/lit/ - Literature

>>3275122
I'm not going to say Biologists aren't real scientists. They've collected a group of observable evidence and made a theory out of it. Are you going to call geologists non real scientists because they believe in the theory of tectonic plates?

>>3275101
>Life being created a few thousand years ago wouldn't account for the vast amounts of allele...generation that has happened.
See:
>>3275022

I mean, we believe the Arabs all came from one man (Ishmael) who had a lot of kids who also had a lot of kids.

>>It wouldn't be a suitable explanation for the diversity of life both in macro- and micro-evolutionary scale. "A few thousand years" would directly contradict all supporting evidence (carbon dating, genome mapping, etc) for evolutionary occurrences, things like the late precambrian diaspora and the human genome bottleneck roughly hypothesized about 100,000 years ago.
G-d created all this diverse life in its current state. Again, pretend a man pops out of no where one day and he goes to the doctor. The doctor says, "What's your age?" The man says, "I am one day old." The doctor replies, "One day old? From what I'm seeing, you'd have to at least be 20 years old." The man is telling how the doctor how old he really is and the doctor is telling the man how old he appears to be.

>If the earth is only a few thousand years old, the theory of natural selection as we understand it today is almost entirely incorrect.
G-d has the ability to create anything half way or partially into its life. He doesn't have to start it from scratch. Stop thinking on such narrow grounds, this is G-d we're talking about. He can create an infinitely complex universe in zero time.

>>3275062
>some dead Jew on a stick
>G-d
Nope.

>>3275077
Continuing on this, even if the evolutionary theory said that the Earth appears to be millions of years old (and this is not evident within the theory itself), it is still only based on an appearance. This isn't first hand proof, this is an extrapolation of observable phenomenon. It's like saying Nihilists are crazy when some say, "We're all part of some child's video game!"

>>3275052
>Yes, great, I understand that, but it would directly contradict evolutionary theory because one of the most fundamental, basic points of evolutionary theory is that the earth is several million years old.
No, the basic points of evolutionary theory is that animals are not static creatures that stay the same forever, that they evolve. The evolutionary theory does not make any claim on how old the Earth is or when life began. Now, people who accept the theory may use evidence of fossils to make evolutionary trees and such, but there is no necessity to claim that the Earth is billions of years old. However, a biologist might say something along the lines of "Based on the data that we have, this species popped up around 100k and 500k years ago." The Biologist is saying, based on the data he has and based on the scientific evidence, that the species appears to be X years old. No scientist however today has lived before the 19th century.

>>3274943
I was thinking more along the lines of:

"Dearest ______,

Your beauty and intellect is so sharp that it's even edgier than the post I am replying to. I hope I don't cut myself by accident.

ModernOrthodox Jew"

>>3275000
Oh wait, let me expound on this with the alleles.

People fuck a lot in the Torah. I mean, a lot. In a few hundred years, Jacob fathers a nation of over 2 million people. Even Genghis Khan only has about 1.6 million direct descendants. Again, is it insanely implausable? That's for you to decide, but it isn't impossible.

http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/238,162/How-does-Judaisms-claim-that-the-world-is-about-5-700-yea
rs-old-coincide-with-science.html

>>3274967
Yes it would. G-d created such a diverse Earth becomes he's infinite.

>>3274970
What in the world are you talking about? I'm not trolling, I just don't seem the contradiction. The ridiculous of it, I can see? But the contradiction? G-d, being an All Powerful being can create what ever He wants in what ever stage of its life.

>>3274925
>This would directly contradict the modern synthesis of evolutionary theory because of its emphasis on the rate of mutation and adaptation across millions of years, not to mention it would completely deny the connection between chemical evolution and life processes, so no, they can't both be true, at least not how you mean it.

Why? G-d created the Earth at a certain point in its natural lifespan just as G-d created Adam at a certain point in his life span. G-d also created animals at a certain point in their evolutionary chain. Does it sound ridiculous? That's for you to decide, but is it contradictory? Nein.

No, but maybe I should start. It's hard finding a frum girl to marry.

Why can't evolution and Torah both be true? Is it really impossible to believe that the Earth was created a few thousand years ago in its current state? I mean, Adam was created as a full grown man, but that doesn't mean we can't believe in human birth and childhood.

>>3274890
Well, the episode was very Israeli like. The show itself is called The League I think.

>>3274867
I just remembered this episode of "The Sukkah," where someone wants to get their kid into a big Jewish school, so he throws a Sukkot party and invites the vice principle over and one of the shenanigans prone characters brings over 4 huge marijuana pants for the blessing and hours of Jewish music in case the party got crazy.

It's kind of like "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia," but Israeli.

>>3274865
Well they did have some funky incense lit up nearby, haha. But the point is that G-d can create a paradox in reality that we could not possibly understand.

>>3274857
23/2, not 30/7. Derp.

>>3274829
I'm not saying that there cannot be contradictions in logic, I'm saying that there are no seeable contradictions unless you would like to present them to me. There's a story from our sages about a physics contradiction. In the Holy of Holies (think the center room for the Temple) the dimensions were that of a rectangle with one wall (west wall I think) being 30 cubits. Standing smack in the middle of one of the walls was the ark of the covenant. Now, the wall itself measured 30 cubits, and the ark was about 7 cubits long. So how much space do you think was between ark and both sides of the wall? 15 cubits left and 8 cubits right? 30/7 cubits for each side? Nope, it was 15 cubits each. You see, everyone could see that the Ark took up space, but when they measured the space between each of its long side to the end of the wall, they found out that it took up zero space. It was impossible because their eyes saw one thing and the measuring ruler showed another.

>>3274783
Moses did write down the Torah, that is true. However, he was divinely inspired by G-d to write it and the proof behind that is not definitive. It's still a religion, you still have to have faith. However, I won't explain it here, but there is a decent (I'm meh on it) argument for a rational basis for Judaism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEg_Oys4NkA

>>3274772
Show me such contradictions. Is not the burden of proof on you (or whoever posted the picture) to prove that Torah has contradictions that you see as intentional? The truth is that the Torah does not lie to us with two conflicting statements. Are they confusing? Certainly, but are they contradictory, I see no reason to think so. Sure, Rashi might have been stumped on Genesis 1:1, but that doesn't mean that it's a contradiction. Especially when Rambam walked in and resolved Rashi's problem.

>>3274762
On top of that, isn't the burden of proof on you? The original person proposed that the Bible (of which I guess he includes Torah) has contradictions and he uses very poor translations to show this. It would seem like you'd have to prove to me that there are contradictions in the Torah and not turn it around and say, "Why would you believe that there can't be intentional contradictions," without showing me a single example or piece of evidence.

>>3274715
>studying the Zohar
>believing in some shit made up by Spanish Rabbis
ISHYGDDT

Seriously though, the Talmud is one of the few documents accepted by virtually every Jewish community after the canonization of the Tanakh.

>>3274725
They appear to be contradictions, maybe; but, G-d's Torah is perfect. It's a manifestation that is completely transparent. It does not have a flaw.

>>3274710
I'm opposed to the silly idea that the Zohar was a secret teaching passed down by Moses and received by G-d, that Ha'Ari HaKodosh was a prophet, et cetera. Does that mean I oppose biblical exegesis beyond the literal level? Of course not, but for the Kabbalah is silly. Some of its really, really basic stuff is just logical statements given a "spiritual" meaning, but beyond it I refuse.

>>3274670
>being a hasid
>believing in kabbalah nonsense

Rabbi Yitzchak ben Sheshet Perfet (The Rivash), 1326-1408; he stated that Kabbalah was "worse than Christianity", as it made God into 10, not just into three.

>>3274656
Correct in what? A canonization doesn't mean that those books are divinely authoritative. Everything must go back to Torah and everything else, everything else is commentary. Even what the prophets wrote down cannot add, subtract, or anything in Torah. It can only... how do I say this, restate what is said in Torah. How do I know if the Anshei Knesset HaGedolah was correct in its authority? Well it was an assembly that lasted 200 years that was made up of over 120 scribes, sages, and prophets. This was really a collective assembly that was settled collectively. It is universally accepted to Jews across the world (except maybe the Karaites that popped up around the 7th century, but I'm not too sure on that).

>>3274628
Yes he did.

>>3274629
Yep.