Knowledge of the Lord from our own side
Hello Rabbi, there is an argument that says that all our conclusions about God are from ourselves, but God (the Infinite) is a mystery and is not limited by anything (not even logic). This argument is repeated in debates about choice and knowledge, for example. Is it really possible to separate our God from the Infinite Himself? And what does this mean?
Not in these senses. When I speak about something (including about God himself) it is done in the world of my concepts. All of these are evasions from providing an answer to difficult questions. Such a sentence really means nothing. Take as an example the statement that it is not limited by logic. So at the same time it is also limited by it, since without logic there is no obstacle to adopting a sentence and its opposite. So what did you say here?
Noam,
If “no end” is an original or earlier stage than the creation as it is on our part, then that creation of “on our part” is not the first cause and it is forbidden to worship it or treat it as a god.
The ability to violate the laws of logic is not found in the Judaism of medieval thinkers and is a relatively very late invention of all kinds of mystics in their own eyes. It is possible to use it to collapse all of Judaism wherever they want. A God who is not bound by the laws of logic has no problem, for example, choosing Joseph Smith as a true prophet who obliges the people of Israel despite the contradiction to the Torah or to cancel all the commandments and command to kill for fun. In addition, this contradicts the Cartesian intuition according to which God is not a deceiver (who deceives us into perceiving the law of contradiction as necessarily true and in every possible world). I have a hard time understanding how this nonsense can be taken seriously.
Indeed true. I agree with every word. The idea of the "unity of opposites" came to us from Christianity through Hasidism.
Copenhagen, again, you contradict yourself.
Someone who is bound by the laws of logic cannot be the first cause. And you do impose your laws of logic on God.
And as for the question itself, it is a very important question. Which indicates a very big problem in perception. When a Jew blesses “Blessed are you” what does he mean? Who is the ”you”?
And indeed, according to reason, we are limited to a certain level of perception and reference, and we cannot relate to God because He is above all understanding and reason and logic and morality and any other human trait. Therefore, there is always a dust of idolatry in this. Ultimately, if a person relates to something, it will always be to some concept that exists in his soul. It is never to something outside of him.
Point,
I did not claim that there is someone outside of God who imposes the laws of logic on him. It is a random decision of yours to put this claim in my mouth.
When a Jew recites the blessing, the commandment of ”You” is interpreted according to what is said immediately after it: “Our God, King of the World”. There is only one answer to the question of who the God of Israel and the King of the World is, and it cannot be an entity that did not create the world. It would be correct to say that there is a concern here for God if there were more than one possibility as to who the Creator of the world is (for example, like those Christians who associate “God the Father” with some “Logos” distinct from him who is identified with “God the Son” in creation, where this is a problem).
The Christians were wrong, they did not know about the existence of the grandfather. Copenhagen is actually the grandfather of the son and father of God, determining for God what he is and what he can be, and how he must behave and what is forced upon him. It is even possible that on Yom Kippur God comes and asks Copenhagen for forgiveness for the sins he has committed against him.
Dot, note that you are also forcing God to fit into the mold you are outlining for him (although I am not sure if I agree with Copenhagen).
You do not understand what is meant. When they say that God is subject to logic, they do not mean that someone is forcing him to listen to them. They are not “laws” like the laws of the road. For example: Mr. Dot asks God to create for him an impenetrable wall and a missile that penetrates any wall. God asks Mr. Dot: Do you want this missile to be able to penetrate the wall or not? Mr. Dot does not let God confuse him and explains to God in a good way that he is not subject to the laws of logic and therefore there is no problem. Copenhagen claims that God will still not give Dot the desired missile and wall. Why? Not because the “legislator of the laws of logic” forces him, but simply because Dot's request is undefined because it contains a logical contradiction.
D
You are even worse than Copenhagen in your realization of God
You claim that God is subject to the laws of logic as well as the laws of physics. In order for you to ask God for something, He must be subject to the laws of physics.
I was just explaining Copenhagen's words.
Your second sentence is gibberish. I can certainly ask God for requests and He doesn't have to be subject to any laws. When I pray every day, do you think I'm violating some kind of fulfillment prohibition?
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
