Scientific FACTS in the Bible

Well I would not argue that the Bible has many scientific facts, although I could argue with some of the evidence you gave for dinosaurs. But the person who can read it in its very original tounge, and knows the older definitions of the words would find the bible is Not at odds with evolution and sciantific facts. It is how some of the bible has been interpreted and some of the downright wrong teachings by the church that makes the bible seem at odds with science. The fact is there would be no science if it were not for holy scriptures. If someone could also read some of the older writings of the mesopotamian cultures that the old testament borrowed on heavily some of the harder verse would also become very clear. Especially the Sumerian texts Enuma Elish and Gilgamesh. Then the codices of the Akkadians and Ugaret and Babylonians. Many of the so called contradictions of the bible are not contradictions at all, but a misunderstanding of the texts. I wish everyone could study ancient near and middle eastern languages and religions. There are so many misconceptions about what the bible really says, heck the whole thing about who Cain married would be solved if only they could unlearn what they were taught, and reread it without preconceptions of what it says, also the age of the earth would not be at odds with science, and all the earths extinctions and dinosaurs would not be an issue, nether would evolution, cro-magnon and neandertal and such is very explainable and there is a history written in the bible and science would actually Prove what the bible has already said, if only it was taught and read correctly.

Can you make something from nothing? If you can't, please tell me what is creation.

The lake of fire in revelations at the end of days reminds me of the current estimates on what will happen when our galaxy and Andromeda meet. They are on a collision course due to the massive black holes at the center of each and everything in both systems will become super heated to become a cosmic lake of fire. Of course according to estimate we wont have to worry anytime soon. In fact our sun will probably expand to engulf our planet long before that. Think happy thoughts, think happy thoughts, think happy thoughts.....LOL

I don't really know why some people insist that the Bible suggest that the world is flat, when it actually tells the opposite. Check out my post http://www.mylot.com/w/discussions/1975512.aspx

I agree with you, however, I know some stuff are lost in translation- so the best way to understand what's written in the bible would be to know Hebrew and read it in that language.

Actually, Isaiah 40:22 is an example of error in the Bible: a circle is a flat, 2-dimensional surface. If the Bible was scientifically accurate, it would have referred to the sphere of the earth.

I'm Catholic and for us the science has never been a big obstacle. Since the days of Augustine, we have put a less literal translation on the old testament. Also, Teilhard de Chardin helped with evolution. It helps to have a famous scientist who teaches evolution and just happens to be a Jesuit priest.

"Job 40:15 Behold now behemoth, which I made as well as you; he easts grass like an ox." In some versions it reads "which I made with thee". In either case, it implies the creature is living with men. We know dinosaurs existed long before humans. We also know that not all dinosaurs ate grass. This bible passage is talking about a large herbivore, not a dinosaur. For your second verse - we haven't yet discovered a Levaithon, so I don't see how it can be considered fact. "Jer 33:22 " This is not so much a fact as it is a figure of speech. Obviously David's children were not as "countless" as the stars in the sky. "Scientists knew nothing about how many stars there were until Telescopes and Rockets came around, but the bible recorded it!" You just got done citing a verse that said the stars were countless. The biblical authors had no idea how many stars there were. Even if they did, that number would be different today, because the number fluctuates based on the destruction and creation of stars. Bet the bible doesn't say anything about that, though. There's not much information that's factually accurate in the bible. Like so many religious writings, it's vague enough that anyone can point and say "look, see, that sort of fits. There must be facts in the bible!" They did get a few things right, but not the stuff you're talking about. It doesn't say the Earth is round (it says the opposite), it doesn't talk about Ozone or the hemispheres, it definitely isn't citing fact when it's covering the Great Flood. The bible is an interesting story book, but not much more.

I'm also one who believes like yourself that the Bible is not a book about science but that when it touches on science it is 100% correct. Of course understanding the original words and translating them correctly in today's language is important. I do not have any knowledge of the original languages so I make use of all the different translations to discern the correct translation. Here is another verse that states a scientific fact that was only proved much later and is different from the thinking of the day. Job 26:7 (King James Version) 7He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

Just because the Bible has several scientific facts in it doesn't mean that the entire Bible is fact. I'm pretty sure that all of the Harry Potter books also had scientific facts in them too. If you're saying that these scientific facts were discovered long before modern science proved them, then it is a matter of interpretation. But really, even I can look up at the night sky and tell you that there are countless stars. Now if the Bible had said, "you can only see 3000 stars at any one time", it would be a lot more impressive than "there's lots of them". By the way, way back when there was not nearly as much light pollution, I would think that this number would be 5 or 6000. Truth be told, I am not against religion as I believe in and follow most of the morals and principles that religions try to teach us. Most of the major religions teach mostly the same things anyway, just presented differently. What I don't agree on is the methods and practices of religions to get you to believe. For me, religion is not necessary as I am confident in my existence and believe in what I do every day. I can't understand why people would be willing to devote their entire lives to a book that was written a really long time ago, without question and without undeniable proof. The theory of evolution has a lot of scientific facts behind it and is generally accepted but the theory of creationism? Where is its proof? By the way, for people asking science to prove that there is no God, the burden of proof is on the believers to prove that there is, not the other way around. Just like the belief in UFOs and ghosts, it is up to the person who believes in them to prove that they exist rather than other people to prove that they don't.

I'm sorry, what's your point?