Question regarding the age of human kind

mehdi I

mehdi I

Member
Messages
20
Reaction score
1
Points
0
I've had many debates with pentacostals and evangelical christians regarding this, and took it with a grain of salt. However I found it intersting after reading Genesis in the Tanakh, tracing generations it seems that there wasn't that many generations in between Adam's time to this date. What does Judaism find as the acceptable age of this world or civilization in particular?
 
meh... I like Chabad and the Reb, but ...meh.

In this case he is beating around the burning bush.

Birth is the standard form of origin? Yeah, but it is birthed from something similar...parents, another cell splitting...

and he focuses on the cosmos, saying well we know it is expanding but we don't know the rate of expansion in the past...

Right. Could be true...might not be 15 billion, or 43 billion...but we do know it sure ain't 6k.

And then he ignores all the other signs... the title of the topic is human kind... and yet again while we can argue till we are blue in the face about the accuracy of carbon dating but the fossil record shows our predecessors sitting around campfires eating spicy chicken wings 400,000 years ago (or even a million with the new south africa find) sharpening stone tools 25k years ago...

And then of course we have a fossil record of dinos, plants, small organisms...

But we gotta remember.... 3,000 years ago....3,000 years of ancesterol records was an eternity and more than enough to solve the issue for the community. They had all these stories that they told around the fire of creation, creation of the world, of man, of their family...and they eventually sat down and tied them together with a bunch of begats...

The Jews I know, and most of the Orthodox I know....they know it isn't 5775...but it is in their book, as their reference, just as it is 2015 in ours.
 
Evidently they aren't as well...since they aren't literalist fundies....

Can you tell me why the rejection of science?

I got no issues with metaphor... but I can't fathom Jewish or Christian short earthers...
 
If you're sincerely interested in understanding this topic, there are articles at chabad.org on the subject, including those linked at the bottom of the one I posted. They're written by people who are far more knowedgeable and qualified to explain it than I am.

If you want to push a "faith is stupid" agenda, the Judaism forum is not the appropriate place.

My personal experience is that forum discussions and articles are not likely to change one's opinions. Only actual religious practice can do that.
 
I don't believe faith is stupid...or the religion...

But I do have issues with folks who hold on to things long after they are known to be completely false.

6,000 years? How could anyone think that today? I understand 4,000 years ago, or 2,000 or even 100....but now?? It is like thinking an eclipse is a sign of the end of the world.
 
Try reading the article I linked again. It's all explained there.
 
The question posed in the first post of this thread was "What does Judaism find as the acceptable age of this world or civilization in particular?"

I gave an answer to that question.

If you want to argue about it, you're in the wrong forum.
 
Thanks for the answer dan, I have another question. Since science has proven that creation couldnt have happened 6k or so years ago, do some jews believe in a different theory of creation, one more compatible with what we know now?
 
Dan0813 said:
The question posed in the first post of this thread was "What does Judaism find as the acceptable age of this world or civilization in particular?"

I gave an answer to that question.

If you want to argue about it, you're in the wrong forum.
Click to expand...

Ask an Orthodox, an Ultra Orthodox, a reconstructionist, a conservative, a reformed and a renewal Jew, and you'll get 6 different answers on many questions...

Judaism like most religions has a wide berth...
 
Dan0813 said:
There you go again. You're not qualified to explain concepts in Judaism, no matter how many "Jews you know."
Click to expand...

I agree with you to a point, since you were the only Jew to answer here and you chose to answer as if there is only one opinion to be had among Jews I think it's fair to include some second hand knowledge for discussions sake. What wil is saying should be taken with a grain of salt but should be disregarded because he isn't a practising Jew. We are all glad we have representatives from different traditions to answer our questions, but if there is no input from more then one 'expert' or if we, the ignorant mass, can't question what the one expert is saying then there really isn't any dialogue to be had.

With all due respect, you are representing Jewish thought, but not all Jewish thought, fair?
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
If anyone has question how and why someone practice as they do, it's encouraged to ask. Correcting someone on their religion is outside the bounds of interfaith. This isn't always followed here, of course, but most of the old timers try to walk the line.
Click to expand...

..........
 
mehdi I said:
I've had many debates with pentacostals and evangelical christians regarding this, and took it with a grain of salt. However I found it intersting after reading Genesis in the Tanakh, tracing generations it seems that there wasn't that many generations in between Adam's time to this date. What does Judaism find as the acceptable age of this world or civilization in particular?
Click to expand...

It was part of the Jewish culture in ancient Israel of the time of Abram, to pay homage to the great ones by excessively exaggerating their age when writing about Biblical History. We can have an idea about the longevity of the people prior to the Flood if we consider that two thousand years ago the average longevity was 40 which became known in Biblical terms as a generation. It means that all those personages recorded having lived almost a thousand years was according to the Jewish honorable homage paid to authorities.
 
Dan0813 said:
..........
Click to expand...
The difference, the way I see it, is that wil is explaining how people he knows perceives their own religion.

In the example I responded to if wil was saying that people believe the world began 6000 years ago has misunderstood their religion or is practising it wrong because he understands their religion better then them. This isn't what I'm seeing, he is bringing the experience he has of Jewish practice to the table.

Are you saying that there are no Jews that believe what he is saying they believe or that those Jews aren't really Jews then that's another matter that should be brought up.

What he is doing is bringing up those Jews because they practice religion the same way he does by being critical of parts of the ancient texts. Further, he is rather condescending to people who disregard modern science which is rather rude and I wish he wouldn't do that. At times I point that out to him but I didn't this time. This time I chose to encourage discussion.

As a side note, I really dislike someone quoting something without trying to put it in a context or commenting on it, I don't know what your feeling toward me is right now. That's important to me because I prefer to walk away before to much drama comes over nothing, I don't want to long in here expecting a fight. Just wanted to let you know that.
 
Rude, was I rude?

By saying I can't understand anyone who ignores the volume of science over the past centuries?

I can easily set is aside (science) for the sake of a spiritual discussion... you know to get into the mysticism, the metaphor, the metaphysics of the time...

But to deny it today...outright? Yes it confuses the piss outta me. I'd LOVE to have someone explain it.
 
I think so, other might not. It's your inability to understand some points of views that make you dismissive of them. Very few people make the effort to understand all points of views, and there might not even be anything good in that anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top