Q&A: Hello Rabbi, Following Up on Our Conversation
Hello Rabbi, Following Up on Our Conversation
Question
Hello Rabbi, this is Or P'ri Devash (we spoke by text message).
I have a few questions and unresolved points, and because of that I’m very conflicted in my faith. I’d be very grateful if the Rabbi could answer them. (Forgive me in advance—I’ll write some of them briefly so as not to burden you, and because I understand that the Rabbi is familiar with them.)
A. The Rabbi brings up the survival of the Jewish people as something that significantly raises the probability that the Jewish people are under the providence of a higher power. But from what I’ve looked into on the subject over quite a bit of time, I found many other peoples who were persecuted too—maybe not exactly like the Jewish people, but not on such a different level that I could attribute it to divinity that took care of this.
B. Regarding the revelation at Mount Sinai, the Rabbi says that the argument is weak, and I myself struggle with it quite a bit and often think that on its own it really is not strong enough—but in my opinion it is stronger than it seems. Is the Rabbi familiar with Living Up to the Truth by Dovid Gottlieb? It’s a book Rabbi Gottlieb wrote on the subject, and it definitely presents a very strong position regarding the reliability of the tradition and Mount Sinai.
Link: https://ohr.edu/992
C. The Rabbi also presented prophecy as something that strengthens faith, but on the other hand it also casts doubt on the writing of the Torah—so how do we know the prophecies weren’t written after the events occurred? Which prophecies are we talking about?
From lengthy investigation into the prophecy of exile, it seems that it really was extremely unlikely to happen—but who says that aside from the matter of returning to the Land, it wasn’t written later, after it happened?
What does the Rabbi think about the prophecy of Babylon as something that proves anything? Isn’t that just statistics? (After all, even The Simpsons eventually predicted more than 10 years in advance that Trump would be president, and it turned out they got it right.)
D. So in the end, what are the actual parameters by which the Rabbi thinks we increase the probability that the Torah is from Heaven?
Personally, based on the revelation at Mount Sinai, the prophecy of exile, the prophecy of Babylon, the 1820 secret (which at first glance seems like something very trivial, but really has something intuitively special to it), genetic testing that found a common ancestor for the priests dated to the time of Aaron the Priest, and also archaeology, where it was found that Joseph’s dynasty matches the dynasty in the Egyptian monarchy with almost completely identical names—but again, I feel like I’m missing something. I found quite a few flaws in all of them from the side of them being a “proof,” so I’m a bit of a mess faith-wise.
Thank you very much, Rabbi
Answer
Hello.
In quite a few of the areas you mention, I’m not so expert, and perhaps it would be better to speak with people who are more knowledgeable than I am. I’ll try to offer a few comments.
A. I don’t know of examples of such survival, over such a long period of time, under such substantial persecution, with such numerical inferiority, and while maintaining cultural and religious cohesion. I’m very surprised to hear that there are “many” such peoples. Could you give examples?
In this context I should clarify two points. First, this is only a supporting argument that does not stand on its own (by itself it is not enough). Second, I bring it as evidence that we have a special role, not necessarily that the Holy One, blessed be He, providentially watches over and protects us. I doubt how involved He is in the world today, at least on an ongoing basis. My claim is that our history indicates that we carry a special and non-natural charge, and that is what causes our survival. I don’t know how much active divine involvement there is here.
B. Regarding the revelation at Mount Sinai, I say that the argument does not stand on its own but joins with the others (see also the previous section). I don’t think it is actually weak. I’m not familiar with Rabbi Gottlieb’s book (someone referred me to it some time ago, but I haven’t had a chance to look at it). Clearly, in historical questions this is a matter of impression. And each person should give this argument the force he thinks it deserves.
C. I don’t know what exactly you mean. What does it mean that it casts doubt on the writing of the Torah? There are prophecies about our return to the Land, about exile and destruction, and so on. Regarding the dates of composition of the books of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh), I’m not sufficiently expert, but it seems to me that no one disputes that they were written throughout the First Temple period. Therefore I think they cannot be seen as “prophecies” about return to the Land that were written after it happened.
As for the chance that this happened randomly, two comments: first, again, this is only a supporting argument and does not stand on its own. Second, Trump had already been a candidate before, and this is a binary question—whether he would be elected or not. But for an exile to occur (and also a return), this is not a matter of one of only two possibilities.
D. See my fifth notebook here on the site. There I also discuss the combination of arguments (as opposed to the strength of each one separately), which has come up again and again in what I wrote here. This is an important point for this type of question.
I’m not sufficiently expert in ancient history, and it’s worth asking people who are. In any case, it is worth remembering two things: A. We are dealing with a combination of arguments (see the aforementioned notebook). B. Archaeology and history are not exact sciences. Beyond the inaccuracies that may exist in our sources, there are also inaccuracies and unsupported assumptions in those fields, so if you draw conclusions from there (I tend not to do so), it is worth first checking carefully how well grounded it really is.
Discussion on Answer
Hello.
In my opinion, even beyond the term “antisemitism,” none of those peoples is a good example. None of them went into exile and returned. None of them was scattered into fragments like the Jews (and certainly if they were scattered, they did not return). None of them was persecuted for such a long time (we’re talking at most a few hundred years. In our case we’re already talking about a completely different culture and entirely different eras). None of them was persecuted just for nothing and without reason (usually it was on the basis of a national conflict and power struggles). And of course none of them had a prophecy that predetermined this would happen. None of them achieved the success and accomplishments despite persecution that the Jews did.
Oren, the site editor, referred me to Gottlieb some time ago. He also sent the following nice video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3sSl7A8jqA
Actually I’ll bring his whole message here (originally these were links, but that isn’t coming through for me):
Rabbi David Gottlieb’s work Living Up to the Truth (available in several languages—the English version is the best and most comprehensive).
The materials database of the organization Ner LeElef (in the Core Beliefs section).
The videos: A Rational Approach to Faith and The Mystery of the Jews on YouTube.
Also several discussions appearing on the site: the Exodus from Egypt in archaeology, on the revelation at Mount Sinai, a defense of the Oral Torah.
Hello Rabbi,
Thank you for the quick responses (the Rabbi is of course welcome to say if I’m burdening him with my many questions).
Regarding exile and return—the Armenians.
Regarding worldwide dispersion—the Armenians, the Roma, and the Circassians.
Still, persecution on such a large scale (the Roma too were murdered in the Holocaust and persecuted over a thousand years, from a period a bit after the Second Temple until the time of the Holocaust, and at the moment they are working on returning to their land; and the Armenians underwent a holocaust in which 3 million died—again, not like the Jews who were persecuted year after year).
But such great worldwide consciousness and influence, and also prophecy about it all—that belongs only to the Jews (though there may be a stated rational explanation by scholars for the persecution, namely that the Jewish people saw itself as the people chosen by God, which aroused jealousy).
Regarding Rabbi Lawrence, he is excellent. I saw the lecture and even asked him a few questions by email. Unfortunately I still haven’t had the privilege of reading his book (my laziness). Personally I highly recommend Rabbi Gottlieb’s book. (I haven’t read Rabbi Lawrence’s, though I’m sure it’s excellent and I will read it.)
What interests me is this (and this is a difficult question coming from a clearly emotional need):
What is the approximate probability, in the Rabbi’s opinion, that the revelation at Mount Sinai really happened and that God was revealed?
Again, thank you very much, Rabbi 🙂
Be strong and courageous.
There are many differences, and I see no point in getting into their details.
In any case, in my opinion the probability that there was some sort of interaction with the Holy One, blessed be He, at Mount Sinai is fairly high. What exactly happened there is less clear.
Thank you, Rabbi 🙂 You helped me a lot.
Hi Rabbi, I saw in the comments that the Rabbi presents the psychophysical problem as proof of a spiritual entity and therefore as reinforcement for the reality of God. Where can I find things the Rabbi wrote on this in more detail? (I’d be happy if there’s a link.)
Thank you
I don’t remember having written something on this directly. I think it is not necessarily reinforcement for the existence of God, but rather evidence for the existence of spirit / mind (against materialism). Of course the materialist also denies the existence of God, but the dualist does not necessarily believe in Him.
The Armenians mostly remained living on their land (only some lived in the diaspora), and over the last 2,000 years every so often they established a sovereign state that was conquered again and again. They were not really a scattered people for hundreds of years that suddenly returned to its land. Needless to say, they also did not maintain a completely distinct cultural identity, since they were Christians—part of one of the strongest empires in the world. They also did not stand out like we did, were not persecuted with the same systematic nature, and so on.
The Roma were indeed persecuted (by Christians, but not by the Babylonians, Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Christians, Nazis, Soviets, and Muslims), but they never preserved a very unique culture (aside from food and clothing, roughly speaking). On the contrary, they adapted themselves to the environment in most respects and adopted much of the local culture (religion and more). The reason they survived as a people is not that they did not assimilate, but that others did not want to assimilate with them. Therefore this is not a culture that survived miraculously against all odds, but a people that lived like the local culture and that others did not want to integrate. That is completely different from us. In addition, it is not clear how many pogroms and the like they suffered relative to us.
The Circassians did undergo exile. But it was in 1860 (and then they underwent genocide) … In 1918, after the war, they were given permission to return. Before the exile, aside from the conquest of their homeland, they seem to have lived reasonably well. To cite them as a people that returned from exile seems to me a bit exaggerated.
To complete the picture, people usually also mention the Yazidis and the Zoroastrians, who were persecuted. But here too:
The Zoroastrians simply moved to territory where they could live in religious peace (India) and concentrated there. They did not stand out, were not dispersed, did not establish a state, and so on.
The Yazidis (who have existed for 1,000 years) lived concentrated in northern Iraq. Indeed, Muslims would murder them, but they did not live in exile, did not stand out, were not persecuted by all the strongest empires in history, did not live among another people (where the challenge of preserving culture is much harder), and were not persecuted with such systematic consistency.
Oh wow, very nice… a substantive answer. You taught me a lot (is this the Rabbi?)… The only thing I still didn’t manage to understand is: “How does this indicate something miraculous?” (And again, I’m not trying to provoke; I’d be more than happy to see before my eyes the miracle of Jewish survival, which at one time strengthened me a lot.)
What are the outstanding features of our survival as distinct from the others? And how, logically, does that show a difference that really and truly seems like something providentially watched over and special, which raises the probability of divinity and that the Torah is from Heaven?
First of all, thank you very much, Rabbi, for your detailed answer and for replying so quickly—it’s really appreciated.
Regarding the peoples the Rabbi asked about:
The Druze—as is known, they were persecuted by Islam.
The Armenians—the Armenian Holocaust, about 3 million were murdered.
The Roma—they were taken into slavery, and there are quite a few similarities.
The Aborigines—the children of Australia, if I’m not mistaken, a people persecuted by the Australians.
As I recall, the Circassians too were persecuted.
There are a few more peoples.
None of them really reaches the level of Jewish persecution, but some are fairly close in certain aspects—length of exile, leaving their land, slavery, murder (especially the Armenians, the Roma, and another people I forgot). But the Jewish people are definitely the highest among them all and even “earned” antisemitism named after them. My question came from the hope that the Rabbi had some aspect of this that could itself prove something through it.
(Which the Rabbi explained is not the case.)
B. The point Rabbi Gottlieb raises is that there really is no people in history with a claim *that it accepted upon itself the yoke of its religion’s commandments on the basis of a revelation*. (The very fact that there is no other people like that in history.)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revelation#Mass_revelation
[Regarding what was written there about revelations to other peoples—there are several peoples that supposedly have a claim to a mass revelation, but from checking it seems that with the Native Americans this is not accurate and is not part of their tradition but rather a book written about them.
Regarding Constantine’s cross, there are two versions, both from two historians: one says there was no revelation and the other says there was (and the one who claimed there was one wrote at Constantine’s own order).
And in any case we have no people at all that passes down such a tradition. (And that revelation had no effect on any people.)
The Fatima lady is not a revelation but a group of people who saw a woman in a church, and there is even a photograph. What they would pass down is that they saw a woman in a church who was a goddess etc. There’s no pyrotechnics here that could testify to something major like a mass revelation (…like saying they saw Pharaoh in Egypt and he was a god and therefore this is a revelation).
But on the other hand there is the cross of Don Alonzo of Portugal and the cross of Saint Andrew, which seemingly are the result of the breaking of sun rays. The question is whether they were regarded as a miracle, and so there is a problem on one hand, but on the other hand there is no acceptance of religious commandments on that basis among the peoples involved, so maybe it still does not meet the criteria.]
C. The Rabbi answered my difficulty, thank you. (By the way, if someone were to say this was just reading the situation and predicting correctly—I went the extra mile and checked, and during the First Temple period the Roman people were weak and did not pose a threat that could have been identified politically and on that basis have a prophecy written.)
I may have gone on a bit, maybe about things that aren’t so relevant, but I wanted to clarify some points I had seen.
Thank you very, very much, Rabbi. I really appreciate it.