Jump to content


Photo

Beware Of Gerald Schroeder


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1 matisyohu28

matisyohu28

    Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 11:15 PM

Gerald Schroeder is an MIT-trained scientist who for years has been popular in both Jewish and secular media as a propoe\nent of reconciling science with Torah, and religion in general. Despite the fact that he has contributed several helpful ideas to the above topics, some of which I heard praised by an Odom Gadol, I feel obligated to alert the public that he is a complete Kofer, because of  the way he views Hashem. He wrote a book in 2009, called 'g-d according to g-d', where he tries to answer the taanos of atheists who question why a merciful g-d would permit and cause suffering etc.., using a completely crazy 'mahalach' that he conjured up based on the literal (and heretical) interpretations of various pesukim in tanakh. He thinks that G-d 'continually learns how to deal with creation', bringing 'proof' from the fact that before the mabul, the pasuk says that hashem 'regretted' creating mankind. He completely ignores the open and available mesorah from every meforesh on the pasuk, that it's not meant literally, and devises a god of his own imagination who is imperfect.  Schroder has unfortunately gained a foothold in the online Jewish world, and is endorsed very much by certain frum kiruv organizations. Without guidance from mesorah, rabbonim, or really anybody, except his bible-researching chevra, he is very involved in the study of tanakh, seemingly without the mesorah of our seforim, just by his own observations and diyukim. His books should not be read, since if this is the way he views Hashem, then his entire view of Torah is entirely messed up; I am also planning on contacting the kiruv organizations that use his work.



#2 Morgenstern

Morgenstern

    Member

  • Members
  • 240 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 09:14 PM

Very unfortunate, in my community everyone accepts Gerald Shroder as a kosher Torah view.



#3 Rabbi Shapiro

Rabbi Shapiro

    Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 17 September 2013 - 10:35 PM

Forget for a moment what Matsyahu is bringing to our attention. Why would anyone consider Gerald Schroder qualified to determine what is a Kosher Torah view?



#4 Morgenstern

Morgenstern

    Member

  • Members
  • 240 posts

Posted 18 September 2013 - 01:35 AM

Because they want to hold on to their secular beliefs and/or they don't want "modern" people to mock them. Never mind the fact there is no source for Torah for anything Schroder says and Torah says complete opposite. Same deal with evolution.

Trying times.



#5 tryme139

tryme139

    Member

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 18 September 2013 - 09:43 AM

Why - because he is (or at least was last time I was there) used and presented as a reliable opinion by one of the largest (and at least supposedly) Kosher Torah kiruv organisations in the world.

 

I'm not saying his opinion is, just that it is certainly presented as such.  Gerald did not determine whether it is or is not, it was determined for him.



#6 AYidOnTheWayUp

AYidOnTheWayUp

    Member

  • Members
  • 43 posts

Posted 22 September 2013 - 12:16 AM

Matisyohu
Rabbi Gottlieb and others have already reviewed this book a few years ago and found it fall of flaws. I'm not sure if he contacted aish or any of the other kiruv orgs about this though.

#7 JewishAttorney

JewishAttorney

    Member

  • Members
  • 60 posts

Posted 22 September 2013 - 09:15 PM

Why did the Rabonim at Aish hire him if he is so wrong? I am not asking this to imply that he is not wrong, just curious if they really did not know that he is wrong when they made the decision.

#8 FS613

FS613

    Member

  • Members
  • 150 posts

Posted 25 September 2013 - 09:38 AM

Forget for a moment what Matsyahu is bringing to our attention. Why would anyone consider Gerald Schroder qualified to determine what is a Kosher Torah view?

 

Exactly. Gerald Schroeder is an MIT-trained scientist. He's not a Rov. So why would anyone consider him qualified to determine what is a Kosher Torah view?



#9 Morgenstern

Morgenstern

    Member

  • Members
  • 240 posts

Posted 01 October 2013 - 11:07 PM

Aish is treif as long as they keep spewing evolution, dinosaurs, and universe being billions of years old. They horribly learn the whole maaseh bereshit and the effect they are having is terrifying. 



#10 JewishAttorney

JewishAttorney

    Member

  • Members
  • 60 posts

Posted 02 November 2013 - 09:04 PM

Aish is treif as long as they keep spewing evolution, dinosaurs, and universe being billions of years old. They horribly learn the whole maaseh bereshit and the effect they are having is terrifying. 

 

Never heard anyone refer to late Rabbi Noah Weinberg's institution as treif.

 

What's your problem with Dianasours? If I am not wrong they probably existed pre-Flood and then the Flood changed the world as we know it.



#11 Morgenstern

Morgenstern

    Member

  • Members
  • 240 posts

Posted 22 November 2013 - 06:19 PM

It was told to me that Rav Noach Weinberg said to someone that he was disappointed with how Aish put more focus on kiruv rather than Torah.



#12 Morgenstern

Morgenstern

    Member

  • Members
  • 240 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 06:50 PM

Also in my previous posts, I said that in modern orthodoxy they spew evolution. I have to make a correction. Modern orthodox is actually a huge spectrum, and not all sections of modern orthodox have fallen into this tarpit of heresy so dont get all excited. 



#13 Morgenstern

Morgenstern

    Member

  • Members
  • 240 posts

Posted 09 March 2014 - 05:04 PM

My definition of dinosaur is creatures that existed millions of years before humans. The belief that the universe is greater than 6,000 years old goes against Judaism. In fact, Rav Chaim Kanivskeym shlit''a, the biggest talmid chacham in the world today  said that a gentile who believes the universe is greater than 6000 years CANNOT be accepted as a ger. (This is quoted by Rabbi Shapiro shlit''a somewhere on this site)

Aish is guilty of watering down Torah, which is a terrible sin. In fact, I heard a quote from a reliable source that Rav Noach Weinberg A''H was disappointed with how Aish puts more emphasis on attracting newcomers than they do on delivering true Torah.

 



#14 Morgenstern

Morgenstern

    Member

  • Members
  • 240 posts

Posted 09 March 2014 - 05:07 PM

Though, it IS ok to say that G-d made giant monsters during the six days of Creation (that Adam HaRishon could have stepped on [Theres a chazal that says he reached to the Heavens and shrunk to 200 feet after the sin]) and they all died out at some point.



#15 Menorah

Menorah

    Member

  • Members
  • 97 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 11:38 PM

Forget for a moment what Matsyahu is bringing to our attention. Why would anyone consider Gerald Schroder qualified to determine what is a Kosher Torah view?

 

Matisyahu said that an Odom Gadol has praised Schroeder. Isn't that a sort of hechsher on him?



#16 taon

taon

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 421 posts

Posted 03 April 2014 - 04:56 PM

It sounds mor elike an idea he said was praised.



#17 Rabbi Shapiro

Rabbi Shapiro

    Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 03 June 2014 - 04:05 PM

What remains is: Gerald Schroeder has no qualifications to teach Torah Hashkafa, especially when he admits that he has a new understanding of Bereishis that, it seems, nobody knew before he figured it out. Such an approach is untenable and we should not give it credence.



#18 jonah

jonah

    Member

  • Members
  • 14 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 10:58 AM

I have a question. If evolution is a heretical belief in Judaism, why did Rav Hirsch write that it does not go against our beliefs?

(I am not asking this question as a "troll" or anything like that that. Someone showed me what Rav Hirsch wrote and it seems like he had no problem with evolution)  



#19 taon

taon

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 421 posts

Posted 08 July 2014 - 01:59 PM

As I recall, alll he says is that if it were true, it wouldn't be a problem. Not that it's okay to believe. This is a bad analogy, but somone can explain pagan gods as demons or something, that doesnt make it okay to believe in them. But i think the main problem with evolution is that its part of a package deal of apikorsus. It comes along with, and is meant to excuse, apikorsus beliefs.



#20 jonah

jonah

    Member

  • Members
  • 14 posts

Posted 08 July 2014 - 07:59 PM

Two points

1)If it wouldn't be a problem, then what is wrong with believing evolution? He says that if the theory were to be proven (which I honestly believe that it is, although you can disagree), he would have no problem with it. So why is it considered apikorsus? Did Rav Hirsch believe apikorsus?

2)While many people who believe in evolution may be heretics, not all. There are plenty of God fearing people who believe it.