Has Science proven the Bible is false?

Question

Many people believe that it is unscientific to believe the Bible. If this is true, however, then the following people were unscientific: Isaac Newton, Johann Kepler, Robert Boyle, Lord Kelvin, Louis Pasteur, Matthew Maury, Michael Faraday, Clerk Maxwell, John Ray, and Carolus Linnaeus. All of these great scientists believed the Bible, including the miracles recorded within it. In fact, they were creationists, as were almost all scientists before the time of Charles Darwin, whose Origin of Species was not published until 1859.

Answer 1

It's impossible for science to prove faith wrong. Like oil and water they don't mix.

Answer 2

The question is not a particularly valid one. The debate really is on whether the bible is allegorical or literal. If the bible is allegorical then "proof" is a non sequiter". The only thing that one can attempt to prove or disprove is the literal interpretation of the Bible. To a relatively high degree of probability the literal interpretation of the bible to a reasonable open minded individual does not co-incide with scientific observations. There is strong evidence for the big bang which goes against genesis in the literal sense, there is strong evidence for evolutionary processes occuring which again is in oposition to genesis, there is a significant amount of evidence that directly conflicts for example with the Noah and the ark story-it is thought by many scholars that the Noah story was plagarized from the babylonian "epic of gilgamesh". There is no particular documentantion of any kind of the 10 plagues of egypt-and so forth and so forth.

Answer 3

Ooh... looks like you found a touchy subject huh? everyone thinks they know it all don't they?

I don't claim to know it ALL but I do know Jesus and b/c I know he woudln't offer me anything false, I know the Bible is real.

There are PLENTY of scientists that believe the Bible b/c it is scientifically proven and their are plenty the don't for the same reason.

Check this place out and try to go the museum if you can! I went to a conference held by these guys (all are scientist, astonomers,etc and they all have the proof that they feel they need to believe God is real) They challenge the millions of years theories, the theory that stars are being born, it's just amazing really. I was doubting God a bit when I went but I sure wasn't when i left. Their website isn't the best but the museum should be wonderful. Find out if they will be visiting your are for a conference soon too. I think you will just eat it up. They have more material you can put your hands on than you will know what to do with. www.answersingenesis.com

Have a great day!

Answer 4

Science and religion are so profoundly dissimilar that they shouldn't even be compared. Religion is ancient and critically depends on the erroneous assumption that subjective mental experience is actually real. Science is a relatively recent phenomenon and is based on the proven fact that only the physical realm is objectively real. The two disciplines are as different as animal and vegetable, and any attempt to compare them is inevitably contentious and utterly pointless.

Fundamentalist Christians are constantly whining about Evolution, largely because it directly contradicts the Genesis version of creation and the origin of the species. It is this lunatic fringe of Christianity (about 5% of all Christians) who fervently believe it is impossible for the body of human knowledge, particularly regarding the nature of the physical realm, to advance beyond the superstitions of the ancient authors of the Bible. The truth is, science never intended to disprove the Bible, but rather humanity has matured intellectually and our knowledge of the natural realm has vastly increased, since the ancient scriptures were originally written. It is the stubborn reluctance of fundamentalist Christians to accept that the Bible was actually written by fallible men, rather than by an infallible god, that is responsible for the animosity between science and religion we all experience today. Apparently, Fundamentalists are unable to accept that -- freed of religious tyranny -- human knowledge can only continuously increase.

As for the distinguished scientists you've listed, you are correct. All were Christians. What you fail to appreciate is that they were Christians because there was no better explanation for the nature of reality during their times. Had those men had access to the accumulated knowledge and information we enjoy today -- had they lived in our times and participated in our culture -- I have not the slightest doubt every one of them would be an atheist.

One tiny complaint: the man's name was James Clerk Maxwell. Since his physics allowed humanity to put electromagnetism to good use, he deserves to be properly remembered.

Answer 5

the bible is not blanketly "false".

it is a series of stories collected that should not be taken literally.

in the movie gladiator russel crowe plays a general turned gladiator that is loosely based upon reality. It may be mostly fictional, but has elements that are historically true to it.

same goes with spiderman. The location, and heroism of the people of new york city are well documented and undeniably true, however the fictional story of a man swinging on webs after bieng bitten by a mutated spider are obviously fictional.

take these two stories' depictions and compare them to classic biblical stories.

is it likely that there was in fact a battle of jericho where the city was besieged and eventually fell to invading forces.

it is purely ridiculous to believe that a man built a sea-worthy boat capable of dealing with a world-wide flood, and was capable of storing two animals of every type and bieng able to only use two to repopulate the earth.

Answer 6

It seems to me that much of the Bible is true but the false part is the way people interprate what they read. The church and religious people seem determined to stick to what was understood 200 to 4000+ years ago at which time there was much less technology than we have now.

There were some areas in which the knowledge some people had was unreasonably sophisticated, like knowledge about astronomy which could not logically have been acquired by primitive people on earth without help from outside. Architecture also seemed to be way ahead of its time.

There was not any knowledge about computers and genetic engineering. Using todays knowledge I think that primitive people could have been describing cloning when referring to making Eve from Adams rib, they could refer to a computer as the tree of knowledge and software when they refer to the fruit of that knowledge.

The Garden of Eden could have been a genetic experiment because there were clearly other people on Earth (Cains wife for one) so the difference with Eden was that it was a controlled experiment with modified humans.

All of the above is consistent with the bible but looked at from a more modern point if view.

Answer 7

Many scientists in the past simply claimed to be religious, as there was no other option at the time without getting your *** thrown in jail like Galileo.
The Bible has been proving wrong historically (many events recorded in it did not take place or were recorded at completely wrong dates) mathematically (such as the calculation of pi, which even the Egyptians managed to get more accurately) and logically (many, many inconsistencies and hypocritical statements).
Stop trying to flog a dead horse.

@Skalite...ish: OMG! Galileo did NOT claim the Earth was the centre of the universe! Do you have any idea who he even is? He claimed the exact opposite, and was almost executed by the Church until he retracted his theory!

EDIT: I know some jackass is going to bring up that tired theory of Einstein being a believer. At most, Einstein was a deist, not a theist.

Answer 8

Of course they were, everyone was back then. Religion controlled the government. Atheism and/or Agnosticism was against the law. Even if you felt that way you kept it to yourself for fear of being put to death. Science was on the verge for hundreds of years. It was constantly being held back by the religious authority for fear that it would upset people.

Darwin was crushed when he made his findings because until he discovered and wrote the Origin of the Species he was very religious. It upset him a great deal to know that his beliefs were probably wrong.

Christianity ruled back then. Galileo was put in prison for suggesting that the earth revolved around the sun. And you're right Newton was interested in and studied religion vigorously but he also studied magic, and alchemy.

There aren't "PLENTY" of scientists that believe in god, Most scientist today do NOT believe in any god(s) most scientists are Atheists or Agnostic.

Answer 9

Science can"t prove the bible is false. Due to the simple fact we can not travel back in time to confirm anything. There are no scientific experiments that can be used to test anything written in the bible. Carbon dating can prove dates of objects but that's where it about ends. On the other hand religion can not prove science is wrong. They may argue its flawed because it doesn't follow religious guide lines or policy. But they can't prove science fact is wrong either. The belief in either being right or wrong is a matter of personal choice.

Answer 10

You post a list of scientists who died long before the modern scientific renaissance to back up your claim that the Bible is compatible with modern day science?

Of course most were creationists before Darwin. Not long before Darwin's time the church was still ikingll anyone who didn't subscribe to their dogma. Ever heard of the Dark Ages?

Issac Newton was a fine scientist, and he worked with the information he had available to him, which in his time, left some debate open in favor of organized religion, the debate has long since ended.

Answer 11

You may get chewed up over this one, but I am with you. There are many parables in the bible that many use to discredit the overall message. There is nothing that has convinced me to deny Christ. I am a follower of His. Debates over how old the Earth is are meaningless, except in the furthering of education. If it is sixty trillion years it does not change the gift of Love that is offered in the New Covenant. A grounded Christian should not be afraid of science. Some are always learning, but never coming to a knowledge of the truth.