Someone help me find a Jew vs. Athiest debate PLEASE

[kahaneloyalist]

Shumely Boteach is Jewish, though he was somewhat thrown out of Chabad he is still Jewish from birth.



This might be the debate you are looking for. Its Caroline Glick versus a bunch of Leftists, officially its about the settlements but its very clear the side opposing the settlements would like there to be no Israel.

There is also this debate between Rabbi Kahane zt'l and Michael Lerner yimach shmo vizichro.

[Rubystars]

Still for athiesm, all I need to show is that it isn't an answer. Where did the quantum fluctuation come from? Was it always there? Now were back to Aristotle's theory, and so long as they can't prove creation is impossible via Torah's explained method, they can't call Jews liars.

"It was always there" is the definition of a steady state. Basically what is being taught now is that the large universe of which our "universe" is a part, is in "heat death" or thermal equilibrium as a whole, but there is a certain amount of chaos on the quantum level in which some bubbles will have temporarily negative entropy, even if time moves forward within those bubbles. Each bubble universe has its time to live and then returns to equilibrium. So no need for a beginning or an implied Beginner is necessarily there.

[muman613]

"It was always there" is the definition of a steady state. Basically what is being taught now is that the large universe of which our "universe" is a part, is in "heat death" or thermal equilibrium as a whole, but there is a certain amount of chaos on the quantum level in which some bubbles will have temporarily negative entropy, even if time moves forward within those bubbles. Each bubble universe has its time to live and then returns to equilibrium. So no need for a beginning or an implied Beginner is necessarily there.

Who created these bubbles, who created the system you discuss, who created time? The question of creation exists regardless of how it is explained. Measurements of time, positive vs negative, movement in three dimensions, etc. all have to have been established in order for the system to exist. Things don't just exist because of nothing.

While I don't know the specifics of theories being flung around today, I know that they cannot explain away the creation of the universe without playing some major mind games.

[Israel Chai]

Ok then, just to see without any of my biases, how would you refute someone going on T.V. and saying "all Jews should convert to atheism because what it says about the firmament with lights set in it doesn't exist so the whole book is a lie..."?

[Rubystars]

Who created these bubbles, who created the system you discuss, who created time? The question of creation exists regardless of how it is explained.

Time exists because of entropy. Entropy creates the "arrow of time". It's why you never see the wind create a sand castle from randomly blown sand grains, but you do see it blow the castle apart, etc. If the universe is overall in a steady state and our "bubble" is just an anomaly, then only within that bubble or others like it would "time" have any kind of real meaning. To ask the question what happened "before" the Big Bang is to ask the wrong question because space and time as we know it begin there. This in the context of a larger "universe".

Measurements of time, positive vs negative, movement in three dimensions, etc. all have to have been established in order for the system to exist. Things don't just exist because of nothing.

From our perspective as theists, we can say that God is eternal though, and didn't need to be created Himself. God is in what you could call a steady state. God is unchanging and eternal. God decided to create this universe with the properties it currently possesses for us to live in.

An atheist however could say that the larger universe (of which our "universe" is a tiny part) is what is in an eternal, steady state without the need to be created.

While I don't know the specifics of theories being flung around today, I know that they cannot explain away the creation of the universe without playing some major mind games.

It's really pretty simple as far as a concept. A steady state with occasional fluctuations here and there requires no creator, although it does not rule out a creator. This would be how an atheist could explain away the need for a creator.

[Rubystars]

Ok then, just to see without any of my biases, how would you refute someone going on T.V. and saying "all Jews should convert to atheism because what it says about the firmament with lights set in it doesn't exist so the whole book is a lie..."?

The statement doesn't make sense.

The choices are more than Judaism and atheism.

If Judaism were somehow invalidated by that, then the only option would not be atheism. There are at least hundreds of religions that have no Biblical connection at all. The only ones that would be affected by that at all would be "Abrahamic" type faiths (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Mormonism, etc.). A religion such as, for example, Taoism, would not be invalidated because of anything written in the Bible being scientifically inaccurate. So, it's not logical to say "If not Judaism, then default to atheism".

The second point of interest is to establish whether or not Judaism (and other faiths that have some Biblical connection) would be invalidated by that. It would take an analysis of what exactly the "firmament" was supposed to be and whether or not it really is important as to whether the ancient authors saw the sky as being some kind of trapped water with lights fixed to it on a dome. If they did see it that way, would it invalidate the faith as a whole? Would it invalidate the principles that were being taught in the relevant verses? These are things that are worth researching BEFORE you are faced with this question.

 

[Israel Chai]

The statement doesn't make sense.

The choices are more than Judaism and atheism.

If Judaism were somehow invalidated by that, then the only option would not be atheism. There are at least hundreds of religions that have no Biblical connection at all. The only ones that would be affected by that at all would be "Abrahamic" type faiths (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Mormonism, etc.). A religion such as, for example, Taoism, would not be invalidated because of anything written in the Bible being scientifically inaccurate. So, it's not logical to say "If not Judaism, then default to atheism".

The second point of interest is to establish whether or not Judaism (and other faiths that have some Biblical connection) would be invalidated by that. It would take an analysis of what exactly the "firmament" was supposed to be and whether or not it really is important as to whether the ancient authors saw the sky as being some kind of trapped water with lights fixed to it on a dome. If they did see it that way, would it invalidate the faith as a whole? Would it invalidate the principles that were being taught in the relevant verses? These are things that are worth researching BEFORE you are faced with this question.

I can disprove every other religion. Pick one.

[Israel Chai]

Anyways it went well and accomplished nothing.

[Rubystars]

Anyways it went well and accomplished nothing.

I'm glad it went well for you LKZ. What kinds of issues were brought up and how did you handle them? This might help other people who have to go into similar debates.

[Israel Chai]

I'm glad it went well for you LKZ. What kinds of issues were brought up and how did you handle them? This might help other people who have to go into similar debates.

Absurdities beyond the pale using situational "evidence", that were completely unprovable, and no actual disproof of any kind. Really not worth mentioning. Just things to cause doubt. I was the purpose of the debate, I see now. Thank G-d JTF and Rabbi Meir Kahane gave me a real education.

[Rubystars]

Absurdities beyond the pale using situational "evidence", that were completely unprovable, and no actual disproof of any kind. Really not worth mentioning. Just things to cause doubt. I was the purpose of the debate, I see now. Thank G-d JTF and Rabbi Meir Kahane gave me a real education.

Maybe your opponent had come unprepared. It's a shame that you can't given any examples though but I'm glad you did well.

[Israel Chai]

Maybe your opponent had come unprepared. It's a shame that you can't given any examples though but I'm glad you did well.

It was just insults that make you think maybe the most holy things about Judiasm are just a big fraud. No evidence, just "oh well prayers are repeated to brainwash and not eating pork was really for this other reason". It doesn't help to fill your head with that, since their arguments require faith and foment doubt. I doing you a favor by not telling you, since the only sensible response is "that isn't true", which can't be refuted.

[edu]

LKZ you mentioned in a previous post, that  an atheist is attacking Judaism because of some issue of a firmament with lights.
What Biblical verse is he talking about and what is he assuming the verse to mean?
By attacking his assumptions you will be able to undo his so-called "proof".

[Israel Chai]

LKZ you mentioned in a previous post, that  an atheist is attacking Judaism because of some issue of a firmament with lights.
What Biblical verse is he talking about and what is he assuming the verse to mean?
By attacking his assumptions you will be able to undo his so-called "proof".

This was not brought up. Nothing was attempted to be proved, please do not tempt me, because I would love to expand further at my own risk.

At any rate: Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters, which were under the firmament from the waters, which were above the firmament; and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day. (Genesis 1:6-8)

[edu]

To LKZ this is Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's translation of those verses (Breishit/Genesis 1:6-8) in his english translation of the entire Torah, entitled "The Living Torah".

G-d said, "There shall be a sky in the middle of the water, and it should divide between water and water. G-d [thus] made the sky, and it separated the water below the sky from the water above the sky. It remained that way. G-d named the sky "Heaven". It was evening and was morning, a second day.

In a footnote Rabbi Kaplan cites as his source Rabbi Saadia Gaon (who lived about 1000 years ago) to translate the Hebrew word "Rakia" used here as sky. He adds that the most literal translation would be "spread" or "expanse". Usually translated as firmament.

[Rubystars]

Prayers used to brainwash. I can see what he means in a way. The way you brainwash someone is repetition and time. Daily prayers recited every day over a long period of time fit the strict definition. On the one hand it can be argued that this is a positive thing, you are attuning yourself toward God's will and focusing on God and worshipping God. From an atheist's perspective it can be seen as steeping a child (or an adult) into a delusion further and further. There is a difference between positive programming (education such as learning the ABCs is one example of that), and coercive brainwashing (Muslims teaching their children about the merits of martyrdom). Where an atheist and a theist would differ would be on whether teaching a child daily prayers would be constructive or destructive programming. We think it's constructive, they think it's destructive.

[edu]

Atheists have no morality, just a wish list of what they like or don't like according to what is popular in today's society (in the so-called enlightened circles).
To paraphrase Rabbi Noach Weinberg, without there being a Creator then all we are, are electrons.
Now did you ever hear of a good electron or bad electron?

So if you hear an atheist say it is bad to teach your child to pray, he is basically just saying.
This is not on my wish list.
So what! Who needs to be on their wish list.

[Israel Chai]

Atheists have no morality, just a wish list of what they like or don't like according to what is popular in today's society (in the so-called enlightened circles).
To paraphrase Rabbi Noach Weinberg, without there being a Creator then all we are, are electrons.
Now did you ever hear of a good electron or bad electron?

So if you hear an atheist say it is bad to teach your child to pray, he is basically just saying.
This is not on my wish list.
So what! Who needs to be on their wish list.

Their arguments are big on unfairness. "Oh Egyptians didn't deserve to die because of Pharaoh" "circumcision is cruel" "Jews killed the people living in the land".

Anyways, I still can't explain Gen 1:14 with the lights set in the firmament, if according to talmud, it is as thick as a finger, or less. I read that there are 7 firmaments or something, but I still don't really understand.