Science Vs. the bible

He does not make your point. Don't take his words and place them where he does not. But then I do not have an agenda to use scripture to prop up evolution.

 

Like the Rose of Sharon? You cannot impose your narrow, twentieth-century thoughts on the passages of Scripture. Your thoughts must be defined by them.

 

You mischaracterize those you disagree with. Whether that is intentional I do not know but it is not certain to me one way or the other. Just because we hold that where scripture speaks on science it is accurate and true does not mean that it is being used or even seen as a science journal. That rhetoric seems to be more of a political type tactic rather than honest discussion.

 

This is a huge assumption.

The Lord spoke unto Moses.

Didn't the moon have phases in ancient times? They knew the moon did not generate its own light.

 

You are really thick.

Usage is what defines a word. Even in modern usage, the word light is not limited to the object that generates light. It can refer to a myriad of indirect lighting sources. You're imposing your arbitrary, narrow assumptions on the words of a better, more knowlegdeable man.

They wrote as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

You have no idea what they understood or didn't. Language is descriptive. Are you saying you never use the words moonlight or sunrise?

No it doesn't. Moses was educated in the wisdom of the Egyptians, but their superstitions did not find their way into the Penteteuch. God dictated the Creation account. He dictated the law. He showed Moses the pattern for the Tabernacle. Bezalel's skill was a gift of the Holy Ghost, not a natural talent.

There is account after account that raises men of God above the constraints of their environments and the superstitions of their cultures.

 

For the benefit of the non-sceptic: http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i1/moses.asp

Beyond notThinking's arbitrary assumption concerning the physical features of an antedeluvian world, the Bible answers this question.

 

I've noticed no such thing. This gigantic leap in logic hinges on two arbitrary assumptions : 1) That you know the state of the technology of the ancients, and 2) That you know what Moses or any of the other biblical authors knew.

You cannot possibly know these things.

Very little is actually known of the ancients, and recent discoveries are shattering long-held assumptions based on a Darwinian world view.

The fact of the matter is that the supposed scientific difficulties you've posed are really no difficulty to people who know what they're talking about. The more limited an individual's knowledge, the more difficulty he has with things he does not understand. When you add the individual's pride and idolatry into the mix, then his conclusion is that the difficulty isn't himself and his stunted mentality, but the supposed ignorance and superstition of the biblical authors.

Professing himself to be wise, he becomes a fool.

You should have titled this thread Scientists Vs. the Bible, because true science is not juxtaposed against the Scriptures.

 

Please make use of the NET Bible online. They have very good footnotes plus if you click on the verse itself, you can see the breakdown of words. For "rabbit" they have "hare" and say this:

Many words for animals in the Hebrew were unknown to translators, and so you have often find these terms translated differently. This should be basic knowledge for the Christian about the Bible.

The moon would have seemed to be a lesser light to anyone - and it still is, even though we know it reflects the sun. But for much of the time, it is a light. One can see on nights when the moon is full or almost full although it clearly is not as bright as the sun.

Interesting that God does not use the words for "sun" and "moon." That is because the sun and moon were being worshiped and God is revealing that He created them. It is a slap in the face to those worshiping the sun and moon.

That's also another reason to call the moon a "lesser light."

 

Rob, see my comments above. This was a way to put down the sun and moon gods.

 

As I said before - it was well within Moses' graps to see that God made the Sun and the Moon on day 4 -- but he was not informed on HOW God made them - not given the manual on "how to make a sun" not given any info at all in fact on the subject of nuclear fusion.

God's intent was to convey the point that He is the creator of the Sun and the moon and that it was done on day four of creation week - and that it was done in a literal "Evening and morning - the 4th day".

Beyond that information - God did not give more details.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Actually I think the comment I made above - is pretty clear on that point.

There is no "how it functions" in the text for making the Sun and the moon.

No mention at all of "nuclear fusion".

I have stated that point repeatedly.

Close

We can show a 10 year old a video depicting the 7 days of Creation week all happenning in seven literal days. The 10 year old can SEE the "sequence" (bronze age or not). The 10 year old can even "report" the sequence.

But they still do not know much at all about nuclear fusion for the sun.

I agree that man is relating what God showed -- as the 10 year old would do it - or a 90 year old would do it etc.

God seldom gets into the "HOW I did it" -- He usually sticks with "THAT I did it" and so when Joshua commands the Sun to stand still - the Bible tells us that this is what happened for an entire 24 hour period - but it does not tell us HOW God did it.

It does not say for example "God caused the great turtle that holds up the earth to move backwards so that the sun appeared to be still" as if the intent was to explain "HOW" God did something.

in Christ,

Bob

 

But there is an interesting example in the case of Jacob -- who was using the superstition of his day to cut striped poles and have the sheep mating in view of striped rods to produce spotted and speckled offspring.

In a dream God shows him that it is God that is brining about the desired result and not the poles. (ok that part was easy) but then the text goes on to show that the trait for spotted or speckled or solid patterns was actually being determined by which males were mating.

This was a level of genetics that Moses did not have.

in Christ,

Bob