The writing, the sound, and what is appropriate (regarding the naturalistic fallacy)

To the honor of dear Rabbi Michael, Peace be upon you,
 
I have a question about what many call the "sanctity of the Torah" or the "divinity of the Torah" or that the Torah is "from heaven."
 
I want to address the question through things I read from you, and I think I also understood them in themselves.
I read that you wrote several times about the confirmation that the Torah is divine from the special history of the Jewish people. If I'm not mistaken, you probably mean the exiles and redemptions.
I'm a little confused about what the reinforcement is here.
I wonder if this could, in principle, join the plagues of Egypt, the plagues in the Torah (if there are any), prophecies that came true, and let's say there were all kinds of miracles related to figures that the Torah tradition exalts.
 
I'll get to the point – I don't know how to confirm or deny stories of miracles or supernatural knowledge, but let's say that tomorrow the Honorable Rabbi is walking down the street and a book suddenly appears before his eyes and lands right in his hands. The book says that it is appropriate to run three times every day and that this is God's will. Would the Rabbi believe that it is appropriate to run three times every day?
I must admit that I was not convinced by the book at all. I do not know what the connection is between the writing that appeared before my eyes and a moral question or understanding as such – what is proper and what is improper. In fact, it fails in the naturalistic fallacy, pointed out by David Hume – it is a leap from facts to a moral command. There is a missing logical link here that connects the writer's sensory vision to moral understanding. This would of course be exactly the same if I heard a voice from above, uttering the words "It is proper to run three times every day."
What is the connection between experiencing sounds and letters out of nowhere, and doing so in a way that goes against the laws of nature that I know so far, and understanding what is right to do?
 
Therefore, even if we say that the tradition about the Mount Sinai stand was exactly as the kindergarten teacher relates in terms of the facts, no moral obligation is derived from the understanding that an experience of words appeared in Moses' consciousness, whether it was vocal or whether scrolls or stone tablets appeared to him.
I think the only solution to the problem of the naturalistic fallacy is the understanding that there is intuition, which accompanies speech, ethical discussion, the understanding of a reasoned text, and somewhere this is always connected at the root of things to a meeting with the inner voices of the soul, of the soul of others, of the soul of the living… This is often connected to the "libido" that manifests itself in various forms in life.
But what is the proof that Moses received intuition? Or did the people of Israel receive it? Maybe there were just supernatural things all along the way. Maybe they just heard voices. And even if he received intuition – how can we know that it was clear, and that he himself understood it properly?
We can say – we directly and authentically experience this from our ancestors, we hear it in the authentic voice of the Rebbe, we understand that the commandments are moral, etc., etc.
But then the Torah is like any tradition, and any Torah in that there is no Rabbi that is "divine" or "from heaven" regarding the reason for its existence, but rather a person must hear the wisdom of the ages, consider for himself, hear the wisdom of other peoples, hear moral philosophers, politicians, psychologists, etc., and decide what is most moral in his opinion.
 
And regarding the thought of reward and punishment – if God created a world with a lot of evil and a lot of good even though He is omnipotent – it is a sign that the trend of creating the world is not entirely in favor of our happiness or the lack of our suffering or the opposite – neither for the lack of our happiness and the abundance of our suffering,
Therefore, I am not sure that the direction of the Torah, which is part of creation, either in a chain or directly from the Creator, is to instruct us on how to be happy or alternatively threaten us with bullying. It is like I would not be much moved by threats or promises from people I do not know intend to do me particularly good or particularly harm. If it is a person with an ambivalent attitude towards me, I will not take his words seriously (except to take care of him). Also, the history of the Jewish people – I do not think anyone can prove that the more righteous we were and kept the more commandments we returned to the land, or that the more we abandoned the commandments we were exiled.
 
Therefore, the question is – what does it mean that the Torah is "from heaven" and how can this be proven apart from the claims of the reasons for the commandments? (It seems to me that Maimonides and Rabbi Kook actually went in the direction of proof from ethics.)
 
Thank you very much and Happy Shabbat,
Ofir