Judaism claims to disprove atheism

Debate Room
1

Sample_1024x1024
Sample_1024x1024632×1024 49.8 KB

Hi guys, there is this lawyer (or someone who claims to be one) that is trying to show that Judaism truly stands up to scientific scrutiny. I mean, I found many points in this book quite compelling, but our job is to disprove what he has to say here. I am looking for people with Jewish backgrounds to first read his book (4 parts) and hopefully tear apart his thesis.

2

IDK if there’s anyone here from a Jewish background but that wouldn’t really be a requirement to debunk something like this.

For a site like this you would want to accurately summarize his arguments, give your take on them and let others weigh in. I’m not going to give this guy money and encouragement by buying his book and reading it. I’m already working 60 hour weeks.

3

Exactly. The evaluation or analysis of a truth claim can not be culturally dependent, or it would only be “true” given a certain cultural context, and not universally “true”. A proper cultural background can certainly make the analysis easier, but it is not/cannot be necessary.

Digression: Damn, I work on average 37.5 hours per week (regulated by law), and I still don’t feel I have enough spare time. There are political forces here that want us to reduce the work week to 30 hours, the claim being it will make it easier to concentrate, thus making the workday more efficient during a 6-hour workday than during a 7.5-hours workday. There is some empirical data (albeit only at small scales so far) showing both economical and HMS gains from doing this. Whether it is true and/or practical for all sectors and for all trades remains to be seen.

4

I am an independent consultant and get paid for all those hours and at some point soon I will hire and train someone to offload some of the work, so it’s a deliberate strategy to build savings going into the chaos and turmoil I am quite sure is coming up here in the US. However there are certainly people who are salaried and labor in corporate cultures here where unpaid overtime is implicitly expected and it’s clear you would never get ahead if you don’t play the game. I had a job like that once during a slow time in the 90s, and my direct report literally told me, “in the end there will be no slackers”.

5

What an odd title!! Alternate Titles:

  • Real Atheism vs Judaism
  • Atheism vs Judaism
  • Real Atheism vs Real Judaism.
  • Fake Atheism vs Real Judaism
  • Fake … and the list goes on.

So what’s real about Real Judaism that isn’t real about regular Judaism. Inquiring minds and all that!

6

Yeah the subtext sounds like it’s referring to a specific flavor of Judaism, whether one of the many extant shades of Judaism or some iconoclastic version of the author’s own making.

I do know enough Jewish folks to know that a lot of them (especially Reform Judaism) are atheists anyway, and even more religiously conservative Jews I know don’t seem to pearl clutch about atheism like, say, a fundamentalist Christian would.

Then there’s the difference between cultural Judaism and the religion. You can get many of the benefits of group belonging without being a religiously observant Jew (provided you’re of Jewish descent; by definition converts to Judaism who aren’t of Jewish descent are a purely religious phenomenon).

7

We don’t have to “disprove” anything.

All of atheism comes down to “I don’t believe in God (or gods, or goddesses, etc.).”

It is very difficult to prove a negative, and we should not have to “disprove” Judaism, just like I shouldn’t have to “prove” thatGod doesn’t exist.

Positive claims require a burden of proof . . . as I shouldn’t have to prove my claim that there is no unicorn living in my garage.

3 Likes
8

I guess the OP feels the book somewhat tentatively meets that burden? But we don’t know how.

I broke down and looked up the book and found a summary here:

Not really enough to go on but he’s a rabbi who “enjoys being an iconoclast” and claims to prove Judaism in a purely “legal” and secular way without resorting to faith. My guess is he’s a charming crackpot.

Again though, if the OP has read the book he should be able to present each of the guy’s arguments in summary form if he wants a discussion.

2 Likes
9

OP is the author. 20 characters

1 Like
10

To provide some specific figures about typical Jewish attitudes toward religion and theism, this just popped up on social media:

1 Like
11

Yeah that fits, actually

1 Like
12

Here’s a short bullet-point summary of how the book argues it disproves atheism:

  • Probability Argument
    • Judaism’s survival for 3,300+ years is statistically “impossible” if its founding event (Sinai revelation) were a myth.
    • The odds of a fabricated national revelation lasting are compared to throwing six sixes in a row (~1 in 50,000).
  • Sinai Argument (Judicial Proof)
    • Judaism uniquely claims a public revelation witnessed by an entire nation.
    • Transmission through 140 generations creates a legally admissible “chain of testimony.”
    • No other religion has ever claimed or sustained such a public revelation.
  • Uniqueness of Judaism
    • Other religions rely on private visions (e.g., one prophet’s claim).
    • Judaism invites scrutiny because it claims an event open to all witnesses.
  • Atheism as Faith
    • Atheists dismiss the supernatural only because they lack personal experience, not because of evidence.
    • Refusing to accept Sinai despite probability and history is portrayed as “blind faith.”
  • Conclusion
    • The continued existence of Jews and their Torah is argued to be judicial evidence of the supernatural.
    • Therefore, atheism fails as a rational worldview, while Judaism is presented as uniquely provable.

Would you like me to also make a visual one-page infographic summary (like a diagram showing “Law of Probability → Sinai Argument → Refutes Atheism”)?

1 Like
13

I used chatgpt to figure out the summary of this book.

14

Or better yet, this is a way to frame it. How the Book Disproves Atheism

  • Atheism ignores improbability
    • If atheism were true, Judaism should have disappeared like thousands of other religions.
    • The continued existence of Jews and their traditions is statistically “impossible” (≈1 in 50,000) under atheism.
    • Therefore, atheism cannot explain Jewish survival.
  • Atheism relies on blind faith
    • Atheists dismiss the supernatural because they have no personal experience of it.
    • The book argues this is not rational but an act of faith — trusting disbelief despite contrary evidence.
    • Thus, atheism is portrayed as just another belief system, not a neutral or rational stance.
  • Atheism fails judicial standards
    • In court, consistent multi-generational testimony would be accepted as valid evidence.
    • Judaism’s historical claim (Sinai) meets this standard, but atheism dismisses it without counter-evidence.
    • Hence, atheism fails the very evidential bar it claims to uphold.
  • Atheism ignores multiple “inexplicables”
    • Origin of the universe, life, human consciousness, and Judaism’s survival are all inexplicable under atheism.
    • Rejecting supernatural explanations in the face of so many improbabilities is said to be irrational.
  • Core Argument
    • Atheism predicts Judaism should not exist.
    • Jews do exist, with their Torah intact.
    • Therefore, atheism is factually wrong (by the book’s logic).
15

There is so much bullshit in these claims that it is difficult to figure out where to begin picking them apart.

As for the “statistical impossibility” of Judaism’s survival for thousands of years if the “Sinai revelation” is a myth, I would call your attention to the Cosmic Hunt story that seems to date from the last ice age, and is found (in various forms) in the mythos of many of America’s indiginous peoples, and also in Asia and Europe . . . which means that it came across the Bering land bridge when Asian people migrated to North America and became Native Americans.

Also, why not apply this same logic (assuming that we want to call it that) to the revelations of Buddha, or the miracles that happened in the ancient writings of Hinduism . . . and Hinduism is a thriving religion that has existed for much longer than Judaism.

And so on.

Incidentally, I am also a Jew.

P.S. Please see below for details about the Cosmic Hunt story.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://wearestardust.myshopify.com/blogs/journal/is-this-the-oldest-celestial-story-on-earth&ved=2ahUKEwizqdSKztqPAxU1RDABHTAeDccQFnoECEoQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0gYRJ6v4t-W2BdM1tOFW9S

1 Like
16

This is a more detailed version of what the book is stating.

This book, “ATHEISM v REAL JUDAISM: The Non-faith Religion – A Judicial Review” by David M. Sands, aims to demonstrate that Real Judaism is not a blind faith but a fact-based religion that can be judicially proven, thereby disproving atheism. The author, an Officer of His Majesty’s Supreme Court, presents an “irrefutable argument” using irrebuttable non-Jewish evidence, scrutiny, and transparency that would be accepted in any civilized legal system.

The core argument against atheism is built upon three pivotal proofs: the Law of Probability, the Sinai Argument, and Purely Judicial Inevitable Evidence. The book systematically dismantles common atheist and secular hypotheses that attempt to explain Judaism as a scam or myth.

Here’s how Real Judaism disproves atheism according to the text:

  1. The Law of Probability and the Impossibility of Jewish Survival

    • The book asserts that the survival of Judaism for 3330 years, with its unique claim of a mass, simultaneous, public revelation at Mount Sinai in 1312 BCE, is statistically impossible if it were a myth. No other religion has ever attempted such a foundational claim because it would be too easily disproven.
    • The odds of Judaism’s unique story surviving among approximately 50,000 religions over 4,000 years are stated as 1 in 50,000, equivalent to throwing a die six times and getting a six each time. This is termed “impossibility in practice”.
    • The author argues that the very existence of a “surviving Jew” today is “living proof that – however impossibly – it worked”. To dismiss this as mere improbability, rather than a supernatural event, becomes “unintelligent, illogical and downright dishonest at a certain point” given the overwhelming odds.
    • The confluence of other “inexplicabilities” acknowledged by modern science (the initiation of the universe, the beginning and complexity of life) with the inexplicable survival of Judaism creates “inexplicability to the power of four,” pushing the conclusion from “inexplicable” to “supernatural”.

  2. The Sinai Argument and the Unbroken Chain of Testimony

    • Real Judaism’s central claim is that all Jews personally and simultaneously witnessed the Revelation and Giving of the Torah at Sinai, observed each other witnessing it, immediately followed the laws, and each generation subsequently passed on this historical event and the laws, creating an unbroken chain traceable to this day.
    • This is presented as a “judicially verifiable testimony” that distinguishes Judaism from all other religions, which are founded on unwitnessed, private revelations to individuals or small groups. The transmission is described as a factual utterance: “my father told me that his father had told him that his father had told him…”.
    • The book uses the example of a court case involving “hearsay” to illustrate that while the direct statement (“my father told me”) is a verifiable fact, the veracity of the content of that statement becomes questionable without direct cross-examination. However, when an entire generation testifies to having heard the same thing from their parents, and this repeats for 140 generations, it creates “evidential certainty conjoined by precedent”.
    • The “Chinese whispers” argument is dismissed because the written Torah, authenticated by non-Jewish archaeology and history for three millennia, served as a constant reference, ensuring the meticulous accuracy of the whispered message across generations.

  3. Accuracy and Preservation of Texts, Oral Law, and DNA

    • The Torah: The book highlights the “meticulous accuracy” of the Torah text, proven by:
      • Yemenite Jews: This community lived in isolation for 2700-3000 years, yet their Torah scrolls are “letter for letter, word for word identical” with others, except for minor, well-known variations. Their adherence to thousands of minute details of the Oral Law, before it was written down as the Talmud, provides “quintessential proof” of its ancient existence. DNA studies confirm their unique, pure genetic lineage back to King Solomon’s era.
      • Samarians: As non-Jewish enemies, they possess an almost identical Torah text, dating back to 555 BCE, written in the ancient proto-Hebrew script, further authenticating the Torah’s antiquity and content.
      • Dead Sea Scrolls: Dating back to 408 BCE, these scrolls offer “ocular, scientific (!) proof” that the Torah is perfectly accurate and pristine for 2500 years, shattering theories of later concoction or corruption.
    • The Oral Law (Talmud): This “vast compendium of Jewish knowledge” was passed down verbally for 1500 years before being written down due to Roman persecution. The Yemenite Jews’ continued oral transmission and practice of these laws, even without access to the written Talmud for centuries, is presented as irrefutable evidence for the Oral Law’s antiquity and authenticity.
    • DNA Evidence: Jewish DNA exhibits an “impossible purity and antiquity” with unique markers traceable for over 3000 years, far exceeding any other population group. This “Direct Noble Ancestry” corroborates the unbroken lineage and cultural isolation of the Jewish people, confirming that they are “what they call you – a Jew”.

  4. Refutation of Atheist “Scam” Hypotheses

    • The book dedicates a section to disproving various secular explanations for Judaism’s origin, such as the “Coalescence Hypothesis,” “Hallucination Hypothesis,” “Hysteria Hypothesis,” “Some Sort Of Hoax Hypothesis,” “Chance Combination Hypothesis,” “General Suggestibility Hypothesis,” “Mesmerisation Hypothesis,” “Brazen Lie Hypothesis,” “It’s In The Family Hypothesis,” “Rag And Bones To Religion Hypothesis,” and “Jus’ Happened Hypothesis”.
    • Each of these is systematically shown to be illogical, unsupported by historical or archaeological evidence, or impossible given the nature of Judaism’s claims and its sustained transmission. For instance, a “mass hallucination” has no historical precedent for being identical among thousands and leading to lasting, self-imposed laws. A “brazen lie” about a publicly witnessed event could not be sustained across generations, especially with a written text contradicting the lie.
    • The book concludes that the only way to cling to these disproven theories is through a “blind faith” in secularism, which “outweighs everything” for the cynic.

In summary, the book argues that Real Judaism disproves atheism by presenting overwhelming, judicially acceptable evidence from probability, unbroken historical testimony, meticulously preserved texts, and DNA, demonstrating that its origins and 3000-year survival are statistically impossible and cannot be explained by any secular “scam” hypothesis. This forces the “intelligent and honest Jew” to accept that Real Judaism, including its supernatural components, is true “beyond any reasonable doubt”. Atheism, in contrast, is presented as a “blind faith” due to its refusal to engage with this evidence.

17

Again, reading this makes me cringe.

If we follow this reasoning, then it seems that just because we don’t understand something must mean that it’s supernatural, and this is wrong on so many levels.

As an example, lightning was believed to come from God, and–even today–our language reflects this when someone says something like " . . . may God strike me dead if I’m lying."

Well . . . if lightning comes from God, then the church should be the safest place to store gunpowder, because the people here are very pious.

This was how approximately 20% of the town of Brescia was destroyed (and 2,000 people killed) when the military stored almost 90 metric tons of gunpowder in the church.

This was after Benjamin Franklin had invented the lightning rod, and after he had been campaigning to have them put on church steeples to protect the bell ringers.

My point in bringing up this story is that using God to explain what we don’t understand can actually be dangerous, and many supernatural phenomena are later discovered to be quite natural as we learn more.

Just because something is inexplicable doesn’t mean that God exists.

1 Like
18

Blind faith?

Why do so many religious people believe that atheists reject belief because we want to spite God? For what purpose?

1 Like
19

Yeah I wonder why the author “refuses to engage” with the other religions that survived, some longer than Judaism.

The economical explanation is that some religions are going to survive and some aren’t. Some of it is having the best set of self-reinforcing memes / rituals / whatever, and some of it is dumb luck.

The notion also reminds me of Catholicism and its claim that a straight line can be traced back through the Popes to Peter and Jesus when in fact it is just one of a host of competing orthodoxies that managed to kill off its rivals in the 3rd century, with the help of state power. And as the Protestants and various non-creedal reformist alternate orthodoxies have shown, it was unable to hold its own monolith together, anyway.

Judaism seems to endure mostly as a cultural and ethnic identity. It has prioritized that at the expense of dogma – and, as we see in the modern Israeli state, at the expense of human empathy.

One might also question if the survival of Judaism isn’t a pretty low bar, given that 0.2% of the world population is Jewish. By that standard Christianity and Islam have it beat with about 33% of the world populace in each of those religions. And those two religions don’t impress either since they claim to be the sole source of capital-T Truth and they haven’t managed over the millennia to convince the majority of the world of that Truth.

I suppose THAT depends on what you think success looks like – mere survival (for some given value of intactness) or actually being compelling enough that people see your teachings as self-evident. Seems to me that any religion worth its salt would want world hegemony, but … there’s also value in feeling special as part of some plucky tattered remnant that just can’t be stamped out. I’d argue that Judaism had no choice but to go that route, given its numbers.

1 Like
20

My wife’s family has a Jewish background, but all of them, which number about a dozen, are “cultural Jews” and are, in fact, all atheists.

2 Likes