« Haredi-Think: Ban In Order To Survive? | Main | New Ba'al Teshuva Blog Features White Supremist Blogger »

December 06, 2005

Chabad Conference On Torah And Science To Feature Discredited Christian Proponent Of Intellegent Design


Chabad becomes more and more 'Christ-like' every day. The latest proof of this is Chabad's upcoming conference on Torah and Science, sponsored by Professor Herman Branover's B'Or HaTorah and the Chabad's Shul of Bal Harbor (Florida).

Branover is a very public messianist. But he won't be the most Christian presenter at the conference. According to this article on Chabad's official PR site, Lubavitch.com, a featured speaker at the conference will be William A. Dembski, the leading Christian proponent of Intellegent Design:

Day two of the conference will be devoted to the discussion of teaching the origins of the universe, an issue still under fierce debate, particularly among those whose scientific background is significantly at odds with their biblical beliefs. Conference organizers expect a large turnout of teachers, educators, and students from both Jewish and non-Jewish schools for this day’s sessions in particular. Addressing the theme will be Rabbi Professor Moshe D. Tendler, one of today’s most respected voices in Jewish medical ethics, Professor Eliezer Zeiger, Biology Professor at University of California in L.A., Rabbi Shalom Lipskar, Professor Branover, and others. Professor Dembski, considered by many to be the most articulate advocate of Intelligent Design, will address the place of intelligent design in the natural sciences, followed by an interactive question and answer period with the audience.

So who is William A. Dembski? Wikipedia reports:

Peer-review controversy

Critics of the intelligent design movement frequently object that ID proponents have published no papers in the peer-reviewed scientific literature in support of the conjectures of intelligent design. The same criticism has been levelled at Dembski's Design Inference. However, Dembski claims that the book has in fact been peer reviewed [3]. Dembski states: "this book was published by Cambridge University Press and peer-reviewed as part of a distinguished monograph series, Cambridge Studies in Probability, Induction, and Decision Theory". In fact, The Design Inference was reviewed by mathematicians and philosophers; the book does not apply Dembski's argument to biology and evolution, the battleground in which ID stakes its claim. The book's content is limited to examining the question of how to recognize intelligent design, Dembski's "explanatory filter"; it does not provide scientific evidence or justification for concluding that life was designed. Thus, while it is true to say that The Design Inference has been published in a peer-reviewed journal for mathematics and philosophy, it is false to claim that any work actually providing specific and detailed evidence for the existence of intelligent design has been so published in the arena of scientific press in which the topic is debated, which is what Dembski implies.

Baylor University controversy

In 1999, Dembski was invited by Robert Sloan, President of Baylor University, to establish the Michael Polanyi Center at the university. Named after the Hungarian theologian and scientist Michael Polanyi (1891–1976), Dembski described it as "the first intelligent design think tank at a research university". Dembski had known Sloan for about three years, having taught Sloan's daughter at a Christian study summer camp not far from Waco, Texas. Sloan was the first Baptist minister to serve as Baylor's president in over 30 years, had read some of Dembski's work and liked it; according to Dembski, Sloan "made it clear that he wanted to get me on the faculty in some way."

The Polanyi Center was established without much publicity in October 1999, initially consisting of two people — Dembski and a like-minded colleague, Bruce L. Gordon, who were hired directly by Sloan without going through the usual channels of a search committee and departmental consultation. The vast majority of Baylor staff did not know of the center's existence until its website went online, and the center stood outside of the existing religion, science, and philosophy departments.

The center's mission, and the lack of consultation with the Baylor faculty, became the immediate subject of controversy. The faculty feared for the university's reputation – it has historically been well-regarded for its contributions to mainstream science – and scientists outside the university questioned whether Baylor had "gone fundamentalist". Faculty members pointed out that the university's existing interdisciplinary Institute for Faith and Learning was already addressing questions about the relationship between science and religion, making the existence of the Polanyi Center somewhat redundant. In April 2000, Dembski hosted a conference on "naturalism in science" sponsored by the broadly theistic Templeton Foundation and the pro-ID Discovery Institute, seeking to address the question "Is there anything beyond nature?". Most of the Baylor faculty boycotted the conference.

A few days later, the Baylor faculty senate voted by a margin of 27–2 to ask the administration to dissolve the center and merge it with the Institute for Faith and Learning. President Sloan refused, citing issues of censorship and academic integrity, but agreed to convene an outside committee to review the center. The committee recommended setting up a faculty advisory panel to oversee the science and religion components of the program, dropping the name "Michael Polanyi" and reconstituting the center as part of the Institute for Faith and Learning. [4] These recommendations were accepted in full by the university administration. The committee also considered the legitimacy of research into intelligent design and gave it a lukewarm endorsement: "research on the logical structure of mathematical arguments for intelligent design have a legitimate claim to a place in the current discussions of the relations of religion and science."

In a subsequent press release, Dembski asserted that the committee had given an "unqualified affirmation of my own work on intelligent design", that its report "marks the triumph of intelligent design as a legitimate form of academic inquiry" and that "dogmatic opponents of design who demanded that the Center be shut down have met their Waterloo. Baylor University is to be commended for remaining strong in the face of intolerant assaults on freedom of thought and expression." [5]

Dembski's remarks were criticized by other members of the Baylor faculty, who protested that they were both an unjustified attack on his critics at Baylor and a false assertion that the university endorsed Dembski's controversial views on intelligent design. Charles Weaver, a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Baylor and one of the most vocal critics of the Polanyi Center, commented: "In academic arguments we don't seek utter destruction and defeat of our opponents. We don't talk about Waterloos."

President Sloan asked Dembski to withdraw his press release, but Dembski refused, accusing the university of "intellectual McCarthyism" (borrowing a phrase that Sloan himself had used when they first tried to dissolve the center). He declared that the university's action had been taken "in the utmost of bad faith ... thereby providing the fig leaf of justification for my removal." [6] Professor Michael Beaty, director of the Institute for Faith and Learning, said that Dembski's remarks violated the spirit of cooperation that the committee had advocated and stated that "Dr. Dembski's actions after the release of the report compromised his ability to serve as director." [7] Dembski was removed as the center's director, although he remained an associate research professor until May 2005. He was not asked to teach any courses in that time and instead worked from home, writing books and speaking around the country.…

Dembski became the Carl F. H. Henry Professor of Theology and Science at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky in June 2005, and also plans to establish a new Center for Science and Theology. According to Russell Moore, dean of the seminary's School of Theology, Dembski will help train ministers to counter the idea that "human beings are accidents of nature" with no spiritual character and no purpose other than to seek sex and power. The seminary teaches creationism but its professors vary on the details, with most adhering to the Young Earth creationist viewpoint of a relatively recent creation which occurred literally as described in Genesis; Dembski does not hold to Young Earth creationism. Despite such "acceptable" differences, Dembski noted in a statement when he was hired that "this is really an opportunity to mobilize a new generation of scholars and pastors not just to equip the saints but also to engage the culture and reclaim it for Christ."

Of course, Chabad is being very open-minded here. The late Rebbe was a big proponent of Young Earth Creationism, a view recently adopted by many 'gedolim,' and a theory Dembski claims to reject.

But both Dembski and the late Rebbe share a common educational background. Both were trained primarily as philosophers of science, not as actual scientists. (In the Rebbe's case, this training consisted of a couple of audited classes at the University of Berlin and an EE degree from a small tech school, somewhat like a vocational school in America. The Rebbe was never enrolled in the Sorbonne. In Dembski's case, no peer-reviewed is very telling.) Chabad's endorsement of Dembski at a conference on Torah and Science is troubling.

[Footnote: Does Rabbi Dr. Moshe Tendler have any idea who he is sharing a stage with?]


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Rabbi Tendler DOES take phone calls. Both at his office at Yeshiva and his home in Monsey.

I look forward to the transcript of your call with him.

To add to his "sins" Proffesor Branover is a good friemd of Proffesor Aryeh Gotfryd Shlit"a (who is widely credited in the press with being the spiritual leader of English speaking Elokistim - those who say Rebbe is God )and edited his popular book "Living in the Age of Moshiach" see: rabbiyess.com/scientists.html
also note proffesor Branover's very "Mashichist" paper in support of the mining claims of Shefa Yamim shefayamim.com/reports/opin2.htm
however if you truly want to understand why is he such a Mashichist read his autobiography almost everything he has achieved till now can be directly credited to following the Rebbe's advice often advice going against his "rational" logic and reason...

I've spoken to people in Israel about the wacko's like you Ariel who have gone off the derech.

They've responded with bizarre stories of attempted murder of Rabbi Bistritsky and Shabak involvement.

The claim the whole movement is a set up to discredit Chabad.

What do you think Ariel? Could you be a puppet of the Shabak?

By the grace of G-d
Shalom uBrocha!
I don't support Jewish terrorism.
I heard the rumors about the particular person in Tzfat however it would also seem to be a convinient way to slander the opposition since I have no firsthand knowlege I have no comment.
As far as I'm concerned though people like you are "off the derech" and will soon become minority within Chabad for the word of G-d will be fulfilled.
With respect and blessing.
Rabbi Ariel Sokolovsky
Moshiach Info Center International
Yechi Yehovah Tsidkeinu!
Moshiach (King Messiah) as Yehovoh (Jehovah) Tsidkeinu - G-d - our righteousnes-G-d our righteous. (Yirmiyahu (Yeremia, Jeremiah) 23:6 Rashi, Radak, Malbim Metzudos Dovid, Talmud Bava Bathra 75 Maharsha, Zohar etc. quotes and commentary ) moshiachtv.blogspot.com/2005/11/rebbe-moshiach-g-d.html

"As far as I'm concerned though people like you are "off the derech" and will soon become minority within Chabad for the word of G-d will be fulfilled."

Excuse me. Earth to Ariel.

What ever gave you the idea that I was Chabad?

I can't become a minority in Chabad because I'm not.

So, once upon a time a missionary comes to the Brisker Rov and tells him the Rabbi's are wrong and Yeshu is the messiah.

The Rov asks, "When were the Rabbi's wrong?"

So the missionary says, "When they said Bar Kochba was Moshiach."

The Rov asks, "And how do you know Bar Kochba WASN'T Moshiah?"

And the missionary said, "It's obvious. Because he died and didn't fulfill the messianic prophecies."

So the Brisker Rov say, "And how did your guy do?"

Same question Ariel...

No kibbutz galiyot.
No peace among nations.
No beit hamikdah.


Just a bunch of wackos proclaiming the Rebbe to be YKVK.

Yechi Ariel Hanotzri.

Shamrya -

I was wondering, what is YOUR view of the creation of the world?


15 billion years. Evolution probably true. Bare minimum a frum Jew must believe? G-d started it all and still cares.

Intresting, you mock the theory of the world being created old, yet you believe in another scientific theory, (or philosophy), of evoloution.

As a Yeshivah student I didin't realy study this, so, correct me if I'm wrong, but didin't Darwin theorise evoloution? How long ago was he? He died in 1882, so his theory isin't that old.

I find it a bit hypocritical to bash one theory (one which the overwhelming majority of contemperary and classic Torah giants hold that the story of B'reishis is literal. (Note: Hashem created the trees already fully grown, he didint just plant seeds.... That might be the world-created-old theory...)


You do not understand how science works. A theory is first proposed and then tested by attempts to falsify it. You incorrectly view science as philosophy.

Further, there is no source in traditional Jewish texts (Rishonim, etc.) for Young Earth Creationism. YEC was developed by Gosse, a protestant theologian in the mid-1800's. What todays gedolim hold by is Gosse, not Bereshit.

Try reading Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's Immortality, Resurrection and the Age of the Universe, published by Ktav.

You can read my summary here:


Same question Ariel...

"No kibbutz galiyot."
Mekabetz "nidchei" Yisroel doesn't mean all exiled.

"No peace among nations."
Yeshayahu doesn't say that there will be immidiate peace among the nationas look in the context...

"No beit hamikdah."
Rambam says Moshiach must build "mikdash be'mkoimo"-in his place the place where Moshiach is found which is outside Israel in fact in Edom (look in the Gemorah) Rebbe explains this means "Beis Rabbeinu sheBebovel" - Torah Center in Exile -Beis Moshiach-House of Moshiach be Gematria 770
see more on this in the Rebbes sicha linked to my screename bellow.
or here for the same Sicha in Hebrew Translation with in deepth explanations :
Beyound that there is a whole discussion who builds the actual 3rd Beis haMikdosh Moshiach or Hashem and what it actualy means in practice etc.

Unless you want to wait till the Beis haMikdosh is rebuilt to get a clue how it shall be in the Rebbe's merit in direct consequence of the holy work study the sources in Chazal discussing the issue above the 5 year old level on which you and many others have learned these issues...
With respect and blessing
Rabbi Ariel Sokolovsky
Moshiach Info Center International
Portland Oregon
Yechi Hashem Tsidkeinu!

"No beit hamikdah."
Rambam says Moshiach must build "mikdash be'mkoimo"-in his place the place where Moshiach is found which is outside Israel in fact in Edom (look in the Gemorah) Rebbe explains this means "Beis Rabbeinu sheBebovel" - Torah Center in Exile -Beis Moshiach-House of Moshiach be Gematria 770
see more on this in the Rebbes sicha linked to my screename bellow.
or here for the same Sicha in Hebrew Translation with in deepth explanations :
Beyound that there is a whole discussion who builds the actual 3rd Beis haMikdosh Moshiach or Hashem and what it actualy means in practice etc.

It means in it's place genius.

If you think the Rambam thought 770 was the Beis Hamikdash you've been smoking crack.

Can you bring korbanos at 770?

This is xtianity.

Ariel Hanotzri

There are plenty of holes in theories of evoloution, some big enough to drive a train through. Therefore I call it a philosophy. (For example: how many links in the so-called evoloutionary chain hav been discovered? Not enough to prove the theory.

There are plenty of holes in theories of evoloution, some big enough to drive a train through. Therefore I call it a philosophy. (For example: how many links in the so-called evoloutionary chain hav been discovered? Not enough to prove the theory.

Shmarya: we've been this before--but briefly: some ID people, including probably Dembski, literally believe that at a certain time(s) God literally makes out of nothing an entire "irreducible" organism--DNA, a cell, a human being, whatever--and some probably believe that even in an "old world" God periodically goes back to his workbench and makes a new species. But ID can also mean a theory that there is a God who created the world with physical properties that would "work" to permit evolution.

Dovid, what would be the problem with a God who does work "within" nature in such a "hidden" way that one might believe that nature is doing all the work by itself?

No problem at all, (in fact, that's the G-d I believe in). However I don't think that that evoloution is proper science. Religion has little to do with my disbelief in evoloution, in my opinion, it's scientificly impossible.

No problem at all, (in fact, that's the G-d I believe in). However I don't think that that evoloution is proper science. Religion has little to do with my disbelief in evoloution, in my opinion, it's scientificly impossible.

Dovid, up front, myself, I don't believe in a literal Genesis. I am also very skeptical of "evolution" as it is popularized by its most athiestic followers (such as Richard Dawkins). I do think that "evolution theory" may be pointing the way to a, how to put this, philosophically more convincing "naturalist" (and more convincingly "self-sufficient") garb for God's providential care--than the dogma that "random mutation" and "natural selection" are the sole and necessary factors for biological diversity.

Paul, what DO you believe?

You don't believe in a literal Genesis, your'e skeptical about evouloution, so, what DO you believe in?

I'll also be up front, verses in the Torah may sometimes have a non-literal meaning, (see Ramba"m Hilchot Melachim chapter 13 regarding the verse "And the wolf will lie with the lamb), however there is a rule regarding Torah, (especialy Chumash): "Ein Mikrah Yotsei Midei P'shuto", "the verse does not leave its literal meaning". Therefore, when it says that the world was created in 6 days, while it can be refering to days of G-d (as it says in Psalms "A thousand years is like a day to you"), or to different eras etc. Nevertheless, I take it to be literal, six days.

Dovid: I believe that all human understanding is partial--I have an "open mind"--I hope my brains haven't fallen through it. My opinion is that an "old world" has problems conceptually--I accept "scientific" truths that can be derived by observation/experimentation + the axiom that physical causal relationships do not arbitrarily change over time or space.

Dovid –

There is a tradition amongst Rishonim that the opening sections of Genesis are not literal. As such, they are exempted from the rule you cite.


I am aware of that, however, the Torah tells us "Acharei Rabim Lhatos",follow the majority. While there are some Rishonim that take a non-literal approach, the overwhelming majority of the Torah scholars throughout ALL generations held otherwise.

That only applies to halakha.

the long arm of reb berale lozor ?
promoting pravoslav culture beyond russia ?

http:// www.jta.org/ page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=16088&intcategoryid=2

Point taken,

HOWEVER, the fact that the majority of Torah-scholard throughout the genertaions held otherwise means something...

No, it does not. They had no halkha to decide on. If they did, your understanding of the results might very well be different.

Greetings in sweet and precious name of our Lord Jesus Christ. I observed from your tidings and messages I am in an opinion that you are brilliant and efficient preacher in gospel disclosure and having so many titles like Doctorate,Philosafer,Stalwet, Pundit, Bishop and Scholar. I am a man in the streets and ignorant in scriptures. Now I am doing God’s service. I read Bible so many times. While reading I got so many doubts about verses written with an opinion that you can solve my doubts I am writing some doubts in shape of questions and forwarding them for my contentment and doubts clearance please read it and try to solve my doubts. Excuse me for the trouble given.
Some of the learned and wise elders in the afore said, established Bible Colleges, Seminaries,Conferences, etc., and trying their level best for the improvement development of God’s word. Every year they are dispatching trainees in thousands to the world to preach gospel. All the Bible colleges are using these that passed doctorate degrees, research scholars, pundits etc., as learned lectures and instructors. With my above cited intention I am also sending my doubts to these colleges also. I am expeoting favorable reply with correct answers to my questions. If I w`nt receive any reply from your honorable presence, the truth and reality will be brought to the notice of all the nations in the world through magazines, news papers and bulletins. Don’t be angry upon me this is my humble representation. My anxiety to settle my suspicions and doubts made me to write like this, don’t think otherwise.Settle my subspicions and doubts made me to write like this with heartest wishes .In the Holy Bible they are so many closed secrets which we all ready try to explain you and so By the help of the Holy Spirit you and I will meet together and explain to the hole world . You please try the secrets from the Bible and our only work is to enlarged knowledge and to research the Bible Secrets. We are prepared to share all information relating to God and will send you if you kindly accept our offering. If there are other big matters in conference . We will definitely. I can interpret all the intricacies of the same subject , We are instantly ready to help un propagate God `s knowledge to all Christian elders and Servants ,We informed you before headed but regrettably you not communicated anything to us , We consider A God` s sent opportunity, To cultivate friendship with you , We are sending some questions only. Please think, And send your reply [1] In the beginning who declared himself as God is not God People does not know about God, until Jesus Christ come to world and telling about God.( Mathew 11:27. All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the son, and he to whomsoever the son will reveal him. Luke 10:22) 1st. John 1:18. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (John 5:36-37). But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me. And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. (1st John 5:20). John 18:38. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all. Jesus Christ exposed the God . [2] Jesus Christ told us every thing indirectly. Why did Jesus says without FORGIVENESS OF SINS with CLOSED EYES and EARS ? Mark 4:12-13. That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them. (John 16:25-29) [3] Ages from Adams to Jesus [to the death of Jesus] how they can be saved or enter in the Kingdom of God ? JOHN: 14;6 Jesus saith unto him I am the way the truth and the life no man cometh unto the father , But by me . ACTS:4;12 Neither is there salvation in any other for there is none other name under heaven given among men where by we must be saved ? [4 ] I am asking you .Do you know JESUS ? Read verse Micah 5;2 but thou , Bethlehem Ephratha though thou be a little among the thousands of Judah , Yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel , whose going forth have been from of old from everlasting . You know the ruler is JESUS , Do you know how many times he descended in the world still how many times he will descend . what is the number of incarnation of Jesus Christ in the world. If you can answer this question I praise God and give honor. Seethe verse --1st PETER 5; 19-20 In the Journey to Canan Isreal Drank of the spiritual ROCK that followed them and that ROCK was JESUS CHRIST. 1ST corin 10; 4 We are expecting your heart warming cooperation. DIVINE GRACE ORPHANAGE & DESTITUTE WELFARE CENTER CHURCH OF THE ONLY TRUE GOD www.onlytruegodministries@yahoo.com

I find the contrast interesting the right and left brain are built to be in contention one to the other; Hashem said my ways are not your ways. So we banter back and forth, to and fro.

Was creation completed? (Law.of.One)
As Genesis says, he rested on the seventh day.

Find someone whom can relate the Sub=Planck to Hashem.

None have all knowledge simultaneously. Only the one.one


Here is the contrast:
Michio Kaku: The Quantum Revolution

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment



FailedMessiah.com is a reader supported website.

Thank you for your generous support!




Please Scroll Down Toward The Bottom Of This Page For More Search Options, For A List Of Recent Posts, And For Comments Rules


Recent Posts


FailedMessiah.com is a reader supported website. Please click the Donate button now to contribute.

Thank you for your generous support!


Comment Rules

  • 1. No anonymous comments.

    2. Use only one name or alias and stick with that.

    3. Do not use anyone else's name or alias.

    4. Do not sockpuppet.

    5. Try to argue using facts and logic.

    6. Do not lie.

    7. No name-calling, please.

    8. Do not post entire articles or long article excerpts.

    ***Violation of these rules may lead to the violator's comments being edited or his future comments being banned.***

Older Posts Complete Archives

Search FailedMessiah


FailedMessiah.com is a reader supported website.

Thank you for your generous support!



FailedMessiah.com in the Media

RSS Feed

Blog Widget by LinkWithin