The Holocaust's unprecedented scale, technological precision, and explicitly genocidal nature shattered traditional Jewish theological frameworks, demanding entirely new religious language to grapple with its meaning. Classical theodicy - attempting to justify divine justice - proves tragically inadequate when confronted with the systematic murder of six million Jews. Through critical analysis of rabbinical writings and religious literature from both during and after the Holocaust, three dominant interpretative patterns emerge, each following biblical archetypal models centered on the "First Adam" paradigm of sin and punishment. These interpretations variously blame Zionism (for hastening redemption), anti-Zionism (for refusing divine signs), and assimilation (for abandoning Jewish identity). Yet the stark contradictions between these explanations, offered by respected religious authorities, reveal the fundamental insufficiency of traditional theological responses. Detailed textual examination demonstrates the need for a new religious discourse - one that maintains the possibility of divine-human dialogue while rejecting victim-blaming justifications. Rather than attempting to explain the inexplicable, this research advocates developing descriptive religious language that acknowledges both the Holocaust's theological challenge and the enduring human need to find religious meaning beyond rational explanation.