Scientific Mistakes in the Bible?

[Darryl_B]

Does the bible contain science mistakes? I was listening to a Catholic Apologist here in Brazil, and he said that although the bible does contain some scientific mistakes such as the fact that some of the writers of the bible thought the earth was plain and it refers to the “four sides of the earth” he said that the main message of the bible remains intact, which is the core message of jesus, etc.

But anyone could help me with this?
As far as I know, the bible doesn’t even infer on dealing with issues of the natural world, and I always thought it was metaphors, such as in the case when the bible mentions that in the end of times the stars would fall, and many other things.

We need better Catholic apologists. One who won’t cut an inch off the leg of a three legged stool, and replace that inch with paper-mache “man”.

 

[tm21]

The Church teaches that since it is not in God’s nature to deceive, Sacred Scripture in its entirety, Old and New Testament, is completely without error in all its parts. Highly recommend reading Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Providentissimus Deus. To say that their are “scientific mistakes” in the Bible is contrary to the teaching of the Church. However, one must understand that the Church teaches that one must know the intent of the Sacred Writer…in other words, whether he is he using allegory, metaphor, etc. Is his intent to teach empirical science to to teach transcendental truths about the origin of man and his relationship with his Creator? Lastly, the Church teaches that the Holy Spirit uses the full faculties of the Sacred Writer, such that the Writer is using language common to his culture. In ancient cultures it was common to describe things as they appear. We do this even today…such as when a weather forecaster tells his audience the time of the “sunrise”, even though technically the sun doesn’t “rise”, the earth rotates.
In the first three verses of scripture, some amazing truths are revealed: 1) The universe has a beginning, 2) there are both material and spiritual realities, 3) God created everything from nothing by his mere “speaking” them into existence, and 4) a sublime truth is introduced; that God is a Triune God (Creator, Word, Spirit). All these truths are related in a simple yet profound manner, easily accessible across the expanse of time and culture. God related these truths through the sacred writer Moses, without suppressing the writer’s own faculties, such that Moses could be attributed as the true author of the text. Priest-Professor M. Hauret of the University of Strasbourg stated succinctly, “[God] did not wipe out the intellectual habits of his messenger to replace them with a new mental structure.” One can begin to see how it would be contrary to reason for God to describe how his creative power was specifically applied over billions of years (man’s current popular understanding), nor to relate, for example, the presence of strong and weak sub-atomic forces and other matters of cosmology and physics. Such comments, besides being irrelevant to the transmission of transcendental truths, would be judged as mere gibberish by a 3rd millennium BC mind.

 

[johnherro]

Bravo, tm21 ! How I wish I could write that well!

 

[mikekle]

LOL.
Don’t worry.* A lot* of people give God *a lot *of credit for natural disasters and cities being destroyed and millions of people dying.

I think I saw that same doc. Are you talking about the one that talks about the stone tablet that describes an asteroid falling in Austria?
If so, you have it backwards.
This specific documentary was not attempting to explain the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. They were investigating the destruction that went on in that area, and suggested that this destruction was maybe what inspired the story of S&G that ended up in the canon.

But…if one believed in God, then wouldn’t an asteroid be considered an act of God?
.

It may have been the same show, I do recall them talking about an asteroid, but imo, they were trying to say this was NOT something God did and it was just a random asteroid strike, kind of like the recent meteor strike in Russia, had there been a city in that area, its likely all would have been killed, so they do have a point there, but I still believe it WAS an act of God, so God could have just destroyed the city at will, he wouldnt have to use asteroids or meterors…I mean, if he wanted, he could cause flaming bricks to fall from the skies LOL, I dont think there is a scientific explanation for what God did at those 2 cities, no matter how hard we look.

Furthermore, I dont think most acts of God even can be explained by modern science, as God can operate outside the laws of physics and nature, no way we could explain those kinds of things…they just happen.

 

[Gold_Star]

It is a mistake to think that the word “earth” in the Bible actually refers to the third planet from the sun. Earth in the Biblical sense refers only to land areas where the Adamic races could live perpetually. The four corners or sides of the earth in Is.11 may really be a reference to the four directions of north, south, east, and west. Note that Is 40:22 from the same book refers to the “circle of the earth.” We have been habituated by scientific progress to always consider every question or statement from a narrow scientific perspective.

 

[lightbeamrider]

Satan brings Jesus to a mountain to view the whole of the earth, indicating that it wasn’t a sphere.

Not really. They had the sun and the moon as examples. There is no reason to assume the Gospel writer was attempting to convey anything about the earth being flat or a sphere.

It shows that some Christians ignore those verses that run counter to science but greatly embrace those that even remotely hint at matching with known science.

Then there are the hyper critics who over-literalize like hyper fundies.

The Bible says there are waters above the earth separated by firmament.

That was pre fall creation. Things were vastly different as a whole. We are post fall. Language has limitations. Once again perhaps too literal.

As our collective knowledge grew some apologists reinterpreted this as clouds, even though that doesn’t make sense. It shows that some Christians will reinterpret verses within an inch of their life to align them with known science.

Modern collective knowledge ignores the ancients who assumed Jonah as historical from extra biblical sources. Modern collective knowledge also ignores its mistake. The existence of David was assumed as real as as King Author and was later verified via archeology. Why are the ancients all wrong and the moderns right when they have been shown to be wrong about David, Bethlehem? Who is keeping track of the mistakes of the moderns? How bout this one.

‘‘Because there is a law like gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.’’

Gravity is something, not nothing. How can nothing create everything and why?

Anyone who has felt a breeze knows that air has weight.

Never thought about it.

It shows that some Christians will take verses that relate to common sense about science and try to claim them as scientific prophecies.

The Genesis verse about the breeding of animals to produce a better strain could be an example of micro evolution. The clean and health laws mentioned earlier. Monogamy is healthy. They are told to abstain from unhealthy sex practices. These all have science and health implications and were contrasted with unhealthy practices of Egypt and Canaan. Multiple partner, anal, animal all unhealthy for humans

God is said to be omnipotent and didn’t require putting Adam to sleep to remove his rib.

So? God did not require Noah to build the Ark. Its ancient literature. How many science mistakes in the Egyptian Book of the Dead? The Sumerian texts?

It shows that some Christians will take verses that have nothing to do with science and claim them as scientific.

Well lets take a look at Genesis 1:1 which assumes things had a beginning and for years they thought the universe was infinite. Genesis was right and those moderns were wrong. 1 Kings 7:23 has Pi to three and that is technically a mistake but was sufficient for the task at hand. They teach children to round off in Math classes. We all know Math is not science and is more the foundation of science. Since science cannot explain why math works it cannot explain everything. Science cannot justify its existence without Math. Unless one is dealing with Darwin macro evolution. Math not required or welcome.

 

[biplnkase9]

I agree!
The early writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit and most knew the apostle or of a close time frame. They put into words of their time.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Not really. They had the sun and the moon as examples. There is no reason to assume the Gospel writer was attempting to convey anything about the earth being flat or a sphere. Then there are the hyper critics who over-literalize like hyper fundies.

Take a globe and imagine there is a mountain 20 times as large as Mt. Everest in the middle of London. Would a person standing on that mountain be able to see Sydney, Australia even with a telescope? No, it’s on the other side of the world. The verse indicates that the entire surface of the world could be seen from a single vantage point (i.e. not a sphere). In a strange way I can respect the so-called “hyper fundies”. They aren’t willing to set aside anything that disagrees with the truth, because when so many items get set aside this way the book becomes swiss cheese. Those non-“hyper fundies” who have no problem celebrating a book with so many holes in accuracy show how willing they are to not face anything that might dispute their beliefs.

That was pre fall creation. Things were vastly different as a whole. We are post fall.

Where is the proof? Where in cosmology do we see a solid surface over the whole of the earth?

Language has limitations. Once again perhaps too literal. Modern collective knowledge ignores the ancients who assumed Jonah as historical from extra biblical sources. Modern collective knowledge also ignores its mistake. The existence of David was assumed as real as as King Author and was later verified via archeology.

Are you suggesting that if a story features a real place or real person that it’s true? Would this include “The DaVinci Code”, or is it more likely that some of these biblical stories featuring real people and places are historical fiction or legend?

Why are the ancients all wrong and the moderns right when they have been shown to be wrong about David, Bethlehem? Who is keeping track of the mistakes of the moderns?

Historians and scientists are always investigating and are willing to correct mistakes. Not so much with apologists.

How bout this one. ‘‘Because there is a law like gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.’’

Perhaps less books with talking donkeys and more books about cosmology will help. Right now we are speculating based on the available facts. Maybe in 10 years our concept of the origins of the universe will change. You ask who is keeping track of the mistakes of “the moderns”. It’s other modern-age people. It’s the next generation and the generation after that.

Never thought about it {if air has weight}.

But obviously other people have, including those well before the scientific revolution. It simply can’t be claimed that the Bible was well ahead of its time saying that air had weight when others of the time knew that.

Here’s another example of apologists trying to give scientific credit to the Bible for already known facts. Pslams 8:8 talks about the “paths of the seas”. There are those who claim that the Bible taught about water currents before man knew about them. Obviously that’s not true, especially for anyone who has worked on a boat.

The Genesis verse about the breeding of animals to produce a better strain could be an example of micro evolution.

How is staring at striped rods to get different patterns of sheep evolution? The Bible is saying in great detail that A caused B even though we know that is completely untrue.

The clean and health laws mentioned earlier. Monogamy is healthy. They are told to abstain from unhealthy sex practices. These all have science and health implications and were contrasted with unhealthy practices of Egypt and Canaan. Multiple partner, anal, animal all unhealthy for humans

Again, these are items that man can and has determined on its own.

So? God did not require Noah to build the Ark. Its ancient literature.

So is the story of Jesus.

How many science mistakes in the Egyptian Book of the Dead? The Sumerian texts?

Probably many. Though no one is seriously making the claim that they were scientifically accurate (or scientifically prophetic) nor are there adherents today that would abuse language to prevent their text from being shown in at least some parts as being grossly inaccurate.

Well lets take a look at Genesis 1:1 which assumes things had a beginning and for years they thought the universe was infinite. Genesis was right and those moderns were wrong.

Maybe or maybe not. It depends if there was a universe prior to the singularity. Take a look at “Big Crunch” to see what I mean.

1 Kings 7:23 has Pi to three and that is technically a mistake but was sufficient for the task at hand. They teach children to round off in Math classes.

Again, the fact that the circumference of a circle is about 3 times its diameter is something that was determined well before the Bible was written, even by those with limit measuring tools.

We all know Math is not science and is more the foundation of science. Since science cannot explain why math works it cannot explain everything. Science cannot justify its existence without Math. Unless one is dealing with Darwin macro evolution. Math not required or welcome.

Honestly, I don’t know what you’re trying to say here.

 

[lightbeamrider]

Take a globe and imagine there is a mountain 20 times as large as Mt. Everest in the middle of London. Would a person standing on that mountain be able to see Sydney, Australia even with a telescope? No, it’s on the other side of the world. The verse indicates that the entire surface of the world could be seen from a single vantage point (i.e. not a sphere). In a strange way I can respect the so-called “hyper fundies”. They aren’t willing to set aside anything that disagrees with the truth, because when so many items get set aside this way the book becomes swiss cheese. Those non-“hyper fundies” who have no problem celebrating a book with so many holes in accuracy show how willing they are to not face anything that might dispute their beliefs.

Where is the proof?

Scripture provides evidence. It is a snapshot into what those believed who were 3000 or so years closer to the events in question and had sources which predated their writings and did not survive to present day nor were they cited.

Where in cosmology do we see a solid surface over the whole of the earth?

???

Historians and scientists are always investigating and are willing to correct mistakes.

Always? Kicking and screaming is not exactly the same as always willing. Science self corrects. That simply means moderns can make mistakes with impunity whereas perceived mistakes from Scripture makes it all a book of myths. Can anyone see the double standard?

Not so much with apologists.

Apologists make a Christian response to hyper critical assumptions. It appears the critics want to propagate their assumptions and don’t want any response voiced. That is not how it works. It works that way in dictatorships, not open societies.

Perhaps less books with talking donkeys and more books about cosmology will help.

Yeah, reduce the Bible to talking donkeys and at the same time entertain the idea there is an alternative universe out there somewhere and our universe popped into existence from another one without a shred of evidence anywhere. The Hawkins quote is complete nonsense. Everything does not come from nothing for no reason. There is nothing observed which verifies any of those wild assumptions. Donkeys do not pop into a persons living room for no reason.

Here’s another example of apologists trying to give scientific credit to the Bible for already known facts. Pslams 8:8 talks about the “paths of the seas”. There are those who claim that the Bible taught about water currents before man knew about them. Obviously that’s not true, especially for anyone who has worked on a boat.

I gave science and health implications stated in the Old which was the minority report at the time as it relates to healthy sex practices and you blew it off. Why were they instructed to abstain from unhealthy sex practices 3000+ years ago when those in Egypt and Canaan were doing it with impunity?

Again, these are items that man can and has determined on its own.

Go to the Old. Read the laws. They are there in black and white. Healthy eating and sex practices to name a few. These all have science and health implications.

So is the story of Jesus.

Jesus ancient literature? The majority report states Jesus existed and was crucified via Pilate. Christians believe Jesus bodily resurrected. So Jesus was a person of history as was Pilate. It was once again the moderns who came up with Jesus myth theory as that was shot down. Once again, the moderns wrong and the ancients right. If you are willing to entertain the idea of alternative universes, abiogenesis, self creating universes then i really do not know what the problem is with bodily resurrection. At least with that there is a sufficient Cause. God, who is the source of all life.

Honestly, I don’t know what you’re trying to say here.

Am saying math is not science and is the foundation of science and there is no math basis for Darwin Macro Evolution.

 

[lightbeamrider]

Are you suggesting that if a story features a real place or real person that it’s true?

I am saying all the available evidence points to the existence of Jonah as historical. There is extra biblical evidence within the writings of Josephus and perhaps Philo. Both these had sources which predated their writings. The quotes from Jesus in the New treats Jonah as historical. Jonah is mentioned nine times in both Matthew and Luke. This is all evidence. There is archeology.

mfa.gov.il/mfa/israelexperience/history/pages/archaeology_verifies_life_time_jonah_6-feb-2012.aspx

There is no ancient precedent for any modern assumption Jonah was a myth figure. The kings of Europe could trace their ancestry back to Adam.

freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~heddins/Adam-Eve-Desc.htm

Where is the ancient precedent for any of those modern assumptions Jonah was a myth figure? Why are the moderns always right and the ancients wrong? The ancients did not know fact from fiction in every detail?

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Scripture provides evidence. It is a snapshot into what those believed who were 3000 or so years closer to the events in question and had sources which predated their writings and did not survive to present day nor were they cited.

The Greek myths also give insight into what that group believed thousands of years ago. We don’t use them to extrapolate universal truths. If we take this story about Satan and the mountain as just a story, and time after time after time after time after time we get stories which can not be true what credence can we take of the things not yet proven true or false?

???

The firmament as translated in both the Vulgate and Septuigant describes a solid object. It was said to cover the earth. I asked what in cosmology proves that such an object existed pre-fall (as you assert). Do you have evidence of a firmament or even of a fall or is this statement pulled out of thin air?

Always? Kicking and screaming is not exactly the same as always willing. Science self corrects. That simply means moderns can make mistakes with impunity whereas perceived mistakes from Scripture makes it all a book of myths. Can anyone see the double standard?

The scientific community looks down on those who willfully try to falsify information, while at the same time it looks favorably on disproving those who find error in scientific claims. Please back up your assertion that scientists can make mistakes with impunity. There is no double standard. No one corrects obvious mistakes/contradictions in Scripture.

Apologists make a Christian response to hyper critical assumptions. It appears the critics want to propagate their assumptions and don’t want any response voiced. That is not how it works. It works that way in dictatorships, not open societies.

Is any fault found in Scripture automatically “hyper-critical”? Can there be no open inquiry on Scripture or is the symbolic temper-tantrum the go to maneuver?

Yeah, reduce the Bible to talking donkeys and at the same time entertain the idea there is an alternative universe out there somewhere and our universe popped into existence from another one without a shred of evidence anywhere.

Quantum fluctuation exists. It’s not intuitive and it by no means is proof that the universe came from nothing, but it does offer a possibility of such. It’s more than a shred of evidence but we are quite a long way for saying definitively that’s how the universe was formed. At this point we are making educated guesses based on facts at hand.

The Hawkins quote is complete nonsense. Everything does not come from nothing for no reason. There is nothing observed which verifies any of those wild assumptions. Donkeys do not pop into a persons living room for no reason.

Spontaneous donkeys don’t happen but spontaneous virtual particles do appear to happen. It may end up being wrong but it’s not utterly silly like talking donkeys, talking snakes, and talking bushes.

I gave science and health implications stated in the Old which was the minority report at the time as it relates to healthy sex practices and you blew it off. Why were they instructed to abstain from unhealthy sex practices 3000+ years ago when those in Egypt and Canaan were doing it with impunity?

A few thoughts: Not everyone discovers everything at the same time. Anal sex (which you listed earlier) has some health risks but it’s relatively minor (chance of infection and a possible increase in cancer for a people that didn’t live as long as we do).

Go to the Old. Read the laws. They are there in black and white. Healthy eating and sex practices to name a few. These all have science and health implications.

What are the benefits of not mixing meat and dairy?

Jesus ancient literature? The majority report states Jesus existed and was crucified via Pilate. Christians believe Jesus bodily resurrected. So Jesus was a person of history as was Pilate. It was once again the moderns who came up with Jesus myth theory as that was shot down. Once again, the moderns wrong and the ancients right. If you are willing to entertain the idea of alternative universes, abiogenesis, self creating universes then i really do not know what the problem is with bodily resurrection. At least with that there is a sufficient Cause.

Christians believed Heracles (aka Hercules) did at one point exist although they deny that he had superhuman strength, was a god, or completed the feats that he was said to have done. They offered up the Praeparatio Evangelica in part to show that his stories were false. Again, we have a figure who may or may not have existed and we’re showing that the stories about him are false.

God, who is the source of all life.

Evidence needed.

Am saying math is not science and is the foundation of science and there is no math basis for Darwin Macro Evolution.

That’s what you said the last time. Can you break it down more cogently?

 

[biplnkase9]

Scripture provides evidence. It is a snapshot into what those believed who were 3000 or so years closer to the events in question and had sources which predated their writings and did not survive to present day nor were they cited. ???
Always? Kicking and screaming is not exactly the same as always willing. Science self corrects. That simply means moderns can make mistakes with impunity whereas perceived mistakes from Scripture makes it all a book of myths. Can anyone see the double standard?
Apologists make a Christian response to hyper critical assumptions. It appears the critics want to propagate their assumptions and don’t want any response voiced. That is not how it works. It works that way in dictatorships, not open societies.
Yeah, reduce the Bible to talking donkeys and at the same time entertain the idea there is an alternative universe out there somewhere and our universe popped into existence from another one without a shred of evidence anywhere. The Hawkins quote is complete nonsense. Everything does not come from nothing for no reason. There is nothing observed which verifies any of those wild assumptions. Donkeys do not pop into a persons living room for no reason.
I gave science and health implications stated in the Old which was the minority report at the time as it relates to healthy sex practices and you blew it off. Why were they instructed to abstain from unhealthy sex practices 3000+ years ago when those in Egypt and Canaan were doing it with impunity?

Go to the Old. Read the laws. They are there in black and white. Healthy eating and sex practices to name a few. These all have science and health implications.

Jesus ancient literature? The majority report states Jesus existed and was crucified via Pilate. Christians believe Jesus bodily resurrected. So Jesus was a person of history as was Pilate. It was once again the moderns who came up with Jesus myth theory as that was shot down. Once again, the moderns wrong and the ancients right. If you are willing to entertain the idea of alternative universes, abiogenesis, self creating universes then i really do not know what the problem is with bodily resurrection. At least with that there is a sufficient Cause. God, who is the source of all life.
Am saying math is not science and is the foundation of science and there is no math basis for Darwin Macro Evolution.

 

[biplnkase9]

Modern sciences have made major advances and most of all theories in the past 100 years which are fascinating.
Before the Big Bang the universe supposing was a primortal soup as bubbles which became other Big Bangs, thus universes, according to a lot of cosmologists.

Why are they so afraid of an infinite God creator as a potential theory instead of condemnation of such?

biplnkase9

 

[NotAllHere]

Why is that a mistake. Even today we use the expression to all corners of the earth even though the earth does not have corners. It is simply an expression. Why do people take these things so literally.

Check out Interpreters dictionary under Cosmology for more complete information about that viewpoint being in the Bible. In Isaiah the phrase “circle of the earth” refers to a dome over the land. Joshua 10, uses the language of appearance of the sun moving across the land.

 

[lightbeamrider]

The firmament as translated in both the Vulgate

Hebrew to Latin with Greek influence.

and Septuigant describes a solid object.

Hebrew to Greek. Why not go with the original Hebrew? It simply means expanse in English. Nothing solid since the substance is not inherit in the word. In the Genesis verse the substance is the heavens. In Numbers 16:38 the substance is plates. An expanse of plates in the latter and an expanse of the heavens in the former.

Do you have evidence of a firmament or even of a fall or is this statement pulled out of thin air?

Nobody i know translates the Genesis verse the same way Bible critics do for reasons stated.

Is any fault found in Scripture automatically “hyper-critical”?

Been there before with Gen.1:6. All anyone has to do is google Gen. 1:6 and a host of websites will appear making the same arguments. If you really think Moses or the author of Genesis was attempting to portray early Earth as having a solid dome then there is little hope. Can you pass a basic biblical literacy test? Let me ask you a question?
There are two examples of slave revolt in the Old Testament. Name them.

Quantum fluctuation exists. It’s not intuitive and it by no means is proof that the universe came from nothing,

Then where did it come from? We say God. You say? Anything but God?

but it does offer a possibility of such.

Right. Everything from nothing for no reason since no Intelligence was involved.

Spontaneous donkeys don’t happen

Why not? Spontaneous universes do.

but spontaneous virtual particles do appear to happen.

Appear to happen.

A few thoughts: Not everyone discovers everything at the same time. Anal sex (which you listed earlier) has some health risks but it’s relatively minor (chance of infection and a possible increase in cancer for a people that didn’t live as long as we do).

You have kids? Anal sex a few health risks? This article all wrong? What about the Science?
factsaboutyouth.com/posts/male-homosexual-behavior/

What are the benefits of not mixing meat and dairy?

Cite the verse where not mixing meat and dairy is explicitly prohibited. Either way, i am done for today.

 

[Aloysium]

The Bible is a collection of writings, which in every age, reveals the nature of our relationship with God both historically and in the here and now.

Science has nothing to say about this most important of truths.
It is merely an operating manual for matter, telling us how matter behaves, interacts and how it can be manipulated. That is all it is.
People do infer things from that, but that is science fiction.

There are no mistakes in the Bible.
It is about Truth, the Word of God creating the universe and we ourselves in it.
The Word, who seeks to bring us into that very same relationship He has with the Father in the Trinity.
We could have chosen to do so at the beginning;
but since we did not, the Word prepared the Way (the Old Testament) and
in Jesus, reveals Himself to be the Way in which we grow into an eternal, loving filial relationship with our Creator.

The Bible is about the Truth of love, of being, beauty and meaning.
We need know nothing of matter to know what is of ultimate importance.
Many who know everything there is to know about matter, know nothing of God.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Why not go with the original Hebrew? It simply means expanse in English. Nothing solid since the substance is not inherit in the word. In the Genesis verse the substance is the heavens. In Numbers 16:38 the substance is plates. An expanse of plates in the latter and an expanse of the heavens in the former.

Been there before with Gen.1:6. All anyone has to do is google Gen. 1:6 and a host of websites will appear making the same arguments. If you really think Moses or the author of Genesis was attempting to portray early Earth as having a solid dome then there is little hope.

If so many people are making these arguments, maybe they have a point. The sources I’ve seen have the Hebrew word raqiaà mean “that which is hammered, beaten out.” As you noted it’s later used in reference to plates – which are solid objects. Also what are the waters above the firmament that are separated from the waters below the firmament (the seas)? No one can ever explain what they are. You doubted Moses would state something so incorrect about our universe, but remember the Bible tells of a star as being a small thing that can p(name removed by moderator)oint followers to a manger. Then in Revelations it has the stars falling from the sky, as if they were tiny points of light and not massive objects that would engulf our planet.

Can you pass a basic biblical literacy test? Let me ask you a question?
There are two examples of slave revolt in the Old Testament. Name them.

I only know of one, the Jews escaping Egypt. But considering how much God condones slavery and the beating of slaves, and considering how there is no evidence of the Exodus, that’s maybe not the best example to use.

Then where did it {quantum fluctuation} from? We say God. You say? Anything but God?

I’m not ruling out your particular concept of a god, or the god of deism, or any god. I’m just not filling in that unknown with a god. It’s best to say “I don’t know” than to make grand assumptions.

Right. Everything from nothing for no reason since no Intelligence was involved.

Just because you find it incredulous that things can be formed without intelligence doesn’t mean it can’t and doesn’t happen.

Why not? Spontaneous universes do.

I said spontaneous particles do. A donkey is a collection of those particles that form atoms, which form molecules, up and up until we have a full being. And it still doesn’t talk.

Appear to happen.

That’s what I wrote. Escpecially in fields of study like this it’s important to go in with eyes open, and that future discoveries may impact the discoveries of today. A healthy dose of skepticism and doubt is better than the blind assuredness that the being responsible for creating the universe was close to killing a man for not circumcising his son.

You have kids? Anal sex a few health risks? This article all wrong? What about the Science?
factsaboutyouth.com/posts/mal…xual-behavior/

Perhaps then we should encourage female/female sex. It’s much safer than even heterosexual sex.

Cite the verse where not mixing meat and dairy is explicitly prohibited. Either way,

There are actually three verses: Exodus 23:19, Exodus 34:26, and Deuteronomy 14:21 Each says not to seethe a kid in its mother’s milk, which Jews have long interpreted as not to mix meat and dairy. What health benefit came from that?

i am done for today

Have a good night.

 

[lightbeamrider]

If so many people are making these arguments, maybe they have a point.

Its their motives and the select facts which are in question. They wish to make the Bible look foolish. If Moses wrote a more accurate statement, who among his audience would have understood it? Historical context is ignored. Moses, raised in Egyptian royalty probably had the best education available. Besides, the atmosphere of the Earth is a barrier. It shields the Earth from harmful rays and solid objects.

The sources I’ve seen have the Hebrew word raqiaà mean “that which is hammered, beaten out.”

Or expanse.

As you noted it’s later used in reference to plates – which are solid objects.

So expanse cannot be used for gas?

Also what are the waters above the firmament that are separated from the waters below the firmament (the seas)?

If you have seas and dry land then you do not have a solid smooth Earth.

No one can ever explain what they are.

Right. The Bible is not exhaustive in a lot of details.

You doubted Moses would state something so incorrect about our universe,

Why would you expect Moses to write scientifically accurate statements according to 21st century standards 3000+ years ago when his audience probably would not understand any of it?

I only know of one, the Jews escaping Egypt.

Good for you. One right. Not bad.

But considering how much God condones slavery

God liberated the Jews from slavery via Moses. That contradicts your assumption God condones slavery.

and the beating of slaves,

Corporal punishment common in the ancient world for both slaves and free. Solomon disciplined with whips (Non Hebrew forced labor) Rehoboam promised scorpions. Anytime you have a large slave class and they are beaten, there is always the possibility of revolt. ‘‘So Israel has been in rebellion against the house of David to this day.’’ 1 Kings 12:19. Whips were allowed and regulated, but they were not practical. Abuse of power is a biggie in the Old. It brings about judgement.

Job 31:13-15New American Standard Bible (NASB)

13 “If I have despised the claim of my male or female slaves
When they filed a complaint against me,
14 What then could I do when God arises?
And when He calls me to account, what will I answer Him?
15 “Did not He who made me in the womb make him,
And the same one fashion us in the womb?

and considering how there is no evidence of the Exodus,

the Bible, which is multiple compiled is the evidence. Do you have anything from the ancients which validates your assumptions? Again there are extra biblical sources. Those sources (Josephus) cited earlier sources. The earlier did not survive history.

Perhaps then we should encourage female/female sex. It’s much safer than even heterosexual sex.

Where is the science in that? Anal sex is unhealthy and non reproductive as is female/female. Men and women have compatible reproductive organs for the purpose of reproduction. There is the hard science.

There are actually three verses: Exodus 23:19, Exodus 34:26, and Deuteronomy 14:21 Each says not to seethe a kid in its mother’s milk, which Jews have long interpreted as not to mix meat and dairy. What health benefit came from that?

There is no prohibition against eating of meat and dairy in those verses. Christians view the Old thru the lens of the New. It is really a harmless way to put a fence around the Torah for Jews. Overall the Old contains a healthy diet which was my point. It does not mean Christians should include locusts in their diet.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Its their motives and the select facts which are in question. They wish to make the Bible look foolish. If Moses wrote a more accurate statement, who among his audience would have understood it? Historical context is ignored. Moses, raised in Egyptian royalty probably had the best education available. Besides, the atmosphere of the Earth is a barrier. It shields the Earth from harmful rays and solid objects.

That is a post hoc explanation. I found a very interesting article here. It’s from the BioLogos Forum, a religious group committed to find harmony between science and Christianity. They agree with you in that they think people like me are overly nitpicky when pointing out items in the Bible that are scientifically inaccurate. There is one point though that they disagree with you on, and that’s the meaning of raqia in its context in Genesis. They go into detail as to why raqia can’t mean a non-solid object. I hope you look it over. It’s fairly short.

Now I know you can point to various apologetics articles which state how raqia can possibly mean expanse, but I doubt you’ll find one that will show that this is the most likely usage nor historically the one that was accepted at the time.

So expanse cannot be used for gas?

How does one hammer or beat out gas? Where in a cloud does one have to strike to spread it out?

If you have seas and dry land then you do not have a solid smooth Earth.

You misunderstand. I’m not talking about land masses which separate the seas, I’m talking about the waters above the earth that are separated from the waters below the earth (the seas, oceans, etc.). What are those waters above the earth?

Why would you expect Moses to write scientifically accurate statements according to 21st century standards 3000+ years ago when his audience probably would not understand any of it?

I would expect an ordinary man from millennia ago who is trying to explain things like our origins and how things work to come up with theories that will eventually be proven wrong. The problem is that Moses was no ordinary man. He had the power of God behind him. God, who can not lie. He guided Moses and his people to the truth, and one does that without introducing falsehoods. I agree that it’s not necessary to explain these things by 21st century standards, but at the same time even the layman’s explanation must not contain gross inaccuracies. We explain how the earth revolves around the sun and how the moon revolves around the earth to little kids in school each day. While we don’t go into the laws of motion, we give a simple explanation that doesn’t contain errors that we later have to explain away.

I clipped out the part about slavery. It’s my fault for bringing it up, as I sometimes forget that people actually defend it. The fact one of your main arguments regarding slavery in the Bible was the practically of whips lets me know where you stand. I’ve participated in a number of slavery topics on CAF. If you want to take that part of the discussion to a new thread or in direct messaging with me that would be fine; but we’re already going far afield of the original topic of science in the Bible (which I noted I am partially to blame).

the Bible, which is multiple compiled is the evidence. Do you have anything from the ancients which validates your assumptions? Again there are extra biblical sources. Those sources (Josephus) cited earlier sources. The earlier did not survive history.

Earlier you were so excited to point out archeological discoveries of places and people with names that match those in the Bible, but now when there is no archeological evidence of the Exodus you find that the Bible is sufficient evidence for it. Archeological evidence (for which is there is none) is unneccessary and/or did not survice history. I find that fascinating.

Where is the science in that? Anal sex is unhealthy and non reproductive as is female/female. Men and women have compatible reproductive organs for the purpose of reproduction. There is the hard science.

Your argument is about the Bible warning of unsafe practices. I brought up a similar practice that is safer that is frowned upon. I’m aware that it is non-reproductive.

I should point out that heterosexual sex for women was far more dangerous than any anal sex just when you figure in deaths during childbirth. Of course that’s “post-Fall” biology so I’m assuming we don’t count that.

There is no prohibition against eating of meat and dairy in those verses. Christians view the Old thru the lens of the New. It is really a harmless way to put a fence around the Torah for Jews. Overall the Old contains a healthy diet which was my point. It does not mean Christians should include locusts in their diet.

If you feel that such dietary prohibitions are for Jews and not for Christians, that’s fine. But to say that those verses don’t say not to mix meat and dairy goes against several thousand years of Jewish interpretation. Remember Christianity is an offspring of Judaism, and since there has been a Judaism they have seen those writings to tell them how to prepare food. As someone who lives next door to both Shloimy’s Kosher World and Glatt Bite in Lakewood, NJ. I can assure the Jewish people are quite confident in those passages’ meanings.

 

[Abu]

As the Sacred Scriptures do not intend to teach science it is pointless to conjecture “scientific mistakes.”

On a literal interpretation see rtforum.org/lt/lt59.html
[Fr Brian Harrison refers to the *Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum) of Vatican II, 1963-5].
“The true sense of Dei Verbum, 11, then, is not that the guarantee of inerrancy covers those propositions which a biblical author affirms (or teaches) as opposed to those which he merely “states,” i.e., with less force or deliberation, but still as an expression of his own judgment. Rather, it covers those propositions he affirms (or teaches) as opposed to those which he merely “uses materially,” i.e., those in which what appears on paper, taken in isolation, or in its most superficially literal sense, does not express his own judgment in any way.

”These “materially used” (but not formally affirmed) propositions in Scripture would appear to be of three main kinds. First (and most obviously), there are those which the human author does not himself utter but attributes to someone else, in which case divine inspiration guarantees only the truthful reporting of such propositions, not the truth of the propositions themselves. Secondly, this category would include individual propositions used by the author as part of a parable or other imaginative literary composition, in which the formally affirmed teachings it sets out to convey emerge only from the story as a whole. Finally, there are propositions in which not every word is meant to be understood in the most immediate literal sense, since the author may be “using” hyperbole, metaphor, or other literary devices, even within a passage or book which is substantially ‘straight’ history or didactic teaching rather than fiction of some sort.

”In short, what is essentially guaranteed to be true by virtue of divine inspiration, according to the sentence of Dei Verbum, 11, we are considering, is not the isolated propositions taken in their ‘surface’ meaning and without regard to their historical and literary context, but rather (as the next article of *Dei Verbum *puts it) “that meaning which the sacred writers really intended, and which God, by their words, wanted to make known.” 55 The discernment of that divine and human meaning is what the Church understands by a proper ‘literal’ interpretation of the text - which is not to be confused with a ‘literalist’ interpretation.”

There are no “errors” or “contradictions” in the meaning which the sacred writers intended – only in the feelings of those who fail to understand and assent to the teaching of the Church on the Sacred Scriptures.