Darwin’s Jews

Jewish Week ^ | 23 Feb 06 | David Klinghoffer

[Doctor Stochastic]

I was unaware that Maimonides actually discussed evolutionary theory or mentioned Darwin. Perhaps someone could consult the orignal Arabic.

[narby]

The media always tries to make mischief for the Church on these issues.

The church can only make trouble for itself. As it stands, the Catholic church has no problem with evolution, so, there's no problem. Should they change their mind, there's a problem.

Why not just leave it alone? There are plenty of more urgent concerns at the moment.

Good point. And if the rest of the Christian denominations would decide the same as the Catholic church, then the conflict between faith and science is over.

Unfortunatly, some people make money from the conflict, so the problem is likely not going away.

[muir_redwoods]

That's it? A bunch of subjective opinions about the work of people whose work they are not fit, educated or capable of judging? That's the list?

Wow, for this they need to be in an institute. The ID-iot Institute.

[Bogie]

it's It's really all about cult tactics and mind control.

Remember Jonestown?

[longshadow]

from the article:

"In 1965 the Bell lab scientists Penzias and Wilson showed how the detection of cosmic background radiation, left over from the Big Bang, proved the universe was finite ....."

Details can be troublesome things. BBT is compatible with either a spatially finite or infinite Universe.

[narby]

It's really all about cult tactics and mind control.

I think you're actually pretty close to the truth.

By preaching a doctrine so far away from reality, it filters into the congregation only a certain type of mindset. A mindset that's easy to control, that will believe anything said from a pulpit. A congregation that can be told to send money, and they'll send money.

[Anti-Bubba182]

"In his “Guide of the Perplexed,” Maimonides wrote that combating the Darwinism equivalent of his day was the highest calling of a Jew.."

I don't think so:

Maimonides

"Moshe ben Maimon (March 30, 1135–December 13, 1204) was a Jewish rabbi, physician, and philosopher...."

[Doctor Stochastic]

Well, no one accused the author of the article of being scientifically literate. Perhaps he should have stayed on topics such as Why the Jews Rejected Jesus.

[Doctor Stochastic]

An untimely anachronism. Not unlike the music in the awful remake of "Moulin Rouge."

[Radix]

 

"So why should you care? Because Darwinism, if accepted, makes any meaningful Judaism intellectually untenable."

 

The more I read, the more I was inclined to comment on phrases which I disagreed with, or felt were worthy of critique.

 

I might as well write my own column.

 

What a bunch of BS!

[Coyoteman]

Can't you see that Science today is a self-interested guild structure? That its primary purpose is to take money from taxpayers? That it has a hierarchy and rules of behavior designed to protect the group? That it is bent on profit maximization?

No. No. No. and No.

Do you actually know any real scientists? I am one, and I don't see your version of this at all.

[narby]

I am very much pro-knowledge, but I will oppose any guild that turns into a dishonest...

Jim Jones. Ame Simple McPerson. Marjoe. Oral Roberts. Jim & Tammy Fae Bakker.

tax-grubbing,

Non Profit, tax exempt, "churches".

self-interested,

Discovery Institute.

high-handed and arrogant den of thieves.

Tear jerking beggars for Jesus on TV wanting my money for the "poor", who will only see a fraction of what people send.

On the other hand, we can both recognize that most scientists actually do want to discover new knowledge, and most Christians are just interested in pleasing God.

Demonizing entire groups doesn't solve the evolution issue one way or another.

[jocon307]

self ping for later

[Doctor Stochastic]

Doing science is much like playing football or playing a musical instrument. It takes study and practice.

[Cicero]

If you check the comments I was replying to, I was speaking about the Catholic Church and Limbo, not evolution.

[DallasMike]

In reality, ID theorists would hardly deny that the forms which complex life takes have changed or evolved over hundreds of millions of years. Rather, ID points to positive evidence of a designer’s guiding hand in that long history. More than 475 scientists, at places like Yale, MIT, Rice and the Smithsonian Institution, have affirmed in a signed statement that they doubt the power of Darwin’s selection/mutation mechanism to produce the splendor of life all around us. The Discovery Institute, where I work and which has led the ID movement, compiled the list of Darwin doubters. This is far from biblical literalism.

Excellent statement. The standard argument from the hardcore Darwinists is that no real scientist would ever question Darwinism. Unfortunately for them, there are plenty of real, highly educated, highly respected scientists who don't doubt that life changes and evolves, but who also don't swallow the Darwinism hook, line, and sinker.

[narby]

That is my view of humanity: it's mostly bad, with some good and a few excellent. I would have to alter my worldview to believe that most scientists are good.

So scientists are "normal". Oh.... Why didn't you just say that rather than trash science and those who practice it?