INTRODUCTION TO TEACHING EVIDENCE
Imagine you take your car to a mechanic for a tune-up. The mechanic
tells you that he can "feel the needs" of your car by placing
his hands on its hood while the engine is running. Based
upon this method of diagnosis, he concludes that you need a
new carburetor, and recommends one that will cost you $300 (not
including labor).
Obviously, you would dismiss his recommendation out of hand,
because it is not based on solid facts.
Now if we would refuse to rely on someone else's "intuition"
when the risk is only $300, it stands to reason that people will demand
more than feelings or premonitions when considering some of
life's most important questions: "Is there a G-d?" and "What does He
want from me?" In order to influence someone to change his beliefs,
it will be necessary, therefore, to provide clear, convincing evidence
as to why the Torah is true.
To fully appreciate this, it is important to understand the mindset
of the secular Jew. To him, religion is the antithesis of science and
reason; science is based upon fact, while religion is based upon blind
faith.
This perception evolved as a result of Christianity's historical
hostility to science. One of the most famous displays of this closemindedness occurred when Galileo discovered that the earth revolved
around the sun, and not the other way around. Galileo's finding
was censored by the Vatican because it conflicted with Christian
doctrine.1
Unfortunately, Judaism has historically been lumped together
with Christianity, in the popular mind, as being anti-science and antireason.
Therefore, it is counterproductive to suppress a student's desire
for evidence, since this serves to reinforce the mistaken notion.
Furthermore, it is not effective to rely on "the faithfulness and
credibility of our mesorah" as a method of fostering commitment.2 Most secular Jews cannot appreciate its value. It seems like just another form of "blind faith," or "tradition," a la Fiddler on the Roof.
People are sometimes reluctant to teach evidence for G-d's existence
because they feel that this reduces the reality of G-d's existence
to a logical theorem and trivializes Judaism.
This is indeed true for an observant Jew, who not only believes in
Hashem, but has experienced His presence, whether through davening,
Shabbos or learning Torah. For this Jew, limiting an awareness
of Hashem to "scientific reasoning" deprives him of a much greater,
more meaningful religious experience.
However, a Jew who does not believe in G-d must first be convinced
of His existence before he can begin to work on developing
a relationship with Him. In his case, intellectual evidence is a necessary
foundation for an appreciation of Judaism and a relationship
with G-d.
Everyone understands that it would be absurd to limit one's
appreciation of his mother to an analysis of genetic similarities.
Someone who has been raised and cared for in his mother's home
should have progressed much further. But an adopted child, who is
trying to determine the identity of his natural mother, cannot be expected
to create a relationship without real evidence that this particular
woman is in fact his mother.
Finally, while there may be a slight risk in teaching evidence to
religious people, because an occasional person may get confused,
there is no such risk in offering "evidence" to non-believers. Since
they do not believe in G-d to begin with, logical evidence can only
enhance their commitment.
A final note: In determining the authorship of the Torah, there are
only two possible options: Either G-d wrote it or man did.
Our aim in presenting evidence is not to convince the students
beyond any doubt of the Torah's divine origin. Our goal is to demonstrate
that it is overwhelmingly more logical that G-d wrote the
Torah than that man did.
Second, it is easier for a person to evaluate the merits of a position
when that position is contrasted with alternative scenarios.
Analyzing all the possibilities for authorship of the Torah, therefore,
makes it easier for a person to decide which possibility makes the
most sense. When teaching this material, constantly remind your
student of this. Ask him: Based on the available evidence, which position
makes more sense? Could a human being have written this or
would it have had to be G-d?
1. Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Vol. 3, MacMillan, NY, 1972, p. 263.
2. See Igros Moshe, Yoreh Deah, Siman 71, which discusses the importance of clearly
understanding the foundations of our faith and of teaching that information to
students, rather than relying solely on the concept of mesorah.
Buy The Eye of a Needle compiled by Yitzchak Coopersmith at a special online price at www.targum.com
