Are you willing to apply the same standard to your own Scriptures? Here is a bunch of scientific problems with the Bible:__the bat is a bird (Lev. 11:19, Deut. 14:11, 18); _Some fowls are four-footed (Lev. 11:20-21); _Some creeping insects have four legs. (Lev. 11:22-23); _Hares chew the cud (Lev. 11:6); _Conies chew the cud (Lev. 11:5); _Camels don't divide the hoof (Lev. 11:4); _The earth was formed out of and by means of water (2 Peter 3:5 RSV); _The earth rest on pillars (1 Sam. 2:8); _The earth won't be moved (1Chron. 16:30); _A hare does not divide the hoof (Deut. 14:7); _The rainbow is not as old as rain and sunshine (Gen. 9:13); _A mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds and grows into the greatest of all shrubs (Matt. 13:31-32 RSV); _Turtles have voices (Song of Sol. 2:12); _The earth has ends or edges (Job 37:3); _The earth has four corners (Isa. 11:12, Rev. 7:1); _Some 4-legged animals fly (Lev. 11:21); _The world's language didn't evolve but appeared suddenly (Gen. 11:6-9) _A fetus can understand speech (Luke 1:44). _The moon is a light source like the sun (Gen 1:16) ___source: http://freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/The_Bible_and_Science
7/21/2008 4:06 AM
The Bible makes references to mythical creatures, such as in Numbers 21:6 where it speaks of "fiery serpents".
1.Most of your examples are taxonomic.
i) The Bible doesn’t pretend to offer a “scientific” taxonomy. Rather, it offers a cultic taxonomy.
Animals are classified for purposes of ritual purity and impurity. So it’s a question of how an average Israelite would identify, on sight, a ritually clean or unclean animal. So animals are classified according to certain superficial characteristics.
You’re making no effort to understand the text on its own terms. That’s very illiterate of you.
ii) I’d add that scientists can’t agree on how to classify animals. Some use a phenetic taxonomy, others a phylogenetic taxonomy, still others a cladistic taxonomy.
2.As to Gen 1:16,
i) The moon is a light source. Have you never observed moonlight? It’s possible to see at night on a full moon.
ii) Does the moon emit light the way the sun emits light? No. But the text never said that. The moon is still a source of light to an earthbound observer, and the text is written from that vantage-point.
iii) More to the point, the text is talking about the calendrical function of the sun and moon (e.g. solar and lunar calendars). For example, Israel had annual religious festivals. That required a calendar, based on phases of the moon or some other periodic process.
Once again, you’re making no effort to understand the text on its own terms. That’s very illiterate of you.
3.Cant 2:12 refers to doves. In the KJV, these are called “turtles,” which is short for turtledoves. Doves are songbirds. Let’s also keep in mind that Canticles consists of love poetry.
Instead of relying on some inept, “free-thought” Wikipedia article, you need to learn how to read a text of Scripture on its own terms. You also need to make allowance for an Elizabethan translation (KJV), as well as the difference between one literary genre and another.
4.As to 1 Chron 16:30,
i) This doesn’t refer to the “earth,” but the “ground.” Depending on context, the Hebrew word can be rendered more than one way.
ii) It isn’t talking about the relation of the “earth” to other celestial bodies, but to cataclysmic earthquakes.
iii) It’s very anachronistic of you to interpret the text in light of Ptolemaic astronomy.
iv) This verse comes from a battle song. It’s poetic.
5.As to Matt. 13:31-32,
i) That’s a proverbial, hyperbolic comparison—based on Palestinian agriculture.
ii) Also keep in mind the literary genre in which this comparison occurs. This is not a course in botany, but a parabolic illustration.
6.As to the shape of the earth, the Bible uses architectural metaphors. That’s because the earth is sacred space, and so it’s depicted as if it were a temple or tabernacle.
7.As to Gen 11:6-9,
i) The Bible doesn’t say that all modern languages originated suddenly. The text had reference to its own timeframe. We’d expect the survivors of the flood to speak one language.
ii) Also keep in mind that, in context, ha Eretz has reference to the whole “land,” not the whole “earth.” 11:2 mentions a migration from one compass point to another. So the perspective is local rather than global. If the whole earth were in view, there’d be no place to go.
8.As to 2 Peter 3:5, that’s obviously a literary allusion to the creation account in Gen 1. So what’s your point?
9.As to Lk 1:44, unborn babies have souls, and this was the soul of a prophet, so he was inspired. Can science disprove the soul? No. Can science disprove the Holy Spirit? No.
10.As to Gen 9:13,
i) Even if you interpret this in YEC terms, you can’t have a rainbow without sunshine or rain, so, yes, even at that level, rain and sunshine are causally (and temporally) prior to rainbows.
ii) However, the Bible often assigns a new function to a preexisting custom or entity (e.g. circumcision).
11. As to Num 21:6,
i) This refers, not to a mythological creature, but a venomous snake like a carpet viper.
ii) As Donald Wiseman explains, the Hebrew word (sarap) can either mean “fiery” or “poisonous.”
Cf. D. J. Wiseman, “Flying Serpents,” TynBul 23 (1972): 108-10