Living Up to Truth
by Rabbi Dr. Dovid Gottlieb
2nd Revised Edition
Title Page | Author's Preface | Translater's Forward
I - The Relevance of Religion | II - Religion: Pragmatism or Truth? | III - Belief and Action: Criteria for Responsible Decision | IV - True Predictions | V - Archeology | VI - Revelation and Miracles - the Kuzari Principle | VII - Jewish Survival - the Fact and its Implications | VIII - Summary and Conclusion
IV
TRUE PREDICTIONS
Section 1 | Section 2
We have two conclusions from the last two chapters. (1) To act
responsibly we must seek the truth and use our best estimate of
the truth as our basis for action. Action on the basis of pragmatic
considerations without regard to truth are irresponsible. Similarly,
waiting for absolute proof before acting is irresponsible. (2)
The exact weight of evidence required to mandate action cannot
be stated precisely (and is even somewhat controversial). I will
try to show that there is enough evidence to meet whatever standard
you actually use in making your decisions. So the appeal is to
consistency: If you stick to your usual standards and act responsibly,
then you must live according to the Torah.
Now we will begin a review of the evidence. I will start with
two cautionary remarks. First, when I present evidence, the significance
of the evidence is that it adds to the probability of the
Torah being true. To respond that it is still conceivable that
the Torah is false is quite correct,but irrelevant. The
goal is not to remove every conceivable alternative, it is to
present the Judaism as a more probable alternative.
Second, we are now gathering evidence. To gather evidence means
no one piece of evidence will carry the case by itself. This is
similar to a courtroom procedure. If you want to convict a murderer,
just finding his fingerprints at the scene of the crime isn't
enough, just finding a similar weapon to the one that caused the
murder in his house is not enough, just having a motivation is
not enough, just his having been seen at the place of the murder
at the time of the murder is not enough. But, when you put them
all together, it can be enough. So, again, it will not be relevant
to respond that "This piece of evidence is not enough to
justify believing that the Torah is true." Of course it isn't.
No one piece of evidence is enough. It is all the evidence together
which is enough. We won't begin to sum up all the evidence until
the last chapter. The point, then, is for each piece of evidence
to be seen as relevant, to see that the most likely interpretation
of the evidence is that the Torah is true.
SUMMARY
The purpose of the evidence is to show that the Torah is more
probably true than any alternative. Citing merely conceivable
alternative is not relevant. This conclusion is based on the sum
of all the evidence. No one piece of evidence can justify
the conclusion by itself.
Section 1 | Section 2
In Deuteronomy 28-30 there is a prediction of what will happen
to the Jewish people if they don't live up to the standards of
the Torah. It predicts conquest accompanied by wanton slaughter
of the population: men, woman, children, old, young, and so on.
It predicts an exile resulting in world-wide scatter, and that
during this period of world-wide scatter, Jews will have no independent
government. One result of the exile is that some Jews will be
brought back by boat to Egypt to be sold as slaves, and they will
not be purchased. Nevertheless, the Jewish people will survive,
will never completely be destroyed, and will ultimately return
to the land of Israel. It also predicts that the conqueror will
speak a language that the Jewish people don't understand.
Now as we said in chapter II, what is crucial about this prediction
is that it should be a unique prediction, namely, a prediction
that no one else should believe. From no other perspective should
such a prediction make sense. Because if it is a prediction that
other people can believe in or that other people can credit, it
no longer functions as a crucial experiment. It no longer distinguishes
between what you are claiming and what others can claim. So, let's
ask ourselves about each of the details in this prediction, whether
it could have been explained by a sociological analysis of the
times, or by a competing ideology - or whether it is something
that someone could explain only from the Jewish point of view.
[Of course, if someone should accept our prediction from our
sources, then his making that prediction cannot count for
him against us! If Christians and Moslems accept Deuteronomy
28-30 and predict that the Jews will be exiled as a result of
their failure to live up to the Torah, when that prediction comes
true it does not give Christianity and Islam positive evidence
against Judaism, since they took the prediction from us.]
I should mention that this prediction was written at least two
thousand years ago. Jewish sources say it was written 3300+ years
ago. Others might disagree as to when the Bible was written, as
to how many authors it had, how many editors it had and so on,
but no one believes that the account of the Roman conquest and
exile was written after the Roman conquest.
Now, let's see which of the details of this prediction could have
been explained by an observer with a point of view other than
that of the Torah. The prediction of conquest was not a very daring
prediction. Everybody gets conquered sooner or later.
There was a prediction of total destruction: a decimation of the
population and exile. That was rare in the ancient world. It happened,
but it was rare because the purpose of conquest was economic.
Typically it was a question of acquiring colonies and taxing them.
You can't tax people if you slaughter the population and exile
them. Now, I'm not talking about theft. Of course you want to
take all the gold and silver, gems, fine linen and so on. You
may take the young, fine, strong men off as slaves. You may want
to take the good looking, young woman for sexual purposes. But,
you don't wantonly slaughter the rest of the population because
there is no point in destroying your tax base! During their 300
years of rule, the Romans did this only to Carthage and the Jews.
So, the prediction of the wanton slaughter of the population and
exile were predictions that could not be anticipated to really
occur because they were not the normal procedure in the ancient
world.
Now, let's take the prediction that the conqueror will speak a
language that you don't understand. Why should I think that? Couldn't
you be conquered by a neighbor? Neighboring countries typically
understood one another's languages. There was enough commerce
and enough travel back and forth for them to be familiar with
one another's languages. Couldn't we be conquered by a country
that spoke an "international language?" Many Jews understood
Greek. Greek was in those days similar to what English is today.
Business contracts, trade and diplomacy were conducted in Greek.
Had any Greek speaking nation conquered and exiled us, this prediction
would have been false. It just so happens that the Romans conquered
us and they spoke Latin. Latin was a language with which Jews
were not familiar.
If you are going to be exiled, who says that you are going to
end up all over the world? Why should that be an automatic consequence
of exile? Not everyone who was exiled from their countries ended
up with identifiable communities all over the world. Even when
the Babylonians exiled us 500 years earlier, we didn't end up
all over the world. The vast majority of the population was taken
off to Babylon, a large group went to Alexandria in Egypt, but
there were many places in the world where there were no identifiable
groups of Jews.
If they were going to end up in exile, how could one predict with
confidence that some of them will be taken back to Egypt in boats
to be sold, and that there will not be anybody there to buy them?
Why should one think that? It is true that there was a slave trade
flourishing and that there were known slave routes, but who is
to say that it would definitely happen?
If you are going to predict exile scattered all over the world,
how can you be sure that at no point will any Jewish society form
an independent government in some portion of the earth's surface?
Don't forget, we are talking about two thousand years ago. Two
thousand years ago the world wasn't organized with maps and boundary
lines so that every square millimeter of the earth's surface belongs
to one nation or another, and sometimes to two or three. On the
contrary, there were vast areas of the earth's surface that were
unclaimed, unsettled, and simply wild; for example, parts of Russia,
Northern Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, and Central Africa. Who
is to say that Jewish exiles would not form an independent society
in one of these places?
Now that means that for each of these predictions, if I don't
have a Jewish perspective, and I look at it neutrally, or I look
at it as a Buddhist, a Hindu, or a Taoist, a Confucianist, or
later as a Christian or Moslem, I would expect them not to occur,
and I would not be able to explain them if they did occur.
If I were to assign probabilities to each of these detailed predictions
from any of those non-Jewish points of view, the probabilities
would be very low. Total destruction and exile, let's say that
this occurred in 10% of all ancient wars. Then a non-Jewish observer
would give it a probability of 1/10. That the conqueror should
speak an unknown language. I don't know how often that happened,
I mean neighbors often conquered one another. Let's say generously
that it happened one fourth of the time giving us a probability
of 1/4. Being scattered all over the world as a result of exile,
as far as I know, didn't happen at all. I don't know what probability
to give it, so I will be generous and give it a probability of
1/10. To take a nation that is scattered all over the world and
thus be unable to organize itself into an independent society,
again, I don't know what the probability of that would be, so
I'll give it a probability of 1/4. To survive under these conditions
and return to one's land has never happened in the history of
the world - strictly speaking we should give it a probability
of zero! But let's be generous and say 1/10.
Now, when you have predictions for a sequence of events, and each
event has a probability, and you want to know the probability
of them all coming true, you simply multiply the probabilities.
So, we simply multiply 1/10 * 1/4 * 1/10 * 1/4 * 1/10 and we come
out with a probability of 1/16000. This is a very small number.
That is the confidence that a neutral observer would have in this
prediction. What is the likelihood that a prediction like this
would come true? One chance in every sixteen thousand tries. Given
the evidence the observer had to go on, there is no way for him
to explain why they occurred.
But, they all happened. That being the case, this is what I called
earlier a unique prediction. It is a prediction that no one else
would make. Had anyone seen the prediction before it happened,
the response should have been that this is fantasy. No one else
would be able to explain why this should happen. Therefore, when
it comes true, it contributes to the truth of Judaism. It is a
relevant piece of evidence.
[Three technical remarks. (1) Many details from Deuteronomy 28
have been omitted. There are two reasons: either the language
in which they are expressed is poetical and cannot be precisely
defined (and thus we cannot prove that the text means specifically
what in fact happened), or they are predictions which are very
likely to happen in the context of destruction and exile, so that
they would not significantly lower the probability. (2) Some of
the probabilities above are conditional - world-wide scatter
given exile; no independence given world-wide scatter;
survival and return given scatter. Only if they are understood
this way is it appropriate to multiply them to get the probability
of all the events occurring. My numbers are meant as (overly generous)
estimates of these probabilities. (3) The probabilities are for
the predictions coming true; they are not for the predictions
having been made. We can easily think of reasons why someone
would want to make a frightening prediction, but we would
be very surprised if what was predicted occurred.]
Now could it have come true by accident? Yes, it could have. I
freely grant that because we are not playing Descartes. We are
not interested in a mere a possibility. We are interested in a
possibility for which there is more evidence. Anything
can happen by chance, but the likelihood of this happening by
chance is one in sixteen thousand. What this indicates is that
whoever wrote this had access to a source of information beyond
the natural. What that source was and how to describe it we don't
know so far. We are only drawing minimal inference from the events.
That seems to me to be what the evidence indicates.
Finally, I will repeat again that I am not trying to prove that
Judaism is true based on this one prediction. One true prediction
does not prove that a theory is true. I'm merely pointing out
that this is relevant evidence. The full justification will come
later when we take all the evidence together. But this is certainly
a piece of objective evidence which ought to interest us. It ought
to show us that the quest of the realist to find a truth which
can be justified is not a quest in vain.
SUMMARY
We are looking for positive unique evidence of the Torah's
truth. Each piece of evidence must increase the probability that
the Torah is true. To do this, it must not be explained by any
other point of view. One such piece of evidence is the prediction
in Deuteronomy 28-30 that the Jewish people will be conquered,
slaughtered, exiled, scattered world-wide, never achieve independence,
survive and return to Israel. No other point of view would give
such a prediction a probability of greater than 1/16000. That
it came true is positive unique evidence.
Top of Document
Chapter V - Archeology
Chapter III - Belief and Action: Criteria for Responsible Decision
Title Page
Ohr Somayach Home Page
This publication is also available in the following formats:
![[Text]](../../image/ascii.gif)
![[Word]](../../image/worddoc.gif)
Explanation of these symbols
General Editor: Rabbi Moshe Newman
Production Design: Lev Seltzer
HTML Design:
Michael Treblow
Produced by the Ohr Somayach Office of Comminications:
Rabbi Eliezer Shapiro, Director
Publications like this are available via E-Mail, as part of Ohr Somayach's "
OS-SPECIAL" list.
To subscribe, send the message "sub os-special {your full
name}" to listproc@ohr.edu
Ohr Somayach Institutions
is an
international network of
Yeshivot and outreach centers, with branches in North America,
Europe, South Africa and South America. The Central Campus in
Jerusalem provides a full range of educational services for over
550 full-time students. The
Jewish Learning Exchange (JLE)
of Ohr Somayach offers summer and winter programs in Israel that
attract hundreds of university students from around the world
for 3 to 8 weeks of study and touring.
Copyright
© 1995 Ohr Somayach International.
Send comments to: ohr@ohr.edu