Everytime I talk to any of my friends about this they get mad. My argument is one of reason. If we look at our world it is based off natural selection and the survival of the fittest. So why wouldn't god follow Science when he creates? Isn't it possible the people who wrote the bible didn't know about Science and had to speculate?

quote:Ask Rabbi Simmons (http://judaism.about.com/library/3_askrabbi_o/bl_simmons_evolution.htm)



Evolution vs. Creation

Question:

Does the Jewish faith accept the doctrine of evolution as opposed to creation. If so please explain further.

Answer:

How did G-d create the world? The Torah commentator Rashi tells us that G-d created everything in potential on Day One, and then different species developed from that primordial soup. (see Genesis 1:24, 2:4) It is worthwhile noting that as he was writing in the 11th century, Rashi was not making apologetics in the face of a scientific challenge!

Rabbi Shimshon Rafael Hirsch (19th century Germany) further explains that each "Day" represents a specific stage of creation - i.e. a mingling of raw materials and bursts of dramatic new development. As you go through the Torah's account, you see described a gradual process from simple to more complex organisms - first a mass of swirling gasses, then water, then the emergence of dry land, followed by plants, fish, birds, animals, and finally, human beings. This pattern may be similar to the evolutionary process proposed by science.

It is truly fascinating to realize that the Torah's position never changed; science has come to match it! In fact, the recently proposed Punctuated Theory of Equilibria is a further step toward the reconciliation of Judaism and science. In other words, Arnold Penzias, who was awarded the Nobel Prize for his research on the Big Bang, remarked: "What we see marking the flight of galaxies with our telescopes, Maimonides saw from his metaphysical view."

* * *

Of course, there is a point where the Torah and the "evolutionists" diverge. The Bible says these things didn't happen by accident. God made it all happen. Or in other words, is the human being simply a smarter monkey, or a qualitatively different creation? The Torah tells us that G-d blew into Adam a spiritual soul, which is what separates man from all other creatures. (see Genesis 2:7)

You may ask, what difference does it make? Judaism teaches that the purpose of our existence is to sanctify life by utilizing everything in the world to get close to G-d. Only a being with a spiritual soul can have the "spiritual consciousness" necessary to achieve this. If you would remove this aspect of existence, then everything in the world is ultimately meaningless and we are all reduced to a random collection of molecules.

On a deeper level, "physics" is actually a pathway toward understanding the inner science of "metaphysics." As Maimonides writes: "As long as you are occupied with the mathematical sciences and the technique of logic, you belong to those who walk around the palace in search of the gate... When you complete your study of the natural sciences and get a grasp of the metaphysics, you enter into the inner courtyard and have are in the same house as [G-d the King]."

* * *

As for the scientific specifics of creation, Judaism understands that all the details are not revealed for us to understand. As the Talmud explains: Why does the Torah begin with the letter "bet?" To tell you that just as a "bet" is closed on three sides and open only in a forward direction, so too there are many things which occurred prior to the Torah's account which we cannot understand. And what is the only letter which precedes a "bet?" It is "aleph," the first letter of the alpha-bet, with the numerical value of one, representing the One and Only G-d. This tells you that prior to creation only one thing existed - G-d. (see Talmud Yerushalmi - Chagiga 2:1, and commentaries)

To learn more, read the "Permission to Believe" by Lawrence Keleman (Feldheim 1990), and the newest book by Dr. Schroeder, "The Science of God." And next time you're in Jerusalem, you can hear both of these authors lecturing at Aish HaTorah.

With blessings from Jerusalem,

Rabbi Shraga Simmons

Aish.com

The method could suite the purpose. It also could fit the timeframe (which is most likely at least partially metaphorical, in my opinion, as the Rabbi usually tell things in fables) if the big bang theory is true, since things were on a subatomic level, and traveling faster than the speed of light, which kind of fucks with things.

That's always been my belief.

Sweet. Bump +1.

My friend's dad argues that there is a hole in the big bang theory that would make it impossible for life to exist. Does anyone have any proof to the contrary?

Somehow i doubt your friends dad knows more about physics than Stephen Hawking.

Anyway, how could god responible for evolution? Evolution isn't some magic force that suddenly transforms creatures every couple of hundred thousand years. Evolution is simply where more prominent genes take over. Say if there are 2 different family of bears, if one family is usually of a big build, and they are strong and fast, they are going to be more successful than the other family which is weaker, therefore a big kind of bear develops. The process is extremely gradual, in between man and monkey, there were probably hundreds of species, not to mention the big shift between neanderthal humans and the other one i cant remember the name of, but it was very similar to the humans we have come to know.

Neandethals tended to be very big, strong, and enduring, but they were shit at making tools the other branch was not as strong or big, but was much more intelligent and alot better at fashioning tools, needless to say the intelligent one survived.

Think of it this way, if you put 2 bears in a cage, and the bigger one wins, did god do that, no its due to the fact that one of them is bigger, ergo evolution is not god's.

You could argue that god created the big bang, and created the laws of physics, which in turn led to evolution when life came to be. But that would be shit, because it clearly says in the bible, the bibles words not mine "god created the heavens and the earth blah blah blah blah blah god created man"

Okay not those exact words but you get the jist.

It did not say "god created the big bang simultaneously creating all physics ect. which led to the formation of galaxies, solar systems, planets and stars, which in turn when they were created life could come to be through a complex collection of elements aka "primordial soup" and so on.

Anyway bottom line is, religion cannot be right because it says things happened which clearly didn't happen, like the creation of planets out of thin air, and you can't just suddenly say, "oh sorry, they actually meant this" 2000 years after it was written, get over it god doesn't exist so stop praying and shit, your making yourself look stupid.

quote:

It did not say "god created the big bang simultaneously creating all physics ect. which led to the formation of galaxies, solar systems, planets and stars, which in turn when they were created life could come to be through a complex collection of elements aka "primordial soup" and so on.





That's because it was written thousands of years ago when people didn't even have such concepts. Besides, the thread starter didn't even mention a specific god from any religion, yet you try to prove your point using only examples from the Judeo/Christan/Islamic god. You didn't prove anything in you're rant. Just alot of blah blah blah blah blah blah blah fuckidy blah blah blah fuckidy blah.

Blah blah

blah

Fuckidy blah



[This message has been edited by great_sage=heaven (edited 06-09-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Sephiroth:



How did G-d create the world? The Torah commentator Rashi tells us that G-d created everything in potential on Day One, and then different species developed from that primordial soup. (see Genesis 1:24, 2:4) It is worthwhile noting that as he was writing in the 11th century, Rashi was not making apologetics in the face of a scientific challenge!

Sephiroth, care to provide a quote of Rashi stating that god created a primordial soup, from which then we developed? I'm not even asking for those exact words, anything that would indicate he believed something similar.

Seeing as your article provides nothing of this, and I've read Rashi and have not come accross him saying anything similar... I'm left with concluding that the Rabbi is making a bold face lie.

quote:

Rabbi Shimshon Rafael Hirsch (19th century Germany) further explains that each "Day" represents a specific stage of creation - i.e. a mingling of raw materials and bursts of dramatic new development. As you go through the Torah's account, you see described a gradual process from simple to more complex organisms - first a mass of swirling gasses, then water, then the emergence of dry land, followed by plants, fish, birds, animals, and finally, human beings. This pattern may be similar to the evolutionary process proposed by science.



That is nothing like evolution.

1. Those things mentioned do not go from "less complex to more complex".

2. It includes things that are not alive, an hence having nothing to do with evolution.

quote:

It is truly fascinating to realize that the Torah's position never changed; science has come to match it! In fact, the recently proposed Punctuated Theory of Equilibria is a further step toward the reconciliation of Judaism and science. In other words, Arnold Penzias, who was awarded the Nobel Prize for his research on the Big Bang, remarked: "What we see marking the flight of galaxies with our telescopes, Maimonides saw from his metaphysical view."



This is false; and very telling of the Rabbi.

1. "The Torah's position" is nothing other than "what the majority of Jews believe". Nothing else. Thus, "the Torah's position" is up to interpretation.

2. Is the Rabbi claiming that "the Torah's position" centuries ago was, that the universe as we see it now, was the result of the Big Bang, abiogenesis and evolution? I think not.

quote:

Of course, there is a point where the Torah and the "evolutionists" diverge. The Bible says these things didn't happen by accident. God made it all happen. Or in other words, is the human being simply a smarter monkey, or a qualitatively different creation? The Torah tells us that G-d blew into Adam a spiritual soul, which is what separates man from all other creatures. (see Genesis 2:7)

Well then he just refuted his whole argument. "The Torah's position" is not that evolution occured.

But why would God as an all loving being create life using a process (evolution) that leads to suffering and extinction of weaker species? To me that seems cruel and unnecessary, especially seeing as God is all knowing and therefore would know what the evolution would lead to, he might as well just create the end species and skip the whole pointless process.

The bible doesn't have to be taken literally. In my opinion it is full of symbolic meaning, you just have to study the symbols and ask for help from the higher power.

quote:Originally posted by coolwestman:

The bible doesn't have to be taken literally. In my opinion it is full of symbolic meaning, you just have to study the symbols and ask for help from the higher power.

and how do you know what the symbolism is, that the higher power helps you with?

quote:Originally posted by Sephiroth:

[QUOTE]Ask Rabbi Simmons (http://judaism.about.com/library/3_askrabbi_o/bl_simmons_evolution.htm)

[b]

Evolution vs. Creation

Question:

Does the Jewish faith accept the doctrine of evolution as opposed to creation. If so please explain further.

Answer:

How did G-d create the world? The Torah commentator Rashi tells us that G-d created everything in potential on Day One....

<<<snipped due to length>>>

Reguarding Rashi:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/feedback/2005/0603.asp

quote:Originally posted by Silly_Stick:

But why would God as an all loving being create life using a process (evolution) that leads to suffering and extinction of weaker species? To me that seems cruel and unnecessary, especially seeing as God is all knowing and therefore would know what the evolution would lead to, he might as well just create the end species and skip the whole pointless process.

It happens all the time to humans. The middle and lower class suffers and the upper class just gets richer and richer.

quote:Originally posted by xtreem5150ahm:

and how do you know what the symbolism is, that the higher power helps you with?



That's a literalist argument. The argument questions where to draw the line if you don't read precisely from the text. However, the bible is inaccurate about a lot of things and there appear to be cultural influences. I'd say it's more of a danger to be a literalist than someone who tries to understand the context of the readings.

quote:Originally posted by Atomical:

That's a literalist argument. The argument questions where to draw the line if you don't read precisely from the text. However, the bible is inaccurate about a lot of things and there appear to be cultural influences. I'd say it's more of a danger to be a literalist than someone who tries to understand the context of the readings.

Can you point out even one?

As for your original argument: The Bible says what it says. If it uses a symbol it will tell you. Nowhere do i see any indication (including the original Hebrew manuscripts) that a day of creation was any longer than a literal solar day.

Besides, i dont see how you can say that evolution can play a part in creation when the Bible says God created it. Also, i dont see how plants could survive eons of years without sunlight...

I think your just stupid. Who are yuou to say God didnt intend to put in natural selection and survival of the fittest? Who are you to say that those concepts are even inherent to evolution?

Evolution doesnt even have any theoretical evidence on its side (creationism doesnt either). Its all speculation. Nowhere have you reproduced evolution. Nowhere have you even recorded observinbg a creature with characteristics between species. Out of hundreds of thousands of species, you have yet to find a missing link.

Creationism only has to proport all its arguments on the Bible and the concept of God.

Science has to come up with a never ending rabbit trail to explain anything dealing with origins.

Point to me a mutation which has not only been beneficial, but also successfully passed along to successive generations.

Lets put my rant aside for a moment. If the Hebrew manuscripts say that God created the world, how can you say that evolution ever took place without calling God a liar?

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:



Evolution doesnt even have any theoretical evidence on its side (creationism doesnt either). Its all speculation. Nowhere have you reproduced evolution. Nowhere have you even recorded observinbg a creature with characteristics between species. Out of hundreds of thousands of species, you have yet to find a missing link.

[...]

Point to me a mutation which has not only been beneficial, but also successfully passed along to successive generations.





What a surprise, you talking about something you clearly know nothing about!

Evidence:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

Transitional "creatures with characteristics between species" (AKA a "missing link"):

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

Favorable mutations passed through generations:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mutations.html#Q2



Make a fool out of yourself much?

I do all the time but then im not involved in this... and Rust dont just copy web pages at least copy and paste...

[This message has been edited by allthegoodnamesweregone (edited 06-09-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by allthegoodnamesweregone:

and Rust dont just copy web pages at least copy and paste...



"Copy web pages"? Huh? You mean don't just provide a link? What, you can't click the link and read? You don't even have to navigate through the website, the information is contained in the exact link I gave! Geez.

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

[B] Evolution doesnt even have any THEORETICAL EVIDENCE on its side (creationism doesnt either).

I was going to argue with you untill I realized you just used a contradiction in terms. Theoretical evidence, what the fuck is that? Did you mean evidence, or theory? Because Evolution has alot of logic basing it's theories and hypotheses, but no 'theoretical evidence', haha.

Creation and Evolution can coincide peacefully. You just have to keep an open mind.

I though about this, and if the bible is truly gods word, it can't because adam and eve were the first humans on the earth, and their creator was god...not cave men with names like a-ba-da-ba-do-boo

General observation, it all has to do with how literal one takes the bible, and nothing about science or what God can and can't do.

Most literalists accept a natural event causing the majority of earth formations, a flood. Yet most can't accept God creating through a natural means such as evolution.

Why? Because the bible says so, and their interpretation of the bible must be right. There is no other thought process than that.

It is more telling why so many people put their omnipotence above God.

I think the whole thing is hilarious.

It's another example of the God-Botherers jumping in and trying to claim credit for their invisible monster. "What? You mean evolution is the most logical answer? Then God did it"

It's as silly as little kids playing "made ya do it". No matter what we learn and discover about the world and the universe, there's always some superstious fool trying to claim the credit for whichever imaginary monster he believes in. Reason and science are fighting an uphill battle. I hope someday they win.

quote:Originally posted by john_deer:

I though about this, and if the bible is truly gods word, it can't because adam and eve were the first humans on the earth, and their creator was god...not cave men with names like a-ba-da-ba-do-boo

There's over versions of creation besides the Bible... once again, keep an open mind.

quote:Originally posted by Paradise Lost:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by john_deer:

[b]I though about this, and if the bible is truly gods word, it can't because adam and eve were the first humans on the earth, and their creator was god...not cave men with names like a-ba-da-ba-do-boo

quote:

Paradise Lost:

There's over versions of creation besides the Bible... once again, keep an open mind.



i though i was...... IF the bible is truely gods word.......

i was merely stating the bible viewpoint, not saying others were wrong.

[This message has been edited by john_deer (edited 06-10-2005).]

Well there have never been disagreements as to exactly what the bible means, that's why there aren't many different factions in christianity and chistians who fought science because of what they thought the bible said.

quote:Originally posted by Atomical:

Everytime I talk to any of my friends about this they get mad. My argument is one of reason. If we look at our world it is based off natural selection and the survival of the fittest. So why wouldn't god follow Science when he creates? Isn't it possible the people who wrote the bible didn't know about Science and had to speculate?

I've brought up the subject with my diehard christian friends, simplifying it for them... asking if they'd have an open mind about god helping evolution, they shut me out for a week

Yea, it really is simple to understand. The more adaptable of a species survives and breeds, so desirable traits prevail over long periods of time. One example, humans have gotten taller of hundreds and hundreds of years, because tall guys, in general get more pussy. Stretch this out over millions of years and the differences become huge. This doesn't mean there's no god.

quote:Originally posted by Rust:



What a surprise, you talking about something you clearly know nothing about!

Evidence:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

Transitional "creatures with characteristics between species" (AKA a "missing link"):

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

Favorable mutations passed through generations:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mutations.html#Q2



Make a fool out of yourself much?



Im not going to even begin to waste my time reading missing link pages.

I perused the favorable mutations and if thats all that you or they can come up with you need to go shove it back into your ass. Those mutations are in no way revolutionary to any species. So something gets immune to hiv? So what? We get immune to chick pox, you dont call that a mutation.

quote:Originally posted by great_sage=heaven:

Yea, it really is simple to understand. The more adaptable of a species survives and breeds, so desirable traits prevail over long periods of time. One example, humans have gotten taller of hundreds and hundreds of years, because tall guys, in general get more pussy. Stretch this out over millions of years and the differences become huge. This doesn't mean there's no god.

If thats true then we should, in theory, all be around the same height. Yet i see 7 foot tall and then i also see 5 foot tall men.

So if the 7 foot tall get to breed more and have more children, over millions of years we should see a great disproportional skew towards tall men. I also see that cavemen were generally larger than men today, so you say that taller men breed more, yet we are getting smaller?

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

Im not going to even begin to waste my time reading missing link pages.

Not wanting to look at evidence: The sign of a total fucking moron.

Thank you for, once again, making it obvious that you're a waste of human resources.

quote:

I perused the favorable mutations and if thats all that you or they can come up with you need to go shove it back into your ass. Those mutations are in no way revolutionary to any species. So something gets immune to hiv? So what? We get immune to chick pox, you dont call that a mutation.

1. That wasn't the only example, nor "resistance to X" the only type of example given.

2. Nobody said just ONE mutation would be "revolutionary" or that it would change the organism so much that it would be another species. It's thousands of them in one organism which do that.

---

Since you provide no counter-argument and refuse to even read evidence which completely refutes you; then it's safe to conclude that your argument was as pathetic as you are.



[This message has been edited by Rust (edited 06-10-2005).]

Rust, I'm beginning to enjoy your ad-hom attacks. Keep 'em coming, but don't forget to keep those logical arguments in there also. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

anther thing at the main topic:

using bible chronology (spelling?) the bibles says that human life is only about 6000 years ago, but at this link:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/evolution9.htm

which says:

The fact that it takes evolution 100,000 or 10 million years to make relatively minor changes in existing structures shows just how slow evolution really is. The creation of a new species is time consuming.



so if you believe in the bible, its not possible.

1) No, if you believe one mans interpretation of the bible, since the bible never says 6000 years old. The calculations aren't even very accurate, different people have done them and have come up with numbers from 6000 years to 12000 years.

2) If you were paying the fuck attention (which I don't think you are even bothering to read other posts) you would have realized you just Fucked creationists.

To repeat.

Creationism Requires insanely fast "beneficial" mutation rates to work.

In other words, the supposedly short amount of time, and the supposable tiny amount of beneficial mutations, is evidence Against current creationist theories.

Oops. http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

If thats true then we should, in theory, all be around the same height. Yet i see 7 foot tall and then i also see 5 foot tall men.

I never said that, because it's obviously not true. Evolution even as a theory is much more complicated than that. I was refering to a general trend, if you can understand that. Did you really think you were making a valid point? Again, general trend...

Also, yes there are larger cave men than us homosapiens, but there are also smaller cavemen. This points towards evolution being correct, unless you believe god, somewhere along the history of humankind, decided to create creatures similar to us, then wipe them out a while later. I seriously doubt this is the case. Why did you even bring up cavemen, aren't you trying to disprove evolution?

So far you've used the term 'theoretical evidence', and jumped to a retarded conclusion based on something I said. I don't take you seriously.





[This message has been edited by great_sage=heaven (edited 06-11-2005).]

Rust I found those Rashi quotes and I will post them, but as my response is getting exceptionally long and shabbos followed by shavuos is approaching, I ask for your patience as I will not be able to work on it during those times. I'll try to finish them next week if this topic is still around.

Jumping in. How does a Big Bang perpetuate itself in a vacuum? If sound does not travel in a vacuum then what value can be ascribed where sound is required? I call this the sound of light question where life might be the ultimate expression. Could this expression, that courses through our atomic rivers fit the requirements for precognition we ascribe to God?