Yehudi>Medaber>Chai>Tzomeach>Domem?

[churnbabychurn]

So we can all agree:

Some of you seem to be avoiding that and claiming that it's all perfectly logical and may even be provable.

I said it ultimately all comes to free choice. There is always a mokom for the shoitim to err. Gehinom would be vacant otherwise.

[Aaaron]

How does it get started that it was our own forefathers not some random group of people?

Same way every religion begins with a select group: geographical, social, and cultural circles. Of there truly was a patient zero, it would obviously spread from there.

That didn't seem like a checkmate...

I said it ultimately all comes to free choice. There is always a mokom for the shoitim to err. Gehinom would be vacant otherwise.

I'm not sure if you just devolved this respectful conversation into ad hominems.  I hope not.

[aygart]

I see that you are simply not understanding what I am writing either because I was unclear or because you do not wish to understand. I cannot figure out why you keep going back to one person while I keep going back to a multitude of people. I give up.

Either way, just if something is not 100% provable does not mean it boils down to belief. Case in point, a jury in the US decides whether or not the accused is proven a murderer beyond a reasonable doubt. This is not 100% proven but is certainly more than a belief.

[yakrot]

You would have to find the place in our mesorah of rebbe /Talmud all the way back to moshe rabbeinu where the story was sold at some point someone would have had to claim that it was generations earlier that this happened. However since there is an unbroken chain back to moshe rabbeinu this is not possible.


Here's the thing there are three possible lies that could have happened
1) you saw something happen (Har sinia)... This is a very difficult sell imo, to convince thousands of ppl that they saw something

2) you will see it (Har sinia) happen... This would have fallen apart eventually as generation after generation of thousands of ppl wait for it to come but it never dod

3) (most common)  your ancestors saw it (Har sinia) happen... There would have to be a gap in mesorah where one person was claiming an event happened and "there is no possible way to check the authenticity of his story"  and therefore everyone just believes him... Bc if there are ppl to check the facts with it is the nature of humans to do so (this is why every other religion is based on a "story/person" that has no way to be checked and is therefore left to belief)  the "story" of Har sinia,(hundreds of thousands if ppl) along with an unbroken chain of mesorah of generation to generation is too easy of a lie to be made up because it never would have lasted under the circumstances.


I'm sorry if this us unclear as its hard to lay these things down...

[churnbabychurn]

I'm not sure if you just devolved this respectful conversation into ad hominems.  I hope not.

I didn't. Just used a language commonly used in this context to describe people who don't believe.
 Wasnt directed at you or anyone.

[Aaaron]

I see that you are simply not understanding what I am writing either because I was unclear or because you do not wish to understand. I cannot figure out why you keep going back to one person while I keep going back to a multitude of people. I give up.

Either way, just if something is not 100% provable does not mean it boils down to belief. Case in point, a jury in the US decides whether or not the accused is proven a murderer beyond a reasonable doubt. This is not 100% proven but is certainly more than a belief.

Ah, I think I found our disconnect.  You're coming from a point of assuming the 600,000 is accurate and an actual occurence.  I'm coming from a point of thinking it's highly unlikely from a logical perspective, but we have belief in it regardless.

Let me give you two scenarios and tell me which one you'd think is more like without any outside belief or influences.

1)  Something magically preposterous happened 3000 years ago, and even though there is no verifiable or corroborative recording of it, it's been passed down in perfect descent for well over 100 generations.

2)  A charismatic gentleman with a small following offers answers to questions that had been unanswered until that point.  His group of followers grows and the stories he tells spread.  His seemingly faultless understanding of the world leads people to follow him unquestioningly.  One such story is about a magically preposterous event in the past, that gives meaning to life.  The story gets passed on through generations with embellishment along the way, until it's current form which has been told for a millennium. 

Now, which one is more likely, without taking any outside beliefs into account?  One has certainly happened.  It's verifiable and there's corroborative evidence.  Heck, it's probably provable that it's happened more than once.

Have you ever played telephone as a child?

Now, we believe 1 because it's what we're taught, and we choose to believe it.  But some of us don't delude ourselves into believing it's provable beyond a reasonable doubt, or even by a preponderance of the evidence.

[Aaaron]

I didn't. Just used a language commonly used in this context to describe people who don't believe.
 Wasnt directed at you or anyone.

Phew    Thanks for clarifying. 

[churnbabychurn]

Ah, I think I found our disconnect.  You're coming from a point of assuming the 600,000 is accurate and an actual occurence.  I'm coming from a point of thinking it's highly unlikely from a logical perspective, but we have belief in it regardless.

Let me give you two scenarios and tell me which one you'd think is more like without any outside belief or influences.

1)  Something magically preposterous happened 3000 years ago, and even though there is no verifiable or corroborative recording of it, it's been passed down in perfect descent for well over 100 generations.

...

Now, we believe 1 because it's what we're taught, and we choose to believe it.  But some of us don't delude ourselves into believing it's provable beyond a reasonable doubt, or even by a preponderance of the evidence.

If past down in perfect decent, with no disconnect whatsoever, why on earth do you still need some dubious "corroborative verification"?
Is this any less than 100%?

[Aaaron]

If past down in perfect decent, with no disconnect whatsoever, why on earth do you still need some dubious "corroborative verification"?
Is this any less than 100%?

Yes, because there's no evidence it was passed down in perfect descent with no disconnect.  It's just what we're told in modern times.

And to refer to corroboration as dubious is just plain confusing. 

[churnbabychurn]

Yes, because there's no evidence it was passed down in perfect descent with no disconnect.  It's just what we're told in modern times.

Modern times?! We're not talking about events millions of years ago.

Don't you know with absolute certainty that Seder night was celebrated exactly as today 500 years ago? How about 1000? 1500? And what did they relate then?

[Baruch]

I see that you are simply not understanding what I am writing either because I was unclear or because you do not wish to understand. I cannot figure out why you keep going back to one person while I keep going back to a multitude of people. I give up.

Either way, just if something is not 100% provable does not mean it boils down to belief. Case in point, a jury in the US decides whether or not the accused is proven a murderer beyond a reasonable doubt. This is not 100% proven but is certainly more than a belief.

+1.
Let me ask you a question, if someone after Moshe Rabeinu, made up that there was a Moshe Rabeinu and Klal Yisrael, and that every generation of fathers in this nation passed on to their children, and so on....

How can you convince people that their fathers passed on this tradition to them?

How can you tell people that they are children of a huge nation, and that their fathers are part of this nation, and that their fathers celebrated Pesach?

Also, why is there no record of the charasmatic leader that started Judiasm, years after Matan Torah?

I think it's a pretty solid proof.

A proof that no other religion can claim.

And BTW, one things for sure, every religion besides for one is false and made up.

So why did all the made up religions, not make up a huge event in front of millions of people?

You know why? Cuz it's unmakeupable 

[Aaaron]

Modern times?! We're not talking about events millions of years ago.

Don't you know with absolute certainty that Seder night was celebrated exactly as today 500 years ago? How about 1000? 1500? And what did they relate then?

3 thousand years is a long time.  And with the seder being discussed for the first time a little over two thousand years ago that leaves quite a gap.

[aygart]

Also, why is there no record of the charasmatic leader that started Judiasm, years after Matan Torah?

Without giving himself any credit of course

[Aaaron]

+1.
Let me ask you a question, if someone after Moshe Rabeinu, made up that there was a Moshe Rabeinu and Klal Yisrael, and that every generation of fathers in this nation passed on to their children, and so on....

How can you convince people that their fathers passed on this tradition to them?

How can you tell people that they are children of a huge nation, and that their fathers are part of this nation, and that their fathers celebrated Pesach?

Also, why is there no record of the charasmatic leader that started Judiasm, years after Matan Torah?

Answer mine first, then I'll answer yours.

Eh, fine.  I'll answer.  I never said Moshe was made up, nor was Klal Yisrael.  I said the events at Har Sinai may have been.  After a few generations of a certain story, it's very easy to manipulate it from "my father told me and his father told him" all the way to "my father told me and his father told him all the way back to Moshe."  And then that spreads for a few generations and it spreads laterally as well, to people that had most of the story.

As to who this "leader" was.  He's a figment of my imagination.  He could have been more than one person, could be those who wrote down the mishna, or before them.  He could have not existed at all and fables still spread among cultures.  Just look at Norse mythology, or any other mythology for that matter.  It spreads and is taken literally by vast numbers of people without a specific person at the helm. 

[churnbabychurn]

Can't read this this anymore. I don't think you even believe yourself what you're saying.

[David Smith]

If you want to believe, there's what to believe. If you want to deny, there's no stopping you.

[Baruch]

If you want to believe, there's what to believe. If you want to deny, there's no stopping you.

In defense of Aaaron, he's not arguing not to believe.
He's just arguing to believe blindly.

[aygart]

Eh, fine.  I'll answer.  I never said Moshe was made up, nor was Klal Yisrael.  I said the events at Har Sinai may have been.  After a few generations of a certain story, it's very easy to manipulate it from "my father told me and his father told him" all the way to "my father told me and his father told him all the way back to Moshe."  And then that spreads for a few generations and it spreads laterally as well, to people that had most of the story.

If it is after a few generations then you are dealing with thousands of people. If you think it is easy to manipulate thousands of people to think they were told something by their father that they were never told then you are giving answers not asking questions. Get real.

[churnbabychurn]

In defense of Aaaron, he's not arguing not to believe.
He's just arguing to believe blindly.

His posting unbelievable theories of why its possibly all made up cv.

Not sure what could be a valid positive reason to do this.

We all know for a fact that Torah is min hashamayim, (anyone who ever learnt a sugia like a mentsh knows this. )

There may be room to discuss the methods strengthening emuna. Ie. Via, philosophical proofs, aka yedia or emuna peshuta. (Which does not mean the English word of "belief", which implies a sofek)
 
But posting inane theories about how its all made up is wrong.

[Aaaron]

If it is after a few generations then you are dealing with thousands of people. If you think it is easy to manipulate thousands of people to think they were told something by their father that they were never told then you are giving answers not asking questions. Get real.

I never said that.  I never even mentioned manipulating thousands of people.