Does Science support the Bible in regards the history of man?

by Bethelite Elder 24 Replies latest jw friends

  • insearchoftruth
    insearchoftruth

    This is quite interesting.......does the society provide any defense when these scientific facts are posted to thier position that Adam was created in what was it, 4026 BCE??? Or do they just state that carbon dating and all the modern tools are inaccurate?

  • Psychotic Parrot
    Psychotic Parrot

    They tend to just ignore it all & hope that the rank and file won't bother looking further into it, which most of them don't. Those who do usually end up here

    And yes, i think the society has once or twice made a point of dismissing carbon dating as useless. They have the same penis envy that most creationist organisations have.

  • OnTheWayOut
    OnTheWayOut

    There's a fairly new approach to Biblical history compared to archaeology and science (A&S).
    A&S can demonstrate that the flood never happened, the exodus never happened, David was not the king of the vast 12-tribe nation but just the king of a 2-tribe village-nation, Jews came from the Cannaanites.

    So A&S is softening the blow, trying to avoid directly stating that the Bible is inaccurate. They say that the Bible is inspirational and symbolic, teaching lessons instead of history. They say that Moses may have been a composite of men, they say that Abraham was too important to different cultures to be fictional.

  • insearchoftruth
    insearchoftruth

    Thanks OTWO, I would have to say I agree with that approach, with just a little research one is able to see that the stories in the bible are often times not unique to the Bible. It should be looked at as a wonderful teaching novel, not a factual scientific text book!!!

  • mkr32208
    mkr32208
    We must venture to make the bible be cohesive with proven history, not the other way around, and we can do this, its just a matter of trying to understand what was being written.

    So as long as we can add to or take away or just say "that's now what they meant" then the bible is infalible?

    That's a pretty stupid statement, in fact using that statement ANY book can be called true. Heck I've got a cat, I can put a hat on him, therefore all the events depicted in the cat in the hat are true beyond a shadow of a doubt. If you dont' believe me I'll kill you and you'll burn in hell forever. Religion is so ass.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit