Home > Religion & Spirituality > Christianity > Bible Study
Created on: July 22, 2008
After reading one of the primary posts, I too was appalled at the level of ignorance and more so because it was alleged that the Bible provided factual information that pre-dated many scientific discoveries.
The author feels free to put his own spin on the various quotations, so that whatever vagueness is actually expressed, it is then transformed into a vision of scientific fact. It doesn't matter, apparently, that the "facts" are only visible in hindsight. If there were the remotest possibility that the Bible contained anything scientific, then this would have been the best opportunity to predict something which wasn't previously known to science.
Misquoting the inferences in the Bible and using shoddy history do not constitute proof of anything except a bias that is so extreme and deliberate that one can only marvel as to the processes that gave rise to it.
From Isaiah 40:22 "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in." (KJV)
Even if we concede that the reference is to a round earth, there is no indication that any educated person after the 3rd century B.C. ever believed that it wasn't. The idea that medieval belief was in a flat earth is a myth, which is supposed to have originated with Washington Irving's story "The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus" in 1828.
Further in Jeremiah 33:22 "As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me." (KJV)
It is easy to see that the word stars is never mentioned, so it would be exceedingly difficult to conclude that there was some scientific fact being discussed. In fact, in reviewing five different translations, the phrase was always "host of heaven", or "army of heaven". There was never a mention of stars.
Using another example in Hebrews 11:3, it is useful to include the two verses prior to that quoted to put it into context.
" 1: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
2: For by it the elders obtained a good report.
3: Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."
Once again, it would be a real stretch to derive a definition or statement regarding atoms, from this quote, but in context it is quite clear that the
Below are the top articles rated and ranked by Helium members on:
Why can't the Bible be used as part of scientific literature?
by Marie Devine
To suppose the Bible cannot be used as part of scientific literature is a great error. Nor is it correct to suppose that
I recently stumbled across an organization called The Life in the Bible Institute, and being someone with a high regard
What is the difference between truth and fact? This is the seminal question when trying to decide whether or not to include
Scientific literature documents the scientific process of answering questions through observation, experimentation, and
After reading the top 5 stories for this topic I was appalled by the ignorance of the writers. All of them sure of themselves,
View All Articles on: Why can't the Bible be used as part of scientific literature?
Helium Debate
Cast your vote!
Should Christian churches allow gays to be ordained as priests?
Click for your side.
Featured Partner
Collegiate Society of America (CSAmerica)
The Collegiate Society of America (CSAmerica) has partnered with Helium, giving you the chance to write for a cause. Browse CSAmerica's featured titles, pick an issue and write! You can also donate your article earnings. S...more