Rav Samson Raphael Hirsh in 1873 - Evolution does not contradict Torah

[wonga66]

Once the scientific evidences for a recent creation are studied, evilution flies out of the window. The sole reason billions of years are invoked is because the theory requires billions of years to even to begin to start opeartion. It is circular reasoning, and there are no such evidences!

Notice how the Big Bang theory cannot be squared with the Breishis account.

According to the Torah, all the elements were made together, the Earth was formed before the stars, plants were formed before the sun, birds were created before reptiles, and the sun, moon and stars were formed on the Fourth Day after the Earth.

But according to the Big Bang theory, the elements beyond hydrogen and helium were formed after millions of years, the Earth was formed long after the stars, plants evolved after the sun, birds evolved from reptiles, and the sun was formed before the Earth!

[MassuhDGoodName]

Any way you look at it, MassuhDGoodName is first in line for the 6000 remnant Yehudim, and muman613 is burning in Hell begging for icewater!     

[muman613]

Any way you look at it, MassuhDGoodName is first in line for the 6000 remnant Yehudim, and muman613 is burning in Hell begging for icewater!     

I don't follow this reasoning..

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Once the scientific evidences for a recent creation are studied, evilution flies out of the window. The sole reason billions of years are invoked is because the theory requires billions of years to even to begin to start opeartion. 

That's a flat-out lie.

The billions of years are determined by the field known as geology.   It just so happens that this timeline ALSO FITS the biological evidence and fossil evidence, making the theory of evolution that much more plausible and reasonable.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Notice how the Big Bang theory cannot be squared with the Breishis account.

But before you cited Gerald Shroeder's "Genesis and the Big Bang" where he sets out to square the Big Bang theory with the Bereshith account.    Therefore you are proving yourself a dishonest propagandist.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Muman, I notice you've dealt with some softballs but you fail to grapple with the key questions Massuh presented originally.

The fact is, evolution, as a scientific theory, does not contradict a belief in G-d or adherence to Torah Judaism.  Some people here are unwilling to face that fact and continue to promote their weak propaganda instead.   This is truly a shame.    The whole point of this thread was to present that basic point with some evidence backing it up - the statement of the great Rav Samson Raphael Hirsh.   But some people here seem to think they know better than Rav Hirsh and all Torah scholars combined when it comes to this one solitary issue of evolution even though they lack an expertise in Torah and ALSO lack an expertise in evolution or the sciences behind it.   This is incredibly ironic.

As I said before. I have my reservations even after looking at the so-called evidence. I have pointed out that there are scientific reasons to question carbon-dating and I can provide links to these.   

This is complete silliness and you know it.   If I made an inaccurate and misinformed statement about computer science or software engineering, you certainly wouldn't accept it and you would quickly jump on it as incorrect, as you should.   You are making a very silly claim when you say there are "scientific reasons" to question carbon-dating.  Science accepts carbon dating as a reliable technique up to a certain range of dates.   That is a fact whether you like it or not.

But this entire statement of yours that I quoted misses the point.  The point of what I recently said to you was not whether evolution was true or not.    I already think it is true based on the preponderance of scientific evidence to support it, and you are not going to change my mind with philosophical statements, dialectical arguments, or baseless questioning of scientific methods.    That is not at issue here.  I raised the fact that, ASSUMING IT IS TRUE, or not even making that assumption, but SIMPLY ACCEPTING THE FACT that it's accepted by scientific consensus    (or even ignoring this fact) - Rav Hirsh asserts that the THEORY ITSELF, whether true or not true, does not contradict Torah.   What do you do with that statement?

I do not believe that there is any contradiction between Science and Torah. Science is simply the attempt of man to try to understand the forces by which this world operate. Science has been extremely beneficial in many areas, but it has failed miserably in many other areas. 

  true

Science is truly a double-edged sword. When people put more faith in science and the priests of science calling themselves scientists they are lead further and further from the answers to lifes many questions. 

  This doesn't even make sense.   Who does this?

Science asks those who believe in it to only believe that which can be proven by rational means, either by experiments or by mathematical equations. Hashem is not a mathematical equation, nor is he able to be experimented on... There will never be a science which can explain Hashem as science is in itself a creation of Hashem,

I never suggested otherwise and again this strays from the point in question.

The point was, Rav Hirsh says evolution as a theory, does not contradict Torah.   He was not saying it was true or false.    He said the theory itself is not a challenge to Torah belief.   Deal with that, please.

[wonga66]

Gerald Schroeder is excellent for those politically-correct relativistic Aish HaTorah & Moderdox BTs who hold by Relativity ie who just have to have all opinions as being equally valid: that you can have simultaneously a 6,000 year old universe and a 16 billion year old one.

That you can have a Big Bang and a Steady State and a Divine Fiat Creation, all equally true!

That you can have a heliocentric, acentric & geocentric universe as ALL BEING EQUALLY TRUE!

As I've already stated, I personally don't believe Einstein's Relativity theory is correct.

And you obviously also don't, as like me, you are an ABSOLUTIST, and that opinions are mutually exclusive.

You obviously won't accept that 6,000 years is EQUALLY true as 16 billion years.

I happen to hold by a literal interpreation of the Torah - ain hamikra yotzei elo midei peshuto - and by those PhD scientists who show that evolution is impossible, and that geology, astronomy, biology, radiometry etc all indicate a recent Creation.

You happen to hold by a non-literal interpretation of the Torah, & what you learned at high school and by those PhD scientists who believe in billions of years, in evolution, and who ridicule a recent creation and indeed a creation itself.


Meanwhile, you have still not given one iota of scientific evidence, in accordance with Dr Tahmisian: because there is none!

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Gerald Schroeder is excellent for those politically-correct relativistic Aish HaTorah & Moderdox BTs who hold by Relativity ie who just have to have all opinions as being equally valid: that you can have simultaneously a 6,000 year old universe and a 16 billion year old one. 

But that's not his position.

That you can have a Big Bang and a Steady State and a Divine Fiat Creation, all equally true!   

  But that's not his position.

As I've already stated, I personally don't believe Einstein's Relativity theory is correct. 

What a joke.  You've tried to misuse Einstein's relativity to promote geocentrism here.   Do you think the people reading this are idiots?

And you obviously also don't, as like me, you are an ABSOLUTIST, and that opinions are mutually exclusive.

You obviously won't accept that 6,000 years is EQUALLY true as 16 billion years.   

   Yes I agree that the world is not 6,000 years old and it is as old as science can determine it to be.

I happen to hold by a literal interpreation of the Torah - ain hamikra yotzei elo midei peshuto - and by those PhD scientists who show that evolution is impossible, and that geology, astronomy, biology, radiometry etc all indicate a recent Creation.

You happen to hold by a non-literal interpretation of the Torah, & what you learned at high school

This is not true.  You are trying to be sly, but you are failing.  I certainly know a lot more than just what I learned in high school, and I have certainly done a lot more research in the many years since then.

and by those PhD scientists who believe in billions of years, in evolution, and who ridicule a recent creation and indeed a creation itself.

Another lie.

I don't "hold by" anyone who ridicules creation or thinks it didn't happen because I do think God created the world.  So how can I be held accountable for the beliefs of someone else -beliefs which I don't subscribe to?  Stop misrepresenting the issue and distorting reality.

Meanwhile, you have still not given one iota of scientific evidence,

The scientists have given the evidence and this thread was not intended to "agree with the scientists" or "dispute the scientists" with non-scientific stupidity. 
This thread was intended to address Rav Hirsh's very clear statements in which He holds that the theory of evolution does not pose a challenge to Torah belief, the belief in God or the belief in God's creation of the world.

You obviously don't have anything of value to contribute in this thread and simply divert the discussion over and over again with your propaganda-for-simpletons routine.   It is clear that your mind simply cannot grasp what Rav Hirsh said.   That's a pity.

[wonga66]

A Relativist is obliged to accept geocentricity as an equally valid model.

Do you agree or not with Einstein when he states:

The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, 'the sun is at rest and the earth moves,' or 'the sun moves and the earth is at rest,' would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS.

As an anti-Relativist I do not agree with Einstein: I believe that the evidence favours an Earth-centered model.

If you belive that Relativity is correct, then you cannot say that geocentricity is in anyway an unacceptable model.

But if like me you are an anti-Relativist, then how do you explain the zero-velocity MM experiments that fail to detect the Earth's purported 67,000mph velocity round the Sun, unless you say that the Earth really is stationary: join the club!

[MassuhDGoodName]

If you haven't already done so, MassuhDGoodName highly recommends viewing the recent film entitled Agora starring Rachel Weiss.

A most excellent portrayal of The Ancient World in the 3rd Century C.E. .

The plot centers on established Ptolemaic sciences - versus the increasing awareness that the Earth and other celestial bodies may in fact be spherical bodies revolving around the Sun in non-concentric orbits, and is played out in ancient Egypt as hostilities develop between the pagan, Jewish, and Christian faiths coexisting in Egypt.

[Chai]

I saw it .  The film calls out Christianity's ignominious imperialism and locates a valid historical analogue to the religious extremism of today. And thats what you think Religious Zionism is.
Its not.

[MassuhDGoodName]

Re:  "And thats what you think Religious Zionism is.  Its not.

Thanks for telling me what I got out of the film.

No need for me to ever see a film again.

You just go see them, and then you can write for everyone here exactly what I thought about them.

That works for you, right?

[MassuhDGoodName]

p.s. - and you don't have the slightest idea of what the word "imperialism" means.

[Chai]

"Thanks for telling me what I got out of the film". Your welcome. 

"No need for me to ever see a film again."      No need.

You just go see them, and then you can write for everyone here exactly what I thought about them.

That works for you, right?    Oh stop your artsy fartsy  pretentious nonsense LOL. You have inferiority complex?

[Chai]

p.s. - and you don't have the slightest idea of what the word "imperialism" means.

Thanks for letting me know what I dont know.
Oh brother.

You don't have the slightest idea what the word "Idea" means.

[Chai]

I take it back, you have nothing to offer on this forum but your artsy fartsy views.Once in a while you will get in a good joke, but otherwise they suck. all you do is spew AntiJewish dogma and therefore I will try to rebuttal you on all these issues not becase I think Im holier then thou , no . Its just that you are close minded stubborn old man.. So I guess we just both offend each other.

[MassuhDGoodName]

Re:  "you have nothing to offer on this forum but your artsy fartsy views.Once in a while you will get in a good joke, but otherwise they suck. all you do is spew AntiJewish dogma and therefore I will try to rebuttal you on all these issues not becase I think Im holier then thou , no . Its just that you are close minded stubborn old man.. So I guess we just both offend each other. "

You don't offend me at all.

I can't be offended by a negro.

[MassuhDGoodName]

Re:  "you are close minded stubborn old man "

And you, negro, just slipped up!

[muman613]

This is getting out of hand.

Both of you need to chill out a little. This section of the forum should be used to discuss Torah and Jewish ideas. It bothers me that two Jews are arguing like this. Don't we have enough problems that we have to deal with? Should we be spending time thinking about how to insult or demean a fellow Jew? I seriously doubt it is good for our people and certainly it is against our Jewish faith {read the laws of Lashon Hara}.

Massuh, you do come off many times as a mocker and completely disrespectful of the Jewish faith. I have patients with you on this because you explained that there are things in your life which have caused you to behave like this. I believe that you can be much more productive if you spend your time trying to learn the answers to the questions you have. You don't 'buy' the interpretations of some commentators? You can learn from others. I have found that the answers are there to be had only if you open your mind and seek the answers. Nobody is telling you what to believe. Nobody is forcing you to observe the commands. You absolutely have free will to observe or not. But I think that a person should WANT to do the right thing both for themselves and for their community and their people. I don't do mitzvot just for my own merit. I do them in order to increase the merit of the entire Jewish people. It is my wish that every Jew comes to realize that the commands are there for their own benefit.

Chai, I understand where you are coming from concerning Massuhs apparent disrespect of Jewish tradition. But please bear with him. Remember that one of Hashems important 'traits' is his 'arik hapanim' or 'Long Suffering' meaning that he has patients with all of his creations. He does not rush to judgement because the individual may make teshuva at a future time. It is best to reserve judgement on a fellow Jew. This is one of the many Pirkie Avot concerning judging others.

Pirkie Avot
Mishnah 1:6
Joshua the son of Perachia and Nitai the Arbelite received from them. Joshua the son of Perachia would say: Assume for yourself a master, acquire for yourself a friend, and judge every man to the side of merit.

Mishnah 1:8
Judah  the son of Tabbai and Shimon the son of Shotach received from them. Judah the son of Tabbai would say: When sitting in judgement, do not act as a counselor-at-law. When the litigants stand before you, consider them both guilty; and when they leave your courtroom, having accepted the judgement, regard them as equally righteous.

Mishnah 2:4
...
Hillel  would say: Do not separate yourself from the community. Do not believe in yourself until the day you die. Do not judge your fellow until you have stood in his place. Do not say something that is not readily understood in the belief that it will ultimately be understood [or: Do not say something that ought not to be heard even in the strictest confidence, for ultimately it will be heard]. And do not say "When I free myself of my concerns, I will study,'' for perhaps you will never free yourself.

Mishnah 3:15
All is foreseen, and freedom of choice is granted. The world is judged with goodness, but in accordance with the amount of man's positive deeds.

Mishnah 4:7
His son, Rabbi Ishmael would say: One who refrains from serving as a judge avoids hatred, thievery and false oaths. One who frivolously hands down rulings is a fool, wicked and arrogant.

Mishnah 4:8
He would also say: Do not judge on your own, for there is none qualified to judge alone, only the One. And do not say, "You must accept my view," for this is their [the majority's] right, not yours.

Ramban on the 13 middot HaRachamim:
http://vbm-torah.org/archive/intparsha68/37-68shelach.htm

"According to your statement, saying" — what is the statement? "God is long-suffering" – both to the righteous and to the wicked.  When Moses ascended to Heaven to receive the Torah, he found the Holy One, Blessed be He, writing, "God is long-suffering."  Whereupon [Moshe] said to Him, "To the righteous [only]."  But God answered him, "Also to the wicked!"  Moshe then said, "The wicked – let them perish!"  Whereupon God said to him, "By your life!  You will eventually need to resort to this [attribute, that God is long-suffering even to sinners]."  When the Jewish people sinned with the Golden Calf and with the Spies, Moshe beseeched God to be long-suffering with them; the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to him, "Did you not tell Me that this [attribute] is for the righteous [only]?"  Whereupon Moshe answered Him, "But did You not tell me that it is also for the wicked?  'And now, I beseech you, let the power of God be great, according to your statement.'"  These are the words (based on Sanhedrin 111a) of Rashi…

Now Moshe mentions among the Divine attributes "long-suffering" and "of great kindness;" but he does not mention "truth", for according to the attribute of truth, they would have been guilty.  Nor does Moshe mention "guarding kindness to the thousands," because he does not pray for mercy here based on the merit of the Patriarchs (zekhut Avot), and therefore he does not mention Avraham, Yitzchak, and Ya'akov at all in this prayer.  The reason is because the Land was given to the Patriarchs, and it is from them that [the Israelites] were to inherit it; however, they rebel against their ancestors and reject the gift which the Patriarchs desired so much.  How could he say now, "Remember Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yisra'el, Your servants, to whom you swore by Yourself… 'and all this land that I have spoken of, I will give to your descendants'" (Shemot 32:13), since they were saying: We do not want this gift!

[MassuhDGoodName]

Nice try, muman613.

How many names do you go under on this forum?

[MassuhDGoodName]

muman613,

You don't even scan a neo-Nazi website first, before putting the link on this forum?

And so you're going to purposely attack me for pointing it out?

It's easy to see how righteous you really are!

[muman613]

Nice try, muman613.

How many names do you go under on this forum?

I am only muman613... Why do you ask?

[muman613]

muman613,

You don't even scan a neo-Nazi website first, before putting the link on this forum?

And so you're going to purposely attack me for pointing it out?

It's easy to see how righteous you really are!

Massuh,

I did not attack you. I simply pointed out that the information which I found on that site was also found on other sites. That was concerning the age of the Los Lunas Rock {which according to most sites I found was between 500-2000 years old}.

Why do you want to attack me? I have done nothing to you. Do you consider me your enemy also?

[Rubystars]

I'm with you.... I can't believe some of the reasons given for ignoring evolution... I feel like I am watching a poor reenactment of the Scopes Monkey Trials.

With Wonga as William Jennings Bryan and KWRBT as Clarence Darrow?