Evolution Treife?

Writing in Ynet, Yitzhak Kakun complains about the 'secularization' of Shavuot that is becoming increasingly common in Israel. Secular Israelis gather in lecture halls and theaters to listen to and participate in discussions about Jewish history, Zionism, the origin of the universe, etc. Kakun does not like this because he considers these gatherings to be perversions of Judaism, and Orthodox rabbis who participate in them to be traitors:

…The Shavuot tikkun popular with the “enlightened” secular public is a desecration of what is holy, on the day of the receiving of the Torah. We sometimes see people with a kippah on their heads (and not necessarily Reform Jews) who attempt to give their stamp of approval by participating in discussions at an illusory tikkun.…

Of course, some of what bothers Kakun bothers me, as well – especially the admixture of Eastern polytheistic religious thought with Judaism, something that occurs at a minority of these gatherings, usually linked to the rave scene. But Kakun is upset with more than Zen Judaism:

So why do they find a reason to attack our Jewish roots at the lectures they give on this holy night in particular? Is the night of Shavuot intended to teach us Darwin’s doctrine of evolution? In fact, the opposite is true.

This is truly the heart of his argument. Evolution is treife because it appears to contradict the written Torah. Therefore, understanding the origins of life – a topic that takes up a good chunk of Genesis – is forbidden. That there are Jewish sources dating back almost 2000 years which speak of a world much older than 6000 years, and a history much more complex than a surface reading of Genesis gives, is lost on Kakun.

Kakun's view, which is shared by haredim (Rabbi Slifkin book bans, etc.), is closer to fundamentalist Christianity than to traditional Judaism. It is a view that asks us to abandon rational thought and simply believe. No mainstream Jewish movement has ever asked this. The idea of suspending rational thought is foreign to Judaism. Today, acceptance of that foreign concept has become a benchmark for Orthodox belief. How strange.

Comments

[Sara]

I couldn't agree with you more.

The Malbim in his commentary on the last three words of Haftoras Bamidbar - Hosea 2:22 said:

"You should know God, that He revealed His signs and wonders and the dwelling of His shechina among you, until you would know God with clear knowledge as something perceived by the senses, (in order that) you should no longer require belief. Because belief is something which has no clear knowledge, (it is) simply acceptance, but they have to them knowledge to know God, which is greater than belief".

For more evidence see:

http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/TorahTrue.htm

[Alex]

This is coming from people who think that humanity was made out of clay. Carbon based molecules are for apikorouses. :-)

[Zachary Kessin]

When being a torah observant jew requires denial of physical reality I would say we have a problem.

[Garnel Ironheart]

I'm always annoyed when this subject comes up.

For many decades, physicists have been aware of Einstein's theory that the faster a moving object comes to the speed of light, the slower time moves around it (hence, relativity because time itself is relative at these very high speeds). Orthodox physicists, using this theroy and assuming the clock measuring the six days of creation was whipping around the Earth at nearly the speed of light, have been able to prove that it is possible for said clock to have measured almost no time at all (maybe a few minutes) while on the much, much slower Earth below, billions of years passed. Thus, depending on how quickly the clock's motion slows until it reaches the same speed as Earth (which these physicists assume happened 5767 years ago), one can easily account for billions of years in which the Earth and the universe came into being, expanded, formed, etc.

In other words, using modern science it is possible to look at the simple reading of the first chapter of the Torah and see no contradiction. All one has to do is keep in mind that the Torah is not a science text and that it was never meant to be literally read.

[Yochanan Lavie]

Rav Kook was not diametrically opposed to evolution. The Hertz chumash that used to be found everywhere discusses how evolution and Bereishit can be reconciled. Reading this on my own, in my family's Reform temple, convinced me that traditional Judaism was not stupid, and maybe had something to offer me.

[Alex]

Religious Jews should fire every single shmuck that they have speaking on behalf of biblical creation and hire that Garnel Ironheart dude. Although I remain unconvinced, he is the only one I've heard that made a point that has some sort of "scientific plausability."

The issue here is that if one were to take Ironheart's logic as true then it would follow that God went through a process to do creation while from the Jewish texts, it would seem that we are supposed to believe that God merely went 'tadah' and everything was created in their respective days as is.

[Ichabod Chrain]

Shamarya, can't agree with you on this one. You're seeing something that isn't there. He's only complaining about what Jews do on the night of Shavuout.

[rebeljew]

Garnel Ironheart

Your thesis here is a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of time relativity. Gerald Shroeder, a frum professor, wrote a couple of books that tried to make this equation, using very dodgy apologetics. He simply proposes that time is relative and therefore the equation of 6 days to 15 billion years is plausible. He does not successfully unravel the correlation between the six day's creations and a consistent time relativity model, try though he may.

In the end, the literal reading of Genesis, with all of its constituent parts, is not correlated with any reality. The walking, talking snake (coexistent with man, therefore not a dinosaur) should be enough to prove the concept that Genesis is not factual reality. No mefarish that I am aware of explains this snake as anything other than a mashal for the evil inclination of man.

All appeals to relativity, QM, string theory, and latter day hard sciences only muddle the obvious.

[ed]

Shmarya,

Try to help me process.

How does a world older than 6000 years lead to proof of evolution?

[Shmarya]

If you need help with that, ed, then you are beyond help. You know very well why – you're just playing apologetic games. Go bother Gil.

[Alex]

Ed says, "See? Batman has a villian called CLAYFACE!!! I TOLD U SO! People ReALLY ARE made out of CLAY you dumb secularists!"

roflmao

[ed]

>If you need help with that, ed, then you are beyond help.

Shmarya, seriously.

To posit evolution, you need many millions of years. No way can you have evolution according to the Tiferes Yisroel or the other one who said 6 Yovels etc. 42,000 is not enough.

So you're down to R Kaplan/R Y Akko.

Now, all they posit is that the universe is old.

Just because its old, why does that neccesarily lead to a conclusion that humans evolved from a pre-ape/hominid (whatever) ancestor? Perhaps maybe 80 - 300 thousand years ago (or whatever), God did create a talking human and also created an ape-like specie independently?

I'm not pulling your leg. I'm asking seriously.

[Shmarya]

And, perhaps, ed, the world was created five minutes ago and all our memories are false.

[ed]

>And, perhaps, ed, the world was created five minutes ago and all our memories are false.

That isn't an answer.

You posited a certain orthodox belief that evolution is treif. You attempted to counter that by stating that - "there are Jewish sources dating back almost 2000 years which speak of a world much older than 6000 years".

I showed you that the view of the Tiferes Yisroel and co. definitely don't allow for evolution.

And even according to R Akko, all he states is an extremely ancient universe. Where does he posit that it began with a single cell etc and that we decend from an ape-like ancestor?

In short, there is no mesora for evolution. Sorry.

[Shmarya]

ed –

You showed nothing. Either you are simply thick-headed, or you are disengenuous.

The TY's view DOES allow for evolution. Why? Because he does not limit the time the way you think he does. He doesn't say, "Well, if evolution takes more than x amount of years, then evolution is treife" or anything like that. He simply points out that the Torah and ancient sources are being proved correct by science and that the world is rteally ancient. You flip that on its head and insert modern science into the mix, claiming that, because the modern science doesn't fit in that timeline, the TY would have opposed it. But even a cursory reading of his drush proves that view wrong.

Secondly, the what Yitzhak mi Akko is saying, based on what he was taught, is that those years are divine and not human, therefore in our years, that time would add up to 13.5 billion. He's not making this up out of whole cloth – he is explaining the shita as it was taught to him. This is way before evolution or an ancient world was in play, so his opinion is NOT apologetics.

You are – as proved everywhere you leave comments – an ignorant buffoon whose sole purpose is to post haredi apologetics. You don't learn, you don't grow, you don't make better arguments. You just attack anypone who exposes the corruption and crap of the haredi world, while at the same time using weak apologetics to cover for haredi foolishness.

Go away. No one needs your foolishness here.

[Shmarya]

And even according to R Akko, all he states is an extremely ancient universe. Where does he posit that it began with a single cell etc and that we decend from an ape-like ancestor?

In short, there is no mesora for evolution. Sorry.

And there is no mesora for quantum physics or laser surgery or aeronautics. That that mean they're treife, ed? Does that mean you should not fly in planes or have modern surgery?

Please.

[ed]

>And there is no mesora for quantum physics or laser surgery or aeronautics. That that mean they're treife, ed? Does that mean you should not fly in planes or have modern surgery?

I didn't say that if there's no Mesorah for evolution, it is by default treif.

It was you who was attempting to "Kosher'ise" evolution into the Mesorah and I debunked your attempt.

[ed]

>But even a cursory reading of his drush proves that view wrong.

I'll look it up again.

>Secondly, the what Yitzhak mi Akko is saying, based on what he was taught, is that those years are divine and not human, therefore in our years, that time would add up to 13.5 billion. He's not making this up out of whole cloth  he is explaining the shita as it was taught to him. This is way before evolution or an ancient world was in play, so his opinion is NOT apologetics.

I didn't say otherwise. All I argued was that YOU were using him to make evolution "kosher", and I asked you to explain the connection. Yes, evolution needs millions of years, but why does millions of years neccesarily equal evolution? You still didn't answer that.

>You are as proved everywhere you leave comments an ignorant buffoon whose sole purpose is to post haredi apologetics. You don't learn, you don't grow, you don't make better arguments. You just attack anypone who exposes the corruption and crap of the haredi world, while at the same time using weak apologetics to cover for haredi foolishness.

Nice. Instead of addressing my polite questions, you attack me ad hominen.

>Go away. No one needs your foolishness here.

Whatsa matta? Did I hit a raw nerve?

[Alex]

It should be noted that even in the Torah there is a gradual change in human physiology as life spans seem to shorten, (which of course goes against what we know now the more modernity developed the higher the life spans), thereby implying a form of evolution - a change in the human species.

BTW ed there is nothing polite about trying to get people who disagree with you pinned down as heritics.

[ed]

>BTW ed there is nothing polite about trying to get people who disagree with you pinned down as heritics.

Where on this thread have I done so?

[Neandershort]

Oy vey. Several years ago I gave a talk on the night of Shavuot about evolution and how it is fully compatible with Torah, broadly interpreted. This was with the knowledge and approval of the Rabbi of Kingsway Jewish Center in Brooklyn, Rabbi Daniel Goldstein.

Ed - I think you have it "punkt fahrkehrt." An old earth does not lead to proof of evolution, but evolution requires a very old earth. The old earth is necessary but not sufficient.

[Shmarya]

ed –

The original point made by Kakun is that evolution is not part of Torah and has no place a tikkun leil shavuot. My point is that is a foolish argument to make, because there is overwhelming evidence evolution happens. Our job here to be good to our fellow man and know God. The second requires us to understand the natural world – that's how Avraham became frum, after all.

What haredim perceive as a conflict between Torah and science is not a conflict at all. As Saadia Gaon, I believe, wrote, if what I now believe to be literal is proved false, then I must take that and view it as allegory and look for its message. This parallels what other rishonim held, as well.

Your problem is that you refuse to do that.

Now, again, evolution is well-supported. A literal reading of Genesis is not.

Get over it.

[ed]

Shmarya,

I was right. See Neandershorts comment. You tried to squeeze evolution into the Mesora that its an old tradition, but nothin doing.

See you another time.

[ed]

>Now, again, evolution is well-supported.

Right. The millions and millions of intermediate fossils have been all found, and its soooooo makes perfect sense that nature "just happened" to select every step of the evolutionary process. Yeh sure. Nature won the lottery a million times in a row. How do we know? Because they found a couple skeletons and broken bones. Oh! And a fish with some limb like fins too.

I'm convinced!! The eeeeevidence is sooooooo overwhelming............

[/sarcasm]

[Zach Kessin]

Actually the evedence is overwelming, you just never bothered to look at it.

1) While not every intermediate form fossil has been found, MANY of them have. The earliest bird species for example, or early flowering plants.

2) You clearly don't understand what natural selection means. The short version, in each generation there are a lot of young born, some are well adapted to whatever conditions they happen to find, some aren't. Those that are poorly adapted die. Your statistical argument falls flat on its face.

The basics of Darwinian evolution have been firmly established since at least 1880 or so. Ane with new DNA evedence and other more modern data the evedence has gotten stronger, not weeker.

[ed]

>1) While not every intermediate form fossil has been found, MANY of them have. The earliest bird species for example, or early flowering plants.

How many intermediates from specie to specie have been found? Very very few if any at all. Where are they all? There should have been millions?!

[C-G]

This discussion is bogged down because only a couple of participants seem to have the slightest idea of what they're talking about.

I propose a quick time out for everyone. Go to this site: http://tinyurl.com/2ckgfj and brush up on some basic science education (or, for some of you, be introduced for the first time...). Then come back and discuss this in a reasonable way, one that doesn't make you look really silly.

[C-G]

ed-

to begin with, not everything that ever existed left a fossil record. In fact, only a ridiculously small number of the organisms that ever resided on this planet were lucky enough to have been preserved for eternity. Things degrade, decompose, disappear. Take a look in your car's gas tank. Do you see an intact brontosaurus skeleton there?

Why do you think researchers have only found maybe one example of an quasi-intact "Lucy" skeleton, for example? I'll bet she wasn't alone- where's her family?

Second, your demand for that type of evolutionary "proof" is silly and makes you sound kind of ignorant, which I'm going to assume you're not since I've never met you. In order to correctly phrase your skepticism, you'd need to learn a little bit. Otherwise it's kind of like someone attempting to debunk Judaism because the stone engraved with Aseret hadibrot isn't in the Smithsonian.

I posted the url for an online tutorial. It wouldn't hurt to spend a little while learning. Then come back and have an honest discussion, one that's not about whose straw man burns the fastest.

[ed]

>Otherwise it's kind of like someone attempting to debunk Judaism because the stone engraved with Aseret hadibrot isn't in the Smithsonian.

Bad anology. There were only two such stones.

But there should have been MILLIONS of intermediate fossils.

[ed]

>Otherwise it's kind of like someone attempting to debunk Judaism because the stone engraved with Aseret hadibrot isn't in the Smithsonian.

Bad anology. There were only two such stones.

But there should have been MILLIONS of intermediate fossils.

[C-G]

A. What, exactly, is an "intermediate" fossil? And why would it matter? There are birds which live on islands in the middle of the oceans which look vastly different from birds which reside on "nearby" islands 100s of miles away, yet their DNA is, for all intents and purposes, identical- except for some very minor mutations.

Genotype- the genetic profile of an organism- is not the same as phenotype- the outward appearance of the genetic profile. Two very different-appearing organisms could very possibly be close evolutionary cousins, but we'd never know from looking. That's why the questions for which you're demanding answers are so sophomoric and unanswerable.

Your assumption that "millions" of examples of biodegradable material should have survived millenia is likewise flawed.

Evolution happens on the molecular level, in ways that the Torah does not even go into. There's really no sense in trying to make that document do things it can't. Let it go.

[C-G]

What, exactly, is an "intermediate" fossil? And why would it matter? There are birds which live on islands in the middle of the oceans which look vastly different from birds which reside on "nearby" islands 100s of miles away, yet their DNA is, for all intents and purposes, identical- except for some very minor mutations.

Genotype- the genetic profile of an organism- is not the same as phenotype- the outward appearance of the genetic profile. Two very different-appearing organisms could very possibly be close evolutionary cousins, but we'd never know from looking. That's why the questions for which you're demanding answers are so sophomoric and unanswerable.

Your assumption that "millions" of examples of biodegradable material should have survived millenia is likewise flawed.

Evolution happens on the molecular level, in ways that the Torah does not even go into. There's really no sense in trying to make that document do things it can't. Let it go.

[ed]

C-G,

Even Darwin predicted that millions will be found. Never happened.

[Mis-nagid]

"That there are Jewish sources dating back almost 2000 years which speak of a world much older than 6000 years"

It's weird how you still think so frum: you still try to justify beliefs about reality from authority. You don't need any ancient authority, Jewish or otherwise, to "justify" belief in the Earth's age. The only authority you need to believe in reality is the evidence from reality itself.

[rebeljew]

ed

Most of medical science, research and advances in that research PRESUME evolution as a predictive reality. IOW, if evolution and Darwinian principles are just bogus, then experiments on flatworms to produce genetic therapies should work only on a chance basis. Yet, the method overwhelmingly produces REAL CURES time and time again, and it produces breakthroughs which we all depend on. It wipes out diseases like smallpox, polio and increases cancer treatment efficacy. Death sentences 25 years ago have 80% + cure rates today. All of those presuppose the reality of evolution to work properly.

Ed? Ed???? Are you there?????!!!!

[Shmarya]

Mis-nagid:

You're right. II try to make the case in terms that people like ed can understand. That, of course, is a mistake – people like ed will never understand because they have no desire to understand.

C-G:

Thanks for link. I'll check it out.

The idea that there are sources in Judaism that leave space for evolution, that posit a world old enough for evolution to take place, is significant only because it allows one to view the age of the universe and even evolution without conflict with the Torah.

Of course, the Torah posits things that, if taken literally prove the Torah false. But we do have a tradition that much of the early parts of the Torah is allegory. Again, this allows one to remain, if one chooses, Orthodox, and not deny science.

There are difficulties to be sure with the more recent parts of Tanakh, and, increasingly, it seems clear that there are major flaws there. But none of these books claim to be dictated by God.

Haredim remove these possibilities and expect us to deny our rational minds in order to believe. This is both dangerous and foreign to Judaism. And that was my intended point.

[Shmarya]

Rebel Jew –

Thank you for making a point that I should have included in my post. That haredim continue to deny this and all related facts is truly frightening. What a terrible world we would live in if haredi-think and haredi-speak became the norm.

[Yochanan Lavie]

Some people still believe in the geocentric theory. I met a Chabad rabbi who says Einstein's theory "proves" Copernicus and Galileo were wrong. They are entitled to their beliefs, and it is a waste of time arguing with them.

Rebel: Not only would medicine not work, but geology and paleology (spelling?) build upon what we know about physics, chemistry, etc. So none of our technology would work if those disciplines were wrong- because ALL our assumptions would be wrong.

DNA evidence supplements the fossil record. Bonobos contain over 95% of the same DNA as we do. And the fossil record indicates a common ancestor. Birds probably evolved from dinosaurs, based on the fossil record. And recently, some T-Rex protein was discovered preserved- and it is similar to bird protein. (Did they taste like chicken?)

But while I accept science for the bare facts, and even see the intellegent hand behind evolution (which is a theological, not a scientific assertation- and which I would never present as science), I cannot derive a meaningful life from scientific materialism. For meaning, I turn to Bereishit. There I turn allegorical lessons about kedushah, and how to build a relationship with God.

But then again, if I have car trouble, I turn to the owner's manual- for the facts. When I have done what it says, then I may grab the tehillim- to understand what it could mean in the cosmic sense. That kind of compartmentalization has never bothered me.

[Zachary Kessin]

But there should have been MILLIONS of intermediate fossils.

There are infact a large number of fossils, I don't know about millions. Intermediate in this case is a meaningless strawman. THere are many examples for example Archaeopterx
Which is the first known bird. It has many bird like features (such as feathers) but a bunch of other things like teeth that are not found in modern birds, but are found in reptiles.

[Alex]

Ed says "You evolutionists are all wrong!!!!! Evolution can't cure diseases! Disease is test by yatzer hara! If you are sick you have to quit your jobs and spend all of your time at bais midrash studying stuff employers don't care about!!! Anyways, everyone knows that bloodletting is the cutting edge of modern science, not genetics!"

roflroflrofl

[Alex]

Ed says "You evolutionists are all wrong!!!!! Evolution can't cure diseases! Disease is test by yatzer hara! If you are sick you have to quit your jobs and spend all of your time at bais midrash studying stuff employers don't care about!!! Anyways, everyone knows that bloodletting is the cutting edge of modern science, not genetics!"

roflroflrofl

[Mis-nagid]

I met a Chabad rabbi who says Einstein's theory "proves" Copernicus and Galileo were wrong.

It's the Lubab rebbe's position, which is why it's most common in Chabad. See the books Challenge and Mind Over Matter.
Page 142:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/158330424X
And:
http://www.chabad.org/library/article.asp?AID=111581
Specifically:
http://www.chabad.org/library/article.asp?AID=112226

Embarrassing stuff, to be sure.

[Bartley Kulp]

I believe that the world was craeted in the manner that is mentioned in the book of Genesis I just do not know how the six days of creation are really supposed to be interpreted. I do not know for that matter if it was ever meant to be learned as an exact scientific and forencic report on creation. I do not know the real story behind dinosaurs. I have heard that they might be the great beasts that excisted before the flood. I do not know what the real story of other fossils are. Darwin's theory has never been proven in a lab. They did try though by exposing fruit flies which breed new generations quicker than just about any other species on the planet to radiation. The result was that subsiquent generations remained geneticaly unchanged. Belief in evolution is just that, a belief and nothing more. However denying the excistence of bones in the ground is like burying your head in the sand to reality. None of it bothers me though because we do not need to know the answers to everything. It just does not matter. All we have to know is that G-d craeted the universe and everything in it. the details and medium that he used are realy not important. What matters is it is his world and we have to fulfill his commandments. That is all thatI have to say. Good night everybody.

[Bartley Kulp]

I believe that the world was craeted in the manner that is mentioned in the book of Genesis I just do not know how the six days of creation are really supposed to be interpreted. I do not know for that matter if it was ever meant to be learned as an exact scientific and forencic report on creation. I do not know the real story behind dinosaurs. I have heard that they might be the great beasts that excisted before the flood. I do not know what the real story of other fossils are. Darwin's theory has never been proven in a lab. They did try though by exposing fruit flies which breed new generations quicker than just about any other species on the planet to radiation. The result was that subsiquent generations remained geneticaly unchanged. Belief in evolution is just that, a belief and nothing more. However denying the excistence of bones in the ground is like burying your head in the sand to reality. None of it bothers me though because we do not need to know the answers to everything. It just does not matter. All we have to know is that G-d craeted the universe and everything in it. the details and medium that he used are realy not important. What matters is it is his world and we have to fulfill his commandments. That is all thatI have to say. Good night everybody.

[Abe]

Ed,

Please tell us all how you account for the physical diversity of the human species, if you reject evolution? How do you explain the black, caucasian, japanese, chinese etc. races if not for evolution?

How do you account for the bacterial resistance to antibiotics if not for evolutionary selection ?

[Treifalicious]

You know, I have been to those lectures in Tel-Aviv on Shavu'ot. They are not totally removed from Torah, they just take a more intellectual and less "religious" (as in organized religion) approach than they might in a Yeshiva.

The truth is, if they didn't have these lectures, peopel would be at clubs. Maybe these Haredim would prefer this, I don't know.

Often in relationship and marriage counseling people are asked if they would rather be right or be happy and told that a relationship cannot survive if one party (or both) has to be right all the time.

The Haredim seem to have the attitide that they must be absolutely right all the time and that this is more important than Jewish community life. Methinks that they have lost sight of what is really and truly important, and as such, it is a matter of time before the FADE AWAY first into irrelevance, then nonextistence.

The only fossils that I know still exist are the Conservative, Reform, Reconstructionist, and Zionist movements.

[Yochanan Lavie]

Historian Arnold Toynbee said the Jews were a fossil people. He was wrong, I believe. Let's not call each other fossils.

[Alex]

its only a matter of time before haredim die of genetic hereditary disorders because they stay locked in their enclaves so much -a poetic justice for being so closed minded and arrogant.

They wouldn't know, because disease is test by yetser hara and to cure it, one has to study about the practical halachot of the terrible crime of touching a penny on the floor on Shabbes. They might as wel say that DNA is an evil test by the yatzer hara and must not be allowed in yeshivos.

[Alex]

Ed says,

"There is no such thing as DNA! And touching pennies on shabbes is a terrible avarah tantamount to mURDEr!!!!!! All the penny-touchers must be stopped because if everyone stops learning torah and starts touching pennies on Shabbes, THE WORLD WILL BE DESTROYED!!!!!!!! And don't you know, torah study cures disease! All you have to do is wrap the talis around the infected area of the body or whatever say a few teheilim and tadah!"

rofl

[Neandershort]

Bartley,
We are bidden to seek answers; how else do we "subdue the earth" - v'khivshuha? We will never know the answers to everything, but if we didn't seek them our kids would still be dying of diphtheria and whooping cough. As it is, they will be dying of the sequelae of obesity if we stubbornly refuse to understand that evolution (guided by God or not, it makes no difference) did not equip the human organism to sit behind a desk all day, and to act on that understanding.

Yochanan - I am afraid we will indeed prove Arnold Toynbee right. A people that persists in denying physical reality is a living fossil. And the thought is frightening.

[rebeljew]

It was not the Chabad Rebbe's position that Einstein proved Galileo wrong, or however else such silly sentiments were stated here. When challenged with hints to verses that implied a strict geocentric universe, the Rebbe responded with an answer from relativity, that the "center" of any system is relative and so geocentric theory (or at least weak geocentric theory) is not definitively wrong, at least vis a vis these verses. It was an "escape between the horns" argument, not a "proof" as some proposed here.

[Yochanan Lavie]

Neandershort: Not all of us deny physical reality. Ulra-Orthodox (and plainclothes MO who think like them) are a MINORITY of the Jewish people. The vast majority comprise Reform, Conservative, secular, and throw-in many open-minded MO's. Therefore, the future is not all grim. Am yisrael chai.

(PS- Demographically the minority is growing and the majority is eroding due to assimilation- so we shouldn't be complacent either. Modern traditionalists should stop looking over their right or left shoulders and forge ahead- with education and community building.)

[Neandershort]

Education? Few MO will touch the field because it's so low paying. Modern yeshivot end up hiring haredi teachers because they can't find anything else. Questions are answered with, "Our gedolim are smarter than scientists" or some such nonsense, and kids get turned off.

[Yochanan Lavie]

Neandershort: I agree with you. MO are so busy becoming Ortho-yuppies that their kids are becoming plainclothes chareidim. I was stating what SHOULD happen, not what IS happening. But as I said, the Orthodox, despite triumphalism, are a minority within the Jewish people. And not all MO's have given up. So we are not a fossil people yet. We will become one if the non-Orthos fade away, and the Orthos become the Haimish Amish.