April 10, 2013 7:29 pm at 7:29 pm #608931
Can You?April 10, 2013 7:37 pm at 7:37 pm #959586
I got it one word: Existence.April 10, 2013 7:45 pm at 7:45 pm #959588
For someone like myself, who isn’t adequately knowledgeable in science and probability, I need a simple, logical, clear, and concise argument for the existence of G-d.April 10, 2013 7:48 pm at 7:48 pm #959589
??? ??? ?????April 10, 2013 7:53 pm at 7:53 pm #959590
Something doesn’t scientifically come from nothing, yet nearly all agree there was once nothing, proving that a power outside science created the something.April 10, 2013 7:56 pm at 7:56 pm #959591
Another try for one sentence: What Rabbi Kelemen’s book “Permission to Believe” says.April 10, 2013 8:31 pm at 8:31 pm #959592
Birth of a child.April 10, 2013 8:32 pm at 8:32 pm #959593
That every existing thing seems to have a cause, together with the sheer complexity of the universe, reasonably points to an earlier cause which had no cause (and therefore cannot be properly defined or explained), and one that was cognizant of what it had created. This cause is called God.
It should be noted, however, that this argument alone does not prove Judaism or any other religion that I know of. It simply says there was a creator.April 10, 2013 9:14 pm at 9:14 pm #959594
I like yours, yitayningwut.April 10, 2013 11:49 pm at 11:49 pm #959595
frumnotyeshivish, yitayningwut- thank you.
I remember something from Rabbi Avigdor Miller that the fact that nature has a plan and purpose shows that it was created by G-d.
The counter argument of the Atheist is, “If nature was created by G-d, then what created G-d?”
So Rabbi Miller said that is a trap.
To avoid the trap, you should say that plan and purpose of nature shows that it had to have been created by intelligence.
If you want to say that Greater Intelligence created intelligence etc, you can.
Hence infinite intelligence; hence G-d.April 11, 2013 12:15 am at 12:15 am #959596
Talmud: No chiddush there. That argument is basically a summary of Aristotle’s metaphysics.April 11, 2013 12:23 am at 12:23 am #959598
What are the odds that intelligent life could emerge from stars being born and exploding at their deaths? What are the odds that out of complete chaos a complex entity like a human being could be formed? It’s scientifically nearly impossible that the collision of forces that resulted in life could ever have happened or ever happen again. That is enough for me to see that there was a Divine hand guiding this scientific process the whole time- the evolution of life is ingenious and suggests intelligence far beyond blind natural forces.
But at the end of the day, faith is based on trust and hope. All the logic and rational philosophical arguments in the world pale in comparison to the human experience of revelation from hakadosh baruch hu. The midrash says that even the lowliest shifchah saw more at yam suf than yechezkel ben buzi. If only we could merit to see hashem as clearly as those shifchos and have a relationship with him, rather than the philosophers who thought of God in the abstract and were after intellectual understanding of God and his ways. This approach is not bad, Rambam was even a proponent of it, but far inferior to feeling a personal connection to god.April 11, 2013 12:27 am at 12:27 am #959599
Would you go up to Steven Hawking and ask him to prove to you the theory of relativity in just one sentence? I think not, therefore I don’t think you’re giving a fair chance whatsoever to Judaism and God. In any case, simply by looking around you can see God and all His beauty. The fact that the same factors that would kill the fetus are what it needs to survive and the same factors that sustain the fetus whilst still in the womb would kill it as soon as he leaves the womb, and this happens instantaneously, I’d say that’s a pretty strong proof. (It’s the Rambam’s proof)April 11, 2013 4:47 am at 4:47 am #959600
All the Nissim in the Torah are proof that the one who said they will happen, did them, and controls the world. This is the reason they were performed, to be a proof of Hashem. (Taken from Mifalos Elokim of the Abrabanel)April 11, 2013 4:52 am at 4:52 am #959601
Rambam Hilchos Yesodei Hatorah 1:1. For the longer proof, Moreh Nevuchim 2:25.April 11, 2013 5:43 am at 5:43 am #959602
Rabbi Perfect: Theory of relativity in one sentence. All matter travels through time at about the speed of light, which is maximum speed, therefore the greater the speed something travels the slower it moves through time.April 11, 2013 7:07 am at 7:07 am #959603
“Look in the mirror.”April 11, 2013 9:27 am at 9:27 am #959604
no longer need seminaryMember
very well worded yitayingutApril 11, 2013 10:07 am at 10:07 am #959605
If Ink spilled, would it be possible that the ink would magically spread and create a novel?
If a monkey sat with a typewriter, would it be possible for it to write a masterpiece?
If there was only a big bang, where did the complexities of nature come from? How did the marvellous world we live in come into existence? The sun, moon, stars? The millions of wonderful flowers, plants and trees? The thousands of animals?April 11, 2013 10:08 am at 10:08 am #959606
One sentence? Sure: ?????? ??? ????? ?? ????? ??? ????April 11, 2013 5:33 pm at 5:33 pm #959607
yekke2- wow, this ?????? guy must be very powerfulApril 11, 2013 6:18 pm at 6:18 pm #959608
What if G-d has chosen not to be proven? If so, then we cannot prove His Existence no matter how many sentences we use…April 11, 2013 6:29 pm at 6:29 pm #959609
It seems like a rediculous question,but its been asked.
The divinity (G-d’s existence) is in Kashrus.April 11, 2013 6:51 pm at 6:51 pm #959610
Artscroll Shas.April 11, 2013 7:04 pm at 7:04 pm #959611
Ender: sorry, I don’t follow.
Talmud: LOL!April 11, 2013 7:06 pm at 7:06 pm #959612
Relativity does not have to be explained logically, it can be proved experimentally and has been. “Proving,” or disproving for that matter, the existence of G-d by logical argument is simply an intellectual exercise, not proof by scientific standards. We believe in G-d because of the testimony of eye witnesses. Vaya’ar Ysroel es hayad…vaya’aminu baHaShem…April 11, 2013 7:41 pm at 7:41 pm #959613
Relativity does not have to be explained logically, it can be proved experimentally and has been. “Proving,” or disproving for that matter, the existence of G-d by logical argument is simply an intellectual exercise, not proof by scientific standards. We believe in G-d because of the testimony of eye witnesses. Vaya’ar Ysroel es hayad…vaya’aminu baHaShem…April 11, 2013 7:53 pm at 7:53 pm #959614
Rabbi Perfect: Try this.
Everything is always traveling at light speed at all times. This travel is taking place in a 4 dimensional field (time being the fourth dimension). For all intents and purposes this means we are all traveling through time at the speed of light. The faster we travel in the other three dimensions necessarily takes away from traveling through time at the speed of light. Thus the faster we travel the slower we travel through time.
(There is more to the theory than that which involves gravitational pull over distances, but this is the main part that people refer to).April 11, 2013 8:49 pm at 8:49 pm #959615
Doesn’t the ???? ?????? in ??? ????? say that not only must one believe in HKB”H and the fact that He created the world singlehandedly, one is ?????? to be ???? in logically proving this?
(Never learnt it properly; I was told that it is not for ????? ??????, but I flipped through it once)April 11, 2013 8:56 pm at 8:56 pm #959616
No. It is not possible for a mere mortal like me to prove or disprove the existence of HaShem. It is an ikkar of faith.April 11, 2013 9:55 pm at 9:55 pm #959617
this is longer than one sentence but it’s so cool I’m putting it up neways.
if the athiest is right,then he lives life the way he wants to, dies, and then nuthin( they x believe in afterlife). The religious jew lives a torah life tryin to improve himself and do kindness to others, he dies, and then nuthin.
if the religious person is right, then he lives a torah life, dies,and gets rewarded 4ever.the athiest lives his life,dies, and… We can only hope he won’t be 2 surprised…
they can’t both be right. In either case, the religious person hasn’t lost nethin.but there’s a 50% chance that the athiest is in for a rude awakening.
this is from the book sun inside rain by m. Bassra btw…
but… If the religious jew is right, then he livesApril 11, 2013 10:14 pm at 10:14 pm #959618
you can’t prove it in one sentence, one book, or one lifetime. in fact, you cannot absolutely prove it (in the scientific sense) at all. in fact, your ability to prove His existence might only serve to diminish His greatness.April 11, 2013 10:42 pm at 10:42 pm #959619
bure and mactavish, with one and six tenth seconds, puck is dropped, mactavish controls and its all over, the new york rangers have won the stanley cup, something that most people did not think they would hear in their lifetime.April 11, 2013 11:45 pm at 11:45 pm #959620
yekke2- Not to learn ??? ????? is not a recent admonishment. Even the mizrachi, and the far lefters don’t read it.
brony- read yitayningwut’s first post on this thread. All he is saying that there is a ’cause’April 12, 2013 1:48 am at 1:48 am #959621
‘The counter argument of the Atheist is, “If nature was created by G-d, then what created G-d?”‘
Illogical. If you say there is a creator, why must one assume that something created the creator? That defeats the purpose. WHy must the creator have been created?
So in a way, it is a trap, a word trap to get people stuck in their own thoughts when they don’t need to be.
Rabbi Perfect: Apparently, Einstein was once asked that same question by a reporter- he was pretty annoyed, but he gave some form of an answer.April 12, 2013 4:35 am at 4:35 am #959622
writersoul – it isn’t necessarily an irrational argument; I’d prefer to call it pointing out a vague aspect of what is the most rational explanation for existence.
My proof was that things don’t come from nothing. If this is absolutely true, the only logical conclusion is that there always was something (or nothing, which I won’t address more than by saying that anyone who thinks they don’t exist is someone I couldn’t possibly be talking to).
The problem with the idea that there was always something (other than the expanding universe), is that it fundamentally at the deepest level makes no sense. The question of what came first, the chicken or egg has a strong point. There must have been an egg that didn’t come from a chicken or a chicken that didn’t come from an egg. Well, what did it come from? An evolution based argument may say “something else.” And that? “Something else.” But then what? What is physical matter so as to exist, and what caused it?
The most rational answer is “an entity outside the rules,” or more specifically “an entity not caused by any other entity.”
The next obvious question is what created the entity outside the rules? My entire argument was based on the scientific fact that everything comes from something, so how can I says that there’s an entity that doesn’t come from something?
The answer is, that we can’t/don’t know how it works, it’s beyond science; all we know is that it must be.
While it is true that the atheist’s point that this argument is untestable is valid, better the untestable than the one that fails the test.April 12, 2013 2:25 pm at 2:25 pm #959623
The most rational answer is “an entity outside the rules,” or more specifically “an entity not caused by any other entity.”
The next obvious question is what created the entity outside the rules?
That’s not the next question, because you’ve already answered that question: the entity doesn’t have a cause. You can’t ask what created something if you admit it wasn’t caused by anything.
This argument doesn’t really fail any test. The argument is that if the universe had a beginning then according to what we see in our world – that things in existence have a cause – we ought to assume something caused it. Therefore we can argue that either the universe has no beginning – i.e. it breaks the rules of cause and effect – or something outside of it which ultimately caused it has no beginning.
Which possibility is preferable? There is a clear appeal to the second possibility. The reason is that if we are to say that something broke one of the rules of the universe, it seems more reasonable that this thing is not the universe itself but something outside of it not subject to its rules.
This argument simply says that the first cause (the cause that was not itself caused by something else) is an entity other than the universe itself. The fact that the universe is so complex is used as an argument that whatever this cause is, it caused the universe intentionally. This entity we call God.
I should note that well known atheists such as Hitchens do not think that this argument is false as is. They simply state two things in response: 1) Science will eventually produce elegant enough answers which don’t require the belief in an outside, intelligent entity with no beginning; and 2) Even if we accept this argument, it is a far cry from being proof of any particular religion. In fact with this informati0on alone one could still be a deist; someone who believes in the existence of God but completely rejects any idea of religion or of him interacting with us.
Therefore, although this is a pretty sufficient argument for the existnce of God, much more needs to be said to argue for the existence of the God of [Ultra-]Orthodox Judaism.April 12, 2013 4:18 pm at 4:18 pm #959624
Well if Hitchens will agree that there is a God who created this spectacular universe and is obviously the source of all wisdom and intelligence and created humans who possess wisdom and intelligence doesn’t that logically tell you that he created man to be like Him or to resemble Him and to have a relationship with Him? If you believe Hashem made us you must believe he wouldn’t bother with creating beings as complex as we are without a purpose and without revealing that phrpose to us. Its obvious that humans are the pinnacle of physical creation and the most complex. Its apparent that everything else on the world was created for their good and their benefit. Doesn’t that tell you that God is good and kind and wants to give to us so at the minimum this would require us to think about Him and thank Him and show appreciation to Him on a regular basis. This many not be enough to prove any specific religion just yet but it dsfinitely obligates one to live a spiritual ethical and moral life and to treat others kindly because they are created by him and how dare you hurt His beings that he created. To me this all seems logical and he should agree.April 12, 2013 4:34 pm at 4:34 pm #959625
WIY: Not necessarily. I know someone who believes in a higher power (you can call it god or anything else you want), but he believes that this being one day created a universe because it was bored. After creating the universe, it left it alone and went to do something else. Why is that illogical?April 12, 2013 4:57 pm at 4:57 pm #959626
By the way I think its a bit shver to say Hashem would or could get bored. Its a limitation on Him as if He couldn’t come up with a way to not be bored. Furthermore Hashem could have created the world in one second so how did that solve His “boredom? ”
Even if Hashem created the world and left it, we are still obligated to feel hakaros hatov to Hashem for creating us and to constantly thank Him for all the gokd he did for us. For example if bill gates gave you a $100,000,000, for him ghat would hardly make a dent in his fortune, however from your end you are obligated and should feel hakaros hatov every day of your life to him and should probably call him once a week to thank him. No? You would constantly go around talking about how amazing and kind and good and wonderful bill gates is. That’s how you would act. Same thing someone who believes Hashem gave him everything and made everything must also go around living with that awe of the one who gave it all to him and to constantly feel appreciation and to thank that being on a regular basis and not to damage that which the Being created.April 12, 2013 5:10 pm at 5:10 pm #959627
everyone who replied to me: thanks I guess, I was just trying to make a point though lol. And yeah as aforementioned, it isn’t illogical to believe that God created the universe and mankind etc. for His own benefit or whatever, it isn’t logical to say that He must’ve created us to emulate Him. As for the Deists that do believe this, this was actually the common belief for a long period of time. Even Socrates and Aristotle have been sourced to believe this. You see, atheism is really a fairly new belief (maybe a few hundred years old) until then it was either some sort of Monotheism, Polytheism, or as we just said Deism.April 12, 2013 5:17 pm at 5:17 pm #959628
WIY: You’re thinking of Hashem as we believe it, in Judaism. For someone whoisn’t sure what to believe, why do they have to believe god is perfect? Maybe he’s just some super-powerful being who can get bored?
As for an obligation of hakaras hatov, yes, in an ideal world everyone would give hakaras hatov when it is due. Sadly, that is not the case. Besides, this guy doesn’t believe the powerful being gave him everything. The being created the world, and left it to run itself.April 12, 2013 5:22 pm at 5:22 pm #959629
Why create humans at all? If yes why create humans with the ability to pray, believe, love, have self control, be kind have feelings….? Why create a soul? Why does man have this need to want to seek meaning and purpose in his life? Why does man get depressed when he has no meaning in his life? You see if someone looks at the world with open eyes there are just too many questions that have no answer. If there is no God then nothing makes sense.April 12, 2013 6:25 pm at 6:25 pm #959630
WIY- FYI as an aside, Hitchens is dead.
The new runner up Athiest would probably be Richard Dawkins. The former UK Chief Rabbi Lord (chol) Jonothan Sacks debated him last year. Check it out.April 12, 2013 6:37 pm at 6:37 pm #959631
First let the record state that I DO believe in HaShem and that He created the world, etc. I am merely stating some counter arguments to what others said is “logical” and may use as their proofs, thus I am saying that it isn’t so “logical” and therefore that doesn’t constitute as a definitive proof. That is all.
WIY- All these questions are fine, but firstly, one can argue and say that there is no such thing as a “soul”. Furthermore, all these “feelings” could also just be our minds response to our habits and environments, (i.e. a person who has never seen any form of gore or violence will get completely grossed out and sad upon witnessing it for the first time. However if a person grew up seeing it, and there’s no problem with it, it will have almost no effect on him).April 12, 2013 8:18 pm at 8:18 pm #959632
Not really. How do you know for sure that it he is interested in the mundane actions of every individual person? Even if he is interested in man, that doesn’t automatically mean the Torah is from him. There are a lot of steps, each of which must be carefully argued out. My point was not to say that being frum is incorrect; obviously not. I am simply saying that proving the existence of God alone doesn’t go very far in proving that our version of Orthodox Judaism is what God was interested in when he created the world.April 12, 2013 8:33 pm at 8:33 pm #959633
This isn’t once sentence but it’s the best I’ve got.
If believe you believe in evolution and that we are here by random chance, then your very existence could be based on the way the wind was blowing one day and which leaf fell off a tree and landed in someone face causing them to turn a certain way ect.(for those who get the reference:)). Had the wind been blowing a different way or a the leaf not fallen of the tree you might never have existed. Furthermore, if you believe you are here by random chance then your life has no purpose. You are simply drifting aimlessly through the universe with no goal or point or direction. If however, you believe in a higher power that created you with a purpose in life then your life takes on actual meaning and direction with an end that is more than just death and nothingness.
I believe it was Aristotle who once proved through logic that humans have a spiritual, non-physical part of them. Our entire world is physical and in order to interact with the physical world we have physical bodies. We need a hand in order to touch and feel a desk or a tree. We need a nose to smell flowers.But what about the non-physical in this world like emotions or thoughts? Physical cannot interact with the non-physical. Your hand cannot touch love. Your nose cannot smell hate. Aristotle concluded that there must be a non-physical part of you that interact with the non-physical in the world. This is what we call a soul. Since physical cannot create nonphysical there must be a nonphysical being that created the soul that resides in each and every of us. That being is G-d.April 12, 2013 8:40 pm at 8:40 pm #959634
What was called the trap question is answered by the concept of Mechuyav Metzius. Matter begins somewhere and is set in motion by a beginning. The core, conscious essential existence doesn’t have these requirements.
This is the concept that the Rambam, Chovas Halevavos, and philosophers’ arguments are based on.
The Abravanel points out that the Nissim of the Torah are the best proof. The Torah seems to imply the same.April 12, 2013 8:57 pm at 8:57 pm #959635
Another thing to keep in mind is that while many scientists feel survival of the fittest and time explain the creation, it does not explain lack of creation.
Design doesn’t only mean that the world and creations have what they need, it also means that whatever they have, they need. There is no scientific or logical explanation for that fact that we don’t have carrot-like protrusions, that aren’t decoration, protection, storage, or for other important functions.
It is taken for granted that if an animal has a funny looking limb it serves a purpose. Why don’t unnecessary limbs just develope? Why don’t humans have useless wings under our feet?
Often, liturature refer to Nature almost as a conscious entity. This is because when you observe nature, the conscious designer stares you in the face. People also feel instinctively that they were put places for a purpose. Those who don’t want to acknowledge Someone in charge refer to how Fate put them there, or Nature, or the Universe, or the General Consciousness.
Since you asked for one sentence, use the first. Back it up with the rest.April 12, 2013 10:00 pm at 10:00 pm #959636
Ok – so from I’ve read so far (haven’t had a chance to read all the posts in their entirety yet), you all have good answers for those of us who ALREADY BELIEVE. If someone is a non-believer, they can counter probably everything that was said here.
I really don’t think you can convince someone to believe. True belief has to come from WITHIN. It’s just something you have to feel.
I like what LSH said “What if G-d has chosen not to be proven? If so, then we cannot prove His Existence no matter how many sentences we use.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.