- This topic has 294 replies, 56 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 5 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Joseph,
Not one
By hearing Joseph’s portrayal of college vs my own experience, I think I missed something. Maybe I just imagined going and I really wasnt there
Who will you believe: Joe’s description from his Rosh Yeshiva or your own lying eyes?
they will, Gd forbid, wonder what else you made up.
Facts only get in the way of indoctrination. See: Making of a Gadol, among others.
I guess it’s another reason why I’m “Left wing”. The Emes is essential, and Sheker has no feet.
“(And Obviously English)”
And how is that obvious?
I was waiting for you
“your own lying eyes”
I don’t think Joseph ever said it was ZD’s eyes that were lying.
“I was waiting for you”
So you were wondering the same?
No, but that was actually quite a funny response
I don’t think Joseph ever said it was ZD’s eyes that were lying.
🙂
And that one was NOT so funny
“I guess it’s another reason why I’m “Left wing”. The Emes is essential, and Sheker has no feet”
You apparently like the teetering sensation.
Eyes can’t lie as they can’t speak. It was a good misdirection by nisht, and I appreciate it. It was cute, not “funny”.
Nisht, did you buy your luchos at a half off sale?
LU -“All the psychology classes I took were full of evolution and kefira”
IDK, I went to college and the place that evolution was taught was in biology, not psychology.
What school did you go to – Catholic College?!?
Actually a Catholic College would be less of a problem. Sometimes people are davka told by their Rabbanim to go to Catholic Colleges.
What you didnt learn about evolution in History class?
I learned lots of kefira in Calculus
Actually one of the courses I am referring to was in a Jewish School. Many theorists base their theories of psychology on evolution. They have to explain why people are a certain way so they attribute it to evolution.
I never studied biology on a college level and in high school they didn’t teach evolution.
zahavasdad – i start calculus in 2 weeks h’h cant wait and i doubt thats kefira.
Joseph: So don’t take courses in evolutionary history. The methods are true, just not the application to the past. If you take a class in cell biology or anything that uses PCR, the history of the evolution stuff is irrelevant. Most professors or evolutionary theorists don’t care about how the world came into being. They might assume it doesn’t involve God, but that lack of God is not relevant to their courses so they won’t mention anything. High school biology classes are much more problematic than college ones.
Also, again, unless you’re taking contemporary sociology courses, no one will put in the current college campus liberal agenda. Maybe some English courses. So find and avoid the teachers who espouse “PC culture” and avoid sociology. It’s not like math or physics or computer science or whatever professors will be injecting political ideas into their courses.
Sam2 – what is evolutionary history?
I read an article about someone who wrote a book showing how the purpose of college is to inject the students with a Liberal Philosophy. I don’t remember the name of the book or the author. I think the author was Modern Orthodox. Has anyone heard of this book? It sounded very interesting and relevant to this discussion.
but the point is that Joseph either went to college himself and is being hypocritical, or he is making dramatic and detailed descriptions about every university accross the country purely from made up scenario’s based on information from very limited sources. Who sits in a dungeon and describes a rain forest? Who sits in a desert and describes what rainstorms look like? He makes this stuff up and everyone nods their heads in agreement while the ones who end up in college find out he was lying.
Joseph, if you had any REAL faith in your rabbaim you wouldn’t need to make up stories and situations, you could just spit out the truth and let it speak for itself. You are putting our children AT RISK!
lilmod ulelamaid – please find out and post it sounds like it would be VERY relevant to me.
Syag Lchochma – i agree that MOST people who are against something usually (NOT always since some people assume usually is always..) do that thing.
Syag,
Joseph can openly comment about what is taught in colleges only if he went there himself? Otherwise he is one “Who sits in a dungeon and describes a rain forest? Who sits in a desert and describes what rainstorms look like?”
That would exclude most of the comments from some of your favorite commenters who are clearly less informed about what they comment than Joseph is in these matters.
What is taught on campuses these days is readily available information. The schools themselves write about it.
Any sane person knows that Joseph’s comments are not what put your children at risk. Willfully and gleefully ignoring deios kozvos that are antithetical to the Torah and having them taught to your children is what puts them at risk. Colleges are certainly not known for their moral outlook and for moral activities being practiced there.
You know what, nisht? When you can’t tell the difference between me commenting on your condescending attitude and posts toward individuals which is beyond inappropriate for someone of your level of learning, and makes us “right wingers” look bad, and supporting their views, so much so that you call him one of my favorite posters;
and you can’t tell the difference between me speaking out against Joseph’s MISREPRESENTATION of a dangerous situation with added detail and elaborations that dilute the actual, REAL, HONEST danger that our gedolim are able to express without made up scriptwriting, and supporting college, than answering you is futile.
“Any sane person knows that Joseph’s comments are not what put your children at risk.”
Rasha, mah hu omer
nisht, according to Syag I can’t comment either way. Look what she said in her comment. If I went to college I’m being hypocritical to criticize it, so I should shut up. If I didn’t go then I don’t know enough to talk about it, so I should still shut up. So only those supportive of college, like herself, have any right to make authoritative points in this discussion.
She wants this to be a heads I win, tails you lose for herself.
you are an outright liar. Go back thru my posts and see where I support college. I am very clear in SEVERAL posts that I don’t support college.
You disgust me.
Syag lchochma, your comments to/about Joseph and Nisht are rather inappropriate.
Thank you. I appreciate your somewhat limited-as-a-newcomer viewpoint and will consider it in my next post to them/him.
Or perhaps you will jump a bit slower to conclusions.
Syag, some of your nasty comments are still editable.
lilmod, thank you.
And your lies? can lies ever be edited?
“I don’t believe people should go to secular college.” me
“College has dangers. If one needs to go it should be done with tremendous care and research and support” me
“So only those supportive of college, like herself” Joseph
If you decide to tangent off onto anything else you can find and deny the fact that the Torah demands us to be truthful while this is a lie, outright and indisputable, then your frumkeit cannot possibly be genuine.
I’m not one to talk but so many comments here are not very nice…why are y’all taking this personally comments like “you disgust me” should be taken off
Some of the newbies do not know about certain posters.
You talking about me zahavasdad?
I have a serious, honest question as long as we’re mentioning evolution and evolutionary history – from what I understand, evolution does NOT claim that humans descend from monkeys. It claims that humans and other primates descend from a common ancestor, which not much is known about. Being that Adam Harishon was clearly not a human in the manner that we know, e.g. he was supposedly huge, etc… and also being that the there was a snake walking on two legs, (possibly evidence of dinosaurs), could it not be that Adam was the common ancestor and Hashem then made various evolutions throughout the whole mysterious course of history to get us to where we are now? I am not so learned when it comes to torah, but I never understood the immediate rejection of some form evolution when it seems to be clear from even the torah and midrashim that people have changed DRASTICALLY throughout time.
P.S. also consider that there used to be giants and Moshe Rabbeinu was 20 amos tall
evolution does NOT claim that humans descend from monkeys
It claims human and apes share a common descent. Does that sound like anything less than kefira to you?
Adam was the common ancestor of the animals the Torah specifically says were created before Adam? Aside for that, even the evolutionists’ theory denies such an idea.
Syag Lchochma – theres nothing wrong with being pro college in fact i feel like theirs something wrong to be against it. its like being against getting a high school education.
My question is that we see that the world was an extremely different place when it was created – I think it’s fair to say that Adam could not be called human at least in the way that we are human. For example, I think I recall hearing that he was gigantic. Like 100 amos or something. Also considering the fact that there was a “snake” walking on legs and that there used to be giants who could pick up mountains, and there was huge fruit that the Meraglim brought pack – the world was simply a very, very different place when you go back so long ago.
So my question is, could it be that the “animals” that were created before Adam might not have necessarily resembled the animals that we have today, just like it might be fair to say that we might not really resemble what “people” looked like in the times of Adam and subsequently Og, etc…
My question is not meant to deny Hashem – it is wondering if a case could be made to reconcile some of the scientific evidence that has been found in present times with the little that we know of what the world was like at the dawn of man and whether it is possible that Hashem could have caused some sort of evolutionary process to take place over time that has caused the evidence that scientists have claimed they found presently?
This is a legitimate question that I have always wondered. It is meant for people who have really thought about it to respond and hopefully provide me some answers, civilly and intellectually, without simply screaming “kefirah” and “apikorus” and refusing to talk about it. Any help and/or answers are appreciated.
livelovelaugh, I don’t see how the case you are proposing could be made when the Torah specifically states the animals were created before Adam.
On top of that, what you are proposing would also be denied by proponents of the theory of evolution.
And on top of all that, much of the “science” of three generations ago is now considered fiction having been overturned. Similarly, much of these theories you’re trying to reconcile with the Torah will be considered fiction in three generations from now, having been overturned by even newer “science”.
When you have some free time, read through the first post in the following thread:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/all-science-and-astronomy-comes-from-the-torah
“It claims human and apes share a common descent. Does that sound like anything less than kefira to you?”
It is only kefira if you deny that HaShem was in charge of the process.
“Adam was the common ancestor of the animals the Torah specifically says were created before Adam?”
Jews have never insisted on literal interpretations of Torah or Rabbinic narratives. That is a Christian thing. To insist on such is asur because of chukat hagoyim.
Charlie, you can’t just rewrite whichever parts of the Torah you don’t like and hide behind your claimed licence to interpret it in a non-literal way according to your own whims.
DaasYochid – i agree.
Joseph,
I wrote previously “So my question is, could it be that the “animals” that were created before Adam might not have necessarily resembled the animals that we have today, just like it might be fair to say that we might not really resemble what “people” looked like in the times of Adam and subsequently Og, etc…”
Yes, the Torah says the animals were created before Adam. But there was also a nachash (that we define now as snake) walking on legs. Clearly, it is not certain that the animals that were alive then were exactly the same as the animals that are alive now. They might have been. But in the same way that there Adam was different from present day humans, and Moshe was also huge, and there were giants… Let me put it like this: I very much doubt that Adam and his children looked exactly the way we humans do now. Similarly, perhaps the animals that were created before Adam evolved.
I think I realize how I am being unclear. Let me clarify: I am NOT saying, in ANY way, that the full theory of evolution is correct and should be taken at face value. I don’t necessarily think that humans and monkeys share a common ancestor. What I am asking is whether it is possible that evolution has SOME basis in fact – that maybe Hashem caused some evolution through history – in humans, from Adam and on through the times of giants, etc…, as well as animals from THEIR ancestors (e.g. dinosaurs – a snake walking on legs sounds a lot like a dinosaur to me) and that subsequently, based on the evidence of evolution in various animals and plants that scientists have found, they expounded the theory of evolution and erroneously generalized it to humans sharing ancestors with monkeys.
Also – I think it says Adam’s body was fashioned from dust, dirt, clay, etc…no? As far as I know, the Torah does not expressly say how the animals were created. Perhaps Hashem fashioned an animal that shared some characteristics of the body of Adam and that subsequently evolved into present day primates. Again, only questioning the possibility of it.
LLL: Very knowledgeable people have attempted to reconcile evolutionary history with Chumash. Some have done a better job than others. We have no statement on if all the animals were created at once, so it is possible (see below) to reconcile much of evolution with Chumash if someone is so inclined. I would be very hesitant when it comes to humans, though. The Torah is pretty explicit that Hashem created Adam and Chava at the end of creation, after all of the other life-forms. Even if one tries to reconcile evolution, La’anias Da’ati, it has to end with human beings.
The main problem you run into, though, is time. If you assume that the 6 days of creation were 6 24-hour periods, there just isn’t enough time for any evolution. The idea that it is heretical to believe that those days were longer than 24 hours seems to be quite a minority, though supposedly R’ Elyashiv did say it (and all of the Mekubalim got very angry at him for it). We do, however, find no Rishonim or Achronim (that I know of) that claim that the numbers of the ages and generations given from Adam to Avraham aren’t meant to be taken literally, so the 5776-year clock has to start from Adam according to everyone. I am partial to Gerald Schroeder’s work on this subject. I don’t agree with it personally, but he does a very good job trying to reconcile the ideas of the age of the universe.
For whatever it’s worth (which is not much), I personally see no need to accept evolution of species as the way HKBH created the world. I see no issue with Him creating a world with genetically related species. Basically, the Kashyas of evolution and science on these issues don’t bother me. But for those that they do, I do think that some of the attempts at reconciliation are definitely not Kefirah. They might not be right, but they’re not Kefirah either.
DY: To be fair, R’ Saadyah Gaon can be read as saying exactly just that. It will depend on how far you can extend “Eineinu Ro’os”.
Sam2 -“The main problem you run into, though, is time. If you assume that the 6 days of creation were 6 24-hour periods, there just isn’t enough time for any evolution. The idea that it is heretical to believe that those days were longer than 24 hours seems to be quite a minority, though supposedly R’ Elyashiv did say it”
Why assume that? Maybe the 6 days of creation are 1000 years corresponding to 1 day of Hashem year. 6 days = 6,000 years.
I don’t have a problem with one animal or creature changing form to another, as long that originally they both were created from Hashem.
Sam, Rashi says explicitly that when the Torah says Vayehi Erev Vayehi Voker Yom Echad it means 24 hours, “[the day and night together] – i.e. 24 hours between them”. The Gemorah describes 10 things that were created on the first day of creation, one of which is the “length of the day and night” – as it says, “vayehi erev vayehi voke yom echad”. So the time span of the day was created on the first day of creation. On the fourth day Hashem said the sun should shine during the time-period that was called “day” and the stars/darkness should rule during the time-period called “night”.
The main issue I was trying to resolve is what I wrote here, mentioned above:
“I think I realize how I am being unclear. Let me clarify: I am NOT saying, in ANY way, that the full theory of evolution is correct and should be taken at face value. I don’t necessarily think that humans and monkeys share a common ancestor. What I am asking is whether it is possible that evolution has SOME basis in fact – that maybe Hashem caused some evolution through history – in humans, from Adam and on through the times of giants, etc…, as well as animals from THEIR ancestors (e.g. dinosaurs – a snake walking on legs sounds a lot like a dinosaur to me) and that subsequently, based on the evidence of evolution in various animals and plants that scientists have found, they expounded the theory of evolution and erroneously generalized it to humans sharing ancestors with monkeys.”
Basically, I was not wondering if we share a common ancestor with monkeys. I was wondering if it is possible to posit the idea that we evolved from Adam, who possibly looked different from we do in some ways, and other animals evolved from THEIR ancestors, who might have been different in various ways from the way THEY are now.This would open the door to what we have now, which is the possibility of scientists misconstruing some credible evidence of evolution taking place intra-species as evidence that humans share ancestors with monkeys, which would be inter-species. It appears that there may be basis to say this. I was not out to prove anything. Simply curious. Thanks.
Regarding time, I am also aware of Dr. Gerald Schroeder’s work, albeit not intimately. However, the idea is certainly intriguing to me. I guess I am more partial to naturalistic explanations for creation, carried out through Hashem’s word, than to the simplistic, fantastical ideas taught to every grade school child that things just magically appeared in an instant. I’m NOT denying that Hashem is capable if doing that if he so chose. But it would certainly help to reconcile the otherwise irreconcilable, yet seemingly credible scientific evidence regarding things such as evolution and age of the world.
I don’t know enough about evolution or (l’havdil) the Torah views on evolution to know if it’s complete kefira to believe in any aspect of evolution.
But in terms of the above comments referring to the concept of humans and animals sharing a common ancestor (which I believe is what most people are referring to when they talk about evolution being kefira): The problem with this theory is that humans and animals are two inherently different beings. Humans have a Neshama and are created b’tzelem Elokim. We have intelligence and bechira which animals don’t have. So a human could never have been an animal! Adam Harishon might have looked different than people do today, but he had a neshama from the time He was created and G-d gave him life. And it is part of our beliefs that all humans descend from Adam Harishon.
Sparkly and whoever else is interested: I just did a Google search and I found the book on Amazon.
I was going to post the link, but I think the moderators don’t let. The book is: “Brainwashed – how Universities indoctrinate America’s Youth” by Ben Shapiro. You can find it on Amazon.com
I never read it, but it looks interesting and like something that anyone attending or thinking of attending college should read.
Why do you call everything apikorsus Sam
Joseph, Rashi does not say that or even hint that. He says that it was not called the first day to show that there was only Hashem. In fact, it could not have been a day as we know it as the Sun was not created until the fourth day. Actually, the word “yom” can also mean “time period” (e.g. bayom hahu”). In English we also say things like “in those days”.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.