Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Torah vs. Science Clashes?'s all Semantics!

guest post by A12.
mined and truncated by the Bray of Fundie

...and comment mining begets more comment mining. This one is causing me some major cognitive dissonance. It seems (I emphasize seems) to provide a sober dispassionate argument for believing in BOTH Science and Torah.

...First - It makes no sense to hate science. That is like saying that you hate screwdrivers, calculators,....Science is a tool. dislike science because (some) of the findings made by using science do not square with a literal reading of the Torah. However, you are posting your comments using a computer: the product of the use of science. I'm sure you consult with your physician and take prescribed medications for illnesses: again, science. ....It would appear that there is much, where science and its findings are concerned *not* to hate - yet you make a blanket statement that you "hate" it.

Second -...If you're balancing your finances monthly, paper, pen, and calculator in hand - or spreadsheet program - and you crunch the numbers and they tell you that things will be tight - or you don't have enough to cover all of your expenses - do you hate your calculators or spreadsheets because you do not like the outcome they are giving you? (as a matter of fact I do. everything is personal) That's what you are doing to science. Science is based on the data, and it gives the outcome it has to, just like your calculator - and it doesn't do so for any nefarious version, it doesn't try to make you mad, it's just where the data leads it. ...

Fourth (sic, this is third..or did I lose count?)-Why is science "hated" for giving outcomes different from the literal words of the Torah, when other discrepancies are overlooked? For example - isn't a fish considered halachically dead once it is taken out of the water? However, we all know that if you put the fish back in soon enough, it swims away, perfectly alive. We also know that if someone cooks a brisket in a pot, wash it thoroughly and then cook potatoes in the pot, the potatoes have the status of meat. However, a person looking at the potato - who didn't know the pot's status - would not consider the potato to be meat, they would consider it a potato. ...So, my question to you is why is it different when it comes to science?If science looks at the world and says the earth is 4.5 billion years old, why can't it be 4.5 billion years old the way a fish plucked out of the water and then put back was still alive, even though it was halachically dead before? If science finds that humans evolved, why can't that be acceptable, just as it is not offensive to anyone that a potato is still biologically a root vegetable, but takes on the status of meat after being cooked in a meat pot? Why can't it be that, just as a fish is halachically dead, but not scientifically dead, they earth is halachically 6000 years old, but not scientifically 6000 years old? That halachically humans were made from the dust of the ground, but scientifically, humans evolved? Fish swimming away after being caught and potatoes remaining potatoes after being cooked in meat pots don't raise anyone's ire and don't seem to contradict Torah . . . but that is another facet of science presenting things one way and Torah/halacha presenting it another. If you can be okay with one and find nothing offensive about it, why not the same for the other?

Whole comment here

Celebrate Passover 2009 with Magnificent Passover Gift Baskets from Oh Nuts.

No comments: