National consciousness

Why not claim that Jewish tradition is false?

Just as we assume the Greek is false.

And so is the Palestinian lie that is currently being born before our eyes.
So if something relatively simple like the history of a people – that we see that in less than 60 years, an entire people can change their past from a young people to a people that feels ancient.

So no to things that are mythological like miracles and religious rituals.

This is too broad a question to discuss here. See my fifth notebook for an outline for the discussion.

I read the above notebook (and the other notebooks as well)

And yet I think the Rabbi skipped this part.

The rabbi wants to say that if the chance that what is described in the Torah scroll will happen is reasonable, then we will stand by the tradition.
Only if we think it doesn't make sense - Greek mythology (even though most of the gods are nature) will we contradict it and say it evolved.

But still, if you see that it is so easy to assimilate tradition and national consciousness - see the value of the Palestinian people.
So why even consider tradition and not directly contradict it?
Even if there is a reasonable chance that the process she describes could be correct.
But the vehicle for transmitting tradition – the people – is simply so weak that it cannot be trusted at all.

For example, we have no reason to reject the fact that the Palestinian people have always been here. But it is still a lie that has been completely assimilated in less than 60 years…

So how do we know that this is really a lie? If we don't have a broad front of sources on the matter. Then we won't hesitate to reject it outright.

For example, if the only person reporting the event to us is the Palestinian people - a lie.
Many peoples and history books – true.

Of course, it is possible that the people alone will convey the truth, but we are unable to accept such a tradition.
Because what can be done? A national tradition is like a broken bill, a counterfeit bill.
A national tradition based on extensive historical writings from the same period (not a later period) – like a bill of exchange.
(And the rabbi will not say that Judaism has a broader front than Islam and Christianity, because Christianity believed in Greek mythology before that, so you see how easy it was for it to believe in a lie. This is not called a broad front for Judaism. And certainly no one claims that it saw the Mount Sinai stand or was close to these events.)

The Rabbi didn't address this point that much. I would love for the Rabbi to address it more.

It is very easy to assimilate a lot of things. It is very easy to deceive our vision, and yet we do not doubt our own vision. It is very easy to fabricate history and yet we believe in historical traditions (about Julius Caesar and Napoleon, etc.). This is about common sense, and the examples of the distorted use of common sense add nothing here. Such an argument can attack any claim you can think of.
Beyond that, there are all the considerations presented in the notebook that add up to a perfectly reasonable consideration. I don't see what more I can detail than that.