Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
how did they know.?
Topic Started: May 25 2009, 11:27 PM (564 Views)
the breeze
No Avatar
the breeze
[ * ]
Evidence for God from Science: Christian ApologeticsScience Contradicts the Bible? Accurate Biblical Descriptions of Scientific Principles
by Rich Deem
IntroductionBible and Science?
Skeptics claim that the Bible makes a number of errors in its description of the physical universe. Many of these issues are handled on another page. However, what most skeptics don't know is that the Bible, written mostly by a bunch of sheep herders, makes a number of scientific claims that are remarkably correct - even though many were not even confirmed to be correct until within the last 100 years.

Rich Deem
The Bible is often described as a book that includes many ideas that are scientifically inaccurate. The truth is that what many Christians (and non-Christians) have misinterpreted the Bible in such a way as to make it seem to be at odds with the reality of our world. For example, the Roman Catholic Church promoted geocentrism (the idea that the earth is the center of the universe) for many years. This concept is not found in the Bible, but stems from the idea that since humans are the center of God's attention, that the place where they live must be the center of God's universe. This is neither a logical nor biblical inference. In fact, the Bible states that the heavens "fix their rule over the earth,"1 demonstrating that the heavens control the earth and not the other way around. The early proponents (Nicholas Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei) of heliocentrism (the earth revolving around the Sun) were all Christians (see related page - People of Faith - Famous Scientists). In fact, Isaac Newton, in his famous scientific work, Principia, stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being."

Purpose of the BibleOf course, the Bible was not written as a work of science nor was its purpose to describe the workings of the physical world. It was written to explain spiritual principles - the nature of mankind, the nature of God, and how people can have a personal relationship with God. However, when the Bible describes the physical world, it is accurate. The purpose of this page is to illustrate some of the remarkable examples of scientific principles described in the Bible hundreds to thousands of years before they were proved to be true by science.

The Bible and Science Scientific Principle Biblical Reference
Cosmology/Astronomy
Time had a beginning 2 Timothy 1:9, Titus 1:2, 1 Corinthians 2:72
The universe had a beginning Genesis 1:1, 2:4, Isaiah 42:5, etc.3
The universe was created from the invisible Hebrews 11:34
The dimensions of the universe were created Romans 8:38-395
The universe is expanding Job 9:8, Psalm 104:2, Isaiah 40:22, Isaiah 42:5, Isaiah 44:24, Isaiah 45:12, Isaiah 48:13, Isaiah 51:13, Jeremiah 10:12, Jeremiah 51:15, Zechariah 12:16
Creation of matter and energy has ended in the universe (refutes steady-state theory) Genesis 2:3-47
The universe is winding down and will "wear out" (second law of thermodynamics ensures that the universe will run down due to "heat death"-maximum entropy) Psalm 102:25-278
Describes the correct order of creation Genesis 1 (see Day-Age Genesis One Interpretation)
Number of stars exceeds a billion Genesis 22:17, Jeremiah 33:229
Every star is different 1 Corinthians 15:4110
Pleiades and Orion as gravitationally bound star groups Job 38:3111
Light is in motion Job 38:19-2012
The earth is controlled by the heavens Job 38:331
Earth is a sphere Isaiah 40:2213 Job 26:1014
At any time, there is day and night on the Earth Luke 17:34-3515
Earth is suspended in space Job 26:716
Earth Sciences
Earth began as a waterworld. Formation of continents by tectonic activity described Genesis 1:2-9, Psalm 104:6-9, Proverbs 3:19, Proverbs 8:27-29, Job 38:4-8, 2 Peter 3:517
Water cycle described Ecclesiastes 1:7; Isaiah 55:10, Job 36:27-2818
Valleys exist on the bottom of the sea 2 Samuel 22:1619
Vents exist on the bottom of the sea Job 38:1620
Ocean currents in the sea Psalm 8:821
Air has weight Job 28:2522
Winds blow in circular paths Ecclesiastes 1:623
Biology
The chemical nature of human life Genesis 2:7, 3:1924
Life of creatures are in the blood Leviticus 17:1125
The nature of infectious diseases Leviticus 13:4626
Importance of sanitation to health
Numbers 19, Deuteronomy 23:12-13, Leviticus 7-927

Descripciones BÃŒblicas Exactas de Principios CientÃŒficos


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related Pages •False Teachings in the Bible?
•Biblical "Contradictions" and False Teachings in the Bible? Links to other "Bible contradictions" pages on the web
•The Bible Teaches That the Heavens Were a Solid Dome, Embedded with Stars?
•Science and Faith Associations
•Why are Most Scientists Atheists If There is Evidence for Belief in God?
•Famous Scientists Who Believed in God
•Did Albert Einstein Believe in a Personal God?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

What's this paste arguing, that "the Bible was not written as a work of science" or "the remarkable examples of scientific principles described in the Bible"? Contradictions like this are confused.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
ngc1514
Member Avatar
Moderator
[ * ]
Post facto interpretation of ambiguous passages isn't a very strong argument, breezy.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ngc1514
Member Avatar
Moderator
[ * ]
The easiest way to demonstrate the validity of the science behind the bible would be to make a prediction of something science will learn in the future. Far more effective than attempting to fit those ambiguous passages to things already discovered.

Otherwise your argument collapses for the same reason the quatrains of Nostradamus do. Postdicting is easy, predicting far more difficult. Reading a few passages you mentioned, you'd be hard pressed to show that they say what you are claiming they say.

The one about light moving ( 19Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof, ) it would appear that dark is moving as well. And I don't think the concept of light "dwelleth[ing]" anywhere has a lot of scientific validity.

As I say... ambiguous passages subject to post facto exposition. Something that might impress the scientifically illiterate, but not many others.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Gen 1:3 "And God said, Let there be light: and there was light."

Gen 1:14-18 "And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

"And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

"And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

"And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

"And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good."

From that I predict science will find light without sources.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
ngc1514
Member Avatar
Moderator
[ * ]
Amazing how the authors of Genesis didn't know the moon was illuminated by the sun. And if it's supposed to rule the darkness - why do we have so many dark hours without moonlight?

I'm sure sourceless light will be discovered "real soon now."

Yeah, the authors of Genesis did get which light does what a bit muddled.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

"If God did not exist it would have been necessary to create him."

I have always thought that quotation sums it up pretty well with regard to humans & religion. Because we are aware of our own mortality we need a way to deal with it. God may very well exist, I really hope he does. Is he the god of Christianity? Well I have a big problem with that one, since most humans are not Christian, & yet most hold a belief in a supreme being of some sort. An even smaller number hold to their views that their particular brand of Christianity (or Islam or anything else for that matter) is the only valid one. That is even more ridiculous. If the Christan view is correct, I am not so sure I would like to spend eternity with many Christians I know. Having said all that, my gut feeling is there is some other plane of existence after death, but then I return to that initial quotation and wonder if there is.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I can see the evolutionary benefits of early religion as a means of uniting people into groups better able to survive than individuals. Considering that, the more recent trends toward individual personal relationships with God would seem to suggest religion is not as import as it once was.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
ngc1514
Member Avatar
Moderator
[ * ]
I think that the historical context of Voltaire's remark must be considered. Experimental science was just really getting started during his lifetime (1684-1778) and there were far more questions about the fundamental than there are today.

As the gaps into which god is thrust grow smaller, the role of god in the physical universe shrinks. The need for "god the creator" is smaller now than it has ever been in history and there are no signs that the gaps will not continue to disappear.

Afterlife? I certainly hope not! But it does raise the question of "what survives death?" Calling it a spirit or soul without being able to define what it might be - without resorting to basically meaningless terms like the "immaterial part of a person" or the tautological "that which survives death" - leads me to think it's not gonna happen.

The part that most bothers me is "What the heck can engage a reasonably intelligent person for eternity?" I like fishing and drinking a beer or two and that might be fun for the first 789 quintillion years, but it's going to pale at some point and an infinite number of years means that EVERYTHING you do will pale for an infinite span of time.

Sounds like a great definition of hell to me!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mike
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ * ]
I thought the article explained things quite well. The author is right, the bible is not meant to be a science text book. But rather is the divine revelations of God and His relationship with His creation. It never claims to be a science text book. I thought that fact would be obvious.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · RV AND CAMPING DISCUSSION · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis