חדש באתר: NotebookLM עם כל תכני הרב מיכאל אברהם. דומה למיכי בוט.

Searching for God in the World

Back to list  |  🌐 עברית  |  ℹ About
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.

A Decade of “Be’er” – 5773

%d7%aa%d7%9e%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%94-%d7%99%d7%a9-%d7%90%d7%9c%d7%95%d7%94%d7%99%d7%9d

I found this in some café, around the time I was at Be’er.

I no longer remember what I felt at that moment, what preoccupied me in those days,

or where my heart was when my eyes came to rest on this slip of paper.

There was a pile there; I took one and put it in my wallet.

Once every few months, this question resurfaces and meets me.

Out of everyday life I am pulled up to stand before it, small and wondering.

And each time, something different is on my lips.

There are days when I defy it, stamping both feet in the face of that paralyzing pronouncement.

 And there are times when I accept the verdict humbly, holding out both hands to receive a little sweetness and certainty.

There are times when I am just on the way to finding,

and there are times when, once I am lost, I am lost.

Anyone with any information about His whereabouts,

anyone with any information.

What am I really asking? Perhaps I have gone a bit too far in asking for an answer, but it seems to me that there is no one who does not feel something upon encountering a statement like this. The search, apparently, will always be our lot—and the answer?

Odia, Be’er 5

With God’s help

A Response to Odia

Miky Abraham

Given my mode of thought and my personal inclinations toward philosophy and logic, the first answer that comes to mind to Odia’s question lies in the philosophical sphere. What could be more natural than to offer one proof or another for the existence of God (and indeed, in my opinion, there are very good proofs for this) and leave it at that. But my feeling, on reading her words, was that the distress expressed there is not rooted in the question of proof, or in the intellectual plane at all, but rather in the existential plane. She expects God to reveal Himself or to create some sort of contact with her/us—to stop hiding and vanishing into the shimmering recesses of concealment.

So what does one do with such a good and honest question? Where does one find God? Like a Jew, I will answer a question with a question: how would we expect Him to reveal Himself to us, or to make contact with us? Are we waiting for open miracles? Or for some kind of speech from Him to us, in the sense of Would that all the Lord's people were prophets (Would that all the Lord’s people were prophets)? At Odia’s age, I too carried around a similar expectation: if only I could be given a little certainty. Why are we condemned to doubt, to decision-making, and to action under conditions of uncertainty?

Another question we must ask ourselves: is the task really laid entirely on God’s “shoulders”? Perhaps He expects an awakening from below, and then He will fulfill in us As in water, face answers to face (as face answers to face in water). This question is no less difficult and piercing: what are we doing in order to create this connection with God? It is important to understand that here the distinction mentioned above between the philosophical difficulty and the existential one becomes even sharper. If Odia’s difficulty were on the philosophical plane—that of a person who does not know whether God really exists—then it is indeed reasonable to assume that the task lies with God and not with the human being. So long as I do not know that He exists, it is not reasonable that He can expect something of me or impose tasks on me. But if the difficulty is existential, then it arises within a philosophical and existential framework of faith. Even if I believe on the philosophical plane, I still expect a connection with God, or His self-revelation to me. But here it is truly important to make sure that I too am doing what is incumbent upon me for such a connection to exist. As our Sages said: it takes two to tango (ibid., ibid.). And yet—where does one find Him? Even if the task is mine, what am I to do?

Maimonides devotes chapter 1 of his Laws of Idolatry to the beginnings of the development of idolatry, and afterward to a description (drawn from rabbinic midrashim) of Abraham our patriarch discovering God. Because of the importance of these words for our purposes, I will quote the entire chapter here:

A. In the days of Enosh, people fell into a great error, and the counsel of the wise men of that generation was foolish; Enosh himself was among those who erred. This was their mistake: they said, since God created these stars and spheres to govern the world, placed them on high, apportioned honor to them, and they are attendants who minister before Him, they are worthy of being praised, glorified, and honored. And this is the will of God, blessed be He: to magnify and honor those whom He has magnified and honored, just as a king wishes to honor those who stand before him, and that is the king's honor. Once this idea entered their hearts, they began to build temples for the stars, to offer them sacrifices, to praise and glorify them with words, and to bow down to them, in order thereby to attain the Creator's will according to their evil understanding. This was the essence of idolatry. And this is what its worshippers, who knew its basis, would say—not that they claimed there is no God except this star. This is what Jeremiah meant when he said, 'Who would not fear You, O King of the nations? For it befits You; for among all the wise of the nations and in all their kingdoms there is none like You. But in one thing they are brutish and foolish: the instruction of vanities is but wood'—that is, everyone knows that You alone are God, but their error and folly is that they imagine this vanity is Your will..

B. After many days had passed, false prophets arose among mankind and said that God had commanded them, saying: Worship this particular star, or all the stars; offer to it such-and-such sacrifices and libations; build for it a temple; and make its image so that all the people—women, children, and the rest of the common folk—may bow down to it. He would present them with a form that he had invented in his own mind and say, 'This is the image of that particular star which was made known to me in prophecy.' In this way they began making images in temples, under trees, on mountaintops, and on hills. People would gather and bow down to them, and they would tell all the people that this image does good and evil and is worthy of worship and reverence. Their priests would tell them that through this worship they would multiply and prosper: do such-and-such, and do not do such-and-such. Then other liars arose and said that the star itself, or the sphere, or the angel had spoken with them and told them, 'Worship me in such-and-such a way,' and informed them of its mode of worship: do this, and do not do that. This practice spread throughout the whole world—to worship images through differing rites, to offer them sacrifices, and to bow down to them. As the days went on, the glorious and awesome Name was forgotten from the mouths of all living beings and from their minds, and they no longer recognized Him. Thus all the common people, the women and the children, knew only the image of wood and stone and the stone temple in which they had been trained from childhood to bow down to it, worship it, and swear by its name. And even the wise among them—such as their priests and the like—imagined that there was no god except the stars and spheres for whose sake and in whose likeness these images had been made. But the Rock of the universe—there was no one who recognized Him or knew Him except for isolated individuals in the world, such as Enoch, Methuselah, Noah, Shem, and Eber. And in this way the world continued to turn until the pillar of the world was born—our patriarch Abraham..

C. Once this mighty one was weaned, he began to roam in his mind while still a child. He began to think day and night and wonder: How is it possible that this sphere should always move without having a mover? And who causes it to turn? For it cannot possibly turn itself. He had no teacher and no one to inform him of anything; rather, he was sunk in Ur of the Chaldeans among foolish idolaters, and his father and mother and all the people were idol worshippers—and he worshipped with them. But his heart kept searching and understanding until he attained the path of truth and grasped the line of justice through his sound understanding. He knew that there is one God, that He guides the sphere, that He created everything, and that among all that exists there is no god besides Him. He realized that the entire world was in error, and that what had caused them to err was their worship of the stars and images, until the truth had perished from their minds. And Abraham recognized his Creator at the age of forty. Once he came to know and understand, he began answering the people of Ur of the Chaldeans and debating with them, saying that this was not the path of truth they were following. He smashed the idols and began making known to the people that it is fitting to worship only the God of the world; to Him alone it is fitting to bow down, to offer sacrifices, and to pour libations, so that all creatures yet to come may know Him. It is also fitting to destroy and smash all the images, so that all the people should not err through them as these people do, imagining that there is no god but these. Once he overcame them by his proofs, the king sought to kill him; a miracle was performed for him, and he left for Haran. Then he began to stand and proclaim in a loud voice to the whole world that there is one God for the entire world, and Him alone it is fitting to worship. He went about calling out and gathering people from city to city and from kingdom to kingdom until he reached the land of Canaan—still proclaiming, as it is said: 'And he called there in the name of the Lord, God of the world.' When people gathered around him and asked him about his words, he would explain to each and every one according to his capacity until he brought him back to the path of truth, until thousands and tens of thousands gathered to him. These were the members of Abraham's household. He implanted this great principle in their hearts, composed books about it, and taught it to his son Isaac. Isaac sat teaching and warning others. Isaac taught Jacob and appointed him to teach, and he sat teaching and strengthening all who joined him. Our patriarch Jacob taught all his sons; he set Levi apart, appointed him as head, and placed him in a study hall to teach the way of God and to keep the commandments of Abraham. He instructed his sons that the office should never depart from the descendants of Levi, with one appointee succeeding another, so that the teaching would not be forgotten. This continued to grow stronger among the children of Jacob and those who joined them, and there came into being in the world a nation that knew the Lord. But when Israel's days in Egypt grew long, they reverted to learning the practices of the Egyptians and worshipping stars as they did, except for the tribe of Levi, which remained faithful to the commandment of the patriarchs. The tribe of Levi never worshipped idols. And in but a short while, the principle planted by Abraham was nearly uprooted, and the children of Jacob would have returned to the errors and delusions of the world. But because of the Lord's love for us, and because He kept the oath made to our patriarch Abraham, He appointed Moses our teacher, the master of all the prophets, and sent him. Once Moses our teacher prophesied, and the Lord chose Israel as His inheritance, He crowned them with commandments and made known to them the way He is to be worshipped and what the law is regarding idolatry and all who go astray after it.
+/Raavad's gloss/ 'And Abraham recognized his Creator at the age of forty.' Abraham said: There is an aggadic tradition that he was three years old, as it is said, 'Because Abraham obeyed My voice'—the numerical value of ekev indicates this.

The corrective process that Maimonides describes here begins with Abraham our patriarch’s intellectual conclusion about the existence of God, who created and governs the world. From the moment Abraham arrives at his philosophical conclusion, he begins to spread faith and to serve as a conduit for the connection between God and His world. He assigns this task as well to his descendants and their descendants, in the sense of For I have known him, so that he may command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, doing righteousness and justice. God does indeed reveal Himself to him, but Maimonides scarcely mentions this. Apparently it is not all that important. Later in the process a miracle occurs for him, which is a kind of revelation. But the entire emphasis is on what Abraham did, not on God’s part in the process. Thus begins the chain nourished by Abraham our patriarch, the “knight of faith,” in the phrase of the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, through his sons Isaac and Jacob, Moses our teacher and the prophets (who are granted very intense revelations of God), through the sages of the Oral Torah, down to our own day.

But along this chain another process takes place, one that in a certain sense runs in the opposite direction. If in ancient days God would speak with the patriarchs and the prophets, reveal Himself to them, and perform miracles for them, then in our generations (especially since the end of prophecy) this no longer exists. It is no accident that the Sages explain that the Scroll of Esther, written in the age of the end of prophecy (the end of the First Temple exile, the beginning of the Second Temple period), takes its name from concealment—And I will surely hide My face (I will surely hide My face). This is part of the root of the distress that leads us to disconnect from God. He is absent from our world, because He no longer reveals Himself. We keep asking: where is He? and we receive no answer. True, the disconnections of our day do not head in the pagan directions common in the ages Maimonides describes, but the process seems similar. If we have no miracles and revelations, then the connection with God has been severed. Our substitutes are not idols of wood and stone, but we have found ourselves other idols.

What is the meaning of this process? Why does God, as history advances, withdraw from the world He created? Many Jews await the restoration of that connection to its earlier condition: that He reveal Himself and shine His light upon us, that He return to relating to us, and of course restore prophecy to us as well. But the Sages already said The only difference between this world and the days of the Messiah is subjugation to foreign kingdoms alone (the only difference between this world and the messianic days is subjugation to foreign rule), and The world follows its natural course (the world follows its ordinary course). Astonishingly enough, it seems that even in the utopian messianic days for which we all long, no change is expected on the plane of our relation to God. The disconnection, or concealment, in which we live is apparently not so bad, and it seems that it is not meant to change.

If I may offer a new interpretation of this process, I think it stems precisely from the world’s elevation and progress. People with primitive ways of thinking tend to think that miracles and departures from nature point clearly and sharply to the hand of God. Therefore, in primitive societies there is a tendency to associate divine manifestation with the suspension of the natural order, and the well-known words of Nachmanides at the end of Parashat Bo deny the very concept of nature and claim that everything in our world is miracles. But those same words of Nachmanides can be interpreted in a completely opposite way: even what we call nature is a miracle. Not because there are no laws of nature, and not because we are supposed to deny the laws of physics, chemistry, and biology, but on the contrary: because natural and regular conduct according to the laws of nature points to God’s governance far more clearly than miracles do.

Miraculous conduct expresses chaos. When there are no laws in the world, the world is random and arbitrary. Modern science is characterized by examining the regular and natural conduct of the world, not anomalous phenomena. It seeks lawfulness, not deviations from it. An anomalous phenomenon interests the scientist only as a challenge to the theory and the general law. This is part of the same process of maturation that we have undergone since ancient times. Precisely when the world proceeds according to fixed laws, we can see that there is Someone guiding the sphere (in Maimonides’ formulation regarding Abraham our patriarch). Conduct according to laws means that there is a ruler and a lawgiver. Chaotic conduct, by contrast, expresses the weakness of the ruler, if there is one at all, since he himself cannot manage the world in an orderly and systematic way and therefore requires constant intervention. Moreover, this points to our weakness as well, because God is not willing to let the world—and us within it—conduct itself independently, and He is forced to intervene all the time and run the world in our place.

In ancient times, and for many even today, the feeling was that in order to be a believer we must reject the natural, and certainly its systematic understanding. A scientific theory (such as the Big Bang or evolution, or psychology, or the academic study of the Bible and the Talmud) seems to many to threaten faith and the assumption that God is the One who turns the wheel. But this is childish thinking. In modern thought we can—and therefore are also expected to—understand that the opposite is true: the laws of nature reveal God’s hand and the fact that the world is governed and purposeful. The investigation of nature reveals the divine; it does not hide it. We have matured, and more adult thinking is now required of us. God will not take us by the hand and lead us through His chaotic world. He created laws, He established norms and values, and whoever lives by them and within their framework will discover God in a more mature way. The more He is required to appear, the more it means that we are still dependent, that we still have not grown up. For us to behave nicely, the teacher has to be in the classroom.

The expectation of a miraculous revelation of God is rooted in a mode of thought that has already outlived its usefulness—and if not, then we must make it do so with our own hands, and quickly. Today we are called upon to think more maturely, to understand that if there are laws, there is a lawgiver, and that the laws themselves are the very expression of the lawgiver in our world. An adult does not need miracles in order to understand that he stands before God, just as an adult can understand that scientific abstractions describe reality even though no one has ever seen them directly.

God withdrew Himself to leave room for us. So that we would not rely only on our Father in heaven, as that distorted, enervating bumper-sticker slogan would have it. A good parent is supposed to allow his child, at least when the child matures, to develop independence and gradually free himself from childish dependence on the parent. Yeshayahu Leibowitz wrote more than once that miracles never led anyone to repentance. The most striking example he gives is that immediately after the revelation at Mount Sinai we fell into the sin of the Golden Calf. This is a result of childish faith. Children who believe and obey only because of discipline and by virtue of the teacher’s presence sin the moment he is absent.

This is the meaning of the historical process of “divine hiddenness.” It is not concealment but a great revelation. God does not want us to develop dependence; He wants us to stand on our own feet. He regards us as more mature than earlier generations, and from mature people He expects that they not require miracles and departures from nature. In this God conveys an important message to us: faith in God is not an alternative to life in the world; it is the meaning of the ordinary world in which we live. To be a believer does not mean living in another world. The Torah was not given to the ministering angels (the Torah was not given to ministering angels). This is the world in which we live, and it is into it that God must be brought. Religious life is not an alternative to life, to rationality, or to naturalness; it is the foundation of them all. It seems to me that this is the meaning of the Hasidic story about the Kotzk Rebbe: when they asked him where God is to be found, he answered: wherever one lets Him in.

The Sages say that in the generations after prophecy, prophecy was taken from the prophets and given to the sages. The meaning of this is that the connection with God is a task that rests primarily on us and not on Him. To the extent that we understand the world and manage it ourselves in a proper and better way, our connection—as mature and rational people—to God will deepen. It is hard to be an adult. It is frustrating, and it demands responsibility and imposes it. Sometimes it is despairing, and sometimes it leads to defiance and foot-stamping. We wait for a bit of certainty, and it is not given to us. An adult is supposed to conduct himself in the world as it is, and not expect someone to replace him, or to lead him by the hand and manage him.

For many years the believing Jew was passive (in contrast to Protestant Christianity, which, ironically, specifically within a deterministic outlook calls for activism and taking fate into one’s own hands, and of course in contrast to secularism). It is hardly surprising that our return to the Land was carried out mainly by people who were, for the most part, non-believers. The lesson is that we must refresh our faith. To believe means to understand, to stand on our own feet, to be autonomous and rational, to draw conclusions and act upon them. Not to let frustrations paralyze us, and not to wait for some old father in heaven who will come and change the “cruel” world for us—the world within which we are condemned to act.

My answer to Odia, then, is that God is present in everything we look at. He has neither need nor desire to reveal Himself, because He is revealed before us all the time. In an age of mature humanity, that revelation does not take place through miracles and transcendent events, but through law and the natural order, and through the norms and values that He gave us in His Torah. Those who do not see this simply need to grow up. And those who do see it certainly have no need to luxuriate in the childish romanticism of a miraculous connection with the transcendent.

Discussion

Michi (2017-02-19)

Shu"a
Maturity is nice, and childish romanticism is not, but is the distress worth the king’s cost? What bothers God so much about solving the existential difficulties people have? As far as I’m concerned, the arguments about independence and the demand for maturity and growing up do not seem strong enough to justify refraining from solving hardships that apparently lead people to cut significant chunks out of their lives in order to overcome them. Is there some additional benefit here, or are these foundational values in and of themselves? [And with respect to free choice, it doesn’t harm it too much, as you yourself brought from the sin of the Golden Calf].
Besides, it seems that God also makes no effort to solve philosophical difficulties (for those of us—for example me—who do not see God in everything, whatever the reasons may be that my capacity for thought has not yet become obsolete).
In any case, I’m waiting for the book on theology..
8 months ago

Michi
This has nothing to do with what does or doesn’t bother Him, nor with our free choice. He created His world according to laws because that was His will (perhaps to help us manage within it. In a world without laws, you cannot manage because you cannot predict what will happen), and a world that operates according to laws does not allow such interventions.

Michi (2017-02-19)

Amir Chozeh
All the arguments in favor of a world governed by fixed laws are all well and good, but in my humble opinion miraculous revelation is not equivalent to chaos; rather, it points to an entity standing behind that miracle.
In the same sense, when a person makes a conscious choice and does not merely go along with his nature (if you think about it, that too could be called a miracle—though not a grandiose one—because after all it is an act that goes against nature), one can see that behind this body of flesh there stands an independent entity, unlike my Tami 4 water dispenser, which has served me faithfully for years and does not choose to defy my will (and therefore I see it as an extension of myself and not as an entity in its own right).
In other words, I do not think that a miracle, if it occurs, points to chaos any more than choice points to randomness.

And even if we set aside the issue of miracles, what prevents the Holy One, blessed be He, from revealing Himself to us through speech, for example?
To sharpen the question: how does His revealing Himself to us through speech negate all the advantages you showed in the article of a world operating by the laws of nature? I do not see them as contradicting one another. The Holy One, blessed be He, can reveal Himself to me, can tell me what to do or not tell me what to do, or hint to me what to do, without interfering with my process of maturation.
I also visit my parents from time to time (and will continue to visit them all my life), and I do not see this as something that prevents me from maturing or being independent, or at least prevents my independence to such an extent that I would have to cut off all contact with them and not exchange a single word with them lest I receive from them some hint or advice about how to conduct my life.
7 months ago

Michi Abraham
When I compare a world that is governed by laws with chaos, I am not speaking about a local miracle but about ongoing conduct that does not follow laws. Miraculous conduct of the world as a whole is indeed chaos. You are speaking about local, directed miracles, and that indeed is not chaotic. Here there remains only the question of maturation.

There is nothing preventing the Holy One, blessed be He, from revealing Himself through speech, but it seems He does not want that. But a visit from the Holy One, blessed be He, is not like a visit from one’s parents. If you do not visit your parents, then you have no relationship with them. But you visit the Holy One, blessed be He, all the time in the Torah when you study it, and when you pay attention to nature and investigate it (in the language of Maimonides in Hilkhot Yesodei HaTorah: “And what is the way to love Him and fear Him?”). After all, you have no way to approach Him directly. His revelation and speech are meant to give instructions, but instructions He apparently does not want to give you, because He has already given them. Now He expects you to conduct yourself according to them like a mature and independent person.

Michi (2017-02-19)

Amir Chozeh
I agree with your distinction between a local miracle and an ongoing miraculous mode of conduct, and I understand what you meant in the article.
I also understand your position when you speak of maintaining a relationship with Him through Torah study, and perhaps also through performing the commandments (although you did not mention that in your reply). But I have to say that despite all this, it seems that when prophecy ceased, our connection with God—and also with the Torah—largely ceased as well.
It seems that people in the biblical period had a natural experiential charge regarding ritual actions connected with divinity, whether these were commandments of God or idolatry. If I may put it simplistically, one could say that all these matters—ritual, sacrifices, the Sabbath—spoke to them! Today, performing the commandments and studying them are no more than technical acts that we do because we are obligated to do them (a simplistic description, I know, but one that describes a real phenomenon).

I know your doctrine regarding the reason for performing commandments relatively well, and I mostly agree with your view that we perform them out of a basic obligation of gratitude (for me personally, the anchor is the Exodus from Egypt and God’s revelation at Mount Sinai), but it is obvious to me that it is not supposed to stop there. It is supposed to continue and develop from there and speak to me—otherwise, what is the point of such a life?? Is this what God wanted—that I should place two black boxes, one on my arm and one on my head, until the end of my days? What is the point here?
And if we are talking about maturity, when a small child is initially educated, he certainly accepts his parents’ authority without much understanding or desire, but as he grows up (and overcomes), that very education he receives from his parents begins to speak to him; things start to sound reasonable, and he even begins to find satisfaction in the way of life to which his parents (if they educated him well, of course) led him.

To sum up, if I understand you correctly, you are basically saying that God’s detachment from the world is the final stage that the world was meant to reach from the outset. I of course agree with you that His detachment was intentional and was meant to play a role in our development, but I simply do not see it as logical that this is where it ends. I have no other theological explanation for why God chose to detach from the world, but to see His detachment not as a stage but as a final goal is simply inconceivable if one takes into account the terrible disconnection from the Torah itself that resulted from it (or at least from its ritual dimension).
7 months ago

Michi Abraham
A small child too has a constant experience of connection with his parents, whereas an older child no longer does. This is indeed a true description of the absence of experience, and that is exactly what I was talking about—that it is part of maturation.
I have no idea what role the black boxes serve, but I think the earlier generations also had no idea. That has not changed, and therefore this difficulty has nothing to do with my point. What disappeared over the generations was the revelation of the Holy One, blessed be He, and miracles—not the reasons for the commandments. Why the reasons for the commandments were not revealed is a good question to which I have no answer.
7 months ago

Yisrael (2017-03-05)

In the Torah (the portions of Nitzavim and Vayelekh), it is stated explicitly that the hiding of God’s face comes as a punishment, and not as the rabbi said above, that it is actually an optimal state.

mikyab123 (2017-03-05)

In the ancient period it was a punishment. If a father hides his face from his small son, that is a punishment; not so once he has grown up.

Yaakov (2019-12-14)

Regarding the messianic era, it is simply not true that the situation is not destined to change. There are explicit verses about this in the Prophets, such as “I will pour out My spirit upon all flesh” and “the earth shall be full of knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.” It is also explicit that there will be miracles and wonders, as it says, “As in the days when you came out of the land of Egypt, I will show him wonders.” And there are more explicit verses that teach this.

Michi (2019-12-15)

The Sages disagree with you: “There is no difference between this world and the days of the Messiah except subjugation to foreign kingdoms.”
The question is: about which period was “As in the days of your coming out…” said? And does “wonders” necessarily mean miracles, or only redemption?

Shveik (2020-04-13)

This reminds me of my first girlfriend, who broke up with me unilaterally. At the time I did not understand the hint; I thought it was some sort of relationship thing, that she expected me to invest more and pursue her with full vigor. At a certain point it became a bit embarrassing, and fortunately I understood that I should stop. In this sense, there indeed was a relationship between the world and God in the classic biblical style, but in light of God’s voluntary departure, I personally get the hint and am prepared to part as friends. Just as they gave Him reward for the demand, let them give Him reward for the withdrawal.

Tam. (2020-09-29)

The matter of individual providence does not contradict what you said above, as long as providence is not an act that contradicts regularity, aside from the timing, which sometimes leaves no doubt that there is no such thing as chance. Childish or not, that is not the question; there is a reality and one must deal with it. One can believe that the timing is only the result of statistics, and one can assume what is more plausible: that every timing has one who times it. Occam’s razor teaches us that it is preferable to choose what is more probable rather than a remote statistical possibility.
Can one prove God through individual providence? Seemingly not, but rational probability says that there is intervention here, and the skeptic will remain a skeptic. If he insists, we shall knock out his teeth, and cast doubt on whether it was we who knocked out his teeth—after all, perhaps he is dreaming that his teeth were knocked out.

Oren (2021-02-03)

Rabbi, there are explicit prophecies about prophecy returning to the world. Do you believe prophecy will return? And how does that fit with what you said?

Michi (2021-02-03)

I have no idea. As for prophecies, they can be interpreted in many ways.

Aharon (2024-01-31)

Perhaps just as divine involvement existed only in the time of prophecy, so too the observance of commandments belongs only to the time when there was prophecy?

Michi (2024-01-31)

Perhaps

Former Student {who glanced toward openness, and returned to sobriety!} (2025-01-01)

What do you say about such great divine intervention in our own day? Has God returned to our land?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2zMU6UQiRk
If you want to meet him, such a meeting can be arranged (not a head-to-head “verification” but a heart-to-heart “confrontation”)

As above (2025-01-04)

Well then? What does Your Honor say about what my honor has brought?

Michi (2025-01-05)

My honor is not interested in these topics, and neither am I.

A Nuisance Fly on the Nose (2025-01-07)

Your Honor need not take an interest in these topics as an intriguing and interesting subject in its own right, but if it contradicts your general doctrine that nowadays there is no individual providence, then you are compelled to deal with such cases and others like them. And if it turns out that this is not one case, nor two, nor three, then you have two choices in your hands: either to revise your doctrine and say that God has returned to the land {perhaps due to the prelude to our redemption}, or to say indeed, “It is the finger of God in individual providence,” and just as I thought to receive reward for the demand, so I will surely receive reward for the withdrawal

השאר תגובה

Back to top button