http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/825980/jewish/Interpolated-Translation.htmQuote30 Thus, on that day, G-d rescued Israel from Egypt.
The pathways through the sea were semicircular, and the people emerged from the water on the same side of the sea as they had entered, further north along the shore (see Figure 7).40 The people did not see the Egyptians drown, so they feared that they, too, had left the sea somewhere else along the shore. They thus doubted G-d's ability to rescue them for a second time.41 In order allay this fear, G-d made the sea wash up all the dead Egyptians, and thus Israel saw the Egyptians dead on the seashore. After the Israelites saw them, the earth swallowed the dead Egyptians. In the merit of Pharaoh having previously submitted to G-d,42 G-d granted them proper burial.43
Footnotes:
40. See Tosefot, Arachin 15a, s.v. Kesheim sheAnu; Maimonides, Commentary to the Mishnah, Avot 5:4; Shitah Mekubetzet, Arachin 15a §13.
41. Arachin 15ab.
42. Above, 9:27.
43. Rashi on 15:12, below.
http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/825980/jewish/Interpolated-Translation.htm
21 Moses raised his arm over the sea. And God drove back the sea throughout the night with a powerful east wind—which He uses to punish the wicked32—and turned the sea into dry land, and, in addition the waters all over the world split, so the whole world would know of this miracle. The sea split into twelve pathways, one for each tribe.33
I don't understand what the problem is.
The Torah itself says there was a strong eastern wind.
They mathematically determined a way in which an eastern wind could possibly cause what the Torah describes as having happened.
Wouldn't you be more concerned if it was mathematically impossible? Wouldn't THAT make it less believable? Why would G-d supposedly cause a natural phenomenon that is actually not physically possible within the natural rules with which G-d governs the world? Does that make any sense? No! Not to me anyway.
I believe in either Nachmanides or Maimonides somewhere he says that there are always natural explanations to miracles so that everyone has free will and non believers use that to deny it, but believers know better.
The question is what do you do with this information. I don't see what is wrong with the information on its own.
couldn't science be the answer to how and not the answer to why?
I don't understand what the problem is.
The Torah itself says there was a strong eastern wind.
They mathematically determined a way in which an eastern wind could possibly cause what the Torah describes as having happened.
Wouldn't you be more concerned if it was mathematically impossible? Wouldn't THAT make it less believable? Why would G-d supposedly cause a natural phenomenon that is actually not physically possible within the natural rules with which G-d governs the world? Does that make any sense? No! Not to me anyway.
I believe in either Nachmanides or Maimonides somewhere he says that there are always natural explanations to miracles so that everyone has free will and non believers use that to deny it, but believers know better.
The question is what do you do with this information. I don't see what is wrong with the information on its own.
The issue is that regardless of how it happened, it happened at the time it was most necessary. Nachson jumped into the sea at the very moment all seemed lost as the Mitzrim chariots were bearing down on the Children of Israel at the edge of the sea. I doubt that the scientists could determine the odds of that happening, or can they?
Also their model only discusses a single passage way from one side of the sea to the other, not the twelve separate channels which only made a semi-circle..... That seems to me to be a problem..
Actually the point of this action of G-d is that it was a miracle. People that try to find other explanations for it diminish from faith in the fact that G-d did it despite that it would normally be impossible. So the idea that it can be mathematically proven actually takes away from the event rather than adds to it.
Actually the point of this action of G-d is that it was a miracle. People that try to find other explanations for it diminish from faith in the fact that G-d did it despite that it would normally be impossible. So the idea that it can be mathematically proven actually takes away from the event rather than adds to it.
I strongly disagree with this point.
First off, this is not a "proof that it happened."
This is merely evidence that it was scientifically possible and could have happened. There's a big difference.
Secondly, I am fairly certain that a major rishon (I think it was Ramban) speaks about the fact that Every miracle Hashem does has a corresponding natural explanation. The role of the believer is to not let the natural explanation take away from the power of the miracle or the faith that G-d was behind it.
But you just did let the natural explanation take away from the power of the miracle when you said the following:QuoteWouldn't you be more concerned if it was mathematically impossible? Wouldn't THAT make it less believable? Why would G-d supposedly cause a natural phenomenon that is actually not physically possible within the natural rules with which G-d governs the world? Does that make any sense? No! Not to me anyway.
Lack of scientific explanations do not make something that G-d does less believable, and being not physically possible within natural rules does not mean G-d can't do it.
I would actually have more respect for these scientists if they just came out and said the stuff didn't happen rather than offering scientific explanations for things that G-d clearly intended to be miracles.
To say that a miracle must conform to the laws of the natural world is to say that G-d can't act outside the laws of the natural world, when He very clearly does this in the Bible on many occasions. G-d is beyond the physical world, and His actions are also beyond the physical world. There is no scientific explanation for the chariot of fire that carried Elijah into heaven, water from a rock, a woman spontaneously turning into a pillar of salt, fire from the sky that burned water, etc. If these "scientists" need a natural explanation for these things then that means they are limiting G-d and their faith in G-d is weak or nonexistent and they are just playing around with theories.
6. Ten things were created at twilight of Shabbat eve. These are: the mouth of the earth [that swallowed Korach]; the mouth of [Miriam's] well; the mouth of [Balaam's] donkey; the rainbow; the manna; [Moses'] staff; the shamir; the writing, the inscription and the tablets [of the Ten Commandments]. Some say also the burial place of Moses and the ram of our father Abraham. And some say also the spirits of destruction as well as the original tongs, for tongs are made with tongs.
5. Ten miracles were performed for our forefathers in the Holy Temple: No woman ever miscarried because of the smell of the holy meat. The holy meat never spoiled. Never was a fly seen in the slaughterhouse. Never did the High Priest have an accidental seminal discharge on Yom Kippur. The rains did not extinguish the wood-fire burning upon the altar. The wind did not prevail over the column of smoke [rising from the altar]. No disqualifying problem was ever discovered in the Omer offering, the Two Loaves or the Showbread. They stood crowded but had ample space in which to prostrate themselves. Never did a snake or scorpion cause injury in Jerusalem. And no man ever said to his fellow "My lodging in Jerusalem is too cramped for me."
To say that a miracle must conform to the laws of the natural world is to say that G-d can't act outside the laws of the natural world,
If these "scientists" need a natural explanation for these things then that means they are limiting G-d and their faith in G-d is weak or nonexistent and they are just playing around with theories.
Just for review purposes I will post the thirteen principles which Rambam laid out concerning Jewish faith:
1. Belief in the existence of the Creator, who is perfect in every manner of existence and is the Primary Cause of all that exists.
2. The belief in G-d's absolute and unparalleled unity.
3. The belief in G-d's non-corporeality, nor that He will be affected by any physical occurrences, such as movement, or rest, or dwelling.
4. The belief in G-d's eternity.
5. The imperative to worship G-d exclusively and no foreign false gods.
6. The belief that G-d communicates with man through prophecy.
7. The belief in the primacy of the prophecy of Moses our teacher.
8. The belief in the divine origin of the Torah.
9. The belief in the immutability of the Torah.
10. The belief in G-d's omniscience and providence.
11. The belief in divine reward and retribution.
12. The belief in the arrival of the Messiah and the messianic era.
13. The belief in the resurrection of the dead.
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/332555/jewish/The-13-Principles.htm
PS: BTW KWRBT I was wondering the other day whether you believe in something called the G-d particle. I don't know what it is, but in my mind I already think it is a heretical thing to name something. Hashem, who we call our G-d, 'cannot' exist as a particle.
" I don't know what it is, but in my mind I already think it is a heretical thing "
i came up with an idea just a few minuted ago and i figure i have to post it
what if G-d is so awesome he knew in advance every single miracle he would need to preform so he constructed the entire universe in such a way that would accommodate those miracles?
i came up with an idea just a few minuted ago and i figure i have to post it
what if G-d is so awesome he knew in advance every single miracle he would need to preform so he constructed the entire universe in such a way that would accommodate those miracles?
That is certainly a possibility. But my point is that we cannot constrict Hashem such that he could only do things which we consider physically possible. I believe that one who believes that Hashem MUST be constrained by physicality is testing the principle of Rambam of "3.
i came up with an idea just a few minuted ago and i figure i have to post it
what if G-d is so awesome he knew in advance every single miracle he would need to preform so he constructed the entire universe in such a way that would accommodate those miracles?
That is certainly a possibility. But my point is that we cannot constrict Hashem such that he could only do things which we consider physically possible. I believe that one who believes that Hashem MUST be constrained by physicality is testing the principle of Rambam of "3.
That's a straw-man argument because that's not what I'm doing with what I'm saying in this thread.
Creation ex nihilo was beyond physicality or logic. And I believe G-d did that (creation ex nihilo).
However, I don't see any problem with other miracles having natural explanations.
Was the ingathering of exiles and re-establishment of Israel as a nation in its homeland a miracle? I would say yes. Did it happen through natural means? Also yes. Does this limit G-d? No. And does it say that it couldn't have happened through supernatural means? No, but naturally (pun intended), the world (G-d's world and G-d's action in it) operates such that it wouldn't happen that way but rather through disguised natural means.
I'm not saying "G-d is incapable of x, y, z" - I'm saying it wouldn't make sense for it to happen that way or for G-d to do it that way because that is not how we experience the world ourselves. In much the same way I say that the Temple will not fall from the sky but we will build it. Because while of course G-d could make it fall from the sky if He wanted to, theoretically speaking G-d COULD do anything, it is IMO silly to expect that to happen that way and very unlikely that G-d would do that because we don't really experience G-d in that manner in this world we live in.
KWRBT,
I said outright that I did not know what the particle is... I simple commented on the fact that the name sounds heretical to me. Putting the word G-d and particle together seems odd to me. I don't fear it, nor do I want to stop people looking at it. I just want them to acknowledge that it is not like G-d, because Hashem is not a particle, or a concept, He is the One.
If you would like to explain what this G-d particle is, it may be interesting. But I really don't want to go seek out what it is, unless I happen to read about it in the media.
KWRBT,
I said outright that I did not know what the particle is... I simple commented on the fact that the name sounds heretical to me. Putting the word G-d and particle together seems odd to me. I don't fear it, nor do I want to stop people looking at it. I just want them to acknowledge that it is not like G-d, because Hashem is not a particle, or a concept, He is the One.
They don't claim it's G-d. So you don't need to worry about it.QuoteIf you would like to explain what this G-d particle is, it may be interesting. But I really don't want to go seek out what it is, unless I happen to read about it in the media.
I actually find it kind of stupid and the name is supposed to be clever but it's also sort of simplistic and silly in a way. It's really called the Higgs Boson. But they are basically saying that this particle a "scalar boson" - the only particle predicted by standard model not yet observed - that they will find one somehow (using hadron collider) and that this particle holds the key to understanding how there is mass in the universe. This particle supposedly caused all the other particles we have observed to actually acquire mass themselves. I don't fully understand it because I'm not a physicist, but I think that's a basic synopsis.
It was made famous by a book in which it was referred to by this name - Leon Lederman's "The G-d Particle - If the Universe is the answer, what is the question" so the media love to parrot this, but I read on wikipedia now that actually many scientists don't like the name and voted to change it to a different nickname. So I guess I'm not the only one that thinks it's a stupid name.
A tachyon (pronounced /ˈtæki.ɒn/; Greek: ταχύς, takhus, "swift" + English: -on "elementary particle") is a hypothetical subatomic particle that moves faster than light. In the language of special relativity, a tachyon is a particle with space-like four-momentum and imaginary proper time. A tachyon is constrained to the space-like portion of the energy-momentum graph. Therefore, it cannot slow down to subluminal speeds.
The first description of tachyons is attributed to German physicist Arnold Sommerfeld. However, it was George Sudarshan,[1] Olexa-Myron Bilaniuk,[2] Vijay Deshpande,[2] and Gerald Feinberg[3] (who originally coined the term in the 1960s) who advanced a theoretical framework for their study.
If tachyons were conventional, localizable particles that could be used to send signals faster than light, this would lead to violations of causality in special relativity. But in the framework of quantum field theory, tachyons are understood as signifying an instability of the system and treated using tachyon condensation, rather than as real faster-than-light particles, and such instabilities are described by tachyonic fields. Tachyonic fields have appeared theoretically in a variety of contexts, such as the bosonic string theory. According to the contemporary and widely accepted understanding of the concept of a particle, tachyon particles are too unstable to be treated as existent.[4] By that theory, faster than light information transmission and causality violation with tachyons are impossible.
Conventional massive particles which travel slower than the speed of light are sometimes termed "bradyons" or "tardyons" in contrast, although these terms are only used in the context of discussions about tachyons.
Despite the theoretical arguments against the existence of tachyon particles, experimental searches have been conducted to test the assumption against their existence; however, no experimental evidence for the existence of tachyon particles has been found.[5](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/64/Tachyon04s.gif/250px-Tachyon04s.gif)