FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2094051969> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2094051969 endingPage "121" @default.
• W2094051969 startingPage "116" @default.
• W2094051969 abstract "The Impossibility of Talking about God Michael Graetz (bio) Our teacher, Rabbi Artson, has skillfully and convincingly presented the case for abandoning the classic overlay, in his terms, of Platonic and Aristotelian conceptions imposed upon the raw text of the Bible. He also implies, without stating it specifically, that the raw text of the Bible is created out of religious experiences. So it is possible that the religious experiences of our ancestors who created the texts of the Bible are also overlaid with conceptions that they did not hold—witness the cognate ideas, languages, and metaphors of the ancient Near East present in the Tanakh, as demonstrated through biblical scholarship. The idea itself, however, is extremely revolutionary, in the most literal meaning of that word, for ideas held to be central and true for hundreds of years are now seen as false to the very tradition they supposedly presented to the world. Indeed, one of Rabbi Artson's central points is that the idea of a static, unchangeable, all-powerful and all-knowing God does not square at all with the God of the Bible. Instead we are asked to take seriously the dynamic, changing, powerful (but not all-powerful), and knowing (but not all-knowing God) of the Bible. This is akin to the approach of our teacher, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel zl, who took the prophets seriously at their word, rather than interpreting all prophetic utterances as merely metaphor or simply exhortation. I would like to make two comments about Rabbi Artson's masterful essay. One has to do with the need to go further, and the other has to do [End Page 116] with the subsequent traditions of rabbinic Judaism, and how they fit in to this new conception of God. We are, as the paper shows clearly, always in tension between ideas and language that we grew up with, learned in Hebrew School, and encounter around us daily, on the one hand, and the ideas and language of scholarly academic learning and philosophical and theological inquiry, on the other. Our basic use of the word God leans heavily on all of those inherited modes, from kindergarten on. I doubt if any kindergarten even hints at a documentary hypothesis for the origin of the Bible or utilizes a curriculum that reflects Maimonidean rationality to its core. And yet, we somehow think that these new ways of thinking and talking about religion are available to all people. Furthermore, if we are totally honest with ourselves, we know firmly, true and certain, that it is impossible to talk about God. We have no knowledge or understanding of God. Yet we talk as if we knew, as if there were some verifiable evidence. Worse than that, we talk as if we could give true explanations of God's thoughts, intentions, and actions. We are seduced by texts, traditions, and the feeling of law as solid and of divine origin. How can we get out of this dilemma? Is there any justification for God-talk, given our intellectual understanding that whatever we say can be neither proven nor disproven—that is, that it is clearly and perfectly untrue? (For a brilliant attempt to grapple with this dilemma, see Rabbi Martin S. Cohen's book, Sefer Ikkarim le-Zemaneinu, published in Beersheva by the Mercaz Shiluv in 2000.) The poet Yehudah Amichai has many phrases of theological import. Indeed, perhaps we learn more about theology from poets than from anyone else. In one of his last poems he writes: Open, closed, open.Before a person is bornEverything in the universe is open without him.During his life everything is closed within his life.When he dies everything is again open.Open, closed, open, that is the whole person. Amichai points to the paradox of solipsism as the only possible truth, and to the human ability to believe in and even trust, the ultimate meaning of belief: that there are real things outside of us, beyond our closed selves. [End Page 117] Intellect and emotion may be at odds. We are programmed to recognize the transcendent, but destined to know the limits of intellect. So, for the transcendent, we can only..." @default.
• W2094051969 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2094051969 creator A5024280524 @default.
• W2094051969 date "2010-01-01" @default.
• W2094051969 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2094051969 title "The Impossibility of Talking about God" @default.
• W2094051969 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/coj.2010.0039" @default.
• W2094051969 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W2094051969 type Work @default.
• W2094051969 sameAs 2094051969 @default.
• W2094051969 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2094051969 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2094051969 hasAuthorship W2094051969A5024280524 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C194105502 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C27206212 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C2776261394 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C2776900844 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C2778061430 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C2778311575 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C2780292567 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C2780876879 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C2780882242 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConcept C65264089 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C111472728 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C124952713 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C138885662 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C142362112 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C17744445 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C194105502 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C199539241 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C27206212 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C2776261394 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C2776900844 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C2778061430 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C2778311575 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C2780292567 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C2780876879 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C2780882242 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C41895202 @default.
• W2094051969 hasConceptScore W2094051969C65264089 @default.
• W2094051969 hasIssue "1-2" @default.
• W2094051969 hasLocation W20940519691 @default.
• W2094051969 hasOpenAccess W2094051969 @default.
• W2094051969 hasPrimaryLocation W20940519691 @default.
• W2094051969 hasRelatedWork W2011451085 @default.
• W2094051969 hasRelatedWork W2027925466 @default.
• W2094051969 hasRelatedWork W2060586805 @default.
• W2094051969 hasRelatedWork W2209683185 @default.
• W2094051969 hasRelatedWork W2408757073 @default.
• W2094051969 hasRelatedWork W2510985072 @default.
• W2094051969 hasRelatedWork W3132783619 @default.
• W2094051969 hasRelatedWork W3157596743 @default.
• W2094051969 hasRelatedWork W4283731625 @default.
• W2094051969 hasRelatedWork W590362399 @default.
• W2094051969 hasVolume "62" @default.
• W2094051969 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2094051969 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2094051969 magId "2094051969" @default.
• W2094051969 workType "article" @default.