Our Father Abraham, in this morning’s Torah reading, indulges in one of the most fascinating, dangerous and popular sports known to mankind: debating with G-d. So unique is this controversy between Abraham and G-d, that I think it is one of the most remarkable passages in all the Bible. Listen to the Torah’s account of the debate:

• “The agents went on from there to Sodom, while Abraham remained standing before G-d. Abraham came forward and said, ‘Will You sweep away the innocent along with the guilty?’ What if there should be fifty innocent within the city; will You then wipe out the place and not forgive it for the sake of the innocent fifty who are in it? Far be it from You to do such a thing, to bring death upon the innocent as well as the guilty, so that innocent and guilty fare alike. Far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?’ And G-d answered, ‘If I find within the city of Sodom fifty innocent ones, I will forgive the whole place for their sake.’ Abraham spoke up, saying, ‘Here I venture to speak to my lord, I who am but dust and ashes: What if the fifty innocent should lack five? Will You destroy the whole city for want of the five?’ ‘I will not destroy if I find forty-five there.’ But he spoke up again, and said, ‘What if forty should be found there?’ ‘I will not do it, for the sake of the forty.’And he said, ‘Let not my lord be angry if I go on: What if thirty should be found there?’ ‘I will not do it if I find thirty there.’ And he said, ‘I venture again to speak to my lord: What if twenty should be found there?’ ‘I will not destroy, for the sake of the twenty.’ And he said, ‘Let not my lord be angry if I speak but this last time: What if ten should be found there?’ ‘I will not destroy, for the sake of the ten.’ Having finished speaking to Abraham, G-d departed; and Abraham returned to his place.” (Genesis 18: 22-33)

This, then, is the great debate between the man whom G-d loved, and the G-d whom the man worshipped.

I say it is fascinating, because the very idea of a creature daring to contend with its Creator, of Man arguing with his Maker, is intriguing.

I say that it is dangerous, because if a man takes too light-hearted an attitude to this idea of arguing it out with G-d, he may tend to identify himself as a god, confuse himself with the Deity, and become overly proud, confident and irreverent.

And I say that it is a popular undertaking, because since Abraham, men have not stopped debating with G-d.

Moses carried out lengthy debates with G-d, and at one point his rebuttal became so sharp that he said, m’cheini na mi’sifrecha, “erase me from Thy Book,” if you will not consent to me and save Israel.

Isaiah pictured G-d inviting Israel to join him in debate – לכו נא ונוכחה אמר ה׳.

Jonah engaged G-d in a protracted duel, because he, Jonah, was worried about the safety of Israel, while G-d was concerned about the safety of Nineveh as well.

The Berditchever Rebbe, that wonderful Zaddik of Hassidism, won a unique place in Jewish history almost solely because of his debates with G-d and his intercession for Jewish sinners, and his remarkable way of making them seem like saints.

And we too, we of November 1954, we too debate with G-d. We demand a new home, we insist upon a better automobile, we argue for a fancier neighborhood. We eloquently engage G-d in a debate for health and for prosperity. And if G-d sometimes refuses to submit to our demands, we counter with that stereotyped, hackneyed and empty rebuttal: but I deserve it, G-d, after all, I’m a fellow with a good heart, I’ve never done anything wrong to anyone.

Of course, we all recognize this as an inferior kind of debate with G-d. For there are two ways of debating with G-d – the right way and the wrong way, the permissible way and the forbidden way. And in the Bible these two ways are typified by two men. Abraham typifies the right and permissible way. And Job – the wrong and forbidden way.

Job, you remember, was a fine and upright man who suddenly was hit by a series of tragedies. He lost his fortune, his children and then his health. He suffered terribly. And as a result he began to debate with G-d, demanding to know why he suffered, and justifying himself in the eyes of G-d and insisting that his suffering was unjust and cruel and wrong. His polemics fill the entire Book of Job.

And our Rabbi tell us (Tanhuma Vayera 5): Hu ha’davar she’amar Avraham, hu ha’davar she’amar Iyov – both Abraham and Job said the same thing and had the same ideas in mind when they debated with G-d. Ela she’Iyov balah fagah, aval Avraham balah be’sheilah, but Job’s arguments were like swallowing a green and harmful fruit, while Abraham’s words were like eating a ripe, sweet and mature fruit. Job said, achas hi, al kein amarti tam ve’rasha hu mechaleh, It is all one thing, therefore do I say that G-d destroys the righteous with the wicked. Whilst Abraham said ha’af tispeh… Will You, G-d, sweep away the righteous with the wicked, and said in answer chalilah lecha, far be it from you!

Here then is the difference: Abraham debates with spiritual maturity, with spiritual ripeness. Job debate with immaturity, is spiritually raw and underdeveloped. One’s words are sour, the other’s sweet. Abraham’s attitude is expressed by fact that he debates while standing before G-d in prayer, and addressing his remarks to G-d, while Job sits in his parlor and complains about G-d to some friends. One argues in the synagogue, one on the golf links. Job says achass hi… it’s all the same, there’s no difference what your religion is or what you believe in or observe, I, Job, know it all, I conclude therefore that there is no justice in the world. And the other is undogmatic, and does not offer personal opinions, but rather, offers pleading questions: would You, O G-d, do such a thing? I know it couldn’t be true. Don’t do it G-d, not because I am deserving but chalila lecha, because it will result in chilul Ha’shem, it will desecrate Your name and drive people from religion. G-d, says an Abraham, I have no answers to give You. I just have questions which I want You to answer – because anochi afar ve'eifer – I’m only human, weak, inadequate.

Here, then, are the two ways, of debating with G-d. You can debate like a Job, or like an Abraham. An Abraham will ask his questions and think carefully, he might assume that there are those who dedicate their lives to such problems and ask their guidance. He will offer the challenge – in a polite, humble and intelligent way – at an Adult Course or שעור. He will ask and read, challenge and listen, debate and wait for a response.

But a Job-type does nothing of the sort. He tells the Rabbi off, and snubs G-d. He measures religion – the worship of G-d – by his own standards of what is right and what is not right.

The wrong kind of debater will say achass hi – it’s all the same, and then why not marry outside the faith. He will presumptuously assume he knows the meaning of Shabbos and what “work” means, and so, with the smug assurance we have come to expect, tell us that “in those days” one had to rub two stone to make fire, whereas today an electric switch is used, hence permissible. He gives the answers, this debater does – but he doesn’t begin to understand what Shabbos means and is. So that there is the right way and the wrong way of debating with G-d. The way of arrogance and dogmatism – and the way of humility and righteousness and sweetness. Balah fagah and balah b’sheilah.

At the end, measured by airily practical results, the Jobs may seem the winners. They get double their fortunes that they asked for, as did Job. But they’ve really lost for, as our Rabbis said of Job, he got double his fortune in this world and therefore relinquished the other world. He won materially, lost spiritually.

Abraham, the sweet and mature debater, might have lost the debate. Sodom was destroyed and is desolate to this very day. But he won the other world. He emerged unscathed, a glorious loser. The Biblical passage ends with the words ve’avraham shav limkomo, Abraham returned to his place. Not one chip was there in his spiritual stature. He was as great and as holy as before, though he lost the debate.

Let me conclude by telling you one Hassidic tale which illustrates, like nothing else, the kind of debate with G-d we are trying to encourage, one which manifests the great sweetness of the Jewish kind of debate. It is told of R. Elimelech Lizensker that he spoke as follows to G-d: Ribono shel olam, I know that when I die and appear before your Divine Tribunal, you will not let me enter Paradise with all those great and holy saints. But you will send me to Gehennom. But G-d, you know how I dislike the r’shaim, those who disobey you, I can’t stand their company. Therefore, O G-d, take the r’shaim the sinners out of Hell and send them to Paradise, so that I may enter Hell in Peace.

That is how a noble descendant of Abraham speaks. Let us try to emulate that kind of debating.

When we debate with G-d, as we may, let us do so with mellowness and understanding and maturity – and in the synagogue, lifnei Ha’shem. Let us not do so with sourness and irreverence and smugness and impudence. Better let us lose like Abraham than win like Job.