Knowing what we know today about Astronomy, Cosmology, Evolution, Biology and Earth Science...?

Question

would have Christianity and the Bible taken hold as it has, if it began in 2007, instead of 2000 years ago...? For example, the Bible would need a complete re-write to not look rediculous to today's scientists. (Whales are fish, bats are birds, and dInosaurs never existed. The earth is the center of the universe, and flat, and the sun revolves around it? yeah, ok)

Answer 1

Not a chance. Religion flourishes in ignorance. When Koreshes and Joneses arise, their followers are needy, passive and deeply ignorant of reality.

Only their deep roots keep the big religions going. A few generations of unobstructed education could do away with all of it.

CD

Answer 2

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the earth is flat nor that it is the center of the universe. No such scriptures exist. Because science had been teaching that for centuries - even before the Bible was written - theologians attempted to interpret a Bible verse to support that wrong science.

Whales are not said to be "fish" at any point in the Bible.
Bats are said to be "flying creatures" and included in a list creatures that fly with birds, but are not listed AS "birds" anywhere in the Bible.
The word "dinosaurs" is not used in the King James Bible because it was translated in 1611, and the word "dinosaurs" was invented in the late 1800s. The Bible uses the word "dragons" - which is what dinosaurs were called at that time. There are 50 references to them in the Bible. This includes a land species which resembles what most people think of as a "dinosaur" - the Behemoth, and a water species called the Leviathan. It also refers to the frequency with which the bones and fossils of extinct dragons were found in desolate and uninhabitated places. So the people of that day had knowledge of the existance of "dinosaurs" and mentioned them in the scripture.

Perhaps instead of a "rewrite", what is needed is a "re-read" of the current Bible. You seem to have missed a lot of the detail your last time through it.

Answer 3

I think we very likely could; taken in the context of the times it was written in, the Bible was scientifically "accurate;" I think at least some of the mysticism and miracles were symbolic interpretations even then, told in the style of the times to make a point.

As a very good friend once told me, we can waste a lot of time debating whether miracles occurred and how factual the Bible is when the more important thing is trying to understand what lessons can be learned. I suppose we could also debate whether scorpions could talk to frogs-or if people actually believed they could-back in Aesop's time.

I do think in today's cynical climate that we would be more likely to deconstruct the second coming of Christ and crucify him symbolically long before a modern-day New Testament was written, but escaping that, it would still end up on the best seller lists and provide a moral compass to millions-and be misinterpreted or used for the personal gain of some.

Answer 4

Yes, because the Lord could write books and books and books about what man doesn't know about God's creation.
No where in the Bible does it say the earth is flat. Do you agree everything in the universe could be related in some way to earth? Scientists say the sun does rotate.

Bible says "Great fish" as usual man says "whale."
Have you ever thought they said bats are birds because bats fly.

This is the Book of Job and does this sound like a dinosaur?
Job 40:15-17
Behold, now behemeth,WHICH I MADE WITH THEE; he eats grass as an ox.
Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
He moves HIS TAIL LIKE A CEDAR: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. (thighs are tighty knit)

Doesn't that tail sound like a dinosaur to you? Read on it mentions he is so large he can attempt to drink up a river.

Today's Scientist don't know the Bible or they would not think it rediculous.

Jesus Christ, my friend, was such a powerful force that walked this earth that nothing could keep people from speaking about Him. His enemies verified His existence. So powerful that time split history into B.C. and A.D.

The world has never known a man to compare with Jesus Christ. Knowing what I know today about Jesus Christ, you better take a better look at astronomy, cosmology, evolution, biology and earth science.

Answer 5

All of those examples you just listed. whales are fish, bats are birds, dinosaurs never existed, the earth the center of the universe and flat are NOT found in the Bible. If you're going to blast the Bible try using examples that are actually in the Bible.

Answer 6

The bible would not need a complete rewrite. Not at all. Our predecessors weren't dumb. It is only modern Americans of the evangelical camp who insist in a six day, six thousand year ago creation. The earliest Christians did not believe this sort of thing.

Contrary to popular opinion, early Christians were well aware that a literal understanding of Genesis was preposterous. As Augustine, the bishop of Hippo, wrote 1,620 years ago:

"Often a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the
heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances...and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all that we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, lest the unbeliever see only ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn."

In the middle ages, Thomas Aquinas wrote, "since Holy Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity of senses, one should not adhere to a particular explanation, only in such measure as to be ready to abandon it if it be proved with certainty to be false; lest holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing."

Genesis is not an Audubon field guide to prehistory - it was never meant as one. Its precise value is in giving us creation mythologies, and layering over that what it means to be self-aware, and aware of the existence of evil.

Genesis is a delightful investigation of these things even today, which is why Carl Sagan - a scientist of the modern era - devoted a whole book to it ("The Dragons of Eden.")

Answer 7

You spelled the word "ridiculous" as "rediculous".

This is a major error on your part, and I'm not even going to pay attention to your main point. I'm just going to point at this mistake and say that you hate freedom!

Answer 8

Religion is clearly wrong to those of us who have some understanding of modern science and aren't already religious so it probably wouldn't be taken very seriously (look at the Raelians if you an example, everyone seems to laugh at them (to be fair they are pretty much harmless though)).

Answer 9

Some mighty irrelevant - even ignorant - examples given there at the end o' yo' speech, Cobber!
You sure you know what you're talkin' at??

I think, if yo' were goin' ta use examples, surely, deys could'a bin selected with more forethought.
Don't you?

Answer 10

what do we know; it changes day to day as it has now in 2007 and we still don't know about our bodies nor the universe; they just recently found out about black holes; still haven't figured out why the dinosaurs vanished , several theories but just that a theory; everything works without the input and hand of mankind; hmmmmmmmmm; in perfect harmony and long before we arrived hmmmmm; you have everything provided for you to live ; hmmmmmm ; everything is working in your body without your input ; hmmmmmm ; there was a design ; harmony doesn't happen by accident and coincidence.