Bible as a Science Book

[iceage]

Several Biblical Creationist here make claims along these lines...

I don't try to limit God or deny His truth. Like I said before, when it comes down to believing His word or you, I'm gonna choose His word every time.

These people view the Bible as the source of natural knowledge and that as such is the authority concerning real things such as creation, biology, geology, cosmology, linguistics, etc.

It is notable that the Bible has never ever demonstrated to contain any prescience or foreknowledge about the nature of reality.

No scientific discovery ever preceded from the pages of any scripture or mystical communion with spirits or God. No literal or inspired reading of the Bible has ever served as the origination or a priori inspiration behind any discovery of the natural world - over thousands of years!

Compare the discoveries, leaps in understanding, paradigm shifts and just incremental accretion of knowledge that has originated via the ways of means of science versus revelation or inspiration via the Bible (or any other supposed word of God).

If we take a piece of paper and draw a vertical line down the middle and label one Science Sourced and other Bible Sourced and list the items of discovery, we would have one side filled with things like:

• Spherical Earth
• Heliocentric Solar Systems
• Existence of Galaxies (ours and others)
• Atomic Nature of Matter
• Chemical Natural of Atoms
• Duality of Matter and Energy
• Duality of Magnetic/Electric Fields
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics
• Structure and properties of DNA
• Relativity
• Quantum Mechanics
• Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics

These are only the profound highlights (many which I have missed). In the other column there is stark blank white space.

This result is an insurmountable problem for those who wish to hold the Bible as a book of natural knowledge, a science book.

[MooseOnTheLoose]

Science is limited by its own parameters.

The Bible deals with issues science can't.

I've never viewed the Bible as a science book. If it was, what would be the point of any human effort in the areas of learning and discovery? As far as I'm concerned, Science and Scripture do two entirely different jobs.

Just my take on things...

[docpotato]

The Bible also contains some pretty hilariously inaccurate methods for breeding spotted cows.

[rossum]

The Bible also contains some pretty hilariously inaccurate methods for breeding spotted cows.

Sheep. Genesis 30:31-70.

rossum

[iceage]

The Bible also contains some pretty hilariously inaccurate methods for breeding spotted cows.

I am surprised ICR hasn't carried out a scientific study on this biblically prescribed method of breeding spotted cows (or sheep as it may be). Who knows maybe there will be supernatural results, seems worth a try.

[Soyeong]

I am surprised ICR hasn't carried out a scientific study on this biblically prescribed method of breeding spotted cows (or sheep as it may be). Who knows maybe there will be supernatural results, seems worth a try.

Well, I think there is a difference between God saying to do that in a specific case and saying that it works the same in all cases. Perhaps going against man's wisdom on how to breed spotted cows and trusting God was a test of faith?

[iceage]

Well, I think there is a difference between God saying to do that in a specific case and saying that it works the same in all cases. Perhaps going against man's wisdom on how to breed spotted cows and trusting God was a test of faith?

Except it sounds like something a voodoo priest might described.

Back to the point, and I believe it to be significant argument that YEC'ers have never addressed.

The Bible as never ever been the inspiration or the source of a revelation about the workings of the natural world. This lack of performance is sufficient to say that these scriptures are not to be trusted or relied upon as a source or authority concerning matters of the physical reality of the universe.

[Tiggy]

Except it sounds like something a voodoo priest might described.

Back to the point, and I believe it to be significant argument that YEC'ers have never addressed.

The Bible as never ever been the inspiration or the source of a revelation about the workings of the natural world. This lack of performance is sufficient to say that these scriptures are not to be trusted or relied upon as a source or authority concerning matters of the physical reality of the universe.

Yep. There are any number of things in the Bible that if taken literally make absolutely no sense.

One story I always liked was about the naming of the animals. According to Genesis 2:19, God made every living thing and brought them to Adam to name. Well, according to the best estimates there are currently 30 million - 50 million living species on the Earth today. It is also estimated (based on population genetic studies and the fossil record) that over 99% of all species that once lived have gone extinct. Even taking the low end of those numbers, that means Adam had to name at least 2.97 billion species while he sat there - T-Rex, Brontosaurus, great white shark, blue whale, tsetse fly, box jellyfish - all of them. If he named one a second for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week he'd be at it for over 94 straight years (!).

And the YECcies still want us to take every word of the Bible as literal scientific truth.

- T

[docpotato]

Well, I think there is a difference between God saying to do that in a specific case and saying that it works the same in all cases. Perhaps going against man's wisdom on how to breed spotted cows and trusting God was a test of faith?

You'd think there'd be some sort-of disclaimer from an all-powerful deity writing down His instruction manual for mankind. Something like, "This does not always work. It only works this time because it is a miracle!"

[ChemMJW]

Which denominations tend to view the Bible as some kind of science book?

I'm Catholic, and a scientist, and I don't view the Bible as a science textbook.

[Tiggy]

Which denominations tend to view the Bible as some kind of science book?

I'm Catholic, and a scientist, and I don't view the Bible as a science textbook.

From personal experience I can tell you that a large percentage of Southern Baptists (at least in Alabama) view a literal interpretation of the Bible (as per YEC) to be a source for scientifically accurate info.

- T

[Soyeong]

Except it sounds like something a voodoo priest might described.

If God can do miracles that defy the natural order for someone who has faith, then it doesn't really matter what you think it sounds like.

The Bible as never ever been the inspiration or the source of a revelation about the workings of the natural world. This lack of performance is sufficient to say that these scriptures are not to be trusted or relied upon as a source or authority concerning matters of the physical reality of the universe.

You are welcome to try to do more than do more than just assert that is true.

[Soyeong]

You'd think there'd be some sort-of disclaimer from an all-powerful deity writing down His instruction manual for mankind. Something like, "This does not always work. It only works this time because it is a miracle!"

And here I thought it was fairly obvious. It's similar to needing a disclaimer on a superman costume that warns that it does not allow the user to fly.

[rogue06]

And here I thought it was fairly obvious. It's similar to needing a disclaimer on a superman costume that warns that it does not allow the user to fly.

Obviously you aren't familiar with our tort system and the things lawsuits have now required like warning labels on irons cautioning you not to be wearing what you are trying to iron.

[docpotato]

And here I thought it was fairly obvious. It's similar to needing a disclaimer on a superman costume that warns that it does not allow the user to fly.

Completely unfair: it's not like God steps in and says, "behold through my powers, spotted things!"

It is presented as the natural order of things. The way things are.

But they aren't.

Superman is presented as a fiction. Is that how you feel about this passage?