The Torah is Not A Science Book – or Is It?

BS”D

Thanks for posting this.

I do need to mention that some parts are not clear (and pls edit the “nor” in the title by changing it to not) as it was very late at night when I wrote it and I did not proofread. I am more than a little concerned that my dismissal of the “discrepancies” in evolution, age of earth etc can be misread as a need for us to accept theories which supposedly prove a certain age for the earth or evolution itself.

To be honest I cannot say I can understand or have any real need to understand the correct age of the earth (except that I have no problem accepting either a literal six day creation meaning 144 hours or a scenario in which Hashem held the day and night periods out for many many years during the six days of Bereishis – what is important is again Who created the earth and not how – again we would not listen to a scientific description of creation especially on Simchas Torah after kiddush and during chosson Bereishis LOL!).

On the other hand, I do not accept evolution as it now is defined and explained, nor do I believe that Darwin’s theory is either accurate or proper when held up to the all-encompassing lens of Torah.

Actually I have no problem looking at a 600 kilo bear in the zoo and then at my neighbor’s Newfoundland and seeing very definite facial, structural and other similarities. To me this does not prove a common ancestor or anything other than an orderly and beautiful creation that had to have been G-dly in origin. After all General Motors or the new Chrysler-Fiat alliance would have created a 600 kilo bear with air bags that any deer or walrus could puncture with little effort and a Newfoundland which needs 10 gallons of water to go on a half-mile walk.