Permission To Believe: Four Rational Approaches to God's Existence

by Lawrence Kelemen

The most perplexing question of all does God really exist?
And is it really irrational to believe so? World renowned lecturer and educator Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen, Harvard graduate, examines the case for God in this intellectually groundbreaking book. A well-researched and footnoted work, this is an essential read for any individual with intellectual curiosity and spiritual thirst, and anyone who is involved in Jewish outreach.

Genres: Jewish, Judaism, Nonfiction, Religion, Philosophy

104 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1990

About the author

Lawrence Kelemen is the founder and current Rosh Kollel of the Center for Kehillah Development, a leadership development project devoted to the growth and wellbeing of Jewish communities worldwide. He also created the International Organization of Mussar Vaadim, a network of self-development organizations focusing on character development in more than two dozen communities in Israel and North America. He has been honored as a visiting scholar at universities and communal organizations around the world. During his decade-long tenure at Neve Yerushalayim in Jerusalem, Rabbi Kelemen influenced thousands of students. He is also the author of many journal articles and books, among them: Permission to Believe (1990) Permission to Receive (1994), and To Kindle a Soul (2001), and he is the translator of the classical text of ancient pedagogical theory, Planting and Building (1999).

Reviews

[Gary · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this volume Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen deals with the unfortunately widespread misconception that believe in the Almighty is neccesarily irrational.
On the contrary Rabbi Kelemen loggically explains why belief in G-D is rational and logical and that it is atheism that is irrational.
He explains that to be sure that no G-D exists , one has to know all that there is to know in the universe , which is impossible.
He deals with ethical and moral approaches to G-D's existence , pointing out that the truth of the absolute distinction between right and wrong , which underpins all decency and civilization, has to come from some supreme being.
He provides hard scientific evidence with the cosmological and theological approaches to G-D's existence , and he provides an outline of Jewish history , explaining why the miracle of the survival of the Jewish people over four thousand years , points to the existence of G-D.
He outlines the beginnings of the Hebrew nation , and the millenia of persecution , to the miraculous re-establishment of the State of Israel , and how Israel has survived against a massive Arab world dedicated to it's destruction through seven wars.
In fact this book was published in 1990 before [...] rained thousands of deadly scuds into Israel's population centers , the following year , leading to not one single Israeli fatality.
Israel has also in the last six years faced a concerted war of terror by the Palestinians , with the support of most of the world. considering that almost daily attacks are launched ta Israeli civillians , the 1000 c death toll is miraculously small.

These events bare out further the Jewish history approach to G-D's existence.

[Martin]

It pains me that the faith in which I believe is so poorly defended. It hurts even more that probably the most popular and oft-quoted book on the subject is so weak and filled with inaccuracies and old, dull arguments, that have long ago been refuted, to boot With some seasoning, I believe I can make a better case for God's existence, and may yet do so. This book, at worst is incapable with nary an understanding of scientific principles or what sciense IS or DOES exactly. At best, it's just plain sloppy. I shall deconstruct each chapter to reveal the flaws:
Chapter 1: Atheism is irrational. He commits the same error in this chapter that Kenneth Miller did in "Finding Darwin's God." Namely, he comes to a swift conclusion about something without once mentioning a single position from the opposition to mull over and discuss. He creates a little branch of reasoning, that he concludes is final without presenting any opposing argument. It's a one-sided debate. Throughout the book, he also evinces sheer laziness by discussing certain scientific concepts without giving them their proper names. This is an incredibly dishonest maneuver.
Chapter 2: The moral approach: He says we wouldn't know if murder is wrong if God didn't say so, and again, he says it with a finality even though a different-opinioned reader may be objecting. No, I do NOT need God to tell me murder is wrong, neither does civilization. A planet-full of atheists would determine this for themselves in due course.
And he's lazy again, as this is the only example he offers. No other proofs are offered.
Chapter 3: The cosmological approach: He argues that the complexity of the universe show God by talking about lottery numbers and chances, when these tired, old, boring arguments have been eviscerated by science long ago, and very effectively, I might add. The tornado-in-a-junkyard metaphor? Been there. The monkeys on a typewriter? Done that. Then he argues that science cannot explain the origin of the universe, the pre-big bang. But science has admitted pause when discussing that. Science cannot discuss that which existed before time. Why? Because science can only study extant material, and pre-singularity discussions are purely religious discussions. It's as if this book is arguing with someone who's moved on to other matters.
Chapter 4: The teleological approach. The same comments I have to offer hear are reflected in my Chapter 3 comments above. The complexity of life gives me pause, specifically in many details of evolution. The problem is, evolution did happen and is no longer a theory and complexity is not an argument at all. The lotto argument comes into play. Sure, the lotto player has a 1 in 23,999,222,999 chance of winning, but the lotto organizer has a 1 in 1 chance of having a winner. Life as it is, may have been inevitable and what he fails to discuss is the size of the universe, which is so gargantuan as to allow for multiple solar systems to have one the lottery.
Infuriating is a single page where so many lies are written as to be offensive. He says things like "Science has never," when indeed it has, or "Science has not explained," when it has done so ad nauseaum. Was he covering his ears when science tried to explain each point?
Chapter 5: The Jewish history approach: He makes a bit of sense here, but the same argument I have concerning pre-big bang events stands here. This is not a discussion of the natural. We are discussing the supernatural. Science cannot explain why the Jews still exist. That is a mystical discussion, and science leaves such mysticisms to the mystics. Again, such mysteries behold me to my God, but science doesn't delve in this realm, so why does he keep bringing untestable claims to science? God is supernatural, science is not. He doesn't understand the difference.
He concludes by summarizing every chapter except one, as if he forgot in his continued laziness.
I believe in God, but I don't need this man's permission to believe.

[Kressel Housman · Rating 5 out of 5]

This short but densely-packed book is perfect for people whose rationalist education taught them that the existence of G-d cannot be scientifically or logically proven, so therefore, it is false. Employing hard science to point out the flaws in the theory of evolution as well as bolstering the argument from design, the author makes a rational case for G-d, giving the reader permission to believe without believing himself to be a deluded fool. Nor does the author stop at science. There's a chapter on Jewish history and our people's miraculous survival, a chapter on how belief in morality is predicated on a belief in G-d, and last but not least, the question of why bad things happen to good people.

Every campus rabbi should have this book in his armory. It's the perfect antidote to Philosophy of (Anti-)Religion.

[Joel Weinberger · Rating 2 out of 5]

A valiant attempt at his goals, but Kelemen falls well short, from my view. And this is coming from a Believer.

To me, chapter 2 is the only chapter that I find truly compelling. In fact, the morality argument is effectively how I came to believe, and Kelemen makes a fine run at the argument. Additionally, chapter 5 on Jewish history as an indicator of the Divine is interesting, but ultimately falls flat.

I may update this with a more complete review at some point as I took extensive notes, but until then, this review, although a bit unnecessarily mean, is a pretty good chapter-by-chapter breakdown (as noted, though, I did find chapter 2 compelling).

[samuel stolper · Rating 3 out of 5]

I had Shabbat dinner with the author the week after I finished the book.

[Grace · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting book but poor execution. I found some arguments to be worthwhile yet the book delved into and explained them poorly.

For example, why bad things happen to good people. The argument was poor, though the author could have leaned into the book “When Bad Things Happen to Good People” but didn’t. That would have made it much more convincing.

I understand that the point of this book isn’t to necessarily definitively prove G-d’s existence, although it could have done a much better job at explaining the points. The author tried to cram too much and explain too much in under 100 pages.

[Shari (Shira) · Rating 3 out of 5]

After watching yet another movie entitled UNORTHODOX, I decided to read this book. The movie was a documentary about rebellious Jewish teens who become observant after spending their gap year in seminary in Israel. All three teens report that this book was a contributing factor to their decision to walk the straight and narrow. After reading the book, I understand why.

[Alex Tuttle · Rating 1 out of 5]

Drivel. Not for anyone looking for an actually rigorous defense of the mere plausibility of Jewish monotheism. Ignores basic philosophy, history and archaeology which present major difficulties to his claims. This book was written as outreach propaganda, not for casual or curious readers.

[Yisrael Dubov · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderfully rational.

[Dan · Rating 2 out of 5]

Rabbi recommended this to me and I do not remember thinking its arguments were compelling.

[Jorvon Carter · Rating 2 out of 5]

I didn't finish the book. None of the presented arguments for Gods existence are new, not surprisingly. The only interesting argument is an appeal to Jewish history. The following blog post presents more convincing counterarguments.

http://www.talkreason.org/articles/ke...

Despite the unconvincing arguments, Kelemen's presentation is easy to understand.

[Ken · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent guide for atheists and skeptics on the reality of God's existence.