Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wrong forum to ask this in. Any Jew (the American ones at least) who post in forums about Judaism is usually in the top 20% of religiously-committed Jews, and very few of these are scientists.
That said, evolution as a scientific theory is the best model that fits all scientific evidence and can make the best predictions. There could be a new scientific theory that is better than the existing theory of evolution, but it's certainly not creationism or intelligent design. Personally, I would say that we scientifically speaking have non-human primate ancestors, but "souls" (neshamot) were planted by God in humans only.
Anyone who claims that accepting evolution as scientific fact is kefira (heresy) is essentially saying that God lied and is trying to deceive us.
Wrong forum to ask this in. Any Jew (the American ones at least) who post in forums about Judaism is usually in the top 20% of religiously-committed Jews, . . .
A perusal of the posts indicates that the above assumption is not true. I'm not sure that we have even ONE poster who is in the top 20% of religiously-committed Jews, although MissShona, theflipflop and the one rabbi who posted a few times may be the exceptions. There may be others, but the LARGE majority here are not "in the top 20% of religiously-committed Jews."
However, IF you are right, which is unlikely, this may be the right forum to ask in. The original poster may be looking for people who follow the Jewish religion, not for Jews-by-Halachah, which is a MUCH larger crowd.
The original poster may be looking for people who follow the Jewish religion, not for Jews-by-Halachah, which is a MUCH larger crowd.
Yeah, I think I see the problem.
People consider themselves to be Muslim or Christian because of their beliefs, but some Atheists consider themselves to be Jewish because they feel they belong to the Jewish culture.
I was looking for anyone who considers themselves to be Jewish.
A perusal of the posts indicates that the above assumption is not true. I'm not sure that we have even ONE poster who is in the top 20% of religiously-committed Jews
If you define religiously-committed as "frum" / dati, or observant Orthodox, then you are correct. But this is a very narrow-minded definition. If you ask anyone who is not observant Orthodox or Israeli what "religiously-committed" means, it will mean that they have a solid connection with Judaism, whether that be Reform, Conservative, or non-denominational. Believe it or not, there are people who go to egalitarian Jewish services who pray and study Torah everyday and keep kosher and Shabbat.
The OP is looking for all people who consider themselves Jewish. This would exclude non-Jews who believe in Judaism and observe Jewish law. These people are called Noahides.
To answer the OP's question, evolution is the best currently available scientific theory to explain human and animal origins. And it predicts that humans and all four-legged animals descend ultimately from lobe-finned fishes similar to lungfish, which descended from the earliest bony fishes, and before that, jawless fishes and before that, proto-vertebrates similar to lancelets. Not much is known before this time because animals before the Cambrian period didn't fossilize well, but it's likely we're more closely related to starfish and urchins than insects and worms because of the way their embryos develop in the womb.
To answer the OP's question, evolution is the best currently available scientific theory to explain human and animal origins. And it predicts that humans and all four-legged animals descend ultimately from lobe-finned fishes similar to lungfish, which descended from the earliest bony fishes, and before that, jawless fishes and before that, proto-vertebrates similar to lancelets. Not much is known before this time because animals before the Cambrian period didn't fossilize well, but it's likely we're more closely related to starfish and urchins than insects and worms because of the way their embryos develop in the womb.
Yes, I believe all of that.
I do wonder, however, how my fish ancestors would have tasted fried. Would they have been as tasty as grouper or as bad as a carp? I would like to believe that I descended from something that tasted good.
It would be so sad if we were descended from nothing better than a monkey. Seems like self hatred to me to say Jews evolved from apes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
