What to do when contradiction happens?

[FiveLinden]

Dark matter and dark energy cannot be explained by current scientific knowledge/methods.

But they can be subjected to the scientific method. they can be observed (in a way), hypotheses developed and tested and theories developed. the scientific method is a method, not a body of knowledge or a series of beliefs.

 

[fredystairs]

Sarcelle:

The Bible wasn’t meant to be a primer for maths.

Sure… and also for biology, or sociology, or astronomy. But the problem is that it is supposed to the word of God, so elementary errors cannot be overlooked.

In fact, as has been mentioned, the Bible is not a scientific document. It is a theological and historical document that was inspired by God and written in time by people who were people of their time and culture. It makes perfect sense that those doing the writing would not know every scientific advancement that we know now. As I wrote before, they interpreted events as they saw and understood them.

The sun does not rise in the East and set in the West as I wrote before. But that is how it is interpreted.

Pax

 

[FiveLinden]

Matthew 13:32:1 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.
The mustard seed is not the smallest of seeds.

Sirach 17:6 says: “He gave them the ability to think, made a tongue, eyes and ears and gave them a heart to be able to think.”

We don’t think with our heart. It’s merely a pump.

We also have the incorrect order of creation that conflicts with science not even counting the two versions that conflict with each other.

Are these acceptable as conflicting with science?

It is observed reality that these contradict. Observation is the beginning of science. But while biblical literalists face an insurmountable problem over such observational errors in scripture, Catholics are able to interpret these as allegorical or holding meaning in the context of their times. there are some areas of Church teaching that do cause problems for a believing scientist such as the literal existence of Adam and Eve, but these are not insurmountable at least with some mental effort.

 

[Dan_Defender]

But they can be subjected to the scientific method. they can be observed (in a way), hypotheses developed and tested and theories developed. the scientific method is a method, not a body of knowledge or a series of beliefs.

So far particle accelerators and such have produced no evidence. Sorry but atheists do not have all the answers, even in the natural universe.

 

[Pattylt]

Sorry but atheists do not have all the answers, even in the natural universe.

Thank goodness! How awful would it be to know everything and have no further areas to explore. Both scientists and atheists are able to say, I don’t know. It just seems that the religious have a bit harder time with that statement (not all, though!).

 

[Dan_Defender]

Christians do not need to know everything about the natural world, or everything about God even. They only need to know what has been revealed to reach union of their soul with God.It is only the unbelievers who wish to know everything, to be themselves God in a way.

 

[Zaccheus]

Sarcelle:

I was referring to the Bible.

So was I. Kings 7:23. “And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.”

Even in those times people knew that the circumference of a circle is NOT three times of the diameter. (In other words, the value of “pi” is NOT 3.) The Chinese even had an incredibly precise approximation for the value of “pi”, they used 355/113. And this is just one example.

In other words, the text in the bible is contradicted by reality. And that is the question: what does one do in tat case?

Suppose I tell you it’s five hundred yards from my doorstep to the front door of the nearest corner store.
You come out with a yardstick and measure it. You find it’s four hundred ninety-six yards plus two feet plus one inch.
Do you call me a liar, or do you accept that it’s five hundred yards for practical purposes?

The Biblical passage does not say: thirty (decimal point) zero zero zero feet around and ten (decimal) zero zero zero feet across. There was no need for that level of precision in that context.

Not till somebody decided to mock scripture by claiming “the bible say PI equals three LOL”.

 

[Sarcelle]

It was still written by humans and therefore subject to human mistakes.

This text was written and rewritten thousands of years ago right?

Who knows, there could have been errors in the copying by the scribes, like typos.

 

[MPat]

So was I. Kings 7:23. “And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.”

Even in those times people knew that the circumference of a circle is NOT three times of the diameter. (In other words, the value of “pi” is NOT 3.) The Chinese even had an incredibly precise approximation for the value of “pi”, they used 355/113. And this is just one example.

In other words, the text in the bible is contradicted by reality. And that is the question: what does one do in tat case?

Well, for starters, one needs honesty and humility. Competence would be useful too, although optional, as long as one knows one lacks it.

So, for an illustration, how would you rewrite that Bible verse? That is, how would it have to look like for you to accept that there is no contradiction?

 

[Zaccheus]

Rau:

The context of the thread is that which is written in the Bible. Recall the OP: “And yet, many things in the bible are contradicted by science. How do you resolve these contradictions?”

It can not be demonstrated to the level of a scientific observation that any of the miracles reported in the Bible happened.

Christ never volunteered to perform a miracle under scientifically defined experimental conditions. Why should he? Christ was concerned with healing the sick and the injured, not with providing textbook examples for us to dissect two thousand years later.

 

[White_Tree]

Sirach 17:6 says: “He gave them the ability to think, made a tongue, eyes and ears and gave them a heart to be able to think.”

We don’t think with our heart. It’s merely a pump.

The New American Bible translates that word as “mind,” not “heart.” Though it really doesn’t make a difference.

Out of curiosity, do you really think that verse refers to the physical organ, or were you just putting that out there as a straw man?

 

[Zaccheus]

If I tell you it’s raining cats and dogs outside, do you expect to go out and find a German shepherd lying next to a poodle with a Siamese cat and an orange tabby next to them?
Or do you just understand that I mean it’s raining heavily?

It’s easy to ridicule such passages if you interpret them with rigid literality.

 

[Abrosz]

The spiritual world is fundamentally different from the physical world. So there is no contradiction.

But they refer to the same physical reality.

 

[Pattylt]

Well, it isn’t a straw man as it is a direct quote and it’s wrong. I agree it could just be an expression that was common as we still refer to our hearts as having emotion even though it doesn’t.

Apologists have answers to every type of contradiction anyway, even if some of them are a bit “out there”. I’m not even bothered much by the mustard seed as it may well have been the smallest seed they knew about…even though that statement is wrong, too. I also wouldn’t touch the Adam and Eve story as we have no evidence to completely refute it though it’s ridiculously unlikely…scientifically speaking…

I’ll leave you to your discussion…it’s been interesting.

 

[fredystairs]

Sirach 17:6 says: “He gave them the ability to think, made a tongue, eyes and ears and gave them a heart to be able to think.”

We don’t think with our heart. It’s merely a pump.

And we do not love with our hearts (love being a supernatural virtue) yet we understand when someone says “You’ve stolen my heart.” we understand them to mean that they love them.

Pax

 

[Abrosz]

So, for an illustration, how would you rewrite that Bible verse? That is, how would it have to look like for you to accept that there is no contradiction?

I would not even try. Just like I would not wish to rewrite any fairy tale. Of course those tales do not “assert” that they are the inerrant words of the Almighty.

Aren’t these physical?

Haha! Of course they are. The “teachings” are just another example of “testimonial” evidence.

 

[Abrosz]

Not till somebody decided to mock scripture by claiming “the bible say PI equals three LOL”.

The words of the Almighty cannot contain errors, no matter how minor and mundane.

 

[Dan_Defender]

There was no need for that level of precision in that context.

Exactly. Actually it is amazing that the pi number in this case is close for a text that is not trying to teach mathematics. By contrast, the Rhind papyrus is an ancient applied mathematics text and does not give a good approximation of pi either. The bottomline is that no civilization that ancient had the number pi right.

 

[Pattylt]

The words of the Almighty cannot contain errors, no matter how minor and mundane.

To be fair…as was pointed out above, the Catholics don’t interpret scripture quite as exactly as the fundamentalists. They leave room for mans influence.

 

[Zaccheus]

Zaccheus:

Not till somebody decided to mock scripture by claiming “the bible say PI equals three LOL”.

The words of the Almighty cannot contain errors, no matter how minor and mundane.

The Almighty did not assert that it was 30 (DECCIMAL POINT) 000 feet and 10(DECIMAL POINT) 000 feet.
You are trying to apply a level of precision that was not intended, was not needed, and that people normally would not apply in such a context.

It’s four hundred ninety-seven yards, two feet, one inch to the corner store. But people don’t say that. They say it’s five hundred yards.