Post by Cloud Hobbit
On Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 11:14:10 AM UTC-7, Kurt Nicklas
Post by Kurt Nicklas Post by email@example.com
On Mon, 17 Apr 2017 23:16:45 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno
Post by Joe Bruno
faith in another's ability.
He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
Thing about this one is if you have faith in one you must have
faith in them all. Your christian god is also the jewish god is
also the muslim god is also the greek gods is also every god
has ever existed is also the belief in any and every mythological
and fictional creature that has ever existed
Why would you make such silly claims as this?
Don't you realize how it makes you sound like an idiot?
That idiot still thinks I'm a Christian? He has the IQ of a carrot.
If you talk like a Christian, act like a Christian, chances are
people will tink you are a Christian.
You are the only person I have ever heard of who is both Jewish and
anti-evolution, aside from Ben Stein.
The Rabbinical Council of America (RCA) has "maintained that
evolutionary theory, properly understood, is not incompatible with
belief in a Divine Creator, nor with the first 2 chapters of
Genesis." Prominent Orthodox rabbis who have affirmed that the
world is older, and that life has evolved over time include Israel
Lipschitz, Sholom Mordechai Schwadron (the
MaHaRSHaM) (1835–1911), Zvi Hirsch Chajes (1805–1855) and Abraham
Isaac Kook (1865–1935). These rabbis proposed their own versions of
theistic evolution, in which the world is older, and that life does
evolve over time in accord with natural law, painting natural law as
the process by which God drives the world.
Many Conservative Rabbis embrace the term theistic evolution, and
reject the term intelligent design. Conservative
rabbis who use the term intelligent design in their sermons often
distinguish their views from the Christian use of the term. Like
in the scientific community, they understand "intelligent design" to
be a technique by Christians to insert religion into public schools,
as admitted in the Intelligent design movement's "wedge strategy".
The Central Conference of American Rabbis is opposed to the teaching
of creationism in public schools, as is the Rabbinical
Conservative Judaism strongly supports the use of science as the
proper way to learn about the physical world in which we live, and
thus encourages its adherents to find a way to understand evolution
in a way that does not contradict the findings of scientific
research. The tension between accepting God's role in the world and
the findings of science, however, is not resolved, and a wide array
of views exists. Some mainstream examples of Conservative Jewish
Professor Ismar Schorsch, former chancellor of the Jewish
The Torah's story of creation is not intended as a scientific
treatise, worthy of equal time with Darwin's theory of evolution in
the curriculum of our public schools. The notes it strikes in its
sparse and majestic narrative offer us an orientation to the Torah's
entire religious worldview and value system. Creation is taken up
first not because the subject has chronological priority but rather
to ground basic religious beliefs in the very nature of things. And
would argue that their power is quite independent of the scientific
context in which they were first enunciated.
Rabbi David J. Fine, who has authorized official responsa for the
Conservative movement's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards,
Conservative Judaism has always been premised on the total
embrace of critical inquiry and science. More than being compatible
with Conservative Judaism, I would say that it is a mitzvah to learn
about the world and the way it works to the best of our abilities,
since that is to marvel with awe at God's handiwork. To not do so is
But here's where the real question lies. Did God create the
world, or not? Is it God's handiwork? Many of the people who accept
evolution, even many scientists, believe in what is called "theistic
evolution," that is, that behind the billions of years of cosmic and
biological evolution, there is room for belief in a creator, God,
set everything into motion, and who stands outside the universe as
the cause and reason for life. The difference between that and
"intelligent design" is subtle yet significant. Believing scientists
claim that belief in God is not incompatible with studying evolution
since science looks only for the natural explanations for phenomena.
The proponents of intelligent design, on the other hand, deny the
ability to explain life on earth through solely natural
That difference, while subtle, is determinative.
David J. Fine, Intelligent Design
...the Jewish view on the first set of questions is much closer
to the picture painted by adherents to intelligent design than to
those who are strict Darwinians. Judaism, as a religion, and
certainly Conservative Judaism, sees creation as a purposeful
directed by God, however each individual defines the Divine. This is
clearly in consonance with the theory of Intelligent Design. What
Darwin sees as random, we see as the miraculous and natural
of God’s subtle and beautiful plan.
...However, as unlikely as it may seem, this does not mean for
one moment that Judaism’s view rejects wholesale the veracity of
Darwin’s theory. In fact, I believe that it is easy to incorporate
Darwin and Intelligent design into a meaningful conception of how we
humans came into being...
We have frameworks built into our system to integrate the
findings of science into our religious and theological beliefs. That
is because we believe that the natural world, and the way it works,
was created by God and therefore its workings must be consistent
our religious beliefs.
...One of the most well known ways our tradition has been able
hold onto both the scientific theory of evolution as well as the
concept of a purposeful creation was by reading the creation story
Genesis in a more allegorical sense. One famous medieval commentary
proclaims that the days of creation, as outlined in the book of
Bereshit, could be seen as representative of the stages of creation
and not literal 24 hour periods. Thus each Biblical day could have
accounted for thousands or even millions of years. In that way the
progression according to both evolution and the Torah remains
essentially the same: first the elements were created, then the
waters, the plants, the animals, and finally us. Therefore, Genesis
and Darwin can both be right in a factual analysis even while we
acknowledge that our attitudes towards these shared facts are shaped
much more strongly by the Torah – we agree how the process unfolded
but disagree that it was random.
It doesn't matter to me what you believe, I'm more interested in the
stupid shit you say and why you choose to look like an idiot.