How does Olam Haba give purpose to life?

One of the common arguments I often hear in support of OJ is that, without God and the Torah, there is no purpose to life. Through the Torah's commandments, God has given us purpose and a way to attain a place in Olam Haba, the World to Come.

I have two problems with this "reason" for going along with OJ:

1. If, as many OJ adherents claim, Olam Haba is sitting in the presence of God and enjoying the Torah with Him, then I am not really interested. They make it as if the reward is basically hearing a Torah shiur (class) from the Man himself. Sorry, but that just doesn't do it for me.

2. Ok, so the goal is to get to Olam Haba. Then what? Do we sit around God and hang out with other do gooders? What is the purpose of that? So Olam Haba really just gives you a goal for this world, but then the problem arises again since there is no purpose to Olam Haba itself.

Sure, if you are into OJ, then living OJ with the addition of a closer connection to God would sound great. But in itself, that is a lame carrot to dangle as a reason to be OJ.

Let's say we get 100% proof . . .

I was talking this past shabbat with my wife about the fact that it bothers me that moshiach & olam haba are not mentioned outright in the torah. As the discussion ensued, she basically told me that she thinks I am looking for excuses to get out of OJ and am therefore nitpicking all the things that seem to annoy me. While she isn't completely on target, she isn't necessarily that far off.

This got me thinking, what if I was presented with 100% proof that gets rid of all the issues I have with Judaism. What that proof is, I don't know, but suffice to say it was rock solid. Maybe God himself comes and has a one on one chat with me. Maybe Moshe Rabeinu pops in with a video of him getting the torah. Maybe I am provided with a time machine and see things myself. Maybe I fly on Alladin's carpet up to God's castle in the heavens.

You get the point: ROCK SOLID proof is provided to satisfy me and any skeptic out there of the following:
- God created the world
- God chose the Jews and personally gave the torah to them, which is all fact
- God wants us to follow the torah and cares about our daily lives
- God generally rules the world
- God rewards us in the life to come after we are dead

So then what? Does OJ all of a sudden interest me? As I once responded to my wife when she asked me if I was interested in a shiur she read about, "Just as you never attended my engineering classes because they do not interest you, I am not attending the shiur because I am just not interested".

So, in the end, it really doesn't matter how "right" OJ is. It just matters that I am not one who is spiritual and believes in the mitvot and supposed reward that OJ offers. Couldn't I just opt out and not be bound to things I don't believe in or care in? I would gladly give up the "olam Haba" that OJ think I have coming to me. Just like there are people who prefer to not to be managers because with the additional money comes additional rules and responsibilities, i want to choose to be a plain old person.

If all jews were really given a choice, I wonder how many would choose OJ? And I am not taling about the "choice" they say we have now, but then look down upon anyone who isn't a practicing OJ.

The logistics of Techiyat Hamaytim (resurection of the dead)

I have posted in the past about my disbelief in Techiyat Hamaytim (resurection of the dead) at the time of Moshiach (in whom i also don't believe). Today, I went with the family to the cemetery and my kid's were asking questions about what happens when these people will come back. I gave them the usual "we don't really know" OJ viewpoint.

It got me thinking about how this would actually work (and yes this is a part serious, part mockery) . . . .

- If a guy was married to two wives during his lifetime because his first wife died, will he get to choose which one he wants?

- Will these people just rise up from the ground or will they all come from a central location?

- Once they arise, will we be able to differentiate them from currently living people of the same age?

- How old will they be? Will they continue to age from the age at which they died?

- I am assuming people with lost limbs will not get them back. however, will people who died of diseases come back healthy?

- What about general pysical ailments?

- Since their bodies have decomposed over the years, what body type will they have?

- Will the newly resurected person have the same personality as they had before death?

- Will they be clothed or in the shrouds that they were buried in?

- Does every Jew who ever died come back? Are there opinions who believe non-Jews will come back as well?

- Since we are assuming that all of these people will come to Israel since it is in the time of Moshiach, where the hell are they all going to live?

- Can cemetery land be developed for housing or other projects since it is no longer filled with holy bones that can't be disturbed?

Go in the direction of the evidence

Honestly, i don't remember what topic we were discussing, but i remember bringing up an issue with my friend where the torah and science disagree. He kept asking something along the lines of "how do we know that science is correct?" Sure, I don't KNOW that science is correct, but at least it follows guidelines, allows for peer review, and admits to changes in light of changing facts. In short, science starts out with a theory on why or how something is what it is and then goes about looking for evidence that back up or disprove the claims.

Compare that to the fundamental torah approach where the torah is assumed correct regardless of mounting evidence against a specific item within it. It is always he evidence that is viewed as flawed.

Clearly, this just isn't a fair or intellectually honest way of looking at things. While I personally, do not believe in the Torah from God model (TMS), i think if someone treated it as a scientific model and came to that conclusion, it would be a fair fight.

Along the same lines, my wife once asked me what level of proof i would need to satisfy me that God exists and that the torah is true. I responded that just as we wouldn't believe in the tooth fairy without evidence, why would we believe in God, the Torah etc without reasonable evidence. Of course, i made it sound a bit nicer so she didn't get too upset with my utter lack of reverence for Ortho Judaism and its tenents :)

I just don't see how fundies don't see the hypocrisy in bashing science for any possible error (which even scientist admit only they then update their conclusion's), but then giving the Torah a complete pass.

Are we allowed to ever change?

On another skeptic blog, JA made the comment "Why is it always the less religious parent who has to hide his beliefs and practices?". I thought about his comments through the lens of my situation and that of my fellow skeptics. Since most of us were ostensibly religious at the time we got married, it is us who is changing the dynamics of the relationship. In this light, I believe it is reasonable for the still religious spouse to be bothered by this change in our beliefs/actions. Likewise, I don't think it is fair for a spouse to become religious when both partners were irreligious at the onset of their relationship. Of course, from an OJ point of view, this is obviously seen as a positive move and it is the non-religious spouse that needs to get with the program.

This is not just true when someone undergoes a religious transformation. I think the same thing would hold true for anyone who significantly changes the dynamic of a relationship from the understanding they had at the onset. Such cases like someone who suddenly decided they wanted to quick their white collar job and live the life of an artist or someone who decided they no longer wanted to have any children. There are no right or wrong side of these issues. Rather, if they deviate from the understanding that one spouse has initially, then it is reasonable for them to be bothered when a change occurs.

So does this mean that nobody is allowed to change anything from the time they get married until they die or risk divorce? In short; no, they really aren't. Well, at least not in a significant manner without the buy-in of their spouse. Whenever we look for a partner, we are looking for personality, intellectual, religious, physical traits among others that appeal to us. So it should not be hard to fathom that by changing one of our core traits, out partner will have to adjust accordingly. Sometimes these changes can be accepted, other times they are just too big of a change to accept.

In a nutshell, I feel that this is the basis behind my fear of coming out fully to my wife about my religious views and practices. I love my wife dearly, but realize that some changes are just to great for a partner to accept and fear that this may be a deal breaker for my wife. My marriage isn't based solely on our common religious views that we shared, but it is certainly was one of our common views initially and one that my wife considers important. .

The "reason" for keeping kosher

One thing that has always troubled me about the torah is that Jews are expected to keep slews of commandments that have no clear reason. Yes, I know that the OJ view is that God doesn't need to give me a reason. Since He knows best, I should just take it at face value and do as I am told. However, i think even the most fundamentalist OJ would agree that it would be easier to follow the torah if we had reasons for the commandments.

A few weeks back, I was on a business trip in European city where there where next to no Jews. Subsequently, there was no kosher restaurant or take-out available. So I went ahead and ate with my co-workers in whatever places they ate for lunch/dinner. While I don't really care about keeping kosher, if I am in a place where it is readily available I will usually go for it. I think this comes back to my general fear of being found out that I am not really religious. So I would rather just place it safe even if it isn't the most convenient thing to do.

After being in this city for about a week & a half and eating with my co-workers, I have to admit I loved every minute of it. For once, I actually felt like one of the guys and not this pariah that always has to separate himself at meal time.

And that is when it dawned on me. This is probably why Judaism has the laws of kosher. What better way to make sure you don't hang out with non-Jews than to take away the opportunity for meals and parties with them? It makes a lot more sense than the tired reasoning that kosher is healthier or that non-kosher animals are somehow dirtier than kosher ones (let's be honest cows aren't the cleanest animals either).

Even skeptics and non-believers like me have to admit that this is an ingenious way to keep your own culture going and to keep your followers away from people with opposing views.

Did Rachel Imeinu help the IDF in Gaza??

I am not going to rehash the whole story here, but, in short, there have been stories going around the country that Rachel Imeinu appeared to soldiers in Gaza during the recent operation and steered them clear of booby traps.

Yes, I admit I am a HUGE skeptic and would not readily accept miracles like the believing crowd would. However, I just have one question for those that believe it without questioning it at all:
Would you believe the same story if it was told about US soldiers and that it was Jesus that saved them? Of course, most believers in Judaism would say no without thinking twice. And I think this points out the err in their ways. They are so anxious to believe ANYTHING that puts God in a good light that they don't stop to think that maybe the story isn't true.

I was not in Gaza and have no idea if this happened or not. But to automatically accept it wholeheartedly or discount the opposite scenario of US soldiers and Jesus immediately is ridiculous.

I just wish EVERYONE (myself included) would actually take the time to look at the issues, listen to what others have to say, realize we may be wrong in our thinking, and then come to a conclusion. To jump to immediate conclusions in either direction doesn't help any of us.

btw, for some further reading, DovBear had 2 good posts on this as well:
http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2009/01/new-rochel-imaynu-fable.html
http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2009/01/did-rachel-imeinu-appear-or-not.html

**Update
2 additional posts on this topic, both from Rav Aviner
http://www.ravaviner.com/2009/01/rachel-imenu-our-foremother-rachel-in.html
http://www.ravaviner.com/2009/01/more-on-rachel-imenu.html
In short, he basically says that without better proof, we should assume it is not true.