"Every single item in the general doctrine is denied, but the conclusions from the doctrine as a whole are retained. The result is a complete muddle in the scientific thought, in philosophic cosmology and in epistemology..."
55 Comments Posted
There is no conflict between science and Torah, because as one learns more about the world it is obvious that it is not random, but an act of G-d. The reproduction of bacteria can be described as a mathematical equation. Rashi's answer to a complex mathematical problem in the Talmud was proven correct using Game theory. The bible codes; The list can go on.
|
Rabbi Levi Langer said that science is about mechanics while religion is about meaning. Rabbi Manis Friedman said that Evolutionary Theory has a lot going for it, but that G-d still made the world first. The Curator of the Museum of Natural History of Chicago said that theologians have no business interfering with the work of scientists, but that scientists have no business saying there's no G-d. Karen Armstrong pointed out that when you try to replace science with religion and vice versa, you end up with both bad science and bad religion. It is counter-productive to try to pit these different kinds of truth against each other.
|
B"H
Why does the six (Hebrew) letter sequence for "Let There Be Light" repeat itself?? {Y'HY Ohr v' Y'HY Ohr}
Why did Avinu Moshe write this sequence twice, when once was all he needed?
Why say "..and Elokim said, 'Let there be Light.' ......and then quantify it by writing as a narrator, and there was Light. ??
Elokim said it first, then the Hebrew letter vav; which can represent man, or mankind (we were made on the 6th day).....
Some have suggested that God said it and it would happen through Man, or that one day man would learn to Create as did HaShem. Science by the way has written Y'HY Ohr in this way.......
E=mc2. Einstien was a Jew, where do you think he got it from???
|
A non religious person once told me that he does not believe because the order of creation listed in Genesis makes no sense. If it would list fish, amphibians, land animals, and birds in that logical order, he might have been swayed. I told him that I had never thought about before, and the order that he assumed was "logical" was the order that he was programmed with when he studied the theory of evolution, but lets sit down with a Bible and look what it says. It was then we discovered an amazing fact. It also answered the question, why did G-d make light on the first day if no one was around to use it for at least three days. The Biblical order of creation is in fact scientifically brilliant. Land, water, air and light, needed to sustain plants are created first, before plants. After are created fish, birds, and bugs, that plants sustain, They in turn, are created before the larger animals of prey that eat them . Cross one item from the list and you wreak havoc on creation.
|
I agree with the initial point about there not being a conflict between science and faith. Faith answers "the why," science answers "the how." But science is not a faith. The word implies a belief in an ethereal cosmic safety net- optimism. That has nothing to do with science. I am a scientist, who is deeply faithful. I find no conflict because I use science to explore the intricate, divine genius that is our creation. Is there any greater expression of faith?
|
The discussion of science as a faith raises an interesting viewpoint.
I see many reasons to enjoy Shabbat, just as I see many reasons to enjoy ice cream.
Unfortunately, for many decades, life in the United States made it almost impossible to enjoy Shabbat. Now, however, while it may still be difficult, it is no longer impossible.
But as for science...the basic assumptions may be false. But science is not a faith, for it is willing to question its basic assumptions and to change them. For example, it used to be said that matter and energy are totally different. Now it is said that they are two aspects of one reality, and that one can be changed into the other, which indeed occurs in atomic energy electric plants or bombs.
Whenever science produces information which engineers can translate into machines, and those machines work, science gets the credit. Something about scientific information must be correct or true or the machines would not work.
|
From my friend Maurice Mizrahi Phd in Physics:
For the real scientist (as opposed to the strawman non-scientists like to invent so they can shoot it down), science always begins with faith, with hidden assumptions, with unspoken understandings. He knows there is no logical process without axioms accepted without proof, there is no road without a starting point. Change the starting point and you get different conclusions. The modern scientist's axioms are his factual observations, augmented by his faith that there are laws governing the universe and his faith that we can understand these laws.
Euclid knew he had to start his mathematical journey with unproven axioms. It took mankind 2000 years to realize that you can change his axioms and get a mathematical system that is just as valid as his. It took another 50 years to realize that such an alternative system is the rule, rather than the exception, in the physical world.
|
When people ask for a proof of the existence of God, the competent philosopher (who has not yet been born) replies, "Fine. What unproven axioms shall I start with?". For Jews that starting point is Torah, which puts God on the list of axioms.
|
I love Judaism for its reasoning.
I love science for its workable explanations.
Both question and make decisions and then question again.
What makes us assume that our brains can explain it all, as if WE were the authority, and not G-d?
As you say:
I don't see why any of this conflict should get in the way of you adopting the entire beauty of Shabbat...
|
I have often been challenged to answer this question by my( atheist?)friends,and could not have put it better!I always point out that science is just as much of a mystery as Hashem.In fact in the case of spiritual faith,this'mystery'goes unchanged.In the scientific 'faith',someone can come along tomorrow with a new idea of the cosmos,etc.,that could essentially disprove everything science has believed for an eternity!More importantly,the cosmos,etc.to me is the embodiment of Hashem the infinite and eternal.Everything around us,near and far is connected by one great immovable life force i.e.Hashem.
I have recently heard that now many scientists are actually accepting a link between the big bang theory and the book of genisis'description of creation.Ultimately science and faith can give us many answers yet leave us with many other uncertainties.It's endless and infinite and no one will ever know for certain.
The other point I make is that science was not created to disprove Hashem but rather to assist Him!This very computer I sit at has actually brought me closer to Him,not distanced me.It has enriched my faith and brought me closer to other Jews in discussion and opinion,and helped me enlighten others.
It's perhaps no coincidence then that many of the greatest scientific minds in history were Jewish!Einstein believed in G-D for a fact,and accepted his theories could someday all be disproven.
I think science, like much in life, will always be inconclusive.We can use it to further ourselves,or abuse it and destroy ourselves.At the end of it all remains Hashem!All you need for that is faith...which as you pointed out before ,is in everyones own personal reality,the only evidence of proof we'll ever truly have.
SHALOM
|
This debate has been raging since the early Modern period. My former professor Richard Popkin has written extensively on how those arguing for the validity of the religious point of view used sceptical arguments to show the limitations of human reason, and the necessity of faith. My own view is that the essential belief that makes us jewish is the belief in the Sinaitic revelation. Science has never disproven that Moses received the law.
|
I don´t know if the Torah is in contradiction with science or not..I don´t care about it. The only thing I know for sure is that,a t least for me, the Torah "works" very well for my soul as a "scientifical aspirin" works very well for my hedache.
|
I could not agree more with Tzvi. I think everything we do in life has meaning. I have had discussions with many people on science vs. beliefs, and there is no reason why they actually cannot go hand in hand.
|
There really is no conflict between Torah or Judaism and science.
We know very little about all the possibilities of science. By stating that there "is a conflict" is actually a statement that denies the possibility that we don't know everything; absolute arrogance.
We can find many, many examples of how Torah and science fit perfectly.....let's concentrate on not being so arrogant.
|
Positive and negative aspects of the same thing.
|
Tzvi really hits it home for me with the truth of his words, "life itself is nothing but meaning. Reality is personal."
How else to explain the cauldron of The Shoah, and the possible purpose of this awful trail. Absent meaning, the suffering would be an indictment of G*d.
|
Exactly! Beautifully stated. Because of these wonderful questions and answers I have come to understand so much. Thank you for all that you are doing. Only this morning I became to understand that Torah means understanding G-d and doing what He wants us to do. His purpose for us as humans, to be good citizens and neighbors, and families, active in care-taking and charity, and observant to Him and studies. Also I have never seen so much science in my life than the Torah. So much extraterrestrial and spiritual power! Your G-d reigns!!! G-d's science side is that He made us and the universe and everything in it, and can take us out, cause world wide destruction if needed to make a point, His spiritual side is His purpose and love for all that He has made and His reluctance to punish us at all for our huge mistakes, our inhumanity toward mankind and taking unfair advantage of others.
|
There is no conflict between science and religion, and one can believe in Torah and still believe that the ultimate goal of science (to understand HOW G-d put the observable universe together, and how the principles and laws work and how the pieces are assembled and interact) are NOT incompatible. Answers such as you give are misleading and do not help those of uncertainty approach Torah. In fact it is self-defeating to respond dismissively of science. Science works! Science gives us "medical miracles". Your attempt to discredit science by quoting "ancient" scientists from the 1920's is ridiculous and insulting to all scientists who are religious (and there are many).
|
Torah moves forward; science looks backward.
When science ask a question and reaches an in pass ,science dismiss the question as spiritual.
Science confirms: life can be altered but can NOT be created; life can be dissected into chemistry but can not be reconstructed.
Nothing can be discovered that is not already here.
If the big bang happened,what physical elements existed that created an explosion instead of imploding that can also make all the elements that could survive millions of degrees of heat and travel from another solar system to ours.
Science created the 2 theory. If the sun or moon or earth was 2 degrees,closer or father away; or any one of the three planets were 2% larger or smaller, or the orbits changed 2% or the earth did not rotate and wobble the exact way it does, life on earth could not exist.
Science needs to correct science by reading Torah.
|
Actually, I used science to answer the question--so I can't be opposed to science. The question was not about science as an efficacious tool for the benefit of human life, but as a world-view in conflict with faith.
To make it real simple: People imagine this conflict to be a battle between faith and reason. My point is that both Torah and science are faiths. Intellect cannot live on intellect alone--it can't take a step forward without a handful of unfalsifiable axioms. The difference between the two faiths is that science is faith without purpose, while Torah imbues life with essential purpose and meaning.
Concerning the quote from Whitehead: to this day, science is taught within a paradigm of "energy and matter". My point was that over eighty years ago, as highly respected a thinker as Whitehead was already astonished that such an anachronistic paradigm could still be in use.
|
Whitehead was asked Why he attended religious services when he did not believe in G_D. He said "he could be wrong"
G_D in Torah is 100% right or 100% wrong; Who would believe a G_D that is 99 . 9999999999999999999999 right because 99.99999999999999 right is equal to 100% wrong !
|
Comparing Torah with science is like comparing potatoes with astronomy. You can’t compare things if they do not belong to the same "category". So, logically it’s impossible to compare these two items. You can compare potatoes with, say, apples or beans but you cannot compare potatoes with, say, the weather in Mars.
This illogical discussion makes no sense.
Limitated the frame of that discussion in this way one can say that...well..science is a useful instrument of the Torah that helps us to gradually understand the existence of G-d to understand the rules of the universe. Science is our "servant", our "tool" that helps us to dis-cover what in the Torah is "covered".
First: G-d
Second: Torah
Third: We
Fourth: science
Science is fantastic as it confirms the Torah and must be subdued to the Torah so as not to become wicked. Only science being a humble servant of the Torah is fair and good.
Science "not looking” at G-d is wicked as the history shows every time.
Science just discovers what G-d knows a long time ago. What science discovers is new just for us but for G-d is something without surprises. He knows everything. We are learning everything.
So, don’t fall in the trap of that discussion that helps more the devil than the human being.
|
Architecture, Alchemy, and Astrology were the sciences of the ancient world. The Torah is encrypted with the combined knowledge of all of those ancient societies, and beyond. If E=mc2 is related to the 2nd verse of Torah, image how much more there is for science to figure out. It didn't take me too long to realize that I am blind, and rather ignorant as compared to the Torah of G-d. Remember the words of Yyov(Job)? After Yyov had requested a court to plead his case before the throne of G-d he saw the whirlwind (the same one Elijah the prophet rode upon)and then he said, "Forgive me G-d I spoke out of Ignorance, I am but dust." G-d had shown Yyov just a glimpse of what He had made.
|
After spending $100K on a laser measuring table and placing a frog at one end ,he made a loud noise, he measured how far the frog jumped to the mm. He removed one rear leg in surgery, repeated the test,measured distance in mm and removed the other rear leg. Repeating the test he made his conclusion: In the last test the frog did not jump after hearing the sound because frogs have their ears on their rear legs .
|
Taking into account what Annonymous from Passadena observed....I have a question:
why is the Torah estudied by so few people in the world ? In comparison with other religions and beliefs....realy very few !!!!
How many people however are hungry and thirsty of "knowing"because they don´t find logical answers in their traditional faith, full of dogmas, blind fanatical faith....why is not Judaism more spread in the world ??? people have a right" to know" the Torah as "another new refreshing perspective" towards life, science and religion. Moreover it would be a good way of neutralizing antisemitical conceptions.
I am 100 X 100 sure. children and young people in every school in the world would be very interested. They want" to know" the truth, the Only Truth because there is only One truth and the science has a lot to learn about and from the Torah.
Sad situation !!
|
Larry Eisman,! very good your joke!. Thank you for it. It´s a joke but also truth.
|
The question posted by Fernando on the 14th should inspire him to look into more himself. I would like to know how he is 100X100 sure about what young people want to know. As to spreading the word of the Judaism, Jews do not go out to try and convert, we are not out to convert the world by spreading the word. We live and show by living by example, and by living our lives as the Torah would have dictate. One of the great things about Judaism, is that we can question, and we encourage discussion and questioning to we can learn more. Check out the order of creation in Genesis, and see how closely Darwins evolution follows the creation sequence, and then come to your own conclusions.
|
These lines are my answer to Anonimous,Valencia,Usa.
First af all thank you for your lines.
I know 100 X 100 for sure that young people like to know more about Judaism because....I am teacher, I love my job and I speak every day with my pupils. After so many years of contacting with their problems, doubts, questions...I " came to my own conclusions" and these are: They would be delighted to know more and more and more about averything including Judaism.
When explaining Judaism or Bhudism or Islam or whatever it may be...is not intended a "convertion"in to anything at all but just giving information about all aspects of life including religions," philosophies" and ways of thinking.Judaism is for them a religion with its own peculiarities and traditions as any other religion in the world. Young people ask and want to know about it. For them Judaism has nothing especial and they consider it as a religion among thousands.So, nobody can censor their interest of knowing about anything as it happened with the Inquisition, sadly famous for his censor activities. The problem about "convertion" is not in the mind of young people but in the mind of some people who think they are being stolen if they share knowledge.
What Darwin concerns..let me tell you that..well...his theories are already mega-out and they are in flagrant contradicition with the Torah. Torah and darwin are ,say, like black and white colours.
|
In most of the articles here, it seems one could substitute Christianity, Incan Ancestor Worship, etc for Judaism without really changing the underlying arguments against science. This makes me suspiscious of the quality of these arguments.
These pages over generalize science and focus too specifically on an orthodox interpretation of Torah. There are serious doubts that the Torah was written by G-d or Moshe, and not all the doubters are scientists or even influenced by scientific arguments.
There seems to be an interesting difference in thnking between religious and secular people. An example is the Bible Code, as one responder mentions. My non-scientific opinion of this theory is that it is highly dubious, yet here we see it accepted as if it has clear "scientific" validity.
I like orthodox prayer and learning, but haven't seen any convincing rational arguments for the world view espoused here. Probably it is best just not too worry too much about it.
|
I doubt and then I try to disprove, to enforce my doubt. This is the way I used to be. One day I believed, and tried to disprove that. I could easily explain so many things, yet could I disprove my belief? What is true? There shall always be something more than I can understand. Science, religion, Judaism, it is based upon belief. Yet I can doubt all I want to, it doesn't mean that my belief is disproven. Belief can be refined, just as science does through trial and error, record-keeping. The word hypothesis, is a belief of a probability, or a possibility that has yet to be proven. Regardless, many things that had proven true, are found to not always be true, or perhaps true if circumstances permit. The worlds of Torah are similar within the Hebrew texts. It is not so as written in any other language, where the principles are similar but the circumstances are compromised. The Kabbalah will assist you in your journeys. Pragmatism is allowable.
|
There's nothing in this article that is "against" science. In fact, it was posted using science and I'm responding using science. The issue is the pseudo-scientific worldview that asserts a conflict between faith and science. My point, really, is that this view is not scientific--it's just another religion. And not a very convincing one.
|
Sorry for misunderstanding this Rabbi.
Your comments in points 1-3 and the paragraph below seem negative and this and some other statements may have misled me.
I hope my response, in general, was not totally without point.
There is some doubt, in my mind, about the overall argument because what do we learn from it that would lead a potential prosletyte to select Judaism over other religions.
Perhaps, one might hypothesize that pseudo-science is superior to every religion except Judaism.
Joking aside, I suspect there is little substantial difference between our views.
I any case, I have been inspired by these articles to learn more about the history of ancient Judaism and Israel.
|
As I said a time ago I can´t see how can you compare two things that don´t belong to same category. HOw can you compare Torah and science ?? Science is bussy with material goals while the Torah is bussy with espiritual goals and both sometimes coincide and sometimes diverge as both are two different things. Sometimes you "see" G-d in the wonders of the Nature or in the architectural structure of the universe..but you can see also G-d in the Torah...there are contradictions and also similarities between them but you can´t compare such different questions. One can get crazy if you try to swimm in that ocean of chaos and theories. Leave the Torah be Torah and Science be Science. That´s healthy and useful.
|
Fernando,
I think science needs to accept Torah...imagine the possibilities then. It doesn't matter who or what falls into what category. All that matters is Torah....
|
These are all excellent comments.
Apparently one can believe Torah and follow halakha, while at the same time accepting a secular view of the world (I don't like saying "science") .
If the individual's secular view doesn't include accepting the divine origin of Torah and the unbroken link of the oral tradition, this has real implications.
A person with this issue will probably interpret the Torah differently, etc. than one who doesn't have these doubts.
As someone who doubts the divine origin, etc, I have to learn to deal with this. On some level it would be desirable to change but this seems to be integral to my personality (similar to sexual orientation).
My views might change when I put premium gas into a rental car.
|
TO Anonymous, FC,CO
You are 100 X 100 right. Sometimes I forget my own convictions and beliefs....Amen to your words, Anonymous, Amen , Amen and Amen. "All that matters is Torah.." ..yes and yes... G-d be with you.
|
Joseph,
I don't agree that one can substitute the word secular for science. Secular has a specific meaning with respect to religion, and many scientists are not secular. I can think of one such 'scientist', a physicist to be exact, who is a very orthodox Jew, and who views physics through the light of the Torah, and not visa-versa. This is not accepting the world through secular eyes, quite the opposite actually...
|
I was relieved to see that secular seems to mean approximately what I meant. My doubts are not really based completely on science, and using the term just seems to cause confusion, at least for me.
Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan was also a physicist and inspired me to consider Judaism as a medium for meditation as opposed to something like Buddhism.
He wrote an interesting monograph demonstrating that the universe could be 15 billion years old and still not contradict Halakha.
It surprised me that he didn't say a single word about the age of the earth. This reminded me of Alan Sherman's famous line "the rockets go up, who cares where they come down; it's not my department says Werner Von Braun."
My interests are in areas like history, archaeology, and textual analysis which may not technically be considered sciences.
Generally, I do not seek advice from Rabbis or Scientists. I'm quite capable of misunderstanding things on my own.
|
<comedy noted and appreciated> ;-)
I especially like the "It's not my department" quote...and the "I'm quite capable of misunderstanding things on my own" statement. <grin>
I think R. Kaplan was on to something historically speaking, as well. I think that Judaism had the things that many people assume are Buddhism, long before Buddhism had them. My personal bent is that we need to look back at Judaism and history before we look to other sources of "relief". So many people seem to want to run off to something like Buddhism, when they can find the same things in Judaism, if they would only look more closely and at deeper and older roots within Judaism.
On the Earth age question, I saw an article by a Jewish Physicist that describes, according to Breshit, the age of the Earth in a manner that exactly matches the supposed age derived from science. VERY interesting article.
|
studys show that quantum mechanics down to a single electron which emits a photon and then basically travels back in time so it can reemit that same photon, and this process happens myriad amounts of times. Why? Well it goes to show to me at least that life is predetermined, but yet we still have freewill. How? Well the choices you dont make lead you to who you are, and so you ask yourself how did i arrive at this point in my life. Real freewill is a moral decision, but looking back i feel we are being carried by this Divine chariot which never ceases to amaze me.
|
If the words "in the beginning" are not true, every word in Torah is false.
Would you believe in G_D if his word was 99. 9999999999999 % true.
Science might find confirmation in Torah BUT Torah will never need conformation in science.
It is easy to debate what a person speaks or writes. Debates about Torah and science happens because we can not serve two masters.
A Fun facts is when science confirms Torah
|
When it was found that the earth rotates around the sun and spins on its axis, revealing that it is only an illusion that the universe rotates around earth, we learned that our planet is not the center of the universe. That was hard but we adjusted to it.
When ancient human writing was found to be over 5000 years old, and other human artifacts to be over 10,000 years old, that was hard, since the biblical record places the age of the universe at less than 6000 years. But using metaphor, many adjusted to it. Others denied it. Never mind that now. We have a bigger problem.
This is the one problem we can never overcome. We say that humans are the pinnacle and purpose of creation. What happens when we learn that we are not only incidental, but inimical to all other living things and that Gd has decided to get rid of us before we destroy the rest of His creation?
Once we are faced with that, can the Tanakh stand?
|
Maurice, interesting points, but I don't think man has put the earth much less the universe in danger of total destruction.
There are posts around here about how environmentally sound the Torah is.
I think the rabbis use the science/Torah discussion as a fence around the key question of whether the Torah was given by God to Moshe on Sinai.
The evidence that this did not happen is really indisputable, but unfortunately the attempts to integrate this concept with Judaism have not been entirely successful.
Meanwhile, what can we do except avoid constructing tall buildings and telling strangers that our wives are our sisters.
David's post was really interesting. He may have invented Quantum Merkavah Mysticism.
|
Nothing in science claims that everything in the universe is intelligible to human beings, or that the human mind is capable of explaining the deep, enduring mystery of the origin of things. This is rather a metaphysical question (or THE metaphysical question: Why is there something instead of nothing?)
But it is evident that some phenomena are intelligible, and amenable--to some extent--to the mathematical/scientific method. Moreover, the boundary between the knowable and the unknowable is not static, and is dependent on a variety of circumstantial factors.
Certainly, there can be no purely "scientific" resolution to the question of why science is possible, and the faculties of the human mind may indeed be of spiritual significance. However, why discount what is knowable about the development of our body-brains and minds? Certainly, our minds have allowed us to reach social agreement about many truths, and their status as basic is subject to debate.
2. Certainly chance has played a role in the development of human beings and in human life. I do not understand how this could be subject to debate. What is meant by necessity in science? The scientist both observes and reasons. When she claims "X is so" because she has observed it, and then claims that this implies that "Y must be so" because she has reasoned it, certainly there is a distinction to be made--though there is a hidden sense in which she is using reason to determine that what she observes is what is so. This is not the same as claiming "X is just so" and "Y is necessarily so."
3. Contemporary scientists do not cling to these anachronistic notions, as you yourself rightly point out. This is one the benefits of a mode of inquiry which promotes revolutions in thinking, rather traditionalist orthodoxy.
|
Science finds consistencies. Eventually we can say that if A happens, B is highly lilkely. We cannot, incidentally, say this about the weather. There are far too many variables, and the influence of even the tiniest change it enormous. The point is that even if scientists think the consistencies they have found are laws, it is possible to regard them as an arbitrarty tendency which G-d has set up and which can easily happen otherwise if G-d so chooses. For example, everything in the universe may be subject to specific tiny variations in the position of my little finger, but as long as this is not activated nobody will ever notice it. Then if G-d wants to create a miracle, he can just move my little finger and cause these changes within a natural law that nobody had noticed. Or let it be your little finger.
Meanwhile, the fact of G-d's loving care and of His giving the Torah and of the covenant between G-d and Israel are not disproved by any nuclear or steller or DNA.
|
Josef, my language was careless. I meant the other living things on earth, not the whole universe.
Not everyone lives by Torah, not even all Jews. The Torah says not to kill trees frivolously, not even when beseiging a city, but a Jew has bought a stand of ancient redwoods to cut down to make wall paneling for profit.
Many dozens of species have gone extinct in less than 100 years, and some of them may be necessary for human well being or even for human survival. Humans are behaving contrary to common sense in order to achieve short term profit and sometimes for no benefit at all. E.g., the World Bank lends money to cut down the rain forest to use for pasture. Even though they know that the land does not work as pasture. W/o the renewing effect of the dead leaves, it dries up and nothing will grow. A desert results. Thousands of species die. Many actually go extinct. Some of these would protect against disease and give other benefits. We also lose tribal wisdom.
|
Sorry for my remark Maurice, I agree with most of what you say. There is no mechanism for orthodox Judaism to modify its belief system to account for new developments and this is sad.
Nathaniel, Einstein commented on the unpredictability of weather: ..."we are confronted with a casual connection whose casual components are in the main known to us. Occurences in this domain are beyond the reach of exact prediction because of the variety of factors in operation, not because of any lack of order in nature."
Also, Iyour final sentence could be modified to read "G-d's loving care and of His giving the Book of Mormon and of the covenant between G-d and the Mormons are not disproved by any nuclear or steller or DNA."
|
You wrote: "There is no mechanism for orthodox Judaism to modify its belief system to account for new developments and this is sad."
There is no need to modify the belief system. Like the DNA of a resilient animal, it contains all that is needed to adapt and confront all that comes upon it. It stood for us through Hellenism, through Arabism and through the Reformation & Enlightenment, and will stand for us in this age as well.
In each age, rather than changing our beliefs, we looked deeper into them, came to a more profound understanding, and learned new wisdom. So it was then and so it shall be today. Those that change their belief system for the times and the fashion, they are like weed-trees with shallow roots, easily uprooted by the wind. But we are like the tree that plants its roots ever deeper and deeper, its trunk pliant in the wind, yet never moving from its place. They spin the same circles again and again, while we grow higher, deeper and wiser.
|
I misunderstood Nathaniel's argument and regret my final comment. To paraphrase:
"God causes the weather,
therefore the Torah is great"
is hard to follow, but there seems to be an implied
"The God of Israel is the only God"
in between which at least makes the statements make sense. This seems to be standard in many articles here.
Also, even though saying the Shema twice daily, I hadn't really thought of the implications of God bringing the rain which to Maurice's point now is polluted, etc.
I vaguely understand revelation and am not convinced.
Ironically, in a function that seems to be related to natural selection, every change to Judaism that has worked is regarded as revelation, and the failures are ignored.
This is similar to prophesizing backwards, which some claim can be found a few times in the Bible.
The latest example of revelation might be the Bible Code, which seems to be just silly. My guess is that this mutation won't survive.
|
Not following. A little more explicit?
|
Rabbi, my basic point was that you present an idealized view of the process involved in the creation of and modifications to the Jewish religion.
My opinion is that the path to the present was difficult and substantially different than your description of events.
The Bible (or Torah) Codes is a recent example of an appealing idea to Orthodox Jews, which gains some measure of acceptance, and is in fact not deep, profound, or containing any wisdom.
My earlier labelling the codes silly was not exact on my part, there are a few academics who defend the concept., Hashem knows why.
This site inspired me to look into Biblical Studies a little. The unanimous view in this field, is that the Torah was written after the Judges period. This is based not so much on "science" as on analysis of the texts.
Looked at from this perspective one gets a sharply different picture, hence my remarks on backwards prophecy.
|
Concerning the Bible Codes, this is by far an accepted study for orthodox Jews. The Rebbe, in fact, dismissed it offhand.
Concerning Biblical Studies, there is no "unanimous view"--that is total nonsense. A strong, intelligent voice on the side of tradition can be found in the ground-breaking work of Provan, Long & Longtemp in "A Biblical History of Israel" (2003). There are many others.
Concerning the "analysis of text"--I am very familiar with such analysis in contemporary literature and I find the analysis of these critics--who truly believe they are "scientists"--bordering on the follies of graphology and psychoanalysis. I am not alone. Take a look for yourself--but with as critical an eye as you use when reading the material on our site. You'll see that all their analysis is nothing but projections of preconceived opinions--not much different than seeing canals on Mars.
|
If you were to read statements by early scientists, those considered the "fathers" of their area of study, most made mention of wishing to understand the wonder of G-d’s creation. Also, many in the field of microbiology are becoming more aware of the Creator. Those who deny Him admit they’d credit UFO's before admitting there is a G-d.
Not long ago science taught the universe was eternal, black men were inferior, and there was nothing smaller than the atom. Science changes yet "I am G-d, I change not."
|
I just viewed a scientific program on TV where they reconstruct how the Universes are created, what are Black Holes, etc., and science has shown that in the beginning there were gasses and gravity. Does this PRECLUDE the idea that God created the gasses and the gravity? Ah-hah, there is the crux of the issue. No matter what science finds, G-d created it in the beginning. We have to remember that knowledge is itself making leaps and bounds, and we are DISCOVERING HOW G-d did what the Torah says He did. Because our knowledge was slim in Biblical days, we needed answers which would satisfy the people of those times. Many of the passages we know, today, as being metaphors and parables, and having a deeper meaning than the literal words.
|
When science SHOWS us other planets and ANALYZES whether those planets can maintain life "as we know it", it is real. When science SHOWS us how other galaxies are formed through telescopes, it's real. Sometimes, however, they do studies with control groups and come up with conclusions according to that one study. Then, they call it a "fact". That is not real. Reason- you really can't get control groups that are homogenous. Since G-d is A)an emotion and not a person (i.e., G-d is love); B) G-d is the very strength inside our beings which gives us our own strength to face daily ups and downs, then there is NO WAY Science can either prove or disprove G-d's existence. I disagree that if you believe in G-d, you must have issues with science. Or, if you believe in the scientific method and conclusions, you can't believe in G-d. The Holy Scriptures say, "My people die for lack of knowledge". G-d WANTS us to have science!!!!!!!!!
|
|
LOGIN
ASK THE RABBI
Read this article
