands of people donating to two cancer patients. I saw anonymous people with large sums. I saw those who had nothing and yet gave from what they had. And the truth is, tears flooded my eyes. How could I not? I saw purity of heart in action in front of thousands. It was special.

It is clear that this Yaakov is not even close to being on my level [the final arbiter,] not everyone on the site can be the final arbiter. You don't see me and you don't know how important I am.

Shame, repulsive pride, will return to you quickly.

A righteous person saves a soul

Who appointed you to be the final arbiter anyway? Maybe you should delete this from the site [ask the rabbi]

I saw that you wrote that Yaakov compares himself to Maimonides. I think there is someone else problematic here.
And Maimonides did not deal with this alone, he wrote for the confused [teaching the confused] and I am in the level of the confused. True.
And in general, you yourself discussed this, you brazen

Dear Jacob/Shmuel!!! Not every bad thing that happens in the world is the result of a human choice. It could be like a plane crash. You can't take the fact that there is good in the world as proof that God is good when at the same time crazy horrors are happening, for some reason when God does evil He has immunity.
If you decide that your proof is through the reality that we see with our eyes. Then I see with my own eyes half a million people who were killed by Corona. Maybe God is doing some good because he has a conscience after all the horrors he has done, maybe he is a psychopath, I have no idea, but this is not evidence because if so I will also bring evidence from the other side that he is doing evil.
And this is why I did not accept Rabbi Michael's answer: (which for some reason does not answer me) Because it is impossible to prove that people have a good quality, that God is good, because if so, I am proving the opposite: that people have a quality to murder is a sign that whoever designed them was evil or a psychopath, I do not mean to be disparaging and I do not mean to claim that God is a psychopath or evil, and therefore all the fanatics of all kinds are out of place, I am giving a theory instead of the accepted immunity, I simply want evidence that He is good. Believe me, I wish I already had evidence that He is good.

I didn't write the comment, even though it's somewhat true. Let's have a little fun here.

Who is this and what is it that responded on my behalf?

You will not bear the name of the last judge in vain.

I addressed your claims, the great of the generation [the last posek]
A] You wrote, “I didn’t see Yaakov’s response.
Now I see that he decided that he and the Rambam are on the same intellectual level. That’s a bit cheeky too.”
I already answered that
B] You wrote, “Of course, God is not good. If He were good, that would mean that good preceded God.” No. That’s what the Rambam is saying in the book, “The Confused One”: that good and the Rambam are one forever.

C]You wrote “And even worse. When a person says that God is good, he means to say that God is according to that person's deviations regarding the definition of good.” This is nonsense, what can be done about some things being moral and some not. And I already wrote
“Nonsense that it is said in the Torah that there are 13 virtues,” above,
D]You wrote “I wrote that God precedes good. If God says an eye for an eye. That means it is good.”
I already wrote that the Maimonides disagrees with you but you are the final arbiter, what is the problem?!
And what you wrote “If God says an eye for an eye. That means it is good” I already answered you above
“The example you gave is also really not that moral as it is simple and the sages determined that it is money, why is it morality?!” An eye on the subject of a confused teacher.
In short, I was reluctant to disagree with the last posak, but here you went too far. You wrote nonsense. There is nothing to be done.

The Rambam defined good as something that exists. He was an existentialist.
That's his definition. And that's not the use you and others make of the concept of good. And that's just proof of the end of my words that everyone defines good as they see fit. And says that God upholds his definition of good. That's not how you build a wall.

A musician will come along and say that God and music are one.

The fact that the sages determined that it was money doesn't say anything about what is good and what is not good. They had their own constraints. And they don't determine what is good. And the concept of morality is pretty uninteresting because it stems from psychological deviations of humans. The Nazis thought it was moral for Jews to burn in crematoriums. They wanted to resemble God. Is that why it is like that?

Yaakov, I explained everything. I see no point in repeating myself over and over again.

Elchanan, I don't understand what the problem is. When you ask a person how to get to Bialik Street and he explains it to you. Why do you believe him? There are two possibilities: either he is a good man and tells you the truth or he is a bad man and then he has no problem lying to you. These are what I called skeptical claims above.
I explained that from our tendency to do good and our commitment to morality, we can conclude that it is important to God. This also follows from the fact that He commands this of us in the Torah in several places. In addition, He also tells us that it is important to Him and that He is good. You are proposing a conspiracy theory that in fact our tendencies are the evolutionary construction and we live in an illusion. God's command in the Torah is manipulation. And the one who will testify about himself is obviously not trustworthy (invalid in law). You will never find an answer to unfounded claims of this kind. Every answer will also be worthy of the question: How do you know that this is true? Maybe it is an illusion? This is exactly skepticism and there is no point in engaging in it.
That's it, I'm done.

A message to the other members. The discussion here deteriorates from time to time. If this continues, I will start deleting messages. It is possible to occasionally go down on people, but when the entire discussion is about the character of a certain person or the impudence of an anonymous person, it is unacceptable.

To discuss the nature of the ’ (including the “Thirteen Virtues”) is blasphemy. And whoever does not understand blasphemy has both intellectual and emotional numbness:

This is the rejection of the highness of Rabbi Hanina, who said, “The great God, the mighty, the terrible, the majestic, the strong, the fearsome, the strong, the courageous, the sure, and the honorable.” They waited for him until the end. For when he finished, I said to him: Have we finished praising your path?! What do I need the whole island for? Yes, here is the commandment of the Lord, the Lord, Moses, our teacher in the Torah, and the people of the Great Synagogue A parable is like a king of flesh and blood who had a thousand gold coins, and they were slapping them together with silver coins. And he was not jealous of them!

24 Tammuz 5771

To Ramd ”a – Hello,

Although I usually don't like ad hominem discussions for the body of defenders – in this discussion, these discussions are in place, because after we have put God up for discussion about His goodness and righteousness and removed His immunity from ‘ad hominem discussion’ – how has the fate of His creatures who respond here improved, and why should they not, as their Creator, be entitled to a discussion about their goodness and righteousness? 🙂

With greetings, A”d Hominofov

On the 24th of Tammuz, 57521

The question of good and evil in the world is not a simple one. On the one hand, human life is full of wonderful blessings from the Creator. The entire body and spirit of man are a marvelous machine made with wisdom that no ‘supercomputer’ has succeeded in imitating and will never succeed in imitating.

On the other hand, all of man's days are ‘pain and anger’, many moments of happiness and contentment but also much suffering and disappointment, and the greatest disappointment is death, which seemingly returns man to ’point zero’ from which he began.

And here arises the question of the telephone operator ‘if God wills’ We didn't show all this to death, it doesn't seem that all the wonders and graces and moments of happiness in a person's life are just an illusion and a maxim-shaughness.

Here comes the answer of Naomi Shemer, who, near her death, when she was sick and tormented, fading towards her imminent death, turned to her son and said: ‘Nevertheless – I gave a day's work’…

All the world's possessions, wealth, honor and pleasures – remain here. They will all be taken from a person, but the feeling of ‘I gave a day's work’, I took advantage of the time to leave behind a world a little better and more beautiful than I received. This cannot be taken away from a person.

This is the eternal grace that our Creator gave us, the ability to ‘give a day's work’.

Best regards, Sh”t

I am so sorry that the Rabbi said the last word:
Because I disagree: This is not just skepticism that came out of nowhere. The doubt that God might be evil, and therefore also a liar,
is supported by the enormous atrocities that have happened and are happening in the world.
This is not skepticism about an empty void. I have something to be content with.
I understand the direction of the answer, but it is not enough for me.
Thanks in any case to the Rabbi, and to everyone.

And the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the LORD repented that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the LORD said, I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the ground, from man to beast to creeping thing and to the fowl of the heaven; for I am grieved that I have made them.

1. The children of men do abominations. Not God.
2. That's why they are punished.
3. That's why there are more atrocities. They cause them.

So where's the problem?

Do you think a good God should have destroyed all humans? Is that what you would want to happen?

First of all, no one asked Him to create us: we lacked nothing because we wanted nothing.
This is because He gave us desires and then asks us to thank Him for His great goodness that He gave us bread and water.
This is like me making you crave cigarettes, but not taking care of you for cigarettes. Of course I have to take care of you for cigarettes. He created us lacking, and He has a moral obligation to take care of us.
Only people do evil?!
Who made the coronavirus? Who made cancer? Who creates sick children?
And regarding what you wrote about God punishing for sins: Isn't He omnipotent?! So He could simply erase our sins without suffering, who benefits from this suffering?!
A father slaps his child for his own good, because he has no choice because that is the only way the child is raised, but not even an ”omnipotent” father would slap him. He would solve it with a kiss.

You misunderstood.
The commandments did not come to satisfy God or to make Him happy.
The Torah came to correct man.
The reason they say it makes people happy is because there are those who say it encourages them to continue doing the commandments.

Let's focus on the point:
You have very beautiful theories.
After all, do you have evidence that God is good or not??????????
I'm tired of hearing explanations without evidence.
You don't understand that if I ask for evidence that God is good, then telling me that it's for our benefit or that it's because of transgressions is not an answer, it's a theory. I'm asking for evidence.

You missed the point on this one too.

The Torah came to correct man.

God has no significance in the Torah beyond the fact that his mention comes to enable the correction of man to be carried out.

And if we go back to the level you're talking about.
So yes.
The evidence that God is good is that the world exists at all.

And I will even support this and say that this is the best world that could have come into existence.

Sadd Isek and the journey from Har Shefer 2011

To Alchanan, Greetings,

The example you gave of serious illnesses is excellent. They come upon humanity due to not maintaining a healthy lifestyle. When we pollute the air and water, eat junk food, and fill our lungs with smoke, etc., the body loses the natural immunity that God gave it in nature, and then we complain to the Creator.

The Creator, who created passions and desires for them, also created in them the mind to guard against them and the ability to work hard to correct even the distortions and failures. The ability to choose is the human right. From the animal and the more this leads to good choices, the healthier and happier his life will be.

With the blessing of Shabbat Teva, Sh”t

I have answered the question of evil in the world more than once here on the site and in the trilogy. I have presented the evidence that it is good here. Beyond that, I have nothing to say. As I said, in my opinion this is pure skepticism.

The common denominator for areas where the coronavirus has been particularly severe is that they are ‘excellent’ in terms of air pollution, both due to emissions from industrial plants and vehicles and due to the high rate of cigarette smoking by the population.

And yours: God has blessed us with a ‘rein’ world (= clean) 🙂 – Let us keep it pure and clean and be healthy.

With best wishes, Sh”z

Come on, really???!!!The evil in the world only happens because of people's irresponsibility???!!
Enough!!! Why are you dodging???!! There is enough evil that happens without the help of people!!!!!
And the evil that happens because of people is also the full responsibility of God!!!!!!! He created the world and the dangers, and if a pedophile raped children, it is also the fault of the one who knew it would happen and in any case put the deviation in the profile.!!!!!!!!
Why do you say that the world is beautiful and conclude from this that God is good, but you are silent about the horrors? Who pays you for the immunity you gave him, where is the fairness,???!! Seeing only one side??!!!
Stop taking me at my word, and you will understand what I am tired of explaining:
This is a war of attrition. It is not fair.

And yes, if God created a bacterium that can kill and hurt so much,
even if people could have prevented some of the damage, if he knew it would turn out so bad
he is the one to blame and responsible, just like I am to blame if I infected someone with the virus,
won't you tell me that I behaved properly, because he smokes and he caused himself a weak system and therefore he is guilty, and I am innocent of her actions???
And why?
Because if I have care and a desire to do good, then he also neglected, I will do everything to make him feel good!!!!
So what is this nonsense that people pollute???!!!

Elhanan. You don't understand. God didn't create the bacteria. Our world has the laws of physics.
You couldn't create a better world.
If you changed the laws of physics a little, life wouldn't have been created at all.

In short, to claim that you have a way to create a better world, you have to come up with laws of physics that make it possible.

And a question for the singer:

Who invented air pollution, junk food, radioactive radiation, and wars and weapons of mass destruction?<

Who invented the mad pursuit of money and luxury, which leads to stress and nerves? Who invented the culture of gossip and shaming, the pleasure of man in the disgrace of his fellow man, which leads to envy and hatred?

Who invented the media that floods man's consciousness 24/7 with instinctive and violent messages and highlights beyond all proportion only the evil in the world?

Is all this a 'destiny' or the work of humans?

I am not urging you to answer immediately because you are already tired. Take advantage of the wonderful gift that God has given you, the rest of the Sabbath, to restore the peace of mind and renewal, to say that the Lord is upright and has not caused any harm to you.

With blessings on Shabbat Shalom, Sh"Z

But God is omnipotent!!!!!
So He created a world to the best of His ability without sorrow and without evil and without suffering and in any case allow for choice,
And also forgive our sins without hell because He is omnipotent!!!
Is this what bothers God?? How many poor laws of physics can He change nature!!!
He is omnipotent, you know what omnipotent is. The explanation: that He can do everything!!!
So if He really cares about us and wants us to be good but He has some annoying laws of physics then He is not omnipotent!!!!
Or He can create a world with choice and without evil, and He does not do it because I do not care that we suffer.
Please read carefully and think hard and only then respond.

My answer to what you asked: God and people are to blame for this!
And I will repeat it again: When God creates such a dangerous world and places dark desires and desires in people, He is irresponsible, and the fact that He did not prevent it is a sign that He does not care.
Even if the people are to blame, with God's love so great, He would not have done it.
Your argument is likened to: a father who sees his son approaching a pit and does not want to save him because the child is irresponsible, maybe the child is truly irresponsible, but this is not a father who loves his son.
Read again the parable about the father who slapped the child. It is clear to everyone that if he could solve it without a slap, he would be very happy because he loves his son. And even with his son, he does not want a slap.
Have you seen the movie Escape Room:? The film depicts a group of evil people who throw a group of people into dangerous rooms and test the limits of their abilities, according to you there is no problem with this because the people have to make every effort and escape the room???!!!
If one of them ate a lot of chips a week ago and now can't run and escape the room then that's their problem. Is it conceivable???!!!!
Shabbat Shalom!

Elhanan, you just insist on telling people to read carefully before responding. Get over yourself. Your question has been answered here on the site several times.

I promise I didn't understand or agree with what you wrote!!
And I'm not trying to insist for no reason!!!
I really want to understand!!!
You have no idea how much this bothers me!!!
By the way, you didn't answer me when I explained to you that I'm not satisfied with just anything, I'm satisfied because I've seen nature do atrocities.??
If in any case the Rabbi wants us to finish the subject. The Rabbi decides.
Thank you.

If you didn't read what I wrote, how could you disagree? Read first, then we'll talk.

I read. I read with faith!!!

You gave an example of a person I ask on the street where Bialik Street is,
and you explained that there is no reason to be satisfied that maybe he is lying, but with God it is different, is there a reason to be satisfied?? Does he do evil???
And you also brought the evidence that good is important to him, and I have argued here all along that the evil he does is ignored and for some reason is not taken as evidence.
I did not receive an answer to that. And I read it again.

Since you don't read what I write and continue to insist and claim that you did, I'll end it here.

Thank you. And sorry for driving you crazy!!
This is the most important issue in my life. And I've been trying for 3 years to get an answer.
Thank you very much, I really appreciate it.

If this is so important to you, that's exactly why you should read the explanatory suggestions instead of repeating an answered question over and over again. There's more detail in the second book in my trilogy.

Elhanan, there is no answer to the question of evil. The option is that God is neither omnipotent nor omniscient of what He created. And I have already discussed this here on the site several times and broken it down into its components.

Beyond that, you have nothing to lean on in the God of the Bible. There is evil there too. But the simpler explanation is [with a bias toward the right]: that the writers of the Torah were frightening in order to educate. Or that things there were written in general with humor, there is a researcher who claims this and it seems to be broader.

Is God omnipotent? Where does this nonsense come from? Can God pee?

Enough talking nonsense.
And instead come up with laws of physics that will create intelligent life that will be better than us.
And with that you will come complaining to God. Then it will be serious. Otherwise you are like someone whining that he can't go back in time and fix the mistakes he made in the past.

P”H.

I really suggest to you, brother, and not jokingly, that you take some time out with yourself to think about the things you write. It doesn't deny you anything at all, it's just that sometimes a person can be in a loop for all sorts of reasons.

Thanks for the suggestion.

One possible reason someone is in a loop is because others simply don't relate to what they're saying. Because they're in their own loop. So they repeat themselves until someone gets out of their loop and listens.

In the Book of Acts and the Journey of the Children of Israel 2001

And perhaps the more likely option is that man is not ‘all-knowing’? We understand very little about the ’what’ of creation, so we presume to judge the ’why’.?

We see the great wisdom in every detail of creation. On the other hand, we see the difficulties as ’message’, and we assume that the difficulties were placed before us as a challenge, so that we too may share in the wisdom of creation

With blessings, Shࢭz

Where did I write that I am omniscient?

I just wrote to Elhanan that before he complains about how bad this world is, he should come up with proof that he has a way to create a better world.
But this is only allowed to be done through laws of physics that he proposes and that he proves bring about a better world.

Otherwise he is just a whiner.

The arbiter, the omnipotent and able to bring about any defined state of affairs in the world. If you want the arbiter to saw a tree, the meaning of the words is to see a saw waving in the air and working on the tree. He has no problem doing that.

Dear Sha'at.

Your answer is the answer of a believer. He will endure even ten disasters with faith. Faith means, as the prophet explained: confidence that everything will come to pass, whether for good or for bad. But he spits in your face, so what do you rely on? After all, when we enter into logical thinking, this issue has three possibilities: If God wants to prevent evil, but he is unable? Then he is helpless. Is he able, but he does not want? Then he is evil. If he both can and wants? Then where does evil come from? And to remind you, religious people believe that he is both omnipotent and omniscient, as in the Bible.

And your answer that there is no evidence that there is a system of laws that leads to a better world seems to be the answer of the rabbi (and Leibniz). That is, God created the world so that people (perhaps also animals) can function with pleasure only within a rigid and blind constitutional mechanism (this is also probably impossible otherwise) and He has other kinds of unknown desires that outweigh the marginal question of whether suffering was created. I suppose you can understand why this answer is a development.

And if you answer me what Leibniz formulated: ‘This is the best of all possible worlds’, which Smichy uses in his arguments (what really is the best of all possible worlds?), I will answer you: let him intervene. He is responsible for the harms of natural evil and also for human evil – which is responsible for its consequences. You don't see any intervention, so it's one of two things: either spitting in the face as I wrote. Or it's all baseless babbling about nature itself, which, by the way, makes more sense.

In the Book of Proverbs, the Journey of the Children of Israel, 2011

I answered your words in the last line.
The sweet planning of nature is evidence of the Creator's ability and wisdom, and therefore we assume that even the chaos and difficulties were placed before us so that we too may be worthy of sharing in the joy of creation.

Ultimately, the good and the bad in our lives are determined by us. He who sees his difficulties as a 'spit in a cow' will always remain depressed.

But he who feels that his difficulties are meant to strengthen him will indeed emerge from them strengthened and forged. He will work diligently to improve the world, and will be rewarded for his labors, knowing that his life in the world will be a blessing.

With blessings, Sha'ban

Oh, how man felt bad when he was in Paradise. Passivity is a great mental distress

Marginal. It is clear that God is not omnipotent. Simple proof: He cannot pee.

In conclusion. You believe in Santa Claus and then you whine why he doesn't bring you the presents you want.

In general, you don't seem to understand what the universe is and what the laws of physics are. And how humans were created.

A. Demanding God to intervene means destroying the world and creating a new one.
You just don't get it. You think God is Santa Claus who gives out presents.

Sh”C.

‘And the difficulties were laid before us’ – Or commit suicide. I will soon check how many suicides there are this month, hiding it so as not to give drive to others.

P”H.

I already wrote to you that you need to take some time off with yourself. I won't repeat it again.

The final arbiter, you are wrong and right.

“You are wrong and right”. I am particularly pleased with these 3 words and am currently considering them as my national anthem.

I will repeat what I said [I didn't notice there was such a mess here] I already wrote this:
“That is, the good God can do both evil and good [the so-called “reward and punishment”] but why would your imaginary, lying God also do good” Everything that confused the mind here lacks an explanation of the strange and unstable subject or used the wording of the rabbi:
” I have answered the question of evil in the world more than once here on the site and in the trilogy. I presented the evidence that it is good here. Beyond that, I have nothing to say. “