God, Attributes

Abraham challenges God’s plan to destroy Sodom with two distinct arguments: the innocent must not suffer alongside the guilty, and a righteous minority should suffice to spare an entire city. Why does Abraham stop at ten innocents? Can collective punishment ever be just? The Rabbis sharpen Abraham’s critique of divine justice. Yet the story’s implications extend beyond whether perfect justice is attainable: God chose Abraham to teach his descendants righteousness and justice, even when it means challenging God.

Why does Elohim, and not YHWH, create the world? Philo and the rabbis—though in opposite directions—each read the two names as two divine attributes, one beneficent and one that judges. The kabbalists see these as the sefirot דין Judgment and חסד Lovingkindness—while Ramchal further unites them as two colors in the prism of the divine crystal.

After the Golden Calf, Moses refuses to lead Israel unless YHWH remains with the people, and presses further: teach me Your ways. God deflects with a tautology—“I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious”—and only afterwards reveals the divine attributes (Exodus 34:6–7), compassion and grace, faithfulness for a thousand generations, but punishment for sin to the fourth. The list is not a catalogue of divine qualities but an explanation of how YHWH is willing to limit the divine power to engage directly and intimately with the people out of love.

The “thirteen attributes” portray YHWH as compassionate and forgiving, yet they are immediately followed by a declaration of divine justice (Exodus 34:6–7). The tension between these two aspects of YHWH’s character is visible in King David’s sin with Bathsheba: Nathan confronts him, he confesses his guilt, but the consequences remain in place. When David’s son Absalom rebels and he flees Jerusalem, David accepts this suffering as the price of his sin. Paradoxically, it is this acceptance that becomes the path to his restoration and return to the throne.

YHWH is a God compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in kindness and faithfulness, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin… yet “he surely does not erase punishment” (Exod. 34:6–7). To make sense of this seeming contradiction, the Talmud offers a midrashic reinterpretation, and in selichot the verse is truncated. But could this attribute—one of God’s Thirteen—have been misunderstood all along?

YHWH also reveals to Moses His goodness, glory, and name, but are knowing these the same as knowing YHWH?

Jonah is resentful when God is ready to forgive the wicked city of Nineveh, and his book ends with God trying to change Jonah’s perspective. Whether or not God was successful, on Yom Kippur we read the words of Micah (7:18–20) as if Jonah finally accepts God’s compassionate nature.

But doesn’t YHWH tell Moses that “no human can see me and live”(Exodus 33:20)?

When YHWH sees the evil ways of humanity, he initially decides to wipe them out, but then determines to save Noah’s family. After the flood and Noah’s sacrifice, YHWH promises that He will never again destroy the earth and all life, even though humanity will continue in its evil ways. Thus, the story chronicles not the moral and emotional advancement of humanity but of YHWH.

As part of the selichot prayer service, the rabbis cut the biblical phrase וְנַקֵּה לֹא יְנַקֶּה “[YHWH] does not remit punishment” to read only וְנַקֵּה, which yields the opposite meaning, “[YHWH] remits punishment.” Although this edit is surprising, the rabbis are responding to a serious tension in the biblical text: Is YHWH a merciful God who pardons, or a vengeful God who will never remit punishment?

“God has not given you a mind to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear until this very day.”—Deuteronomy 29:3

The Shema has many interpretations, philosophical, eschatological, national, etc. A historical-critical way to understand the Shema is to read it (and Deuteronomy more broadly) against the backdrop of Assyrian domination, when Assyria touted their god Ashur as the supreme master of the world.

The Difference between God’s “Name (שם)” and “Presence (כבוד)”

Ezekiel challenges the divine (in)justice of intergenerational punishment, even though it appears in the Decalogue.