The concept of revealed law stands as the bedrock of Jewish religious and communal continuity, yet its indispensability remains contested in modern Jewish thought. Through critical analysis of Dr. Boaz Cohen's "Law and Tradition in Judaism" and examination of three contemporary approaches—complete rejection, acceptance without revelation, and retention with varying interpretations—a clear pattern emerges. Historically, revealed law fulfilled three essential functions: it provided rationale for the law's perceived perfection, justified observance-related hardships, and imbued Jewish life with cosmic significance. Purely rational justifications for Jewish law have proven insufficient to maintain observance, primarily because they limit the law's authority to comprehensible purposes and permit easier alternatives. While Jewish nationalism, Hebrew language revival, and attachment to Israel offer valuable communal bonds, they cannot adequately replace the authentic pattern of Jewish life established by revealed law. Historical evidence demonstrates that Jewish communities have maintained their distinctive identity only when revealed law retained vital significance for their members, suggesting that meaningful Jewish continuity requires some acceptable formulation of this concept—one more durable than territory or language alone.