Q&A: Other Religions in Relation to Judaism
Other Religions in Relation to Judaism
Question
I asked a few questions on this topic and I need a bit more help with it (this is the issue here, so sorry for asking so many questions about it).
After a bit of thought and dealing with the issue, I arrived at 2 conclusions about it:
1. Apparently there are no serious revelation accounts in other religions, at least not like Judaism’s.
2. Even if there were some serious revelation account in another religion, it’s not likely to be relevant to me, since I did not receive that religion, not even by tradition, and it’s not likely to have binding force for me, but only for whoever did receive it.
About this point I wanted to ask 2 questions:
1. Do you agree with me about these conclusions?
2. A somewhat strange question: true, each religion on its own does not have the strength and grounding that Judaism has, but maybe all religions together have greater credibility (like multiple testimonies), and after all, what they have in common is that they oppose observing the commandments of a religion foreign to them (Judaism). So it turns out that Judaism is seemingly standing here not only against each religion separately, but against all religions together. In your opinion, does Judaism really carry more weight than all the religions together, or is there any need for that at all?
Answer
- As for 1, yes, but as for 2, not necessarily. You assume that revelations that did not come to you are not directed at you. That is not necessary. It depends on the content of the revelation and whom it addresses. It is also hard to define what it means that it did or did not reach you. Did a secular Jew who does not believe in the tradition and does not imagine there is anything to it—the revelation reached him or not?
- Even if that were true, there is no need for it at all. You choose one path and not eight, and it makes sense to choose the most plausible one. Beyond that, see about the judgment paradox in Column 257.
Discussion on Answer
That is only if all the other religions disqualify only Judaism and not one another. And even then, it is true only on the assumption that the combined probability of all of them exceeds that of Judaism.
Even if they contradict one another, they still have in common that they also contradict us, like the analogy with tefillin.
I’m saying the same thing about the tefillin as well. All the possibilities contradict each and every one of them.
Bottom line: why do you think it is still preferable to adopt Judaism over the other religions? Why choose the best tefillin rather than refrain from putting on tefillin?
Sorry for the bother—
do you intend to answer?
I don’t see what there is to answer beyond what I already wrote.
Forgive me for my lack of understanding, but it still feels unclear to me. It isn’t clear to me why it is better to go with the most plausible view rather than with what the other views agree on.
There is nothing at all that everyone agrees on. I don’t understand what you want.
I really assume there is some misunderstanding on my part, so I’ll try again. My claim is as follows:
1. There are many religions in the world.
2. Many of them agree and hold that practicing another religion (Judaism in this case) is something forbidden and negative.
3. Judaism alone claims that practicing Judaism is obligatory and a good thing.
From here one seemingly reaches the conclusion that in order to practice Judaism, the probability of Judaism being true has to outweigh the credibility of all the other religions together, not each religion separately, since they agree that it is forbidden to practice Judaism.
I would really be glad to know where I am mistaken here. Believe me, I do not like asking questions for no reason; I ask only about what bothers me.
I have no problem with your asking. The problem is that you are not reading the answers.
To Anonymous: suppose there are three experts and each one gives a different answer to a certain question. According to your method, I cannot follow any expert, because against each one there are two saying he is wrong. Rather, what you need to do is check which of them has the highest probability of being right and follow what he says, even though there are two against him.
That is exactly the point I’m asking about. Who says you have to listen to one of them? Suppose the other 2 doctors say that if you listen to the best doctor, you die on the spot. Maybe it is better not to listen to any of them and not do anything (passive omission is preferable).
Then think of a case where all the doctors say that if you do not listen to them, you will die on the spot. That is similar to the case of religions that say that not obeying them is also false, not only obeying another religion.
You’re right. The question is: who says it is true that this is the case? Who says I am a sick person who needs to gamble on one of the doctors? Maybe in such a situation it is better not to go to any doctor.
Choosing no religion is the worst option, because all religions agree that it is not correct.
Regarding 1, I don’t mean that it is necessary; I mean that it is plausible, and that makes Judaism more essentially true for me. After all, even if there is some religion in the world that is as well-founded as ours, at the end of the day I am Jewish and my religion certainly addresses me; in another religion that is not necessary.
2. I don’t quite understand, so I’ll try to give an analogy, without being precise about all the details, just for clarity. If there are 10 views about what tefillin are supposed to look like, and there is one view that seems more correct than the others, but if I choose to put on tefillin according to that view I violate “do not add” according to all the other views, then maybe in such a case it would be preferable not to put on tefillin at all. (Or to put them on conditionally.)
By this I mean to say that although Judaism seems truer than the other religions, according to many religions taken together it is a mistake and a sin to choose this path. That is, in this case Judaism is standing alone מול all the other religions *together*.
(I think the assumption that all the other religions would define the observance of Judaism as a sin is of course a mistaken assumption, but it seems to me that many religions would indeed define it that way, and in my opinion it is also obvious that the credibility of Judaism is stronger even than several religions together that would deny it.)