tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post111081439289956011..comments2023-10-30T08:40:59.016-04:00Comments on Wolfish Musings: On Evolution, Gallileo and LilliputBrooklynWolfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-1110926026240793372005-03-15T17:33:00.000-05:002005-03-15T17:33:00.000-05:00Again, Enigma, thank you for your thoughtful reply...Again, Enigma, thank you for your thoughtful reply.<BR/><BR/>I believe (and I'll freely admit, without empirical evidence) that where Beraishis and modern science conflict, it's only because we have an imperfect understand of one or both of them. The Torah seems to say that the world is 5765 years old while modern cosmology says that the universe is 15 billion years old? Then we are obviously understanding modern cosmology wrong, or we are understanding Beraishis wrong. Both cannot be true (setting aside Dr. Schroder's book). <BR/><BR/>Likewise, if the Torah tells us that a flood destroyed all life and modern geology tells us that a worldwide flood could not have occured as laid out in Beraishis, then we simply have a misunderstanding of one or the other, or possibly both. In the end, if the question is unresolved in my lifetime, that's fine too - I already know that I'm not going to get all the answers in life that I seek. I fully believe (again, freely admitted without empirical evidence) that one day there will be a discovery (whether in science or in Torah [provided that independent thought in Torah is not strangled -- but that's another argument for another day) that will reconcile the two.<BR/><BR/>IOW, I don't think that one must (indeed, I don't think one can) interpret Beraishis completely 100% literally - especially in light of scientific discoveries. I believe that the Torah can be interpreted on multiple levels and does not have to be 100% literally true to have valid meaning to us as Jews, even in today's world.<BR/><BR/>The WolfBrooklynWolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-1110911443482762562005-03-15T13:30:00.000-05:002005-03-15T13:30:00.000-05:00Thank you for your reply, Enigma.Granted, that thi...Thank you for your reply, Enigma.<BR/><BR/>Granted, that this matter is of supreme importance, but you've missed one small detail from my post... namely that I accept that there is a Creator. Naturally, if one is going to deny that there is a Creator, then there is nothing much else to discuss - the Torah is the work of men and the mitzvos are an arbitrary set of rules imposesd on us by our fellow man.<BR/><BR/>My arguement wasn't that Genesis is an outright falsehood, but that rather it can (and perhaps must) be brought into line with modern, rational thinking. Man once believed that the sun revolved around the earth - until Copernicus this was more or less established fact, and some would cite Biblical support for such a position. The fact that we now no different doesn't mean that the Bible is false or that there is no Creator - it means simply that we now have a better understanding of the way God set the universe up. So, in the end, *providing that one accepts God to begin with* whether He brought full blown bears into the world or whether He had them evolve from lesser creatures is certainly an interesting debate, but really misses the point of Beraishis altogether.<BR/><BR/>The problem really comes into play when one views the Torah as literal, absolute, scientific fact. The Torah is many things, but a science text is not one of them.<BR/><BR/>The WolfBrooklynWolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.com