In this article, we will present a concise set of strong arguments for why Judaism and conventional science are not two completely alien or radically different fields, and why Judaism, the term we use for the concept examined on this website, has greater legitimacy and grounding when compared with conventional science.

Hypothesis and theory

We will begin with what conventional science has accepted as official truth, because if you thought the word “theory” in the Theory of materialistic evolution means the same thing as hypothesis, you are mistaken.

• A hypothesis is a testable assumption or proposed explanation that still needs to be sufficiently confirmed or rejected by evidence.
• A theory is a broad explanation of a phenomenon based on a large body of evidence that successfully connects facts, makes predictions, and can be tested.

For comparison, the physical resurrection of Jesus from the dead is not accepted by conventional science as a theory, but as a hypothesis / historical claim, because it is not easy to repeat and test experimentally.

This practically means that the entire scientific field of history is, in fact, only a set of claims and hypotheses that cannot be absolutely proven, nor easily repeated and experimentally tested.

However, our goal here is not to prove that conventional science is invalid for consideration, but to prove that the other branches of science have no “superiority” or advantage over Judaism. Because today, you will agree, schools do not teach subjects based on Judaism, but on conventional science (apart from yeshivas, although a negligible share of the world’s population attends yeshivas today, and we also agree that the curriculum in today’s yeshivas is not completely objective). Metaphorically speaking, we will prove that these are not two opposing coins, but two opposing sides of the same coin.

Biogenesis and evolution

We will do this together with the father of modern microbiology, of course accepted by conventional science, Louis Pasteur. He proved and established the law of biogenesis, perhaps better known as Omne vivum ex vivo (which translates as: “All living things arise from living things”). This automatically undermines the concept advanced by conventional science, namely that living organisms developed from non-living matter in nature, does it not?

Conventional science has an answer. It claims that abiogenesis has been partially proven through certain chemical reactions, and therefore considers the law of biogenesis insufficient to reject the Theory of evolution.

But does that not mean that the Theory of evolution is actually a hypothesis? How can we be so confident while we have a law that claims the complete opposite, and the law of abiogenesis has not been fully proven? Is that not a position that says, “we still claim that the Theory of evolution is valid because we believe that abiogenesis can be demonstrated under laboratory conditions, but special conditions are required (which are obviously unavailable without a time machine, because according to conventional science this proof requires billions of years and a series of coincidences)”? Yes, look closely at the underlined word “believe”.

Is that then objective, impartial science, or does it look more like a secular religion trying to push a specific agenda?

Your question is probably, “Why would conventional science have a specific agenda to push? Why would it be non-objective?” That is a topic we have covered here.

Judaism and conventional science

We do not want to accuse anyone here, but to resolve a huge misconception. With this logical contradiction, along with many other logical contradictions that we will address on this website, we claim that Judaism and conventional science, as two fields, belong in the same category. Now it is simply a matter of terminology: whether we call them sciences or religions.

The reason we consider the concept of Judaism, as presented on this website, to be the only correct one is that it has no logical gaps that need to be covered. Every question has its answer.

The argument from conventional science is, “but you have neither the will nor the money to fund experiments under strictly controlled laboratory conditions.” That is true, because we believe there is already enough historical, archaeological, and factual evidence to show that Judaism is a collection of non-contradictory, logically grounded facts. We also closely follow news from around the world and will let skeptics of our concept invest money in experiments to try to disprove, or even support, whether we are right. We are always open to debate and discussion, and if necessary for the sake of truth, we will reject the entire concept if it turns out to be wrong, because we are not financially dependent on anyone and we are not religious fanatics. We are simply searching for truth and a logically grounded, non-contradictory understanding of the reality in which we live.

For that reason, we consider Judaism to have greater authority than conventional science, both qualitatively and even quantitatively. In other words, we believe that more people throughout history have supported our concept of Judaism, although of course that term did not always exist. We repeat that we use the term “Judaism” to name the concept we analyze on this website.