[Avodah] Is an INCORRECTargument worse than NO Argument at all?

[Richard Wolpoe]

>
> Rambam was confronted with a similar situation where some philosophers
> wanted to prove the existence of God by arguing that the world must have
> been created by an intelligent entity from nothing. Rambam on the other hand
> shows that there is no such proof that can stand up to a close
> investigation.
>
> "*If you wish to go in search of truth, to cast aside your passions, your
> tradition, and your fondness of things you have been accustomed to cherish
> and if you wish to guard yourself against error, consider then the fate of
> these speculators and the result of their labors. Observe how they rushed,
> as it were, from the ashes into the fire. They denied the nature of the
> existing things, misrepresented the properties of heaven and earth, and
> thought that they were able, by their propositions, to prove the creation of
> the world, but in fact, they were far from proving the creatio ex nihilo,
> and have weakened the arguments for the existence, the unity, and the
> incorporeality of God. The proofs of all these doctrines must be based on
> the well-known nature of the existing things, as perceived by the senses and
> the intellect."* (MN 1:76)


for the entire article please See

http://yediah.blogspot.com/2007/11/cynical-kiruv-chilul-hashem.html

Sometimes we accept arguments because they fit our comfort zones even though
they may not hold water.




-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe at Gmail.com
Please Visit:
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071109/ca768761/attachment-0001.htm>