What is Reddit's opinion of Reasonable Doubts: Breaking The Kuzari?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

Keep in mind that I'm not going to do any of these justice in a comment box, but in short:

​

> The apparent lack of irreconcilable contradictions in the tanach

That's not a thing. I mean, if you can reinterpret pesukim to mean anything you want, sure, you can reconcile anything. But if you take it at its word, Tanach is constantly contradicting itself. Right at the start, there are two creation stories in Bereishis.

​

> the survival of the jewish people

This is remarkable, but not supernatural. It has a lot to do with Christianity seeing Judaism as its parent religion, with Christian laws that prevented us from assimilating, and that discriminatory laws pushed (some of) us into being merchants, and later, lenders, which made us useful to people in power.

​

> the endurance of judaism up until modern assimilation

Do you mean Judaism the religion? The people/culture is the line above.

Judaism has changed radically over the millennia. Part of the reason it survived was becuase it was adaptable - which stands in direct contradiction to current frum dogma, which holds that Orthodox Judaism today would be recognizable to any Jew from any place and time.

> the chains of transmission

The short answer to that is that they don't exist.

This is my long answer: https://www.amazon.com/Reasonable-Doubts-Breaking-Second-Son/dp/1690831723/

This guy wrote a whole book about it https://www.amazon.com/Reasonable-Doubts-Breaking-Second-Son/dp/1690831723 . I will be honest, I haven't read it, but my pretty smart friends have and they loved it. It's very intellectually honest.

I believe you're referring to the Kuzari principle, which to be frankly honest is a terrible argument. Keleman writes about it in his 2nd book, Permission to Receive, which I also plan to critique. Permission to Believe was intended with a more generalized approach to god and doesn't focus on any particular religion.

For the meantime, here's a couple of links that debunk it:

(This is a site that abrogated many of the more popular jewish atheist bloggers debunks)[https://sites.google.com/site/challengingsinai/philosophy/kuzari-principle?authuser=0]

(Jewish atheist tumblr)[https://jewishatheist.tumblr.com/search/Kuzari]

U/secondson*g3 wrote an excellent book that completely demolishes almost all Kuzari formulations, (here's the books' outline)[http://2nd-son.blogspot.com/2018/03/breaking-kuzari.html] and here is an (Amazon link for the book itself)[https://www.amazon.com/Reasonable-Doubts-Breaking-Second-Son/dp/1690831723]

Seeing the Kuzari argument here is fascinating to me, as an ex-orthodox Jew. Have you seen this book?

https://www.amazon.com/Reasonable-Doubts-Breaking-Second-Son/dp/1690831723

It goes through and dismantles the Kuzari argument premise by premise

My thoughts on the Kuzari Argument.

https://www.amazon.com/Reasonable-Doubts-Breaking-Second-Son/dp/1690831723/

The story didn't start with Moshe, there weren't millions of people, and the account in the Torah doesn't describe any miracles.

https://www.amazon.com/Reasonable-Doubts-Breaking-Second-Son/dp/1690831723/

Where does the formulation that you have as the original come from? Is it from a kiruv book, a lecture...?

​

Anyway, this is my answer to the argument, in exhaustive detail:
https://www.amazon.com/Reasonable-Doubts-Breaking-Second-Son/dp/1690831723