Science REaffirms my faith in the Bible. Those events in the Bible can be married with Science. True or not?

Question

Genesis: An account that actually matches with science. Earth was a formless void: protoplanetary disc in the formation of the solar system. Plants first originated on land. Animal life started in the water, then proceeded to land. Human species is a relatively modern arrival. Mankind has dominion of the sea and air and is charged with taking care of it and learning of it to protect it. (Thus Science is from God as well)

Garden of Eden: Scientists have spoken of the fertile plains of the Jordan River, where the Garden of Eden was located. Garden of Eden existed, further proven by science.

Adam and Eve: Science and DNA analysis have proven we have come from a Mitochondrial Eve approximately 140000 years ago, and a Patriarchal Adam approximately 60-90000 years ago, from whom all mankind is descended. Evolved though we are, as God created the Earth, and all the natural processes in it, including Evolution.

We are descended from ape-like hominids, in God's likeness spiritually, not physically. God created all natural processes, and even provided for fossils, so we may learn of the natural world which He created, in order to maintain stewardship and care of the Earth, and to learn about ourselves as well. How can Evolution be bad when God created everything and therefore Evolution as well?

Noahs' Flood: Noah's Ark has most likely been found on Mount Ararat as per the Bible. Science has proven a regional flood in this area several thousands of years ago. Knowing that people then did not have the knowledge of science or the world at large to the degree we do now, it is clear that a regional flood must have seemed like a world flood for them, if they were not aware of the world at large.
The Bible is inspired but is not a scientificly or historically accurate document, although it shows us what happened, it doesn't explain HOW it happened. Science does, and is not at odds w/ Bible

Answer 1

I believe God work through natural processes but I have major problems with evolution and not just Scriptural. Science seems to rush head long into a paradox with evolution. Why is it with the billions upon billions of generation a virus goes through over the years that we haven't see a change in species. They surely do vary but after all the years we have been able to observe them they are still viruses. Seems that just one would move up the evolutionary ladder.. But it doesn't happen... Nope evolution has a huge hole in it. And that's just one of them... Jim

Answer 2

No, if we take Genesis as a LITERAL account, it simply does not match up with what we see in the physical world.

For example, just look at the order of creation in Genesis 1: first water, then light, then dry land, then fruits, then the stars, then the sun and moon, then all marine life, then birds and all other flying creatures, then all land animals. This order does NOT match up with what we see in real life, in hundreds of different subjects of study.

From here, you can do one of several things:
1) Throw out the Bible entirely
2) Believe that the Bible is true, but that God went out of his way to make it look like the events didn't happen the way they were written. In which case you'd be worshipping a being bent on deceiving people.
3) Take the Bible as a book of communications and inspiration, and just not a science or history book, and leave science to the scientists. This is what a large number of Christians do (though not enough, IMO).

Answer 3

If the Bible is the inspired word of God, then how come GOD didnt know about the rest of the world at the time of the Flood? I thought he was omniscient??

I also have issues with our DNA being traced to a "mitocondrial Eve" that is approx. 50K - 90K years OLDER than the mitocondrial Adam...

Scientists have spoken of the fertile plains near the Jordan River. However, you LIE when you say that the Garden of Eden has been discovered by scientists. This is pure FABRICATION on your part.

And, if God is so powerful, why on earth would be bother starting creation of mankind as a single celled creature, and then wait milions of years for us to finally evolve? Ridiculous. and, NOT TRUE at all. And, plants evolved in the water as well.

Answer 4

The problem is that if evolution were true, then the bible would be wrong.
First, If millions of years passed before man arrived, then you would have death and suffering before Adam's sin.
Second, God told Israel in the 10 commandments to remember the sabbath and keep it holy; for IN SIX DAYS God created the heaven and the earth.
Third, If we go with the "day/age" theory we still have a big problem. On day 3 of creation we have plants, but no sun until day 4.
The planetary disc theory has a big problem: The law of conservation of angular momentum. All the planets and moons should be rotating and orbiting in the same direction. They're not. Some planets rotate backwards and some of the moons orbits are in reverse in violation of this law.
The numbers that you quote are from scientists that are philosophically opposed to the genesis account in spite of the science.
For an extensive list of creation scientists, see:
http://www.creationinfo.com/list.htm

Answer 5

Not.

Everything that you have cut and pasted into your question from AiG is completely and utterly wrong. You spelled science correctly, I'll give you that.

The Creation myth of Genesis does not match what science thinks happened. (vegetation before light, light and dark before stars and the sun etc. ) The Creation myth was borrowed from Egyptian and Babylonian creation myths which predate the Hebrews by about 1000 years.
.
The Garden of Eden has NEVER been proved by science, that is a fabrication. The bible itself gives only vague and contradictory description of where it was. Of the 4 rivers mentioned in Genesis, the Jordan isn't one of them. (Pison, Gihon,Hiddekel, Euphrates) The biggest and most significant river Nile, isn't mentioned at all. It says Eden was in the East, but also says it was west of Nod. Nobody knows where Nod was supposed to be. Eden was likely borrowed from the Babylonians who believed in an ancient paradise known as Dilmun. It also may have been influenced by the Egyptian "Island of Flames", which is part of their creation myth about the world being created out of land arising from the Nile. Recall after Adam and Eve are kicked out, it is guarded by angels with flaming swords.

Whatever happened to Eden anyway. Did God destroy it or just let it run down? Is it still there being guarded by angels in some mystical unseen dimension, like Harry Potters' Platform 9 3/4?

Mitochondrial DNA is carried relatively unchanged in human females. They are the power generators of the cell, but have their own unique DNA. Mitochondria are thought to be the remnants of primitive bacteria that became commensals with primitive cellular life forms, and now each can't exist without the other. All it does is support the idea that modern humans arose in Africa and spread out from there. This just independent confirmation of the ideas of anthropologists such as the Leaky's who have been using fossil evidence to say much the same thing. And, last time I checked, Mesopotamia wasn't in Africa.

There is no ark on Mt Ararat. Some creationist zealots have published grainy photos of dark splotches claiming it is the ark. That doesn't actually count as evidence in science. (some other zealots have published grainy photos of Bigfoot and "UFO's) And in any case, the Bible doesn't specify a specific mountain, just a region. Science has shown evidence of MANY local floods in the area. Egyptian mythology was centered around the annual flooding of the Nile. There is no evidence whatsoever of a universal flood, which is what the Bible contends. You concede that it is allegory, but that is a minority view among believers. There are flood myths in several civilizations that pre-date the Hebrews. Many no doubt were based on actual events, about which myths arose through re-telling over the ages. This proves what, exactly?

There was one VERY impressive flood that may have inspired ALL of the flood myths. About 8000 years ago, after the glaciers melted and sea levels rose, the Mediterranean broke through the Bosporus and (re)flooded what is now the Black Sea. That would have been a flood that displaced entire prehistoric "civilizations" and killed untold 100's of thousands of people. It certainly would have led to legends of a flood that destroyed the world.

Christians cherry pick science the way George Bush & Co. cherry picked intelligence for evidence of WMD. If you can twist it to support your pre-concieved ideas than you use it, if it can't be made to fit, then you ignore it, and go to the default position of goddidit...which is faith.

Science doesn't work that way. ALL the evidence must be explained by a scientific theory, if it can't be, then the theory is wrong, and a new one must be developed to explain the evidence. The evidence doesn't lie, as Grissom is fond of saying on CSI.

See the good folks at http://www.talkreason.org/index.cfm for thoroughly detailed and referenced refutations of every single point you made.

Answer 6

Do some more research, more resoning is flawed. Fertile plains of the Jordan river probably did exist but it is not proof of the garden of eden, Noahs ark has not been found as the size is different to what is said in the bible.
Another example of christians cluthing at straws to prove their god is real.

Answer 7

I support your logic and understanding of science not trying to threaten religion, though i would like to point out how difficult it would be for adam and eve to have fathered the human species having lived 50-80 thousand years apart. Also, mitochondria are the energy generating cellular components I believe, so I do not see genetic tracking relevance there. Also, there is alot in genesis that doesnt coaffirm with science, but kudos on thinking for yourself... its definitely appreciated nowadays.

Oh ya, and Noahs ark would've been far larger than the structuring found on mr. aratat, if it did as it was supposed to, also, there is no documentable evidence of a world wide flood having occured (likely we would see that in the geo column).

Answer 8

Are you severe? The bible is God's be conscious or despite and while you're asserting "nicely do no longer in basic terms study that reason it won't make experience study the student's writing too" then you're asserting the bible won't make experience and you could no longer could study any student's writing's to comprehend the bible. The bible is meant to be the words to stay by skill of and in case you could added comprehend it with scholars writing's then you be attentive to on your heart the bible is organic crap.

Answer 9

One popular theory on the creation story, is that it's not a creation story at all, it's simply a reaction to other religions at the time who considered man unimportant.

The biblical creation story ends with Man (and Woman) being the highest form of creation in the phisical world.

Think of it like this.... And it doesn't matter if it lines up with science.

Answer 10

Samual1-Ch2v8 He raiseth up the poor out of the dust,
and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes
, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the
earth are the LORD's, and he hath set the world upon them.
Psalm 104:5 He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.
So---you think science agrees with the Bible when it states the flat earth stands on pillars--& doesn't move at all????