It’s not that at all. But how would someone writing a few thousand years ago explain to uneducated people the creation of the universe and life? How about when the very people explaining them are uneducated and ignorant of science? Spinoza, who knew the Bible better than anyone who posts here, said that the Bible, or Torah, was written by men who had a sense of morals but no knowledge of science.
1 Like
Which is not mentioned as the ancient Hebrews had no idea of what a solar system or galaxy were. For a time it was believed that the solar system was designed like a menorah.
1 Like
How is this significant to anything. All my conclusions are those that a STEM educated person would reach, assuming the Bible is accurate. (KJV is my standard)
Why cares what knowledge was known at the time of the writing?
Because it shows that if the writers weren’t being literal, we shouldn’t read it as literal.
1 Like
Then why should I take John 3:16 literal?
Have you any STEM education? I feel like I am arguing with a liberal educated person. If so, we don’t talk the same language.
Do you realize that the Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy) were written my a single man (Moses)?
God told him what to write. Moses’ source had a pretty good knowledge of science.
Of course, your rebuttal is that God did not talk with Moses. In Bible terminology this is called unbelief. I am okay that you don’t believe. And there is always the case that you have a liberal arts education and you can just pick and choose which parts of the Bible are literal.
Is all of the Bible literal?
I’m STEM educated. Just getting that out of the way.
For me the entire Bible can be taken literal.
Now the problem with STEM is you more inclined to need validity in what you are reading. You will readily accept either the Bible is literal or it’s just another book. But everything in between is difficult to accept.
I had to leave my brain at the Church door, until I examined every Bible passage looking for a contradiction
1 Like
Are you saying the Bible is true because you couldn’t find any contradictions?
I apply the Scientific Method continuously where the hypothesis is that the passage is literal and proceed to prove that it is not true
Can you give me an example?
Genesis 1 is the obvious example of the seven days of creation. Was the account accurate?
When discussing a religious and/or spiritual document, an education in history and religion would be more appropriate than STEM. It’s not like Moses could quote Newton’s Laws.
Why didn’t God just write it?
If God exists, does science exist? If God can defy the laws of physics, are they even laws?
It was actually six days. And according to STEM, it is not accurate.
Granted Genesis chapter 1 only describes 6 days. The 7th day is described in chapter 2. That said, the day of rest might be critical for man to know, making it part of the creation.
I will accept that 6 creative days
Impossible to know. Not testable.
Exactly,
And also contradicted in the Bible,
from 2 Peter 3:8
"With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. "
There is also no reason a thousand could not be a million or billion since it is unlikely the readers of 2 Peter could not fathom a number that big.
You must first understand faith. You either believe or you don’t.
I test a Bible passage against the science I know and other passages of the Bible. I am trying to “prove” the passage is inaccurate.
There is no solid proof of most everything in the Bible. I start by believing the passage is accurate and try to prove that it could not be accurate. I cannot prove that it is accurate.
1 Like
This my absolutely favorite zecarlo post!
Back in the 1970’s and early '80’s, I would periodically be confronted by a stranger who would say something like, “You’re pretty big, but I know a guy built like you, only he was bigger.” Or “My son is built like you, but he is much bigger than you.” After about 5 years dealing with these unsolicited comments, I eventually would reply, “It sure isn’t you.”
I’m not understanding what you are trying to say here. Are you questioning Spinoza’s credentials? He was the father of biblical criticism. He pointed out that Deuteronomy is credited to Moses but it describes Moses’ death and funeral so Moses could not have been the sole author. And keep in mind that Spinoza, a Jew, received a Talmud Torah education so he could read Hebrew and didn’t need to rely on a Greek translation.