Is the Bible Really Scientifically Accurate? (page 5)

Perry

The Bible, taken literally, contradicts simple & logical science.

How so?

JWoods

How so?

Do you really believe that people a few thousand years BC with the same human DNA as man today actually lived 900+ years?

RubaDub

Wow ... this topic brings back memories ... the old "the Bible said the earth was round thousands of years ago."

We had a visiting speaker about 20 years ago on Sunday who gave the talk about the Bible and Science. One of the points was the verse in Isaiah that refers to the "circle of the earth."

After the meeting, we met for field service and I was in a group with four others, including one elder. The subject came up about how great the visiting brother did in his talk (he was a really good speaker BTW).

Anyway, I brought up the point about the earth being round. I asked the others about why the Society uses this verse for Scientific proof. The scripture merely says that the earth is round, not spherical. Many throughout history believed the earth was round based on eclipses and other scientific observations. It was just they often thought it was flat also.

Well, the elder spoke right up and said I was being unreasonable and nit-picking the verse. So I pulled some change out of my pocket. I held a quarter in my hand and asked whether it was round or flat ??? One brother said BOTH. That was my point exactly. Just because something is round does not in any way mean it is spherical. It was just around 500 years ago that it was determined that the earth was spherical, not just round.

Anyway, the elder pulled me into the back room at the KH the next meeting and read me the riot act ... that I was being disrespectful, not appreciating spiritual food, etc, etc, etc.

So anyway, I will never forget my "earth is round" story.

Rub a Dub

Perry

Cantleave;

What I am saying that is NOT Peer review.

I guess you can believe what you want. But, the overwhelming evidence was that a few people together with the funding process dominated the peer review process and produced a reality opposite of the truth.

Perry

JWoods...of course I do. Why?

JWoods

Why? Because that answers my point.

You seem to disbelieve many areas of current science which have proven to be correct, and yet hold on to fantastical tales from the far past without any practical way to verify their accuracy.

Fine - (in a rigidly literal religious sense) but this is not "scientifically accurate."

Olin Moyles Ghost

It's telling that the religious fundamentalists on this board aren't defending the verifiable, provable, lies in the Bible--but are rather trying to say that scientists don't get everything right either.

The fact of the matter is that the Bible claims to be the inspired ("God-breathed") word of a God who cannot lie. But the Bible contains objectively false statements that flatly contradict known facts about the natural world. Thus, the Bible is not what it claims to be. End of story.

Of course, this doesn't sit well with those who want to believe the Bible is God's word. Thus, they resort to misdirection and distraction in an attempt to change the subject. Reminds me of a certain religious organization we all know...

Perry

JWoods,

I am a fundamental bible-believer as opposed to a liberal bible believer. I became a believer while frequenting this board several years after joining.

Fundamentalists believe God first, then science.... in that order. The bar has to be really high before God's words are "spiritualized" or are taken metaphorically, or philosophically for a fundamentalist.

You seem to disbelieve many areas of current science

Which areas do you think that I disbelieve?

Perry

But the Bible contains objectively false statements that flatly contradict known facts about the natural world.

Olin,

Do you have an example?

PSacramento

RE: Peer reviews.

The bible, at least the NT, has gone through its "peer reviews" too.

Many books and letter were not accepted, the offical canons vary from denomination to denomination, the works of the apostolic fathers showed that different views were being formulated and debated and written off as "heresay" after "peer reviews".

Some have argued that certain parts of James and Peter's epistles "counter" arguments made by Paul.

Is the Bible Really Scientifically Accurate?

Share this