I am a conservative Christian, but I think this, along with similar attempts to “prove” Scripture using modern natural science and modern historology are misguided and counterproductive. It cedes to our opponents (and in the public eye) their claim that modern natural science and modern historology are the proper turf on which to fight the battle. Scripture was not written as a history and science textbook in the modern sense. It was written as a great book of Divine Wisdom to be mined for great Truth, not a simple recounting of historical trivia.
The more I get to know the kinds of things that God does, the less I am surprised to see things like this. This automatically limits what secular science can actually illuminate, and that doesn’t bother me. In fact I’d expect God to set up circumstances where secular science, if idolized, will (not might, will) hit brick walls.
I get the point about not rushing into scientism whether it be in YEC or OEC flavors.
There is no need to interject a conflict between the biblical texts and the so-called “natural sciences.” The biblical texts comport precisely with the latter, and are at the same time given for our learning so that we may know where we came from and where we are going. There will always be mockers. Let them mock to their hearts’ content.
I have two sons studying science. One loves physics and sees God’s hand physics, in math and in patterns.
My second son is studying biology in order to be a surgeon. He admires God’s hand in the human body and especially the cells.
Both of them are motivated in part by exploring God’s creation.
A biblical basis for my son’s and for other scientists is from Romans 1
0 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
> It was written as a great book of Divine Wisdom to be mined
> for great Truth,
“What is Truth?” Pontius Pilate to Jesus.
If there is no Truth in Genesis, then how can you trust any of it?
Jesus believed the Genesis account, and it wasn’t just to humor the neanderthalian natives. If Jesus lied, then He wasn’t even a decent prophet, let alone the Son of God.
IN addition to that, before you can try to falsify the bible with scientific knowledge is you would have to know all the "science" there is to know and we haven't even scratched the surface. One feature of every major new scientific discovery is that it reveals a whole new astounding level of complexity we were unaware of.
Yes the Bible says Adam lived 930 yrs and Methusela lived 969 years....but in those years leading up to Noah and the Ark there was a lot of sin, which is why God destroyed the earth by water, and the consequence of that flood was it destroyed the dinosaurs.
“Science” resides within the concept of “time”.
Time was created by God.
God exists outside of such concepts (AKA: eternity).
There is no ^real^ reconciliation between those concepts until Christ returns.
I point to the term (and *concept*) of “the end of time”.
I see nothing wrong with using science to better understand some of the facts laid out in Scripture. Asking “why?” or “how?” is not heresy, it’s curiosity. If we can’t find the answer using those methods, that doesn’t disprove anything, it just means “we don’t know.”