The Problem of Conclusive Proof

Is it useful to try to "prove" the Torah?

Art by Dennis Bacchus

The idea of “proving” the Torah is a relatively recent phenomenon. To be sure, philosophical proofs for the existence of God have been around for thousands of years, but the Torah itself (at the very least the Chumash) has always been considered by Jews to be basic history, a basic fact of life. And in fact, a constant refrain of the philosophers among us, such as the Rambam, has been that for those who struggle with understanding the philosophical proofs for God, “revelation” (the revelation of God on Sinai and through His prophets and miracles) is sufficient. And moreover, even among non-Jews throughout the Western world, the history in the Bible has been considered true for at least the past 1500 years.

The simple reason for the recent interest in “proof” is due to the rapid decline of religion, which itself has many causes, and inevitably leads to the rejection of the Biblical narratives which had been accepted history for so long. For those of us who are sheltered, this is not much of a problem, and there is no need to search for “proof”, since we consider the Torah unquestionable truth. The problem arises if and when people are exposed to the heresy of the secular world which puts confusion in their heart. The same is if one was brought up secular, and never considered the Torah true in the first place, but is now considering becoming religious. At that point, the quest for “proof” becomes very tempting.

This, among many other factors, is another good reason why we should shelter our children from secular media. Why should they be confused for no reason? However, for those of you who read Irrationalist Modoxism, that battle has probably long been lost for you personally (although not necessarily for your children), and you have been already been exposed to all the kefira on the Internet, and have gotten good and confused at some point or other. And it is for this very reason that I don’t feel bad writing about this.

I believe that the enterprise of “proving” the Torah has generally been a failure. Many of you probably know about the various examples yourselves, but I think most would agree with me on this account. The Internet age is unforgiving, anything can be “debunked” within seconds. And I think a good deal of the failure can be blamed on the unrealistic expectations that are set when one announces “PROOF”. If you come along and tell everybody that you have evidence the world is round, that can lead to a productive conversation (sorry Shimshon, in this regard I’m a retard!) Even if your arguments are not 100% foolproof, even if a flat-earther has counter-arguments, you will likely find the preponderance of evidence to be on your side. But when you announce that you have “CONCLUSIVE PROOF” that the world is round, you better be prepared for a crowd of flat-earthers who will poke holes in every single one of your arguments.

Conclusive proof demands a conclusion, which you will never ever get, no matter how banal or common-sense your assertion. But alas, people are searching for a short-cut to assuage their doubts, productive conversations are not enough, only conclusive proof will do.

I recently had the following email conversation with a certain kiruv Rabbi about a book he wrote.

Hello,

Somebody sent me your REDACTED which I read with fascination. It was very clear and well-written and well argued, and doesn't shy away from the hard questions. REDACTED…. Previously, I had found that by far the best online resource on this issue was the work of Rabbi Inbal at https://rationalbelief.org.il/category/the-historical-tradition-of-the-torah/ I am wondering if you ever looked at his essays and if so, what you think?

If I may distill his approach in a few sentences, he is not trying to come up with a "proof". Rather, he simply shows in many, many ways that the Torah fits very well into the history of the era (and the supposed anachronisms are easily dealt with and בטל באלף compared to the historical consistency), it is not mythological in nature, and that the various forms of the Documentary Hypothesis are all extremely implausible.

Although I am not sure if Rabbi Inbal is saying this, based on his general approach, I came up with the following argument which I think comes very close to a "proof". It goes as follows:

REDACTED….

I would be ever so grateful if you could comment on my argument?

Thanks

Happy from Irrationalist Modoxism (REDACTED)

He responded

REDACTED…

Thanks for your feedback.

I've heard of Rav Inbal from Arachim seminar advertisements, but I haven't seen his stuff.

In regards to what you quote from him and your own approach, it's nice. But it can't be more than the "reasonable-but-inconclusive" level that I discuss in the first part of my book, since there are, at the end of the day, logical rebuttals that can be put forth against these approaches.

However, I can't correspond further on the matter due to severe time constraints.

REDACTED…

To which I responded

Thanks for your response.

I understand that you cannot correspond further. However, when your severe time constraints loosen up somewhat (as they no doubt will, eventually), you are welcome to look at the moshol I posted on Irrationalist Modoxism, here 

https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-legend-of-king-maryumana

(I personally believe that it is futile to seek a "conclusive" proof to the Torah, the same way you can't "conclusively" prove that Alexander the Great existed, and I found what you consider to be conclusive in your book to be far less conclusive than the historical arguments of Rav Inbal, but that is a discussion for a different day when the severe time constraints loosen.)

Thanks,

Happy

As you may guess, he didn’t respond. Severe time constraints and all that. But I doubt there are many people out there who went from secular to religious primarily based on whatever he or others like him consider “conclusive proof” or even “evidence”. If any one of you are kiruv professionals who disagree with this, or if you know of such examples, I would be interested.

Rather than proof, acceptance of the Torah requires a change from the secularist materialist mentality that has gripped the modern world to a recognition and appreciation of God and spirituality. When you make that transition, worship of Hashem and adherence to His Torah is the simply the most natural, reasonable path for a Jew to follow, one that leads to everlasting growth and happiness.

עֵץ־חַיִּ֣ים הִ֭יא לַמַּחֲזִיקִ֣ים בָּ֑הּ וְֽתֹמְכֶ֥יהָ מְאֻשָּֽׁר׃ (פ)

It is a tree of life to those who grasp it,
And whoever holds on to it is happy.