Q&A: Prophecies from the Torah
Prophecies from the Torah
Question
Hello, honorable Rabbi.
There is an assumption that a sequence of concrete and unexpected prophecies indicates truth—what does the Rabbi think of that assumption?
Does this assumption hold true regarding the prophecies of the Torah (I’d be glad if you would read them)?:
“And the Lord shall scatter you among all peoples, from one end of the earth to the other”—the meaning is concrete and clear: “among all peoples from one end…” and it is unexpected that in every single nation in the world, an exiled people would be dispersed.
“And I will make them a horror to all the kingdoms of the earth… in all places…” It is to be expected that a people that was exiled would not be loved, but that this would continue for thousands of years is not something that happened then such that one could estimate it from experience (so it is unexpected). Besides, antisemitism is an unusual and baffling phenomenon, since there is no anti-Germanization even though they were responsible for the killing of hundreds of millions, and so on.
“And your land shall be desolate,” and likewise “And I Myself will make the land desolate, and your enemies who dwell in it shall be appalled by it”—surely the intention is that until the Jewish people returns to its land (in another prophecy), the land will remain desolate even though our enemies dwell in it, and only when we arrive will the land give its fruit—and indeed, whoever settled it did not “make the land flourish.” And certainly the prophecy is not expected, since there is no precedent that would allow such a thing to happen—the Land of Israel is capable of flourishing.
“And nations shall walk by your light, and kings by the brightness of your rising”—is it expected that a small and also hated people would influence kings? Is there such a probability? And how should one relate to the fact that we really did become “a light to kings and to nations” literally, in so many senses? Hasn’t this already gone far beyond probability in an extreme way?
What about “until he has destroyed you”—that there is a desire to destroy the Jewish people—which may be expected regarding individuals, but a desire to destroy an entire people?
And what about the return to Zion, where there is some probability that it could happen after a few generations, but is it reasonable that it would happen after thousands of years? Is there any example of this in history?
I would be glad if the Rabbi could address each prophecy, if possible.
I’d appreciate your help in clarifying my faith; thank you very much from the bottom of my heart.
Answer
This is a somewhat overly decisive and simplistic claim. Clearly, if there is an advance prediction of several rare events that come true, that strengthens the credibility of the prophet or the text making the prediction. Still, each case has to be examined on its own merits—for example, what counts as a rare event, how unambiguous the prophecy is, whether there are other prophecies that were not fulfilled and how many, and so on.
As for these prophecies, some seem more persuasive and others are not so unequivocal. This may strengthen faith in addition to other arguments (see my fifth notebook, on relating to the overall body of arguments and not to each one separately).
In general, one should distinguish between two different kinds of arguments, although there is a connection between them:
- The very existence of a rare and special event requires an explanation. For example, if you roll a die and get 6 a hundred times in a row. That must have some cause (skill on the part of the person rolling the die, or the die is unfair).
- A rare but not special event, such as some particular sequence of 100 die rolls. It is rare because the probability of any such sequence is 6 to the power of minus 100 (a negligible number), but it is not special. After all, some sequence had to come out, and therefore it says nothing whatsoever (neither about the ability of the die-roller nor about the fairness of the die). But if there is an advance prediction that this sequence will come out, that makes it special, and then we are back to argument 1, which requires assumptions about ability or fairness.
When there is an advance prediction of a rare and special outcome, that strengthens the argument even more. For example, if someone predicts in advance that 6 will come up a hundred times in a row.
And as for us, the history of the Jewish people is rare and special, and that itself requires an explanation. When there is an advance prediction, it strengthens the argument even more. But as stated, each such prediction must be examined on its own merits, as above.
Discussion on Answer
That is not what follows from my words, neither A nor B (I explicitly wrote the opposite. Read again). In any case, the question falls away from the outset.
In my opinion, this guy is right. Suppose most of the Jewish people repent—will the Messiah come? So why, if not all of them repented but only 50 percent or less, should they not enjoy all the good promised in the above prophecies?
Where does it say in the Torah that the entire Jewish people—literally everyone—will repent?
Now it remains to ask: if most of the Jewish people do not repent, then is another Holocaust, etc., still awaiting us?
On the other hand, isn’t all the technology that Jews invented and that the nations use also a case of being a light to the nations?
So what is holding back the Messiah? What is holding back the good that should come to the good people who have repented?
Do the Rabbi, or Itai, or Mordechai think that something immediate can be done and all this good (in the good prophecies about us) can be attained for the entire Jewish people right away?
It seems from the Rabbi’s words here that if 6 really did come up a hundred times and this had not been predicted beforehand, then there is no reason at all to assume that someone cheated / the die was unfair.
B. It also seems from the Rabbi’s words here that the whole understanding that a complex thing requires a composer cannot be established, because we did not exist before the world in order to observe such a situation.
And it cannot be ruled out that complexity is simply a rare but not special feature.
These things contradict your approach that you presented in the Notebooks on Faith.
I would appreciate an explanation.