Author Topic: how an old earth does not contradict the torah, and even has some support  (Read 29935 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline q_q_

  • Ultimate JTFer
  • *******
  • Posts: 3819
Adam was created on rosh hashana. So that is actually where we start counting the 57xx years. Not from the first day.


It's possible that the 6 or 7 days prior contained eras.
I have read that we have such a tradition that 6 contained eras - dunno about 7th.

And of course the sun had not appeared until day 4. So what was a day during days 1-3? I think this ambiguity was pointed out by the RAMBAN.

The idea of pushing a 24hr 6 or 7 days might be more of a charedi reaction to science.

You can go either way to make the reconciliation.. But the torha does not come out and say one way or the other. 24hr or eras.

There was a kabbalist - rabbi yitzchak of akko - a student of the RAMBAN. Who had the earth as 15 billion years old.
http://www.jewishmag.com/8MAG/WORLDS/worlds1.htm

There is alot of tradition in there being secrets in genesis, and things not necessarily to be taken literally.

The following may be of interest
The Age of the Universe - A Torah True Perspective
by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan <-- brilliant torah scholar
http://www.lulu.com/content/86052
 
This is purely reconciliation.
Not saying that the Torah states one way or the other.
Torah and science are separate.

Other books of interest may be those of Natan Aviezer - "in the beginning", and 2 of gerald shroeder's books. "Genesis and the big bang", and "the science of G-d"(picture of a hand on the cover).
In that latter book by Natan Aviezer, he says we even have a tradition of there being creatures before Adam that looked similar to man but were not man, and they had tails.

Offline Dr. Dan

  • Forum Administrator
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12584
it is an interesting topic really...  But i think in a past ask JTF, Chaim put it quite well..

"Does it really matter? All I know is that Hashem exists and that Sinai took place and that we have to do what's right."
If someone says something bad about you, say something nice about them. That way, both of you would be lying.

In your heart you know WE are right and in your guts you know THEY are nuts!

"Science without religion is lame; Religion without science is blind."  - Albert Einstein

Offline Dr. Dan

  • Forum Administrator
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12584
I say, whatever science shows us..whether it be the scientific age of theuniverse, how it came to be, evolution, etc etc etc...we should learn from it from an open mind and see it as Gd's way of showing us how He does His magic..how it got here and if it coincides with the Torah or not is really a moot point. Gd exists and however He created the universe really doesn't matter to me...Let's learn our science and make us better people and help us to survive...
If someone says something bad about you, say something nice about them. That way, both of you would be lying.

In your heart you know WE are right and in your guts you know THEY are nuts!

"Science without religion is lame; Religion without science is blind."  - Albert Einstein

Offline q_q_

  • Ultimate JTFer
  • *******
  • Posts: 3819
I say, whatever science shows us..whether it be the scientific age of theuniverse, how it came to be, evolution, etc etc etc...we should learn from it from an open mind and see it as Gd's way of showing us how He does His magic..how it got here and if it coincides with the Torah or not is really a moot point. Gd exists and however He created the universe really doesn't matter to me...Let's learn our science and make us better people and help us to survive...

This was posted for those with a belief in torah, , who are faced with certain ideas that science has aroused, that it  is claimed that these ideas contradict the torah. And there are  torah jews that would like to answer these problems.

You are welcome to reject the torah or duck the question, whatever you want. But the work done in this area is very important.

In your liberal mind, you see no problem, so that works, and may lead you the right way, but for the wrong reason. You don't see a problem because you don't grasp the facts of the argument, or even realise that there is an argument.
For logical people, if you believe A and you believe B, and they don't agree, then that's a problem.

I personally, am not bothered whether the earth is 57xx years old, or many billions of years old.
BUT
If the Torah said flat out that the earth was one of the other, then a scientific claim the other way would be a problem, which can be addressed or ducked.

What I have shown is that the Torah does not say one way or the other.

So my position is no different from Chaim's there.  The torah can be reconciled with both. Clash solved.. So now let Scientific study produce science and torah study produce torah.
But if you think they don't reconcile, and you believe both, then there is a conflict.

« Last Edit: July 08, 2008, 06:12:41 PM by q_q_ »

Offline Rubystars

  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *********
  • Posts: 18268
  • Extreme MAGA Republican
I believe that God gave us the means to discover the ways in which he molded his creation through the power of science. I accept evolution, abiogenesis, etc. because I believe God worked through those processes to create.

Offline Dr. Dan

  • Forum Administrator
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12584
I say, whatever science shows us..whether it be the scientific age of theuniverse, how it came to be, evolution, etc etc etc...we should learn from it from an open mind and see it as Gd's way of showing us how He does His magic..how it got here and if it coincides with the Torah or not is really a moot point. Gd exists and however He created the universe really doesn't matter to me...Let's learn our science and make us better people and help us to survive...

This was posted for those with a belief in torah, , who are faced with certain ideas that science has aroused, that it  is claimed that these ideas contradict the torah. And there are  torah jews that would like to answer these problems.

You are welcome to reject the torah or duck the question, whatever you want. But the work done in this area is very important.

In your liberal mind, you see no problem, so that works, and may lead you the right way, but for the wrong reason. You don't see a problem because you don't grasp the facts of the argument, or even realise that there is an argument.
For logical people, if you believe A and you believe B, and they don't agree, then that's a problem.

I personally, am not bothered whether the earth is 57xx years old, or many billions of years old.
BUT
If the Torah said flat out that the earth was one of the other, then a scientific claim the other way would be a problem, which can be addressed or ducked.

What I have shown is that the Torah does not say one way or the other.

So my position is no different from Chaim's there.  The torah can be reconciled with both. Clash solved.. So now let Scientific study produce science and torah study produce torah.
But if you think they don't reconcile, and you believe both, then there is a conflict.




good point..i'll leave it at that.
If someone says something bad about you, say something nice about them. That way, both of you would be lying.

In your heart you know WE are right and in your guts you know THEY are nuts!

"Science without religion is lame; Religion without science is blind."  - Albert Einstein

Offline IslamIsCancer

  • Master JTFer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1346
  • My name is Stalinashvili.
By about 4 billion years :P
Free Javakh!!!
I defecate on Stalin's grave.

Offline q_q_

  • Ultimate JTFer
  • *******
  • Posts: 3819
By about 4 billion years :P

since you are not jewish, you are certainly not a torah scholar, and from what I vaguely recall - you are not even bible believing, , and so making jokes that the torah does not reconcile with science, is rude and you are way out of your depth.
It also shows that you didn't read the first post, but that's good. The torah is the inheritance and betrothed of the jewish people, and for a gentile to study it, is making him similar to an adulterer and a thief. So it's good that you don't. But don't then mock too.    And yes,  I know you mean well. 

Offline IslamIsCancer

  • Master JTFer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1346
  • My name is Stalinashvili.
By about 4 billion years :P

since you are not jewish, you are certainly not a torah scholar, and from what I vaguely recall - you are not even bible believing, , and so making jokes that the torah does not reconcile with science, is rude and you are way out of your depth.
It also shows that you didn't read the first post, but that's good. The torah is the inheritance and betrothed of the jewish people, and for a gentile to study it, is making him similar to an adulterer and a thief. So it's good that you don't. But don't then mock too.    And yes,  I know you mean well. 

Come on man I'm just kidding :)
I have nothing against your beliefs.
Free Javakh!!!
I defecate on Stalin's grave.

Offline q_q_

  • Ultimate JTFer
  • *******
  • Posts: 3819
By about 4 billion years :P

since you are not jewish, you are certainly not a torah scholar, and from what I vaguely recall - you are not even bible believing, , and so making jokes that the torah does not reconcile with science, is rude and you are way out of your depth.
It also shows that you didn't read the first post, but that's good. The torah is the inheritance and betrothed of the jewish people, and for a gentile to study it, is making him similar to an adulterer and a thief. So it's good that you don't. But don't then mock too.    And yes,  I know you mean well. 

Come on man I'm just kidding :)
I have nothing against your beliefs.

Joking about them like that is not funny. I am not offended - though it was and is offensive to -joke- that a person's religious beliefs conflict with science.   But if you are making a joke it should be funny. So bear that in mind.

Offline Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 23384
  • Real Kahanist
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.

Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?

Offline Lisa

  • Forum Administrator
  • Silver Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9373
    • The Urban Grind
I was once watching some religious tv show, where one of the guests said that all those years ago, the earths position  towards the sun was different.  And therefore, one day, back then, would have been much longer than 24 hours.  I don't remember the tv show or who the guest was. 

Offline Lubab

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Master JTFer
  • *
  • Posts: 1641
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.

Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?

I agree with this. If you believe in the Bible you believe G-d created a ready made world from scratch. He didn't make Adam a baby. He made him a grown man who in fact was one day old. So when G-d created man, the rocks and the trees he Created them with the scientific appearance of things looking older than they really are. Believing that is no more far fetched than the fact that something could be created from nothing.
"It is not upon you to finish the work, nor are you free to desist from it." Rabbi Tarfon, Pirkei Avot.

Offline Dr. Dan

  • Forum Administrator
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12584
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.

Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?

it might say days but doesn't describe what a day really is...

but so be it...Gd is clever..I take what He gives us...knowledge from science and Torah.
If someone says something bad about you, say something nice about them. That way, both of you would be lying.

In your heart you know WE are right and in your guts you know THEY are nuts!

"Science without religion is lame; Religion without science is blind."  - Albert Einstein

Offline MassuhDGoodName

  • Ultimate JTFer
  • *******
  • Posts: 4542
Re:  "...Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?..."

Scripture also mentions that multitiudes of the blind and crippled, together with those with leprosy, who were a begging class and a permanent fixture at the gates of each and every town.

Shouldn't we therefore have the blind and disabled and lepers all sleeping at the gates to all of our cities and towns today?

And shouldn't we therefore build walls around all of our cities and towns, so that they be "scripturally correct"?

The Scriptures never mentioned any Jews going to the optometrist to be measured for lenses manufactured from Saudi oil (plastic lenses) so they wouldn't be considered legally blind anymore, so shouldn't doing something anti-scriptural be banned and against the law?

And shouldn't the recently discovered medical cures and treatments for leprosy be abolished and banned also?...I don't recall anything in Scripture at all, relating to leprosy being caused by a microbe spread through mucous emissions, spittle, coughing and sneezing...what it says in Torah is that the High Priest must be in charge of determining leprosy and treating it.

How dare any of you question Scripture?

After all...the Word is the Word...right?

If science discovers that lenses end being legally blind, that same science being the one and the same which has cured leprosy, that same science being the one and the same that has determined that the Earth is older than 5,000 years, then shouldn't we cling only to Torah and arrest and kill all of those who continue to spread their poisonous lies of "Science" against us?

Jews are supposed to be blind and have leprosy, just like Torah says.

Offline Kahane-Was-Right BT

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12581
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.

Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?

I agree with this. If you believe in the Bible you believe G-d created a ready made world from scratch. He didn't make Adam a baby. He made him a grown man who in fact was one day old. So when G-d created man, the rocks and the trees he Created them with the scientific appearance of things looking older than they really are. Believing that is no more far fetched than the fact that something could be created from nothing.

But this was specifically about age of the universe.  And there is within our tradition, rishonim, etc that the 6 days *can be taken not literally.   It is a great difficulty actually to take them literally considering what many rishonim say about those passages.   Consider for instance Rashi.  According to him all was created on Day 1!  If that is the case, it is impossible to take it literally.  Obviously there is more to it.   And the hints in the text allude to it (in addition to our oral tradition about "secrets" of creation etc), but because of the way the language is in the text, this is why Rashi and others gave us these kind of insights.   In some instances to insist upon a "literal" reading is actually insisting upon a simplistic or incorrect reading, in contradiction to language and hints in the text, and that the "literal" reading is really when someone *doesn't take it literally!

Offline Kahane-Was-Right BT

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12581
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.

Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?

This is a very Christian view of the Bible, and you are entitled to it, but we Jews have a tradition on the text that goes way beyond the simplistic reading.  In certain instances, we maintain that one cannot properly understand the text without these traditions and explanations that we have passed down to us.  But this is for Jews, not gentiles.  Anyone correct me if I'm wrong on that, but I think that's the basic idea.

Offline q_q_

  • Ultimate JTFer
  • *******
  • Posts: 3819
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.

Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?

try reading my first post , it destroys your little arguments in at least 3 places.

Offline q_q_

  • Ultimate JTFer
  • *******
  • Posts: 3819
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.

Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?

This is a very Christian view of the Bible,

what is, the pshat? ;-)
or putting the words "literal days" into the text?
(those 2 were rhetorical questions.  I know what you mean)

anyhow, see my point regarding day 4, (1st post) so even from the plain text, it is hard to maintain that they were literal days. 
<snip>
« Last Edit: July 08, 2008, 10:02:39 PM by q_q_ »

Offline Kahane-Was-Right BT

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12581
Yeah , I have to thank you for posting this though.  This is the kind of question I struggle with as a BT.  I really want to get some writings of Aryeh Kaplan.

Offline q_q_

  • Ultimate JTFer
  • *******
  • Posts: 3819
Yeah , I have to thank you for posting this though.  This is the kind of question I struggle with as a BT.  I really want to get some writings of Aryeh Kaplan.

a very good book for jews is
handbook of jewish thought vol 1 and 2. Particularly vol 1. It will blow you away.

his scholarship is awesome..  Tons of references.

his translations are not so good. But for example his 5 books of th torah translation is worth it for its scholarship.

He wrote many books simultaneously.. translated the 5 books of the torah, in 9 months!
The volume of material that he produced is unbelievable.

He was listed as one of america's most promising young physicists, but he chose to follow the rabbinic path.

Offline Lubab

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Master JTFer
  • *
  • Posts: 1641
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.

Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?

I agree with this. If you believe in the Bible you believe G-d created a ready made world from scratch. He didn't make Adam a baby. He made him a grown man who in fact was one day old. So when G-d created man, the rocks and the trees he Created them with the scientific appearance of things looking older than they really are. Believing that is no more far fetched than the fact that something could be created from nothing.

But this was specifically about age of the universe.  And there is within our tradition, rishonim, etc that the 6 days *can be taken not literally.   It is a great difficulty actually to take them literally considering what many rishonim say about those passages.   Consider for instance Rashi.  According to him all was created on Day 1!  If that is the case, it is impossible to take it literally.  Obviously there is more to it.   And the hints in the text allude to it (in addition to our oral tradition about "secrets" of creation etc), but because of the way the language is in the text, this is why Rashi and others gave us these kind of insights.   In some instances to insist upon a "literal" reading is actually insisting upon a simplistic or incorrect reading, in contradiction to language and hints in the text, and that the "literal" reading is really when someone *doesn't take it literally!

Rashi and Ramban who say it was all created on Day 1 explain that the hiyuli (essential substance for creation) was created on Day 1 and then G-d "unfolded" from that essential substance the components neccesary for the particular creations of each day, but they never say that 6 days should not be taken literally.

Saying otherwise really messes with the whole reason we keep Shabbat.
We keep our Sabbath to remind us of how G-d created the world in 6 days (the Torah says that explicitly). If it wasn't really six days then we're not doing a very good job at all of reliving what happened then.
"It is not upon you to finish the work, nor are you free to desist from it." Rabbi Tarfon, Pirkei Avot.

Offline Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 23384
  • Real Kahanist

try reading my first post , it destroys your little arguments in at least 3 places.

Have you come to discuss, or to troll?

Offline Lubab

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Master JTFer
  • *
  • Posts: 1641
Everyone should know that while scripture  has many layers of meaning, they can't contradict the simple meaning of the verse unless our sages tell us it's only an analogy.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2008, 11:04:08 PM by Lubab »
"It is not upon you to finish the work, nor are you free to desist from it." Rabbi Tarfon, Pirkei Avot.

Offline q_q_

  • Ultimate JTFer
  • *******
  • Posts: 3819
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.

Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?

I agree with this. If you believe in the Bible you believe G-d created a ready made world from scratch. He didn't make Adam a baby. He made him a grown man who in fact was one day old. So when G-d created man, the rocks and the trees he Created them with the scientific appearance of things looking older than they really are. Believing that is no more far fetched than the fact that something could be created from nothing.

This gets a bit philosophical.. But


Adam,   (created in a mature state, for obvious reasons)

Suppose earth was created in a mature state within 6  24hr days.
Earth, (created in a mature state, plants, oxygen,  if it wasn't then it wouldn't supply man)

And we accept those. And so people try to compare other things to those. But the mature Adam, and mature Earth(plants, oxygen), have a good reason.


Why fossils though?
Why rings on trees?

Suppose the carbon dating (which is extrapolating, assuming the same pattern of carbon emmissions over billions of years, through big environmental changes e.g. a big flood. So it may well be wrong), but suppose it is correct. And the fossils were made by G-d to appear really old.

Sure, the earth in a mature state.. But in the necessary ways.  To supply man.


An answer I heard from X regarding the fossils, is that they are planted to fool us into thinking that this all came about naturally without G-d.
I wouldn't put it past G-d to do that (he did turn Lot's wife into a pillar of salt). But I think the fossils example is different to the Adam and Earth example. The Adam and Earth example has obvious reasons, not involving G-d planting false information and playing tricks on us.

Another example X gave, to try to justify this thinking, is the tradition that  G-d creates the world continuously, and since that is the case, So, X asks, why have the laws of physics , why should G-d keep creating the world as if it all runs automatically.   The answer that X gave, was that it is to fool us into thinking that G-d doesn't run the world, that he isn't required, that everything just happens automatically.  I disagree.. again. I think there is a very obvious reason for the laws of physics, which is that without them, it would be difficult to operate in the world. We need a somewhat predictable system we can work in.

We do have a tradition that G-d hides his presence, but that's not lying, planting false evidence.

So lulab, my point to you is that although one might accept that Adam and to an extent, the Earth was created in a mature state.  I think there is too significant a difference between that and fossils, to draw a parallel and say well you accept this so you can accept that. You mention trees, I guess the rings on the trees is similar to the fossils example

« Last Edit: July 08, 2008, 10:48:27 PM by q_q_ »