Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: VadeRetro; Junior; longshadow; RadioAstronomer; Doctor Stochastic; js1138; Shryke; RightWhale; ...
Evolution Ping

The List-O-Links
A conservative, pro-evolution science list, now with over 390 names.
See the list's explanation, then FReepmail to be added or dropped.
To assist beginners: But it's "just a theory", Evo-Troll's Toolkit,
and How to argue against a scientific theory.

3 posted on 09/18/2006 1:53:00 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Where are the anachronistic fossils? Where are the moderate creationists?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: PatrickHenry

Interesting article saw on this issue from the Orthodox Jewish perspective:

How does Judaism's claim that the world is roughly 5,700 years old coincide with science?

by Mrs. Sarah Levi

Torah and science can never contradict each other, because two truths cannot be contradictory. When we find an apparent contradiction between the two, it is generally due to a misunderstanding regarding what one is saying.
Science cannot really prove the age of the universe. All that scientists can do is speculate about the age of the universe by extrapolating from observed phenomena. No scientist alive today can say that he or she has first-hand information regarding the beginning of the universe.

The Torah tells us how old the universe is.

Science tells us how old the universe seems to be.


The scientist that does not believe in G-d has no reason to assume that the age of the world is different than what it appears to be To give a simple example: how old was Adam when he was first created? Was he a baby? Young man? Old man?

Our sages tell us that he had the body and maturity of a 20-year-old man. Now, let us imagine Adam going for a medical exam a day after he was created. The doctor asks for his age and he answers: “one day”. “You must be kidding me,” she would reply. “You seem to be at least 20 years old!”

They are both right. Adam is saying how old he really is, while the doctor is estimating his age based on “scientific proof.”

The scientist that does not believe in G-d has no reason to assume that the age of the world is different than what it appears to be. The one who believes in G-d, however, can perfectly accept the fact that the world was created in a mature state and therefore does not contradict the fact that it is really younger than it seems to be.


31 posted on 09/18/2006 2:04:29 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan (Kol Hakavod Lezahal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: PatrickHenry
An interesting article, but it should be noted that it's not really an argument as to why evolution should be accepted. It should be accepted because the evidence points toward it, not because of its consequences.

Saying otherwise is really just the flip side of "evolution leads to Naziism, yada yada..."

48 posted on 09/18/2006 2:11:30 PM PDT by Quark2005 ("Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs." -Matthew 7:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: PatrickHenry

Thanks for the ping!


280 posted on 09/19/2006 9:51:24 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson