Science and Torah conflicts
a) don't exist because scientists are just atheists out to disprove Torah
b) don't exist because nishtanu hateva
c) don't exist because science simply hasn't caught up with Chazal yet
d) are something we shouldn't think about. Taiku
e) must be resolved because we can't ignore science
f) Leave this question out of my results
Ahhh.... Home, sweet home. (A) is false. I'm willing to accept (b) in some cases, but I'd sooner throw out the whole Torah (for rational, not emotional, reasons) than believe it in others. In the absence of evidence in favour of (c), I see no reason to believe it. (D) may satisfy some people, but it's not acceptable to me: why should I accept evidence that the Torah is true, but ignore evidence that indicates otherwise? That seems dumb. (Note: I am not saying that I believe that science indicates that the Torah is false; it is this option - (d) - that seems to imply that.) I chose (e). However, I don't really like the way it's worded. I don't think that every apparent Torah-science "contradiction" has to be resolved; it may be acceptable in some cases to say "Taiku," as per (d). I'm comfortable with a thoughtful investigation leading to what one considers a rational "Taiku." I'm not comfortable - for the reason I supplied - with (d)'s suggestion that we must not engage in the thoughtful investigation in the first place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment