Science vs Torah. And the winner is....

↑ Ruchel ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 11:52 am

Quote:

So much of the time, the problem is because someone is understanding something literally that is not meant to literal.

I agree.
I didn’t even know some people took some things litterally… neither did my husband who went to Litvish schools…

Quote:

Coming up with elaborate conspiracy theories so you can believe something meant to be non-literal is true is a very strange way to think.

Ditto…

Quote:

When the Torah says that in the time of mosiach, eagles will fly us back to E"Y, do you think it is talking about eagles literally or airplanes (or something similar)?

That I don’t know.

Quote:

My own opinion is that the Torah is Hashem's revelation to us on earth, while science is man's attempt to climb from the earth to discover Hashem. At the moment, these two perspectives have not yet met and there is still a huge gap between the two, obviously because the human mind is finite while Hashem's wisdom is infinite.

True, many scientists try to use science to prove that Hashem does not exist, ch"v, but in actual fact, the higher scientists climb, the more they begin to realize that the world exists by virtue of a Superpower.

↑ Sue DaNym ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 12:17 pm

Kmelion wrote:

Sue DaNym wrote:

hey, ive been respectful of everyone in this thread. there is no reason to insult me.

How is remarking that those of us who believe there is a balance between science and Torah are koferim respectful and not insulting???

I did no such thing. I did ask this about one particular poster who, it seems, takes delight in mocking torah values. but even then, I probably did go too far and will publicly ask for mechila. but that hardly means that I think that any1 and every1 who says that there is a balance between science and torah is a kofer.

↑ Sue DaNym ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 12:20 pm

amother wrote:

Quote:

I never said that everything that exists has to be explicitly stated in the torah. obviously I dont believe that because here I am typing on a computer that isnt explicitly mentioned.

Sue, you're not listening. Hafoch Ba, VeHafoch Ba. D'Kula Ba. Turn it, and turn it over again, for ALL THINGS ARE IN IT.
Everything is in the Torah. Everything. You just have to know how to look.
If you don't know or don't believe that about the Torah, then nothing you say about the Torah and how it is to be understood, makes any sense.

but that doesnt mean that they are lying there on the surface. many things that are in the torah are there hidden, in the form of acrostics or other codes. just as computers are there hidden so are the dodos.

↑ Sue DaNym ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 1:53 pm

catonmylap wrote:

It is dishonest to represent the opinion of one Achachon on a non-halachic issue as "the Torah" says. The Torah is infallible, the human beings who learn it are not.

and yet it was still given at har sinai (as was anything that any worthy student would say). did hashem give mistaken information to moshe?

Quote:

If you learn the minchas chinuch and say THIS is the Torah, you are not mikayam the mitzvah of talmud torah. BUT if you say, this is one interpetation/one view of the mitzvot, then you are.

of course the minchas hachinuch is not the torah. but it is a part of it.

↑ TammyTammy ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 3:27 pm

Sue DaNym wrote:

tammy,

again, I dont have to justify the "scienteists" findings. they say that the dodos are extinct, but the torah says they arent. therefore, they arent. just bcuz they cant find them doesnt mean that theyre not out there. the same goes for the passenger pigeon, mammoth and all the other animals that u mentioned.

Ah... the "I don't know where they are, but they must be out there somewhere" shtick.

Well, two can play this game too. I know that the Invisible Pink Unicorn is out there too. Really, I insist that it is. Where is it? You can't find it? Well, I don't have to justify your findings... I say it's out there.

Quote:

why is it so difficult for you to simply trust the torah? if you truly, really beleive that the torah is true why do you fight it at every step. I get the feelings from your writings that if the torah said that the sun rises in the east, you wouldnt believe it unless scientists also confirmed it. but thats such a sad thing to see. it shows that a woman who otherwise claims to follow the torah really doesnt have emunah in it unless it can be proven independently. well, I have emunah. I dont need any proofs. if the torah tells me that no animal goes extinct, then thats all I need. if the torah tells me that eretz yisroel is the highest land, then thats all I need. if the torah tells me that the sun and stars go around the earth, then thats all I need. and if the torah tells me that people never walked on the moon, then thats good enough for me.

I'm glad that that's good enough for you. I suppose that we can disagree over whether Rashi's statement that EY is the highest land (assuming we mean physically, of course) is truly Torah (meaning the product of some mesorah that he received from his rebbe) or something that he wrote to try to explain the pasuk, which may or may not be factual.

Quote:

the torah says lo sasur yamin usmoel. rashi says that it means that even if the chachamim tell you that left is right and right is left, you have to believe them. I find it sad that you give more trust to unproven "scientific facts" then the statements of the torah.

So, you're telling me that if it's daylight outside and a chacham were to tell me (for whatever reason) that it's actually night, I should go home and get ready for bed? Because what you're saying here is that chachamim literally define reality -- a notion that I have to reject outright. HaShem controls objective reality -- not the chachamim. If they tell me that left is right, then they're plain wrong (at least on a purely literal level). I know I'm going to get another "I'm shocked..." from Motek and you, but that's the way it is.

Tammy

↑ TammyTammy ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 3:39 pm

Motek wrote:

TammyTammy wrote:

Saying that Rashi was fallible is not "besmirching" him... it's admitting that he was human. Heck, Moshe Rabbeinu himself made mistakes, so why couldn't Rashi? So, no, I wasn't insulting Rashi... just pointing out that it's possible for him to be wrong... just like every other human being in history.

In the world of Torah scholars for the past many centuries, Rashi has been studied with the assumption that every word of it is true. And yes, they were well aware that the Rishonim disagreed with one another and nevertheless, every word of a Rishon is considered holy.

Certainly that's not literally true that Rashi was considered infallable. After all, Rashi even darshens a letter that doesn't exist in our Torahs. That means that either Rashi had a different Torah than we have or that he made a mistake. I'm inclined to think the latter.

Quote:

and I don't see what the axis has to do with how one views the earth and what is on top

It's very simple. Take one of your kids rubber balls and mark a point somewhere on the ball (to represent Eretz Yisroel). Now put your fingers on opposite ends of the ball (to simulate the earth's axis); but don't do so where the dot is (since EY does not lie on the earth's axis -- the poles do). When you do so, make sure the dot is on top. (To do this, you'll have to hold the ball at a tilt... just as the Earth is tilted).

Now turn the ball. You'll soon see that your dot (Eretz Yisroel) is no longer "on top."

Hence, you cannot say that EY is at "the top" since the only places that can remain "on top" all the time are the poles (either one... since there is no "up" or "down" in space).

Tammy

hadasa ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 4:18 pm

Tammy - that's if you take for granted that the earth revolves at all! But if it is the sun that goes around the earth...than what does it matter where you consider the "top"?

Concerning dinosaurs - the Lubavitcher Rebbe wrote several letters on this topic. Basically, he says that there is no way of knowing how a certain material will react in extreme conditions of weather, temperature, atmospheric pressure, etc. All the scientists have observed is under current conditions. So it is possible that under extreme conditions, certain things can, in a relatively short time, undergo changes to make it seem that they are millions of years old. The Rebbe, as far as I have seen, does not explicitly mention the Mabul, but it is possible that that is what he means, or maybe some other period before the Mabul.

You may disagree, but I defer to the Lubavitcher Rebbe's superior knowledge of both Torah and (Lehavdil) science.

Tammy - do you believe the Mabul happened? Krias Yam Suf? Matan Torah? Shemesh BeGiveon?
All these things contradict science, which says such things cannot happen. Yet the Torah says they did. Do you not take these things literally, either, CH"V?

↑ HindaRochel ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 4:30 pm

There is no top in space except in relationship to something else.
We call the "North" the top, but this isn't scientifically accurate.

The earth is currently tilted towards the sun during the northern summer and away from it during the winter (with the northern most point currently pointing at Polaris. That will change over time, so the earth will point at Vega, but that is thousands of years into the future.)

One could as easily claim as top the point that is "closest" or pointed most directly at the sun.

One could also claim that we should draw a line throgh the earth so that the line is perpindcular to a line through the sun that reaches the earth, assertingone point the TOP. This wouldn't be at the poles.

We could claim that the top of the earth is the point that is directed toward the center of the universe. I don't know that we know where that is yet.

In any case, I do not think the "top" of the earth is, necessarily, a physical place, but a spiritual place.

There is no fight between science and G-d. Hashem created science. Hashem set the rules in motion. Science, and what science discovers through careful investigation reveals the hidden laws of nature that G-d set in motion. There is no conflict. That some scientist and some religious people see a problem is neither the fault of science nor Torah. It is the fault of people.

↑ TammyTammy ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 4:48 pm

hadasa wrote:

Tammy - that's if you take for granted that the earth revolves at all! But if it is the sun that goes around the earth...than what does it matter where you consider the "top"?

I was assuming that Motek agrees that the Earth rotates (you did mean "rotates" not "revolves," right? The earth rotation causes day and not, not its revolution).

Quote:

Concerning dinosaurs - the Lubavitcher Rebbe wrote several letters on this topic. Basically, he says that there is no way of knowing how a certain material will react in extreme conditions of weather, temperature, atmospheric pressure, etc. All the scientists have observed is under current conditions. So it is possible that under extreme conditions, certain things can, in a relatively short time, undergo changes to make it seem that they are millions of years old. The Rebbe, as far as I have seen, does not explicitly mention the Mabul, but it is possible that that is what he means, or maybe some other period before the Mabul.

You may disagree, but I defer to the Lubavitcher Rebbe's superior knowledge of both Torah and (Lehavdil) science.

Was the moon buried in the Mabul as well? Moon rocks have been dated to billions of years.

Quote:

Tammy - do you believe the Mabul happened? Krias Yam Suf? Matan Torah? Shemesh BeGiveon?
All these things contradict science, which says such things cannot happen. Yet the Torah says they did. Do you not take these things literally, either, CH"V?

Yes, I believe that these things happened. And I'll tell you the difference.

Krias Yam Suf was a miracle. It was a suspension of the laws of nature as we know it for a brief period of time, which allowed a remarkable supernatural event to occur.

But that's not what we are discussing here. We're discussing the very nature of the permenant earth. Whether or not EY is higher than Mt. Everest has nothing to do with a miraculous occurrence. Whether or not dodos are extinct or not has nothing to do with miracles -- either nature allows animals to become extinct or it doesn't.

I can accept a short suspension of nature for a miraculous event to happen. But stating that the permanent nature of nature (heh) is not as we observe it is something else and much harder to swallow.

Tammy

↑ Motek ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 8:29 pm

Kmelion wrote:

When there are 2,3, 4, 10 different opinions on what a passage means, never mind their scientific theories, how can they all be true?

Regarding statements in the Talmud, Chazal say, "eilu v'eilu divrei Elokim chayim" - these and these are the words of the living G-d. Do you accept this statement of Chazal?

Quote:

What we're saying is that given the limited scientific knowledge of their times, their conclusions were incorrect.

Do you say the same thing about statements in the Oral Torah (I.e. Mishna and Gemara) that parts of it are incorrect?

↑ Motek ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 8:34 pm

catonmylap wrote:

Rashi is a commentator, not the Torah itself

Are you required to recite the Torah brachos before learning Rashi?

catonmylap wrote:

If you learn the minchas chinuch and say THIS is the Torah, you are not mikayam the mitzvah of talmud torah.

Is that your own chidush?

By the way, this argument is ridiculous since no Torah scholar takes one commentary and says THIS is the Torah.

Quote:

you will find conflicts in what they say because they were humans.

Again, no Torah scholar until recent years has had the audacity to make such statements. Who are you quoting?

Am I correct in that those posters who think Chazal made mistakes and that Rishonim's commentaries contain errors are Modern Orthodox? Kmelion-Tammy-Hinda-Rochel-catonmylap?

Quote:

Our whole Halacha system is based on not taking things literally, and eye for an eye, having hot food on shabbos etc.

The whole system? Nothing is literal? Have you made a study and determined this?

Quote:

When the Torah says that in the time of mosiach, eagles will fly us back to E"Y, do you think it is talking about eagles literally or airplanes (or something similar)?

What difference does it make? What did your ancestors, up until very recently, think it meant?

↑ Motek ↓

Thu, Sep 06 2007, 8:38 pm

Sue DaNym wrote:

its in the minchas hachinuch.

When you can tell precisely where in that sefer it is, it's a source that can be verified. Until then, it's useless.

TammyTammy wrote:

Certainly that's not literally true that Rashi was considered infallable.

Nobody referred to Rashi or any Rishon as infallible. The issue at hand is their commentaries and I repeat: In the world of Torah scholars for the past many centuries, Rashi has been studied with the assumption that every word of it is true. And yes, they were well aware that the Rishonim disagreed with one another and nevertheless, every word of a Rishon is considered holy. Do you deny this statement or do you think the thousands of Torah scholars of the past many centuries were wasting their time analyzing the wording in a Rishon's commentary?

TammyTammy wrote:

Krias Yam Suf was a miracle. It was a suspension of the laws of nature as we know it for a brief period of time, which allowed a remarkable supernatural event to occur.

How do you understand the mabul - for a year, the heavenly bodies did not operate. How do you understand the sun standing still for Moshe and for Yehoshua - what happened with the other heavenly bodies in relation to the sun when it stood still?

HindaRochel wrote:

There is no top in space except in relationship to something else.

Right, and this is something we do for our convenience (to make sense of certain things) and does not reflect what is actually the case which is that nothing can be determined one way or the other. Ditto for the earth revolving around the sun or vice versa - both have equal scientific validity.