Joel asked Staff ago Hello.
I have returned to ask you a number of additional questions.
1. In your opinion, the laws of Judaism (and the laws of other religions) are not the words of the living G-d, but the work of man. Similarly, you feel that Judaism (I am making a gross generalization) is a collection of mistaken assumptions, internal contradictions, ancient fears, rituals, etc. How, then, is it possible that relatively intelligent people continue to follow it?
Why are there famous scientists who are religious and some even (Heaven help us!) have returned to religion? And it’s not only scientists — there are also many rabbis (and lecturers in outreach seminars) who are, by any account, brilliant, intelligent people.
How could their eyes be so blind as not to see what you so clearly see?
Were some of the Jewish sages of the past, who by any measure were geniuses (Rashi, Maimonides, the Vilna Gaon) wasting their time on nonsense?
We can say of those born religious that they persist in a childish version of religion which is difficult to break free of, or that they stay faithful due to inertia, but how can we explain why very intelligent people who have questioned and examined have decided to return to religion?
But the fact that there are geniuses on both sides of the fence proves that it is not a rational matter but tied to man’s emotional makeup. Faith is based on trust and is not subject to proof nor to refutation.
2. On that same issue: outreach professionals promise to prove the veracity of religion and the existence of the Creator to those who are willing to come to them.
As far as you know, what methods do they use and what “proofs” do they bring?
3. Many outreach professionals make the claim that the most important question I have to ask to understand why I should return to religion is “What is the point of my existence? Why am I here on earth for seventy years?”
I tell them that, first of all, their argument (as are other arguments) is based on an axiom which I do not have to agree to. Why am I required to even ask this question, and who decided that this is the most important question? Second of all, I tell them that there may not be an answer to this question, and that no one can answer it.
What is your answer to this question, of cardinal importance to outreach professionals and those who have returned to religion?
4. On that same topic: many outreach professionals mock evolution theory. Every returnee to religion will start off by mockingly asking you if you really believe that we come from monkeys.
From their viewpoint it is utterly inconceivable that a collection of molecules will randomly form together and create life and human beings.
I think there really is a problem about treating this wonder called the universe, existence, humanity in cold clinical terms like evolution, molecules, or even quantums.
Common sense dictates that it is not possible there is no guiding principle in our amazing and miraculous world. Man, secular as he may be, wants answers to questions like why there is life on Earth, where is humanity headed, etc., questions which science cannot answer.
Thanks in advance,
The struggling secular
Joel
jsadmin Staff answered 19 years ago
Dear Joel,
You answered your own first question well, and we will add to what you have said.
Amongst the believing intelligent (aside from their debate with the atheists) there rages an emotional debate about what the “true faith” is. This strengthens your claims.
Montesquieu (1689-1755) wrote a work called Persian Letters, a critical look at European society, particularly French society, from the “view” of two Persian travelers. The tourists lamented that Christians of different denominations (Catholics, Protestants…) fight amongst themselves and each declares that only his religion is the true faith, but in the final analysis they will all be sent to hell, as none of them pray in a mosque.
We will bring another example from the chain of important philosophers, Blaise Pascal (1623-1662). Our words are brought from the survey by Prof. Shmuel Hugo Berman, History of Modern Philosophy. Pascal, as one who preferred heart over reason, the god of emotions over the god of rationality, rose up against those who stood the self at the heart of experience, for we (man) are not capable of possessing certain knowledge and cannot achieve our goals. Man’s status in the framework of nature is paradoxical and tragic. The paradox is part of nature itself; what is more paradoxical than the fact that man cannot understand the nature of his own body (which is so precious to him), the nature of the soul? From this puzzle Pascal extracted the idea of “the wager” and claimed:
It is impossible to prove the existence of G-d. G-d does not want it to be possible to prove His existence. He wants boldness of faith. This boldness is expressed in daily life through a wager. G-d either exists or does not exist; which side do you favor? Logic cannot make any decision on this. On which of the two possibilities will you bet? Logically you cannot decide one way or the other, but we must make a wager. If we weigh the wager from the standpoint of happiness, in case there is a G-d the believer is rewarded with the World to Come and eternal life, but if there is no G-d, his loss is only life in this world. Pascal became a devout radical Christian — he sold his chariot, his horses, his library (aside from holy writings and the works of Augustine) and gave all his money to the poor.
Previously, he had had a revelation, which he described in a note he hid in the lining of his clothes. “In the year of our Lord 1654, on Monday the 23rd of November, on the feast of St. Clement. From approximately 10:30 pm until approximately 12:30 am – Fire. G-d of Abraham, G-d of Isaac, G-d of Jacob, not of the philosophers and the scholars. Certainty. Certainty, emotion, joy, peace. G-d of Jesus Christ. Your G-d is my G-d. Ruth. Oblivion of the world and of everything except G-d.
Now note the two things which tripped up this great man:
In considering his “wager” he did not take into account the possibility that “G-d wants” us to live as atheists to advance our lives in a natural manner by our own logic and reason (it is not for naught that G-d made His presence invisible to us), and Pascal should have taken into account the possibility that one who worships G-d will be doomed to eternal hell and the atheist will live eternal life (these words have been written in keeping with Pascal’s method). In addition, according to Pascal’s wager believers in Judaism (Rashi and the Vilna Gaon) and believers in Islam will be doomed to the pit.
Second, the revelatory event, whose subjective experience seems reliable, arouses thought: why is it that Christians always experience Jesus, Jews Elijah, and Muslims Mohammed? Puzzling, isn’t it? (This is a rhetorical question, whose answer is in the area of psychology. Pascal was orphaned of his mother when he was three years old.)
Our conclusion from all this is that the whole issue of G-d’s divinity is a human issue!!! The very doubt, questioning, wonder, and tragedy in our consciousness begins with man (even the intelligent) and ends with man.
2. Outreach professionals use sales techniques (brainwashing) which they have learned from salespeople and have applied to the sale of religion. (We hold in our hands a pamphlet by outreach professionals which teaches lecturers how to “sell” Judaism.) They are masters over those people who want and desire to hold on to the pillars of faith. They do not pretend to check the veracity of their faith, only to justify it. They will sometimes use reason when they think that, in the specific circumstances, it will help their cause, and sometimes they will stamp out and reject reason, if reason contradicts their illusions.
3. Your answer is quite comprehensive, but if you want to cause someone who has returned to religion to stop and think, ask him questions that suit his approach. Does he think the point of our lives is to make absolutely certain that the lulav is attached at top? Does his god want him to allow a gentile to die instead of picking up a telephone to call a doctor? Does he think the objective of his life is to treat a woman as frivolous, a person who cannot learn Talmud? Exactly what purpose does he have in mind? Does he think it wrong that the non-Sabbath observing public wants equality, freedom, and harmony between all men? Does this contradict the goals of his god? Etc., etc.
4. Your questions about our existence are echoes of what our greatest philosophers have written. One of them (Pascal) was brought above. The fact that our existence is a wonder causes us contradictory feelings: on the one hand we are full of amazement and elevated spirits from this inconceivable wonder, and on the other it leads us into a depression, for we do not understand its essence. Evolution is a scientific theory which has yet to be refuted; you should address your questions to experts in this field, like Prof. Evyatar Nevo of the Haifa University. But it is important for you to know that there is no connection between research into the development of life and the great question of how the whole business started, if it had a specific starting point.
We are not capable of grasping creation ex nihilo nor the infinite.
Have a happy new year,
Daat Emet