The judge of the whole land
Hello,
Although the rabbi wrote that he does not engage in Bible study
But still, there is a problem here.
Abraham our father claims that the Judge of all the earth will not do justice?
That is, it is not possible.
So if that’s the case, if that’s not possible, then there are definitely not fifty righteous people.
Can we really say that he is suspicious of kosher?
To make an assumption and come up with an argument, on the contrary, the Holy One, blessed be He, should have claimed that he suspected him.
Some will say that the righteous are also wrong because they did not prevent the wicked, etc.
And this of course does not excuse it, because then Abraham’s claim is incorrect.
The apparent conclusion from this is that if our forefather Abraham had not claimed this, it would not have been accepted.
And truly, a righteous man would die as a wicked man.
And you say there are no conclusions from the Bible.
You’re usually right, but here I really feel a conclusion.
Opposite of internal logic
But the world really seems to be running like this, and there were both righteous and wicked people.
It is conducted in the sense that if you read the Bible, it seems that the punishments are collective.
Anyway, if there is any excuse for this…
One thing will be certain: the judge of the whole land will not execute judgment.
It is not evidence that God behaves morally.
When I said I don’t deal with the Bible, I also meant the real difficulties it has, and perhaps mainly them.
Explain to me what your conclusion is from studying this parasha. You yourself point out contradictions, and I can explain it in a thousand ways that you won’t be able to decide between. In the end, you will adopt what seems reasonable to you, and again you have not drawn the conclusion from the study and the parasha. When Abraham defied the judge of the whole earth not to do justice, did he take that from the Bible? For him, it was an opinion. So your Bible is the opinions of our forefather Abraham.
Regarding collective punishment, there are explicit verses in the Bible that say the opposite (sons for the iniquity of their fathers. A man will die for his own sin, etc.). Again, you will not be able to draw a conclusion.
Thank you very much for the answer
I never cease to be amazed by the rabbi who never rests and answers questions day and night and all for free
Thank you without limits
To the point, indeed, in the Bible it says they will not die and on the other hand it says the iniquity of the fathers will be visited, etc.
But I am talking about things that were actually done, the collective punishment of nations such as Ammon, Moab and Edom, etc.
In any case, I'm not really drawing a clear conclusion here
But first things first, the conclusion that everyone wants to draw here, that God behaves morally, is already really uncertain, and on the contrary, Abraham claimed it but was not convinced that this is how it works
But from the many places where there is collective punishment
I get the impression that something needs to be updated regarding the understanding of a contradiction with morality and God
I don't know what exactly
As for the actual issue of a contradiction between God's actions and morality, I have a comment on this
For example, we see the greatest moral injustice in murder
Now what is actually the problem with murder that doesn't hurt
And let's say it doesn't hurt the family, etc.
Probably the mere loss of life, but if we knew more details about a case where God takes someone's life, we wouldn't see it as a problem at all.
Now I'm not emptying the concept of good and evil. The concept is exactly what we understand good to be, it's profit for someone or pleasure, only our ignorance of the details tells us that murder is bad.
But every time God kills someone, maybe he celebrates afterwards, etc., etc.
You assume that the claim that God is moral is inferred from the Bible. But this too is a lesson from the Bible and is debatable. There are things that have actually been done that seem this way and some that seem that way. This is precisely why there is no point in studying the Bible. And the contradictions between the statements and the actions are also contradictions.
Your question about murder has nothing to do with the Bible or our discussion. You are simply asking why murder is immoral. And the answer is: That's how it is. Moral values have no prior reason. Human life has value and that is it, just as you wrote. You can see it as someone taking the life of the murdered person. The problem is not the suffering. And it is true that if we knew why God took someone's life, we could understand it in a broader way. But we do not have such information and therefore there is no point in engaging in all this.
Actually, my words are not entirely related
To the previous matter, the comment was about the matter in which the Rabbi extended Toba on the problem of evil and explained that God just doesn't intervene to prevent, etc., etc.
And did not accept the position that says that what God does is good. I am only commenting
That even according to the approach that God does not intervene in what happens in creation at all, it is still very possible that a person who dies is very good for him
And another comment on the matter itself: When someone young dies, we all tend to feel very sorry and sorry
Is that true
I am not talking about the family's grief
Another small comment: I think it is very appropriate to thank the Rabbi a lot
On the other hand, I have a bit of a feeling of a degree of equality on the part of the Rabbi that it doesn't really matter to the Rabbi whether we thank him or not🤔😉
Of course they are sorry. Lives were lost.
I am disgusted by such a moral work. I also don't think it is right to compare.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
