Proof

Good analogy. We don't blindly trust humans with our bodies, and we shouldn't blindly trust G-d with the world. Don't trust that the dentist is a dentist. There have been cases of fake doctors practicing without a license. Check your state licensing board's website.

The analogy in this Daily Dose does bring up another point.

Taxi drivers, dentists, even someone who just braids hair, need licenses from the government.

We don't trust that they are good; we make them undergo training and pass tests. We have boards to certify them, and to suspend them if they kill even one person.

Yet, we trust G-d with far more, with no certification or licensing, and no board suspends G-d when G-d kills millions.

The FDA won't allow a new drug on the market until it is demonstrated to be safe and effective, usually in a double-blind clinical trial. Marketing a medicine or medical device as a way to cure or prevent disease based solely on our "faith" that it will work isn't just dangerous; it's against the law.

Yet, we have no problem saying to have faith in G-d without the same level of rigorous testing. Reply

Simplicity When GOD wants us to know anything HE so chooses, HE does it in simple terms so that there is absolutely no way we can misunderstand what HE wants us to learn. The trouble with mankind is that we take things that are simple and make them complicated to justify our stand on and make us seem wiser then things need to be. Reply

So true! This is so true! Thanks for posting :) Love Rabbi Freeman's laboratory comment too. I choose life! Reply

U'vrocha this is easy, personally, I always ask my Rabbi and also know that G-d does not like to be tested.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe once told me if I did G-d's will all would be good, something to that effect, this is why I have a Rabbi.

Who can operate on themselves?

But I also know one of the main flaws in the thinking of many is trying to test G-d and this is a big mistake.

Thank you for a great website, I enjoy it and greatly appreciate the Torah and inspiration from your site. Reply

Proof I do not believe in the guarantees of the human, mortal men. I have enough evidence from the Infinite, Almighty, Power, and Wisdom of our Creator, blelssed be He. And I intend to continue on the path He has set for me. He called and I listened, and with His help will do what He asked. His will is my will!!! Reply

They say ask for proof of everything- except this I would like to turn this analogy on its head.

We are told to check that a taxicab is real before we get in it, to look at the partition of an NYC yellow cab, find the photo, and make sure it matches the driver.

There have been fake doctors practicing, so now we are told that we should verify a doctor's licensing with the state and should check the doctor's malpractice record before we use the doctor.

Yet when it comes to G-d, which is infinitely more important to get right, we are told to "trust" and take it on "faith".

A person paid to braid hair is required to be licensed and prove to the state that the person is qualified. In the U.S., stores selling wine are required to ask customers to show ID and to prove that are 21.

To start a job in the U.S., we must provide proof that we are not illegal aliens.

But when someone telling us that G-d wants us to do something, we are expected to have trust and faith, without the proof required for less important things. Reply

Self-Doubt We don't doubt G-d. We doubt ourselves. Reply

I am limited by what I know to be, that is to say what G-d is willing to show me. Therefore, what I "know" is what I am allowed to see, which becomes my reality. What I am not allowed to see, I must accept on faith, which transcends the dentist's or taxi driver's performance and demands an acceptance rooted in belief rather than proof. Now, you will argue that the all the "proof" required is the Torah, which you will maintain is the infallible word of G-d. I will counter that the Torah is, in fact, the word of G-d based on the adoption of a system of beliefs rather than hard evidence. What I know to be evidentiary is the number of root canals the dentist has performed. I cannot "know" what G-d is since this is not revealed to me in the same manner. I can believe in G-d based on my upbringing and what I have been taught to believe, but I cannot "know" G-d in the way I can know the number of accidents in which a taxi driver has been involved. Reply

I understand your point. Yet given our limitations to discern between the "proof" of the everyday world and "proof" as it pertains to G-d's desire that we do good is to distinguish between what we know, or perceive that we know based on science, and what we can never know, based on the limitlessness of the eternal. How then do we compare what we are permitted to know against that which we never can? How do you speak of the two in the same breath? Reply

Definition of proof I think the article assumes a subjective proof. As in, "prove it to ME". That is all we need, and that is all that could ever be of use.

Scientific proofs operate in the very limited realm of the laws of nature.

This is about the realm of the mind, spirit, soul, will. This is a boundless realm.

The apples and oranges are when we try to apply scientific thinking to a boundless realm. It becomes static in the background, distracting us from 'the point'.

Know what I mean? Reply

Guarantees Here is how we do it on MTV:

If you want to see if something is true, you act on the premise to test it, because that is they only way you will know for sure.

I always thinks its funny that people want guarantees before they act, rather than trusting their swing and taking the first step. Reply

Simple Deed I understand much better. Perhaps I was fixed on the aspect of "proof" rather than focusing on performing the simple good deed which requires only a desire to do what one considers the right thing, rather than hard evidence. Thank you for the clarification. Reply

The dentist and the taxi driver are tangible and there is tangible proof of their specific areas of expertise (such as the dentist's reputation, the tax driver's driving record, etc.). A discussion concerning of G-d, no matter the strength of one's beliefs, is not. Proof, when based on the conviction of one's fath, is subjective at very best. The "evidence" is open entirely to interpretation, based on a belief system adopted by the specific individual and not necessarily shared by community at large. Unfortunately here, in my view, we are comparing apples to oranges. To argue that one knows what G-d desires of him is not comparable to the work conducted and explained by the individual performing a specific task. Unfortunately here, at least in my opinion (an observant Jew, or so I as the individual perceives me to be), is comparing apples to oranges. It is faulty premise. Reply

A simple good deed For a simple good deed, proof is not so much necessary. But for deeds that are highly restrictive to the human spirit, or deeds that impose foreign, complex and cumbersome systems of behavior on our every move... that is a different story! Proof would be very helpful. Reply