Slikin and Intelligent Design

Rabbi Natan (Nosson) Slifkin recently wrote an article for the Jerusalem Post entitled The problem with Intelligent Design.

In it, he argues why ID should be rejected by the religious Jew. Before reading his piece, I had no confirmed decision either way. But now, thanks to Slifkin, I'm convinced of it's justification. Here's why.

The basic thrust of Slifkin's argument would appear to be that ID restricts God's involvement with the creation to the inexplicable. A believing Jew recognizes God's involvement in all aspects of creation.

But is this necessarily true. Because I see God in one place, does that exclude him from everywhere else. If God must exist in a case of "irreducible complexity", does that mean that He is only there - or that I am justified to extrapolate; just as He can be seen in cases of "irreducible complexity", so too He must be in all areas of creation.

To this point, one would mention the story of Esther. I find it astounding that Slifkin brings this story to prove the opposite! As explained so beautifully by the Vilna Gaon in his perush, the realization of the hand of God in those events allows us, expects of us to extrapolate and see His hand in all events, even where it is far from apparent.

Seeing the Creator in cases of "irreducible complexity" demands of us to see Him everywhere. Not through scientific proof, but through the logic of thought, feeling and sensitivity. And this is a basic Jewish process.

God's involvement in the story of Esther is never proven. But the unlikelihood of the series of events makes God's orchestration the most sensible option. If these cases of "irreducible complexity" will eventually be provided will natural explanations, and I expect they will if anything just to disprove IDniks, that does not at present prevent me from utilizing their phenomena. It makes sense to propose God's hand here.

We would not base our belief in a Creator through these signs, just as the story of Esther does not 'prove' the involvement of a divine 'Manipulator'. But we certainly will use them as tools to help us recognize the majesty of the Creator in all of His creation.

[If it will be shown that proponents of ID actually do deny God's role everywhere else (and they claim to be religious!), well, nothing forces us to follow to that conclusion. But until shown, I don't see this as an issue.]

Lo Tirzach?

A couple of curious signs appeared yesterday in the streets of Meah Shearim. Under the large bold headings " Lo Tirzach! ", my first reaction was, one thing for sure is no one got killed. Lo and behold, no one did indeed get killed. So what's the story?
The first poster has four beautiful color pictures. Two have a man lying in the ground, clutching his head, face full of blood, eyes closed, scrunched up poster next to him, shot (the picture) from different angles. Third is someone being wheeled into an ambulance. Fourth is a hat on the ground with a few red marks next to it.
The second poster has the story. Some fellow called Turchin was hanging posters at 8 in the morning defaming Kletzkin. His crime? He feeds off extortioning widows and orphans by charging for death notices $500 instead of 900 shekels. Then Turchin gets caught by 3 of Kletzkin's thugs who beat him up, grievously wounding him until he bleeds all over his body. So someone calls an ambulance and reports serious injuries. So Kletzkin tells Hatzola "don't worry, not urgent". Since Kletzkin is a money grabber, the wicked zionist police send out beeper messages that there's only light injuries. Eventually the ambulance arrives and removes the unconscience Turchin.
End of story.
But I have some haoros.
1) When you call MDA or Hatzolo, Hatzolo gets there in 2 minutes. How did Kletzkin get to them first?
2) How did Kletzkin get to MDA first?
3) Who informed the police?
4) How did the police get mixed in so fast?
5) Why are the police sending beeper messages to Hatzolo?
6) Why do the police care about Kletzkin?
7) Why was someone taking pictures (and good ones too, from different angles)?
8) Where were the crowds? There are always crowds of onlookers and gawkers within seconds when someone gets hurt.
9) Turchin didn't look so bad to me. So who decided he qualifies as serious? There are standard definitions for these things. Serious means his life is on the line. Moderate means badly hurt but he'll make it. A cut in the scalp and a little concussion don't count.
10) He was supposed to be unconscience. Why is he seen clutching his head?

So here's my version.
Turchin, by himself or maybe with others, is on a campaign. Someone, or someones, who sees him tries to prevent him. A fight breaks out, don't know who started. He punches him, he kicks him, we wacks him, and suddenly Turchin is hurt. Blood all over his face so it looks bad. The opponents flee the scene, they don't want to get in trouble.
But Turchins & friends know how to make the best of it. Turchin lies down while his friend runs home for his camera. Couple of nice pictures and then call the ambulance with a story of death wounds. Hatzolo arrive first, know a light injury when they see one and infom the others on their beepers. Nothing to do with the police at all.
I'll bet Turchin was home for lunch.

Why does someone post up a story so full of holes? Because for every one person foolish enough to write the story, there are a hundred who'll believe it.