- Sinai-Questions
-
- Moshe Ben-Chaim
-
- I have a couple of questions regarding your proof of the validity of
Judaism, as per the national revelation at Sinai.
- Question: Is there a book on comparative religion and/or the
origin of religions that verifies your claim that Judaism is the only
religion that is based on a national revelation? Is this an accepted
fact among Professors of religion?
-
- Reply: Not only by them, but by opposing religions
themselves. It is quite interesting that opposers of Judaism
accept Sinai. This is simply because history (specifically events
witnessed by millions) cannot be
re-written. No other religion has claim to such an event. They are
based on the word of one, or a few
supposed 'witnesses'. Something which you may either believe or
disbelieve, but that which "safely"
cannot be disproven.
-
-
-
- Question: How do you know that this wasn't a case of the
leaders writing the text and everybody else being forced to conform,
on the penalty of death and/or ex-communication (As per Spinoza)?
After all, during recent periods of time when Jews has the chance to
abandon orthodoxy (The move to America, the Enlightenment, etc..),
they did so on huge numbers.
-
- Reply: If this were the case, we would not have unanimous
accounts of the events reading identically. There would be alternate
stories by writers of the specific time and place when the supposed
forced conformation occured. But we have no stories. So why assume
that which is not documented. If we use this line of supposition,
anything is possible, we may even assume aliens. But we are trying to
base ourselves on historical proof, and on a purely scientific
approach which assumes nothing, and does not compel one to simply
"believe" as other religions do. Belief is not how Einstein
formulated laws of the universe. Belief then should certainly not be
used in more crucial areas of one's life, I mean, one's philosophy.
-
-
-
- Question: If the national revelation proof is so obvious, how
do the bible critics deal with it? They have been around for a couple
of hundred years, so they must have dealt with it in one form or
another.
-
- Reply: It seems to me that no one opposes it. It would be
like one opposing any other wide spread historical
account. The presence of miracles in the story does not remove its
status as an historical event, well
attended, and well documented. Had the vent never occurred, then one
would have had to fabricate this
story, and we would be amazed by that the world would accept such a
fantastic event. Should one today
endeavor to circulate a story of such fantastic content with miracles,
and have no proof (others who
admit) he would not only fail at his attempt to circulate such a
story, and be laughed at, but the whole
attempt would be forgotten fairly quick, let alone be believed
unanimously by the whole world and become
religion.
-
- Moshe Ben-Chaim
|