DOCSLIB.ORG

Divine Retribution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Divine Retribution בס“ד Parshat Yitro 24 Shevat, 5781/February 6, 2021 Vol. 12 Num. 22 (#483) This issue is dedicated by Helen & David Wm. Brown & Family, and Golda Brown & Harry Krakowsky & Family, ד ב “ for the yahrtzeit of David and Golda’s father, Al G. Brown This issue is dedicated by Ralph and Paulette Frisch in memory of Ralph’s father Zeev ben Raphael Frischwasser z”l, and his grandfather Avraham ben Tzvi HaLevi Levitan z”l Divine Retribution Rabbi Sammy Bergman When Yitro, Moshe’s father-in-law, and threw male Jewish infants into the Don Isaac Abarbanel (Shemot ad loc.) joined Bnei Yisrael in the desert, sea. Therefore, Hashem led the explains that in return for attempting to Moshe informed him of numerous Egyptians to their destruction. Yitro drown Jewish children in the Nile, miracles Hashem had performed for praised Hashem’s ability to detect the Hashem brought the Red Sea upon the the Jewish nation. (Shemot 18:8, evil plans in the hearts of the Egyptians Egyptians. Rabbi Levi Yitzchak of Rashi ad loc.) Understandably, Yitro and punish them accordingly. Berditchev (Kedushat Levi ibid.) adds rejoiced upon hearing about the ten that the Egyptians worshipped and plagues, the splitting of the sea, and Rabbi Nissim ben Reuven (“Ran”, drew its spiritual strength from the Nile the victory against Amalek. However, Derashot HaRan 11) adopts a similar River. Therefore, it was doubly as expressed in Shemot 18:11, Yitro position, but adds another dimension to impressive that Hashem harnessed the proclaimed his appreciation of Hashem’s precision in punishing Egypt. power of water to vanquish them. Hashem’s greatness in a peculiar and Ran notes that instead of simply cryptic way. Yitro declared that he coercing Pharaoh to free the Jewish Other commentaries expand the knew: “Hashem is greater than all the people, Hashem waited until Pharaoh concept of middah k’neged middah gods” because “badavar asher zadu consented to let the Jews leave. beyond the limited scope of punishment aleihem”, loosely translated: “with the Furthermore, by ordering Moshe to tell by water. Malbim (Shemot ad loc.) notes matter they had schemed upon them”. Pharaoh that the Jews only wanted to that all ten plagues corresponded to the Yitro’s statement raises two exegetical leave for three days to serve Hashem in various forms of suffering the Egyptians difficulties. First, simply translating the desert (Shemot 3:18), Hashem inflicted upon the Jewish people. [See the second half of the verse requires incited Pharaoh to pursue the nation of Shemot Rabbah 9:10.] Rabbi Naftali Zvi creativity. Second, what specifically Israel even after he had freed them. Yehudah Berlin (Birkat haNetziv to impressed Yitro, which caused him to Rabbi Nissim suggests that Hashem Mechilta Beshalach 6) uses this idea to realize Hashem’s greatness? wanted to punish the Egyptians for the explain a perplexing passage in the devious plot they had deliberately Haggadah which describes numerous One approach to Yitro’s exclamation executed against Israel. Therefore, He plagues the Egyptians suffered at the focuses on Hashem’s insight into the caused them to willfully run into the Red Sea. He explains that Hashem Egyptians’ evil machinations. water and drown themselves. Yitro personalized the punishment of each Ramban (ad loc.) interprets the verse understood the brilliance of Hashem’s Egyptian. They each felt the same as follows: “through the matter in execution of justice and therefore anguish to which they had subjected which the Egyptians willfully schemed proclaimed: “Now I know Hashem is their Jewish slaves. against Israel, I know that Hashem is greater than all the gods.” (18:11) greater than all the gods.” Ramban While we normally focus on Hashem’s explains that since Hashem had A second approach to understanding mercy, Yitro recognized that we can also decreed that the nation of Israel would Yitro’s cryptic statement concentrates learn by paying attention to Hashem’s suffer through slavery and oppression on the idea that Hashem punishes justice. Hashem’s precise, multifaceted (Bereishit 15:13), if the Egyptians had middah k’neged middah or “measure retaliation against the Egyptians merely subjugated the Jewish people, for measure”. A midrash (Shemot demonstrated His omniscience and Hashem would not have punished Rabbah 22) explains our verse: “With omnipotence. May we internalize the them so severely. However, the the same thing they attempted [to use lessons of Divine justice without ever Egyptians went much further. They to eradicate] Israel, with that thing the having to experience it ourselves. Omnipresent punished them.” plotted to wipe out Israel altogether, [email protected] OUR BEIT MIDRASH ROSH BEIT MIDRASH RABBI MORDECHAI TORCZYNER SGAN ROSH BEIT MIDRASH RABBI SAMMY BERGMAN AVREICHIM RABBI ALEX HECHT, NETANEL KLEIN, RABBI CHAIM METZGER SEDER BOKER DIRECTOR RABBI MOSHE YERES WOMEN’S BEIT MIDRASH MRS. SHIRA METZGER CORRESPONDENTS EZER DIENA, RABBI ADAM FRIEDMANN, RABBI BARUCH An affiliate of Torah MiTzion and YU WEINTRAUB, RABBI JONATHAN ZIRING CHAVERIM NADAV GASNER, SHAUL HARRIS, ARI KARON, YEHUDA LEVI, SHIMMY NAUENBERG, NATAN Find Toronto Torah online at SNOWBELL, AKIVA WEITZ, ELI WELTMAN tiny.cc/torontotorah CHAVEROT ORLY AZIZA, MINDY CHAPMAN, SHULA DIENA, SOFIA FREUDENSTEIN, TEHILLA HELFENBAUM, We are grateful to ARIELLA MARKUS, SYLVIE MOSCOVITZ, HADASSA NAUENBERG, YEJIDE OMOTOSO, KINNERET WITTY Continental Press Journey Through Tanach: Shemuel II, Chapter 22 Rabbi Jonathan Ziring Summary authors of Sefer Shemuel (Shemuel, been saved. However, the song is This chapter records the song that Gad, and Natan according to Bava only recorded at the end of his life David sings “on the day that G-d saved Batra 14b-15a) wrote down this because David would sing this song him from the hand of all his enemies version, while David wrote down the whenever he was saved, similar to and the hand of Shaul.” (22:1) version in Tehillim himself. (Summary the way all of Tehillim can be used of chapter in Daat Mikra edition of as prayers in a myriad of The song is divided into thanking G-d Shemuel) circumstances, regardless of the for saving David from the travails he exact historical reason David wrote faced before he was king (2-20) and Professor Kil (ibid.) concisely them originally. those he faced after he became king (33 summarizes the views as to when this 3. Rabbi Ezra Tzion Melamed argues -51), and reflections about the nature of song was written. that David wrote this in the middle Divine providence in general (21-32). 1. Rashi and Radak contend that of his reign, close to when he David wrote this toward the end of requested from G-d that he be David highlights how G-d saved him his life, after he had been saved allowed to build the Beit when he prayed (4-7), helped him in his from all of the enemies he faced HaMikdash. He notes that this is wars (33-43), and enabled him to during his lifetime. The fact that the only time in David’s life where establish his kingdom (44-46). He Shaul is mentioned as separate the prophet records that David had further records that G-d saved him as from David’s general “enemies” peace (Shemuel II 7:1), and thus he reward for keeping the Torah (21-25), indicates that Shaul remained could plausibly say that G-d had while punishing those who do not (27). David’s primary foe, despite all saved him from “all his enemies.” David also reflects on G-d’s justice more that David faced in his later years. Like Abarbanel, he writes that generally, noting that G-d consistently (Rashi, Daat Mikra possibility 1 in David continued to invoke this treats people according to what they 22:1) Alternatively, the enmity song and update it throughout his deserve (28-33). David then concludes with Shaul caused many of life. by praising G-d (47-49) and committing David’s later troubles, and thus to sing G-d’s praises because of all that Shaul and all he represented [email protected] G-d has done for him (51-52). continued to be relevant to David throughout his life. (Daat Mikra When Was it Written? possibility 2) A similar song, with some minor 2. Abarbanel, however, argues that changes, is included in Tehillim 18. David wrote this song when he Professor Yehuda Kil suggests that that was young, and Shaul was in fact the song was originally oral, and the the enemy from whom he had The Israeli Farmer: Raising Sheep in Israel Rabbi Baruch Weintraub Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, Peninei Halakha Contemporary authorities have debated this issue: Kashrut 1, 13:15 • Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Kook (Igrot haRa”ayah 1:32), and Rabbi Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer III, Choshen A mishnah forbids raising small [domesticated] cattle (e.g. Mishpat 3) prohibit raising small cattle in Israel today. goats) in Eretz Yisrael, but permits raising them in Syria or in • Rabbi Yitzchak HaLevi Herzog (Teshuvot u’P’sakim, the wildernesses of Eretz Yisrael. (Bava Kama 7:7) Is this Choshen Mishpat 104), Rabbi Shaul Yisraeli (Amud prohibition applicable in modern Israel? HaYemini 23), and Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg (Tzitz Eliezer, 7:24-25) are lenient. Early authorities provide two reasons for this prohibition – either for the sake of settling the Holy Land, as the animals Rabbi Melamed mentions a few reasons for permitting: severely impact grasslands (Rashi, Bava Kama 79b), or 1) According to the Shulchan Aruch, the main reason for because of the severe damage these animals may cause when the prohibition is to avert potential damage. Today, invading the property of other Jews. (Rambam, Laws of landowners are willing to accept the risk as long as they Damages 5:2) [Of course, one may not invade anyone’s will be paid for any damage that does happen.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TALMUDIC STUDIES Ephraim Kanarfogel
    chapter 22 TALMUDIC STUDIES ephraim kanarfogel TRANSITIONS FROM THE EAST, AND THE NASCENT CENTERS IN NORTH AFRICA, SPAIN, AND ITALY The history and development of the study of the Oral Law following the completion of the Babylonian Talmud remain shrouded in mystery. Although significant Geonim from Babylonia and Palestine during the eighth and ninth centuries have been identified, the extent to which their writings reached Europe, and the channels through which they passed, remain somewhat unclear. A fragile consensus suggests that, at least initi- ally, rabbinic teachings and rulings from Eretz Israel traveled most directly to centers in Italy and later to Germany (Ashkenaz), while those of Babylonia emerged predominantly in the western Sephardic milieu of Spain and North Africa.1 To be sure, leading Sephardic talmudists prior to, and even during, the eleventh century were not yet to be found primarily within Europe. Hai ben Sherira Gaon (d. 1038), who penned an array of talmudic commen- taries in addition to his protean output of responsa and halakhic mono- graphs, was the last of the Geonim who flourished in Baghdad.2 The family 1 See Avraham Grossman, “Zik˙atah shel Yahadut Ashkenaz ‘el Erets Yisra’el,” Shalem 3 (1981), 57–92; Grossman, “When Did the Hegemony of Eretz Yisra’el Cease in Italy?” in E. Fleischer, M. A. Friedman, and Joel Kraemer, eds., Mas’at Mosheh: Studies in Jewish and Moslem Culture Presented to Moshe Gil [Hebrew] (Jerusalem, 1998), 143–57; Israel Ta- Shma’s review essays in K˙ ryat Sefer 56 (1981), 344–52, and Zion 61 (1996), 231–7; Ta-Shma, Kneset Mehkarim, vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Moses Hayim Luzzatto's Quest for Providence
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 10-2014 'Like Iron to a Magnet': Moses Hayim Luzzatto's Quest for Providence David Sclar Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/380 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] “Like Iron to a Magnet”: Moses Hayim Luzzatto’s Quest for Providence By David Sclar A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty in History in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The City University of New York 2014 © 2014 David Sclar All Rights Reserved This Manuscript has been read and accepted by the Graduate Faculty in History in satisfaction of the Dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Prof. Jane S. Gerber _______________ ____________________________________ Date Chair of the Examining Committee Prof. Helena Rosenblatt _______________ ____________________________________ Date Executive Officer Prof. Francesca Bregoli _______________________________________ Prof. Elisheva Carlebach ________________________________________ Prof. Robert Seltzer ________________________________________ Prof. David Sorkin ________________________________________ Supervisory Committee iii Abstract “Like Iron to a Magnet”: Moses Hayim Luzzatto’s Quest for Providence by David Sclar Advisor: Prof. Jane S. Gerber This dissertation is a biographical study of Moses Hayim Luzzatto (1707–1746 or 1747). It presents the social and religious context in which Luzzatto was variously celebrated as the leader of a kabbalistic-messianic confraternity in Padua, condemned as a deviant threat by rabbis in Venice and central and eastern Europe, and accepted by the Portuguese Jewish community after relocating to Amsterdam.
    [Show full text]
  • Life and Contexts Ļ
    Chapter 1 Ļ Life and Contexts ļ n a letter that he sent to the Cretan scholar Saul Hako- I hen Ashkenazi a few years prior to his death, Isaac Abar- banel observed that he had written all of his “commen- taries and compilations” after I left my homeland (’eresខ moladeti); for all of the days that I was in the courts and palaces of kings occupied in their service I had no time to study and looked at no book but squandered my days in vanity and years in futile pursuit so that wealth and honor would be mine; yet the wealth was lost by evil adventure and “honor is departed from Israel” [1 Sam. 4:21]. Only after wandering to and fro over the earth from one kingdom to another . did I “seek out the book of the Lord” [Isa. 34:16].1 This personal retrospective, stark even after allowances are made for its imprecision and an autobiographical topos that it reflects,2 alludes to major foci of Abarbanel’s life. He engaged in large-scale commercial and financial en- deavors. He held positions at three leading European courts. He was a broad scholar who authored a multifaceted literary corpus comprising a variety of full- bodied exegetical tomes and theological tracts. And during roughly the last third of his life, in consequence of Spain’s expulsion of its Jews in 1492, his existence was characterized by itinerancy, often in isolation from family and scholarly peers. Situate these themes and their cognates on a wider historical, cultural, and intellectual canvas, and the result is a rich tableau at the center of which stands an ambitious seeker of power, prestige, and wealth who ar- dently cultivated the intellectual life and its vocations as exegete, theologian, and writer.
    [Show full text]
  • Abstract This Dissertation Addresses a Lacuna in the Study of the Literary
    Abstract This dissertation addresses a lacuna in the study of the literary portrayals of divine retribution in the Old Testament. Focusing on narrative texts, this work posits the presence of the divine messenger opposition type-scene, conventional scenes in which an antagonist opposes a divine messenger on whom God inflicts extreme fates that often seem disproportionate to the offense and occur in the absence of any divine proscription. Opposition to the messenger seems to be the offense grave enough to merit the peculiar fates these characters experience. The introduction discusses how the historical analysis of divine retribution has been limited to theological treatments. Recent studies have slightly expanded the analysis to sociological and anthropological approaches, but literary approaches to the topic have been scant. Addressing the intersection of convention and historiography provides a foundation for moving the discussion forward. Employing a literary-critical treatment—supplemented by form-, source-, historical-, and redaction-critical approaches where beneficial—to multiple narrative passages reveals the presence of the proposed type-scene. Chapter 2 explores Moses as the prototypical prophet validated through the bizarre fates experienced by his opponents. Korah’s destruction, Miriam’s leprosy, and the biting serpents all represent divine responses to opposition to Moses. Korah’s rebellion represents a paradigmatic template of the type-scene, one in which God validates Moses. Chapter 3 examines the type-scene in narratives involving the classical prophets. The stories of Jeroboam’s deformity, Ahab’s death, the fiery death of Ahaziah’s military squads, the mauling by bears of Bethel youths, Gehazi’s leprosy, and the trampling of a court official during the siege of Samaria all utilize the type-scene in a manner that validates the legitimacy of a prophet.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining Purity and Impurity Parshat Sh’Mini, Leviticus 6:1- 11:47| by Mark Greenspan “The Dietary Laws” by Rabbi Paul S
    Defining Purity and Impurity Parshat Sh’mini, Leviticus 6:1- 11:47| by Mark Greenspan “The Dietary Laws” by Rabbi Paul S. Drazen, (pp.305-338) in The Observant Life Introduction A few weeks before Passover reports came in from the Middle East that a cloud of locust had descended upon Egypt mimicking the eighth plague of the Bible. When the wind shifted direction the plague of locust crossed over the border into Israel. There was great excitement in Israel when some rabbis announced that the species of locust that had invaded Israel were actually kosher! Offering various recipes Rabbi Natan Slifkin announced that there was no reason that Jews could not adopt the North African custom of eating the locust. Slifkin wrote: “I have eaten locusts on several occasions. They do not require a special form of slaughter and one usually kills them by dropping them into boiling water. They can be cooked in a variety of ways – lacking any particular culinary skills I usually just fry them with oil and some spices. It’s not the taste that is distinctive so much as the tactile experience of eating a bug – crunchy on the outside with a chewy center!” Our first reaction to the rabbi’s announcement is “Yuck!” Yet his point is well taken. While we might have a cultural aversion to locusts there is nothing specifically un-Jewish about eating them. The Torah speaks of purity and impurity with regard to food. Kashrut has little to do with hygiene, health, or culinary tastes. We are left to wonder what makes certain foods tamei and others tahor? What do we mean when we speak about purity with regard to kashrut? The Torah Connection These are the instructions (torah) concerning animals, birds, all living creatures that move in water and all creatures that swarm on earth, for distinguishing between the impure (tamei) and the pure (tahor), between living things that may be eaten and the living things that may not be eaten.
    [Show full text]
  • REVISED FM Comm Bible
    FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS What does “Miqra’ot Gedolot” mean? “Miqra’ot Gedolot” is a Hebrew expression meaning something like “Large- Format Bible” or, more colloquially,“The Big Book of Bible.”The famous “Second Rab- binic Bible” of R. Jacob b. Hayyim (1525) was a Miqra’ot Gedolot. What do you mean “a” Miqra’ot Gedolot? Are there more than one? Absolutely. There are “Miqra’ot Gedolot”to the Torah or Pentateuch,to the Megillot (the Five Scrolls), and to the other biblical books as well. Moreover, the same biblical book can appear in different versions:“Miqra’ot Gedolot” refers to the format, not the contents. So what is the Miqra’ot Gedolot format? It consists of the Hebrew biblical text in large print; a “Targum”or translation of the text (in rare cases more than one); and commentaries on the text, often accompanied by explana- tory notes.That’s why we have titled this English version The Commentators’ Bible. Which translation is included in this Miqra’ot Gedolot? We have included two translations:the old Jewish Publication Society translation of 1917 and the new JPS translation of 1985. Why include both? Both were translated by the preeminent Jewish biblical scholars of their day, but the OJPS is more literal and the NJPS freer and more readable. More importantly, the purpose of the Miqra’ot Gedolot is to help explain difficulties in the biblical text. Because translators are often forced to pick a single one of several possible explanations of what the Hebrew text means, comparing two different translations is the best way for someone who doesn’t know Hebrew to judge whether there is a difficulty in the original text.
    [Show full text]
  • Kristen Davis Doubtless Faith Ministries Phd Student
    Kristen Davis DoubtLess Faith Ministries PhD Student SES Illuminate ancient worldviews Melting Pot Paganism – Oldest and Most Prominent Learn from Snapshot Characteristics of Paganism Practices Beliefs Worldview How does this relate to the Christian Worldview? How can someone believe this stuff? Spiritual encounters Situations where the ends appeared to be the result of the means Solving questions Paganus (Latin) Pagus – meaning a village or country district Rural or rustic One not enlisted through baptism as a soldier of Christ Perform rites or cult acts, but profess no creed or doctrine Not strongly committed to revealed belief Not exhorted to faith – state of uneducated No heresy Cult Act, not belief was all that was required Yet… Action implies intention, motive or purpose, thus underlying beliefs existed while not dogmatically. Hades (Pluto – Roman) - God of the underworld, defeated Titans Persephone/Kore – Queen of the underworld, spring, fertility of vegetation Nemesis – divine retribution, vengeful fate, revenge Hermes – Messenger of the gods, trickster, intercessor between mortals and divine, protector of travelers, herdsmen, thieves Set (Seth) – desert, storms, disorder, violence, foreigners Osiris – afterlife, underworld, dead Paganism Christian Polytheistic Monotheistic Some recognized a Characteristics supreme god, but Unchanging worshipped the lesser Omnipotent god(s) also Omniscient Characteristics Omnipresent Fickle/Changeable Personal Limited power Infinite Location oriented Timeless
    [Show full text]
  • Divine Violence and the Christus Victor Atonement Model
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Middlesex University Research Repository DIVINE VIOLENCE AND THE CHRISTUS VICTOR ATONEMENT MODEL. A Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Martyn John Smith Middlesex University Supervised at London School of Theology May 2015 i Abstract Martyn John Smith Divine Violence and the Christus Victor Atonement Model Doctor of Philosophy Middlesex University/London School of Theology 2015 More recently, there has been in some quarters a theological move away from the Penal Substitution model of atonement primarily due to the concerns it raises about God’s character. This is paralleled by a desire to replace it with a less violent approach to soteriology, with the concomitant representation of a less coercive God. This thesis addresses the biblical manifestations of divine violence across both Testaments in order to present God as one for whom violence is an extrinsic, accommodated function. Divine violence is particularly manifested soteriologically, finding its fullest expression, therefore, in the atonement. The Christus Victor Model is offered as the one best able to explicate and accommodate this divine violence. The main atonement models are assessed, revealing how each has sought to engage with, or deny, divine violence. Firstly, God and violence are explored in order to provide an ideological, linguistic and epistemological foundation for understanding what violence is. Biblical examples of violence are then examined including both Testaments along with consideration of the Satan and the demonic realm; showing how God utilises violence in order to overcome these ontological enemies.
    [Show full text]
  • Tillich on Divine Power and Ultimate Meaning in Human History Guy B
    Document generated on 09/27/2021 5:14 p.m. Laval théologique et philosophique Tillich on Divine Power and Ultimate Meaning in Human History Guy B. Hammond Vatican II et sa réception Article abstract Volume 67, Number 3, October 2011 Paul Tillich’s concept of God opposes the “interventionist” model of traditional Western theism. This paper attempts to determine whether, and in what sense, URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1008604ar for Tillich, God may be said to act specifically to influence the course of DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1008604ar historical events. It is argued that his concept of “Spiritual power” provides his answer. In clarification the concepts of “spirit,” “power,” “meaning,” See table of contents “vocation,” “kairos,” and “the renunciation of power” are explored. According to Tillich, the vocations of specific social groups are empowered by divine power, providing both gift and task. For Christians the vocation of Jesus the Christ to proclaim the coming Kingdom of God as the ultimate meaning of Publisher(s) history provides the criterion by which concrete vocations may be judged. God Faculté de philosophie, Université Laval acts by providing meaning, which must be chosen and achieved. Faculté de théologie et de sciences religieuses, Université Laval ISSN 0023-9054 (print) 1703-8804 (digital) Explore this journal Cite this article Hammond, G. B. (2011). Tillich on Divine Power and Ultimate Meaning in Human History. Laval théologique et philosophique, 67(3), 553–564. https://doi.org/10.7202/1008604ar Tous droits réservés © Laval théologique et philosophique, Université Laval, This document is protected by copyright law.
    [Show full text]
  • Divine Determinism: a Critical Consideration
    Divine Determinism: A Critical Consideration By Leigh C. Vicens A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Philosophy) at the UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON 2012 Date of final oral examination: 4/25/12 The dissertation is approved by the following members of the Final Oral Committee: Keith Yandell, Professor Emeritus, Philosophy Elliott Sober, Professor, Philosophy Steven Nadler, Professor, Philosophy Sarah Paul, Assistant Professor, Philosophy Thomas Broman, Associate Professor, History of Science i Table of Contents Introduction 1 Chapter I: Arguments for Divine Determinism 9 Section 1: Divine Omniscience 9 Section 2: Divine Creativity 43 Section 3: Divine Transcendence 59 Section 4: Divine Providence 69 Conclusions 91 Chapter II: Problems for Natural and Non-Natural Divine Determinism 92 Section 1: Natural Divine Determinism and Special Divine Action 94 Section 2: Non-Natural Divine Determinism and Human Freedom 128 Conclusions 145 Chapter III: Divine Determinism and the Problem of Evil 146 Section 1: Divine Responsibility and Blameworthiness 147 Section 2: That God is Not Causally Responsible (Privative Evil and Divine Permission) 154 Section 3: That God is Not Morally Responsible (Divine Command Theory) 183 Section 4: That God is Not Morally Blameworthy (Theodicies and Skeptical Theism) 203 Section 5: That Divine Indeterminism Fares No Better 246 Conclusion 262 Bibliography 264 ii To Kate, who taught me to take seriously the question, even if she might not agree with my answer. To Keith, who helped me to hone my arguments with his persistent questions and constructive criticisms. And to George, who helped me find the peace of mind to finish this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reception of Rashi's Commentary On
    T HE J EWISH Q UARTERLY R EVIEW, Vol. 97, No. 1 (Winter 2007) 33–66 The Reception of Rashi’s Commentary on the Torah inSpain:TheCaseofAdam’s Mating with the Animals ERIC LAWEE WHILE R ASHI’S BIBLICAL COMMENTARY has profited from extensive and more or less uninterrupted scholarly inquiry,1 considerably less atten- tion has been devoted to the varied reactions over the ages to his scrip- tural exegesis.2 The sorts of questions rightly posed with respect to Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah should also be asked about Rashi’s Commen- tary on the Torah: ‘‘Where and when did the book penetrate first? Who were its sponsors and opponents? What were the initial steps, or stages, in its adoption everywhere?’’3 This essay seeks to illumine an aspect of the Research for this article was made possible by a UCLA Center for Jewish Studies Maurice Amado Foundation Research Grant in Sephardic Studies and by grants from the Faculty of Arts of York University, Toronto. It was written while I enjoyed a Visiting Fellowship from the Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies. Ephraim Kanarfogel, Martin Lockshin, and B. Barry Levy helpfully commented on a draft, while JQR’s anonymous readers significantly improved a later version. I wish to express my thanks to these individuals and institutions for their aid. 1. For bibliographic orientation, see Avraham Grossman, ‘‘The School of Lit- eral Jewish Exegesis in Northern France,’’ Hebrew Bible / Old Testament, vol. 1, pt. 2, From the Beginnings to the Middle Ages: The Middle Ages, ed. M. Sæbø (Go¨ttingen, 2000), 321–22.
    [Show full text]
  • Green on Rudavsky, 'Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages: Science, Rationalism, and Religion'
    H-Judaic Green on Rudavsky, 'Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages: Science, Rationalism, and Religion' Review published on Monday, June 17, 2019 Tamar Rudavsky. Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages: Science, Rationalism, and Religion. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018. 320 pp. $40.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-19-958090-3. Reviewed by Alexander Green (State University of New York, University at Buffalo) Published on H- Judaic (June, 2019) Commissioned by Barbara Krawcowicz (Norwegian University of Science and Technology) Printable Version: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.php?id=53586 Tamar Rudavsky’s new book, Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages: Science, Rationalism and Religion, is an important contribution to the ongoing debate about how to define medieval Jewish philosophy. Since the beginning of the twentieth century, there have been multiple and varying works that have attempted to understand Jewish thinkers and debates ranging from the time of Saadia Gaon in the ninth century to Baruch Spinoza in the seventeenth century. One of the major elements unifying Jewish philosophers living in Baghdad, Egypt, Spain, Provence, and Italy in the medieval world was the question of how to synthesize Greco-Arabic thought with that of the biblical and rabbinic tradition on issues such as the origin of the universe, the nature of God and the cosmos, the structure of the human soul, and the right way to live and to organize political communities. Most histories of medieval Jewish philosophy in the twentieth century have organized their studies chronologically and according to thinker or school of thought, while some of the more recent works present a more diverse account of the players in the field rather than just the famous names.[1] There is a strength to this model as it allows the reader to understand how every medieval Jewish philosopher and their schools of thought each developed their own approach to discerning the nature of God, providence, prophecy, creation, et cetera.
    [Show full text]