Science vs the Bible Part 2?

Question

Many people in a recent thread are saying they would never believe science over the bible. I would like to provide a few examples and ask you a simple question.


Example:

The Bible:
Bats are birds of the air.

Science:
Bats are flying mammals. (rodents)

The Bible:
Rabbits chew their cud

Science:
Rabbits do not chew their cud.

Who do you believe?

Scneblin, thank you for admitting that the bible,as currently written has errors and is not to be believed over science. You can use the same logic with Isaiah.
The Messiah is not to be born of a virgin, but a young women.

Rabbits do not 'raise up what has been swallowed', Scneblin, you're using apologetics again

Completely dishonest.

Pericles, why the dishonesty? Science knows that God did not create man on the sixth day of creation.

Here's another example:

All winged creeping things that go upon all fours are an abomination to you. Yet these may you eat of all winged creeping things that go on all fours, which have legs above their feet, with which to leap upon the earth; even these of them you may eat: the locust after its kind, the bald locust after its kind, the cricket after its kind, and the grasshopper after its kind. But all winged creeping things, which have four feet, are an abomination to you (Lev. 11:20-23, BB).

Hate to break it to you, but insects do not have four feet.

Paul Cyp, so I hear you saying that the bible 'properly understood' is not the way it's written.

Makes sense.

Answer 1

I bet you anything nobody will admit to believing rabbits chew their cud, but they'll say the Bible has no errors. As for me, I choose science. For those doubting the Biblical basis, here you go:

Leviticus 11:3–6 says:

‘Whatever divides the hoof, and is cloven-footed, chewing the cud, among the animals, that you shall eat.

‘Only, you shall not eat these of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: the camel, for he chews the cud but does not divide the hoof; he is unclean to you.

‘And the rock badger, because he chews the cud, but does not divide the hoof; he is unclean to you.

‘And the hare, because he chews the cud but does not divide the hoof; he is unclean to you.’

Answer 2

well rabbits have been classified as chewing the cud because of the way they eat. they do not have the extra stomach.

However, the Hebrew phrase for ‘chew the cud’ simply means ‘raising up what has been swallowed’. Coneys and rabbits go through such similar motions to ruminants that Linnaeus, the father of modern classification (and a creationist), at first classified them as ruminants. Also, rabbits and hares practise refection, which is essentially the same principle as rumination, and does indeed ‘raise up what has been swallowed’. The food goes right through the rabbit and is passed out as a special type of dropping. These are re-eaten, and can now nourish the rabbit as they have already been partly digested.

and the bat reason is explained here

Obviously, Linnean classification was not available in the time of the writing of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, and the scientific definition of what a "bird" was did not exist either. Classification of animals and things was made by different means: function or form. In this case, the word we render birds means simply "owner of a wing", the word being 'owph, which comes from a root word which means to cover or to fly.

The category of 'owph includes birds, bats, and certain insects. It would also have included pterosaurs, if they had been around. Even modern ecologists classify water-dwelling life in a very similar way according to their mode of living: plankton (floaters/drifters), nekton (swimmers) and benthos (bottom-dwellers). It's similar to refuting geocentrism charges against the Bible by showing that even modern astronomers use terms like "sunset" and "sunrise" without being accused of being geocentrists, so why shouldn't we make the same allowance for the Bible writers.

Answer 3

No, not humans as we know them. And this is a scientific fact, whatever the bible says. Throughout history the bible has changed according to popular belief, and I doubt the Pope would assert now that humans lived at the same time as dinosaurs. I doubt the bible says we did anyway, because the bible never mentions dinosaurs. If you're going by what the bible says exactly, then you would be asking a million other insane things before this question comes up.

Answer 4

Shawn, you are being winnowed.
http://www.schneblin.com/studies/pdfs/winnowing_wheat_chaff.pdf

Bats are birds of the air.
The Hebrew "owph" means "that which fly about". The translators assumed "birds". The same word is used for winged insects.

Rabbits chew their cud
The Hebrew phrase "awlah gerah" or "chew the cud" simply means "raising up what has been swallowed". Coneys and rabbits go through such similar motions to ruminants. Also, rabbits and hares practice refection, which is essentially the same principle as rumination, and does indeed ‘raise up what has been swallowed’. The food goes right through the rabbit and is passed out as a special type of dropping. These are re-eaten, and can now nourish the rabbit as they have already been partly digested. This is why they were considered unclean.

I believe the Bible is right, and you do not know how to study it.

Answer 5

The Bible is not a scientific treatise, and is not a single book, is many books compunded over centuries that make no categorical claim on any scientific knowledge. None of these books was written with the purpose of expounding any science or method or measurement of anything. there were plenty of treatises on the ancient world that took care of this. Regarding human knowledge I accept the conclusions derived from logical dedution and induction in the empiric scientific method. If conclusions follow from premises and the remises can be sustanciated and proved beyond the shadow of a doubt to be true, logically follows that the conclusions are true.On matters of faith science is and must be silent, because it lies outside its field of influence, it can't either prove or disprove what lies outside of our physical perceptual capacity. On matters of faith I believe the Bible, because is the inspired word of God I believe to be revealed to men, I trust, I believe....but I don't know in the implicit and full sense of knowing: this would be contradictory, however> There is evidence in the nature of reality, in the intrinsic order and rationality subsistent in all its levels that this can not be accomplished by mere chaos or random ocurrence: We can't go back ad infinitum in the chin of cause and effect: there must be an unmoved mover, a neccesary being, a supreme perfection that lies beyond and within reality itself: and this being we call God.

Answer 6

The problem is ... it's not science vs. the Bible, it's science vs. my own personal, unauthorized, simplistic interpretations of the Bible. There is no conflict between science, properly understood, and the Bible, properly understood. Truth cannot conflict with truth. The problem is, every little Christian group starts from the premise that their own biblical interpretation is infallible, and therefore anything that conflicts with it must be wrong. It never seems to occur to them that their biblical interpretations might be wrong - especially considering that their interpretations conflict not only with known scientific facts, but also with the biblical interpretations of many other Christian groups!

Answer 7

You are just trying to mislead. As I said Science and the Bible
never contradict each other. Only theorists, agnostics, atheists, evolutionists are trying to site contradictions of their own invention. You are just twisting Bible passages which is not there. You cannot even site a verse on what you said above. Sensible people never put their future in an statistical monstrocity.

Answer 8

I believe what the bible says.

John 3:16[kjv] For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

so when we believe in JESUS we have eternal life.JESUS lived a sinless life and gave up his life as a sacrifice so we can be sin free. Ask JESUS to come into your heart and forgive ur sins and cleanse ur past with the blood JESUS shed on the cross.

With a simple prayer like above u can be saved.JESUS loves u and wants u to be saved.

Answer 9

Wow great examples.... not really, I do not even know what cud is. Considering mammals were not really known, if someone said hey look at those flying mammals, people would have thought you were simply crazy. God wanted his people to understand his message on how to live life, he cared little for explaining taxonomy.

Answer 10

I'll take what God chooses to call things, "God" from "His" point of view, not yours, or anyone Else's. Ya see the bible tells us that this kind of stuff would pop up, "ahead of time", but then with a scientific mind you must have read it in it's entirety and not out of context.