benignuman

I apologize for not getting back to posts quicker. As much as I enjoy debating on the internet, it literally costs me hundreds if not thousands of dollars in lost work hours. I am also going to try to keep my posts shorter (if I can help myself).

For Real,

1) Logically I don’t need to account for all of them. If there were an infinite number of prophecies you would be correct, but there is a quite finite number and many, if not most, of them have already occurred. You and Lakewood001 keep on saying that these prophecies are vague. The question however is not vagueness in general (most statements have some degree of vagueness) but vagueness as to the issue at hand. A word might be vague but still significantly narrow the universe of possibilities as to its meaning. I pointed to a prophecy that set forth certain outcomes that would not be easily predictable, and in fact would be counter-intuitive to humans, even at the edge of their vagueness. There might be avenues of argument that might rebut this evidence (or severly weaken it), but just claiming “vagueness” without explaining how that vagueness effects the probability of the evidence in this case is not one of them.

2) I don’t know what you mean by “as you seem to agree yourself.” The para aduma argument is just another piece of evidence that increases the likelihood that the Torah was not written by men. That increase might not be very large, but I only need a preponderance of the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt.

3) I don’t think you are understanding my argument. (My knowledge on those 3 religions is very limited so I cannot speak with that much authority on them. Whatever truth claims they have would have to be examined on a case by case basis. I don’t see however how the existence of these religions impacts my argument.) If the Torah was written by men (as biblical critics claim) there was a time when everyone (i.e. the Jewish people) knew that it was written by many men over multiple generations. That they then forgot, or were fooled into thinking that the entire Torah was written down by one man as commanded by G-d (including large segments of which are the actual word of G-d and including a segment of which was actually written down by G-d and spoken aloud to everyone) is unlikely. I don’t know of any analogue to this situation in other religions.

Veltz,

The point of my OP was to point out that there is a logical fallacy at the heart of scientific knowledge but that we don’t question that assumption because we share it as well, not because it makes sense logically.

Belief in science is not purely utilitarian. Belief in technology is purely utilitarian. It makes no difference to the bridge you drive over whether or not Newtonian physics is correct, what makes a difference is that the bridge stays up.

Science examines and makes statements about life, the universe and everything, including many things that are not utilitarian at all. And yet we still teach those things to our children and believe them ourselves. For example, prior to the proposal of the big bang theory, the scientific model of the universe was that matter was eternal and the universe infinitely large. That this was wrong did not make the technology developed under the assumption of the old model stop working.

Currently science holds of the Copernican Principle (that the Earth is not in a central, specially favored position in the universe, and there is nothing special about Earth on a cosmological level) and most of us just accept it as science. But if the Copernican Principle were wrong and Earth was actually at the center of the universe nothing of utility would change.

Have you ever read The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn? It’s a great book on this subject and you probably can get it used on Amazon for a dollar or two.

Lakewood001,

I never said that the Torah claims that the words were literally written down by G-d (other than the Aseres HaDibros). The claim is that they were said by G-d (e.g. VaYomer Hashem el Moshe or VaYidaber Hashem el Moshe) and/or commanded by G-d to be written down (???????? ???????? ????? ???-?????????? ???????, ??????????? ???-??????-??????????). The oral tradition clearly states that the rest of the Torah was also dictated by G-d (or commanded by G-d), but even leaving that out there is a still a claim that a substantial portion of the book is authored by G-d.

Your evidence to the contrary was that all the other books that we have are written by men. Although that doesn’t speak directly to the question at hand (the source of this particular book) and is therefore weak, it is evidence. I countered that evidence (weakening it still further) by pointing out that all those books claim to have been written by men and therefore do not speak very much to a book that claims that G-d authored, at the very least, large segments.

You responded: “it’s only evidence (weak evidence) when the claimant himself is claiming the book is written by him, and it is established that the claimant exists and writes books.”

You are correct that outside evidence that the claimant exists enhances the evidence of authorship from within the text but it is not a prerequisite. Once again. Evidence is any fact that makes X more likely in contrast with Y. If you are dealing with a criminal case and you are the prosecutor, then evidence for your side is anything that increases the likelihood of guilt (however small an increase); if you are the defense, then anything that decreases the likelihood of guilt is evidence.

Here, anything that increases the likelihood that the Torah was authored by G-d (as opposed to men) is evidence for me, and anything that increases the likelihood that the Torah was written by men (as opposed to G-d) is evidence for you.

The issue is not PROOF but EVIDENCE. There is very little in this world that can be proven (obviously your “all other books are written by men” argument is not proof either, but evidence.)

The three items I mentioned above are all EVIDENCE. They increase the likelihood (compared to if they did not exist) that the Torah was written by G-d as opposed to men.

The point that I was bringing from the prophecies regarding the fate of the Jewish people, was not the “do good or you will suffer” aspect but the nuanced prophecy of being scattered around the world yet maintaining our Jewish religion and identity (something that is not predictable). Being persecuted but never wiped out. And finally returning to our land.

That these prophecies have come true increase the likelihood that they were authored by G-d and not men (as an aside many prophecies are verifiable).

charliehall,

I know that isn’t what R’Uziel tz’l said. But that is the closest thing to dayanim that has become accepted throughout Orthodox Jewry.

“All are Modern Orthodox Religious Zionist. When will the Charedi world get with the program?”

That was my point. We should offer such courses in Bais Yakov and Chareidi seminaries.

Lakewood001,

That things usually fall when you drop them was not discovered by Newton or any other scientist. Science is taking those observations and formulating laws and rules that govern those observations.

If you to present me with a book and tell me that it just appeared out of thin air, I would examine the evidence on both sides of that proposition and evaluate it. Now if there was no practical difference I might not bother, but it would be incorrect to simply conclude without examination of the evidence that you were lying.

Now you presented a piece of evidence both in this thread and in the frum thread. Your evidence is that all other books that we know of are written by men, it therefore stands to reason that this book was also written by men. That is evidence because it increases the probability that this book (the Torah) was written by men.

Now if we examine the Torah we will find that it claims to have been written down by the command of G-d (I will use “authored by G-d” as shorthand). This is evidence that it was authored by G-d because that claim from within the document increases the probability that the book was in fact authored by G-d.

Now as far as I know there is no other book that even claims to have been written down by direct command of G-d, but even if there were they would now be in a small subset to be evaluated each on its own evidence. If we could conclude that each of these books (assuming they exist) were written by men then your evidence would still hold up. Either way, however, we now have evidence on both sides of the equation.

Here are three additional pieces (there are many more) of evidence (remember EVIDENCE, not proof) that the Torah was in fact authored by G-d.

1) The Torah predicts that the Jewish people will be thrown out of their land, will be in scattered around the world, will be persecuted, will be few in number, but will remain Jews until their eventual return to the land. The earliest copies of the Torah we have date back to the middle of the Second Temple before our long bitter diaspora and before our millenia of senseless persecution, before our lack of assimilation, and before our return to our land. This certainly makes it more likely that the Torah was written by G-d then by men.

2) The Torah predicates large segments of its laws on a state of ritual purity that requires the existence of a extraordinarily rare animal (the Para Adumah). It seems unlikely that humans would do such a thing (they could of course, people have good imaginations, but it is less likely), because they could not guarantee the existence of this animal thereby jeopardizing the whole Temple ritual scheme.

3) Jews for thousands of years have believed that G-d was the author of the Torah. This wasn’t questioned until Spinoza and it wasn’t questioned by a group, until the 19th Century. Now if it was written by men it means that at some time in the past, somebody fooled all the Jews into thinking it was authored by G-d or the Jews all forgot. It seems rather unlikely that someone could fool all of the Jewish people like that and therefore makes it less likely that the Torah was written by men.

Once again, none of these are proofs positive. If I was wedded to the position that the Torah was man-made I could come up with a dozen explanations for each point. But that doesn’t change the fact that each one makes increases the odds that the Torah was authored by G-d (imagine if each of these weren’t true, would the G-d authorship side be weaker, stronger or indifferent?).

Zvei Dinim,

Barring extrapolations from the observed to the unobserved does not mean that observation is causitive, unless you already assume that there are laws and rules governing the Universe (and that you can perceive what they are).

Lakewood001,

“I mean makes a lot of sense in that it works. Practically.”

I agree that it has worked practically in many instances up until know. That, however, is not a logical basis to assume that there is any rule or law that it must work in the future.

“As far as the second point; my point was simply that the fact that laws of nature exists is not a premise accepted on blind faith as you inferred in your earlier comment.”

I don’t think it is blind faith. But the only evidence for it is inductive as well and therefore that belief, that there are natural rules and laws, cannot be the basis for inductive reasoning.

I will head over to the other thread to respond to your response there.

Jewishfeminist02,

I think you are misunderstanding me. I am not claiming that we don’t all rely on inductive reasoning all the time. I am only arguing that inductive reasoning has no valid logical basis. We use it, and assume it to be valid despite the fact that it has no logical basis.

Strictly speaking one cannot “prove” rules of the natural sciences. Almost all of us take them as fact anyway, but I think it is a worthwile endeavor to try and understand WHY you take them as fact?

Lakewood001,

“It actually makes allot of sense to predict the future based on what you know to happen in the past from your personal experience.”

Why does that “make a lot of sense”? Your only reason for thinking it makes a lot of sense is your observations in the past projected unto the future. This is circular reasoning.

“Actually it’s the exact opposite! Until people started using the scientific method it was assumed things in the world were arbitrary: i.e. when there was an eclipse everyone would think it was a sign they did something wrong and/or be afraid that God put out the sun and they had to pray to get it to come back out.”

Two points: (1) I wasn’t discussing historically what people thought/believed, I was discussing a potentially logically sound basis for science; (2) It also isn’t true historically. People didn’t believe everything was arbitrary before modern science changed things. Natural rules were believed to exist before Frances Bacon and scienctific method, they just weren’t as observation based and systematically delineated. (It could be what you describe existed in some pagan societies, but it certainly wasn’t the case in monotheistic cultures or in Greece. Eclipses and other relatively rare events might have been understood differently because they did not appear to follow any known Natural Rule or LAW)

Charlie,

What was accepted was that women can be toanot, not that women can be judges.

Rebbe Yid,

The reason why most women you speak to can’t have proper halachic discussions is because they were never taught Gemara, Rishonim, Acharonim, Teshuvos, etc.

If we would have a voluntary course in Bais Yakovs and Seminaries where girls, who wish to do so, can “learn how to learn” then some of them will choose to go on to more advance learning in Shas and Poskim and eventually there will be female scholars worthy of getting smicha and being rabbanim.