4

The first halacha in the Mishnah Torah states that you must know for certain that God exists (Yesodei Hatorah 1:1). Does this mean that according to Rambam, God can be proven to exist through philosophical and logical arguments?

Nowadays, many of the classic philosophical arguments for God's existence (argument from design, ontological, cosmological) have either been disproven, or simply found not to be very convincing. That being said, is it still a value to discover and know God through science or philosophy? Or now that we live in a scientific age where most scientists and philosophers are flaming atheists, should we be relying on faith alone?

msh210
  • 73,729
  • 12
  • 120
  • 359
Eilu V'Eilu
  • 388
  • 1
  • 8
  • This is a huge Mahloket Rishonim if I understand your question correctly. BN if I find time I'll try to shed some light. – Hacham Gabriel Jun 03 '13 at 03:44
  • 1
    we need to use the sciences and philosophies of our times, which is up to date, and use it to our advantage to prove HaShem. We can't understand Him but we can prove Him being "existent" – MoriDowidhYa3aqov Jun 03 '13 at 03:59
  • "Nowadays, many of the classic philosophical arguments for God's existence... have either been disproven, or simply found not to be very convincing." Many intelligent people still find the argument from design and/or the cosmological argument to be compelling, it's just that the discussion has become more advanced in light of scientific advancement. – Fred Jun 03 '13 at 18:34
  • related: http://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/13764 – Fred Jun 03 '13 at 18:35
  • @Fred That sentence actually doesn't affect the content question at all, AFAIU. – Charles Koppelman Jun 04 '13 at 03:07

2 Answers2

4

In my opinion, the arguments have not been disproven only that we do not understand the arguments. see the shaar yichud with commentaries

(i.e. we don't study the arguments in enough depth to understand them, therefore we mistakenly think they have been disproven. hence study with the commentaries, and even then if something doesn't make sense, ask wise Rabanim.)

Rabeynu Bachya and the Rambam, etc. are writing to a generation steeped in philosophy therefore, they could present their proofs with minimal introductions. As this does not apply to us, commentaries are necessary.

For example, in the answer by chanoch here: Why is Sha'ar Ha'Yichud of Chovos Ha'Levavos so "controversial"? it assumes Hawking disproved a premise of the shaar yichud, but if you read the commentaries in the shaar yichud, you will see his disproof was from a mathematical model, whereas the shaar yichud was talking about an "actual infinity", an infinity in the here and now physical world, not a mathematical model.

Furthermore (as a side point), remember science does not have a good track record of being reliable. it is constantly evolving slashing old premises when new ones are discovered but the words of our sages endure forever and ever. (Sefer Habris Maamar 5 ch.3)

As spiritual phenomena is discovered, the entire paradigm of science will eventually collapse and be seen to be merely like a blind men grasping the tail of the elephant as the below quote explains

Ramchal (Mevo L'Sefer Haklalim):

The philosophers and scientists can grasp only the external surface of the world, namely, the physical world, according to what appears to their physical eyes. However, this is merely the outermost garment of the spiritual roots, namely, the sefiros who govern the world and are the innermost spirituality inside the physical... Just like the form of man alludes to the entire system of Divine governance, so too it is alluded from all the parts of nature, and every creation is an expression of one detail of His governance...

And on this are based most of the sayings of the Sages which refer to the Creation and to all matters of the world, whether in heaven or on earth and all of their derivatives, this is also a broad and important subject.

When our sages instruct us on matters of nature and of this world, they are referring to its inner aspect - not on its external garment. Therefore, sometimes in their words we find things which appear strange, and which appear to be clearly false from what we perceive with our senses. But the truth is that they are speaking according to the true governance which is hidden from human eyes, which they received from the prophets and from the holy torah...

(also keep in mind that G-d intentionally created the world in such a way that free will is possible, so there will always be loopholes to interpret the world according to the atheists, otherwise free will is over)

Community
  • 1
ray
  • 21,206
  • 2
  • 45
  • 103
  • 3
    I think this answer avoids the question altogether. Any proof with "loopholes" is not a valid proof. Also, any proof that relies on facts that are "hidden from human eyes" cannot be a logically deduced proof. This is why every "logical" proof of the existance of God that I have seen is unconvincing, which is exactly what the OP is asking about. – Daniel Jun 03 '13 at 13:42
  • 3
    What science is known for is getting closer and closer to laws that describe all natural phenomena with greater and greater precision. Every adjustment is always more and more fine, bringing it yet closer to the truth. – Double AA Jun 03 '13 at 14:21
  • To good ole boy: I understand that science as a discipline deals with material, physical events and problems, and cannot adequately address the "spiritual" realm. – Eilu V'Eilu Jun 03 '13 at 15:14
  • 1
    Daniel hit the nail on the head when he says that a proof that stems from pure faith is not grounded in logic, and thus is hard for the rational human mind to accept. Aside: How is it fair that God must be based on belief, how can God then blame scientists for not believing in him-after all, science can't prove God! If scientists are saying that God doesn't exist because of no solid material/physical proof, what happens to reasonable, or rational faith, as set out by Rambam, Aquinas, etc? – Eilu V'Eilu Jun 03 '13 at 15:24
  • More comments on this answer are at http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/468/2013/6/3, q.v. – msh210 Jun 03 '13 at 15:26
  • 1
    We know HaShe doesn't have a body so there is no point in looking for one – MoriDowidhYa3aqov Jun 03 '13 at 15:26
  • That is true. However, According to Judaism God manifests himself through nature, revelation, and hashgachah. All of these rely upon elements of faith. – Eilu V'Eilu Jun 03 '13 at 16:15
  • @Daniel my primary answer was what i wrote at the top, that "In my opinion, the arguments have not been disproven only that we do not understand the arguments. see shaar yichud with commentaries", hence the question is based on a false premise, and that's the answer to the question. the rest was additional stuff, such as the science itself is questionable whether it disproves anything. so i think you're attacking the supplement stuff, not the answer – ray Jun 03 '13 at 17:24
  • 2
    @good_ole_ray No, to say that we don't understand the arguments defeats the purpose of a proof. The whole point is that it should be logical without any need for some higher understanding. – Daniel Jun 03 '13 at 17:24
  • i didn't mean we dont understand the arguments, i mean we don't study the arguments in enough depth to understand them, therefore we mistakenly think they have been disproven. hence "study with the commentaries" – ray Jun 03 '13 at 17:45
  • @good_ole_ray That's not true. Many of the historic proofs of the existence of God have logical flaws that have been pointed out throughout the years. – Daniel Jun 03 '13 at 18:25
  • like what....... – ray Jun 03 '13 at 18:27
  • @good_ole_ray Well it depends on what proof you are thinking of. Any proof that claims to be based entirely on logic has certainly been disproved or has some flaw. There are lots of experts in logic who don't believe in God, and if an airtight proof of God existed, there wouldn't be. Many of the most common proofs are based on obviously flawed axioms. – Daniel Jun 03 '13 at 18:59
  • Kuzari's argument for truth of Torah from mass revelation is very weak and can be debated. Here is a link refuting the argument from design http://rhetoricsanspareil.wordpress.com/2008/05/02/refutation-the-argument-from-inferred-design/. If there are no logical arguments for God, do we have to rely on faith alone? That is difficult for a rational mind, and contradicts Rambam's first Halacha – Eilu V'Eilu Jun 03 '13 at 19:11
  • @Daniel "That's not true. Many of the historic proofs of the existence of God have logical flaws that have been pointed out throughout the years." - these flaws are no different than the bible critics who find "flaws/contradictions" in verses thereby "proving" the torah is false, ch'v. the Rambam thought of all those "refutations" and answered them if you study his words carefully with commentaries. – ray Jun 04 '13 at 06:44
  • 1
    @good_ole_ray "total nonsense since G-d is the creator" There you accept an axiom that someone trying to logically prove God would not accept. You cannot assume that God is the creator on the way to proving that God exists, because being the creater requires existance! – Daniel Jun 04 '13 at 13:31
  • Given @good_ole_ray's comment ("G-d intentionally created the world in such a way that free will is possible. [...] There will always be loopholes to interpret the world according to the atheists, otherwise free will is over"), which I agree with, doesn't the original question deserve rephrasing? – Lee Jun 09 '13 at 13:49
  • @EiluV'Eilu that link which "refutes" the argument from design is false since once we have established that there must be something Eternal (otherwise the non-eternal would not exist), then you cannot ask what designed it. By definition it was not designed - it always existed – ray Oct 22 '13 at 05:15
1

God's mind IS the universe. Because we are IN Gods mind the only way to prove God is to CHOOSE to align our thoughts,speech and actions with HIS by reading the human beings manual (specifically ancient kabbalistic interpretation of TORAH) and doing mitzvot. In this way all our limbs, arteries, skin and flesh become Godly.You will never KNOW anything let alone God's existence until you become that thing or at the very least recognize that you have the CHOICE to do so.

user5326
  • 21
  • 2