The Bible's Amazing Scientific Accuracy and Foresight

AlwaysBeReady.com ^ | unknown | Charlie H. Campbell

[CondoleezzaProtege]

Even though the Bible was completed 2,000 years ago, long before the invention of the microscope, the telescope, satellites, etc. it does not contain any scientific errors. This might be considered a miracle in itself. Without exception, every ancient religious writing has certain unscientific views of astronomy, medicine, hygiene, etc. The Qur’an says in Surah 18:86 that the sun sets in a muddy spring. Qur’an 18:86 “…when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring” The only exception to these kinds of errors, among ancient religious writings, is the Bible.

Not only is the Bible free from scientific errors, it miraculously makes known numerous, accurate scientific facts about the universe thousands of years before modern scientists caught up. There are lots of them. For time’s sake I will give you a few quick examples.

A. The Sun

In contrast to the Qur’an, the Bible teaches that the sun is actually on a circuit through space. Writing of the sun in Psalm 19:6, David said, “Its rising is from one end of heaven, and its circuit to the other end.” For many years critics scoffed at this verse, claiming that it taught that the sun revolves around the earth. Scientists at that time thought the sun was stationary. However, it has been discovered in recent years that the sun is in fact on a circuit through space, just like the Bible says.

B. The Shape of the Earth

When the rest of the world believed the earth was flat, Isaiah declared that the world was round… Isaiah 40:22 “It is He who sits above the circle of the earth." The Hebrew word there for circle [“chuwg”] literally means “sphere.” When did Isaiah write these words? Between 740 and 680 B.C. That was at least 300 years before Aristotle suggested, in his book On the Heavens, that the earth might be a sphere. Other verses are Proverbs 8:27 and Job 26:10. More than 2,000 years later some people still believed that Christopher Columbus (1451-1506) was going to sail off the edge of a flat planet in 1492!

C. The Suspension of the Earth

Before Isaac Newton discovered gravity Hindus believed that the earth rested on the back of an elephant who stood on the back of a turtle that was swimming in a great endless sea. The Greeks believed that the mythical god Atlas carried the earth on his shoulders. What did the Bible say? In one of the oldest books in the Bible, Job said in Job 26:7, “He [God] hangs the earth on nothing.” Scientists did not discover that the earth hangs on nothing until 1650. ... (EXCERPT for more click the link!)

[CondoleezzaProtege]

“Mr. Till’s argumentation was exactly as we expected it to be. Whenever he is presented with an argument which puts him in a bind, he will argue around the argument. This is exactly what he did in answering my argument on the word khoog. Let us note what he says. He said that Young and Strong defined the word khoog and neither of them used the word sphere as one of the meanings. If Mr. Till would just stop and think about it, he could see that Young and Strong did not give every meaning of the word. Nor did they give the forms of the word. Davidson in The Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon also used the words compass and compasses, but only when the word is used in its feminine form. Strong simply threw out several definitions and did not distinguish between genders as Davidson did. If one wants a quick meaning, he might go to Strong or Young. However, if one wants to see how a word is used, he is going to have to go to a lexicon. However, I am glad that Mr. Till says that Strong is a widely recognized authority. I think that I will quote him when I send my response to Adrian Swindler on the flat earth article. Swindler said that Strong simply lied.

Mr. Till did not begin to deal with the masculine gender of the word khoog. Whenever, this word is in its masculine form. it means a circle, a sphere. In Isaiah 40:22 the word is used in its masculine form, therefore, it means a circle, a sphere. Mr. Tilt suggested that a circle and a sphere are two different things. True, they are sometimes different, but Webster says that a circle is, “...formed on the surface of a sphere by the intersection of a plane that passes through it.” (Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, p.200) A circle is formed on the surface of the spherical earth. Is it not reasonable that Isaiah refers to this spherical circle of the earth? Could God not sit above this circle on the spherical earth? Now, let him deal with the word in its masculine form, it means a circle, a sphere. When it is in the feminine form, it is not translated circle, but something like compass, circuit or something like that. Such is its usage in Isaiah 44:13, there it reads “compass.”

As far as his argument is concerned about this not being an argument for scientific foreknowledge is concerned I do not recall making such an REBUTTAL from argument. I do believe, however, that it is an argument for such and I do not believe that Mr. Till nor anyone else can show that it is not. Mr. Till says that most, “...general encyclopedias indicate that the Greeks Egyptians, and astronomically curious societies of Isaiah’s day knew that the earth was a sphere.” This is only true, if one puts Isaiah about 250 B.C. However, if one puts Isaiah about 750 B.C. (where he belongs) then one is going to have a hard time proving that. The Book of Knowledge says, “Greek astronomers before the time of Christ observed that during a lunar eclipse, when the earth is between the sun and the moon, the earth always casts a curved shadow on the moon. On the basis of these and many other facts they decided that the earth is shaped like a ball... One scholar, Erathosthenes (about 250 B.C.) came very close to figuring the actual distance around the earth.” (Vol. l, p.39) The World Book says that, “The sciences based upon research and experiment did not develop in Greece until the late 300’s B.C.” (Vol. 7:p.364) Pythagoras, the Greek philosopher, “...believed that the earth was spherical...” (The World Book, Vol. 14, p.8 13), but this was around 200 years after Isaiah. Lars Thunberg said that Babylonians thought the earth was a great mountain, then said: “The Egyptians held similar ideas.” (MATC) pp. 26 27) If he wants to debate, let him debate his own paper. (TSR Vol. l, No.3 pp.5,6) jdm”

http://www.bible-infonet.org/Challenge/topics/miscellaneous/01_01_03.htm

[21twelve]

“Well, God didn’t ask us what we think. The universe was created by God speaking it into existence.”

Not sure why the snippy answer. Of course God didn’t ask us what we think.

My point is, the story of creation - God forming everything out of nothing, sounds a lot like the Big Bang Theory. A crazy idea (something out of nothing) that wasn’t theorized until the 1920’s. And did not gain wide acceptance by scientists until the 1960’s.

And of course “science” changes as we learn more and more about God’s creation. Well - the science or the laws of God have always been there and unchangeable, it is just our limited, but growing, understanding of them. (Of course with the normal result of “the more we know, the more we know how little we know”.)

[Raycpa]

If the earth were flat Noah’s flood would be hard to explain. Wouldn’t the water merely run off the edges? Wouldn’t Noah’s ark eventually fall off with the water?

[Raycpa]

I am sorry you are so angry with God. Perhaps you should try and yell at God directly. It might help you reconcile your anger.

[Stultis]

If the earth were flat Noah’s flood would be hard to explain. Wouldn’t the water merely run off the edges? Wouldn’t Noah’s ark eventually fall off with the water?

The earth was apparently conceived as being surrounded by mountains, referred to as "pillars," on which the vault of the "firmament" separating earth from heaven was laid. So the earth had a rim which would hold the waters in. Or in any case the firmament would also provide a barrier. The earth was kind of like a big pasta bowl covered by a dome.

The flood waters would either dry (didn't God send a wind for this purose?) or drain from the bottom through springs and fountains of the "deep". So anyting floating on top of the waters would be O.K.

[Soothesayer]

“More than 2,000 years later some people still believed that Christopher Columbus (1451-1506) was going to sail off the edge of a flat planet in 1492”

Not entirely true. Many sailors prior to 1492 already knew this but none of them had enough political clout to make the landlubbers believe it.

[Soothesayer]

The Bible keeps using the generic term “heavens”. That really doesn’t help apologists much. There are far too many ambiguities.

[Stultis]

Davidson in The Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon also used the words compass and compasses, but only when the word is used in its feminine form. Strong simply threw out several definitions and did not distinguish between genders as Davidson did.

Not quite. Strong doesn't distinguish genders, but he does give both their meanings: "circle" (masculine) and "compass" (feminine). Davidson just adds "sphere" to the masculine sense. Maybe. I don't know Hebrew. But most scholars don't include that sense. At least one commentary I've seen, although I don't recall which now, claims there was no Biblical Hebrew word specifically meaning "ball" or "sphere".

In any case, even if we admit the possibility that the word could have the sense of "sphere" in addition to the sense of "circle," this still doesn't indicate the Bible affirmatively implicates the sense of "sphere," as opposed to the more primary sense of "circle," in Job 26:10, or anywhere else.

Again, all the imagery suggest flatness (in so far as it suggests anything) and none suggests sphericity. The circle of the earth is covered with a tent. It is never described as being covered with something that would normally cover a ball or sphere, like the rind of a fruit. It is drawn with a compass, it is drawn on the surface of the waters. It is never described by the Bible as being drawn, for instance, in the air, or on a non-flat surface. The earth itself is pounded out and spread out by God. It is never gathered together, it is never balled up, it is never sculpted.

Now you can say that all that language is nevertheless consistent with the earth being a sphere, once we otherwise know the earth to be a sphere. But you can't say the Bible predicted in advance that the earth was a sphere. The case just isn't there. The pretense that it is there is utterly gratuitous.

If one wants a quick meaning, he might go to Strong or Young. However, if one wants to see how a word is used, he is going to have to go to a lexicon.

Oops! When Davidson does give the Biblical usage, he does not include the sense of "sphere"!

Here is the entire entry (excepting that I don't know to transliterate the Hebrew script, so leaving that out):

to draw a circle, to circumscribe, Job 26. 10. [No "sphere"]

masc. circle, sphere.

fem. compass, compasses, Is. 44. 13.

That's the whole entry. Not entirely honest to suggest, aside from separating the genders, that it contains more information than Strongs. In fact Davidson seems to miss one Biblical usage of Chuwg, in Proverbs 8:28. But maybe he wasn't attempting to be exhaustive.

Incidentally, having fully admitted that Hebrew grammar (or anything of Hebrew) is beyond me, that passage does have me wondering a bit about the supposed division between the masculine and feminine meanings, since the instance in Proverbs is translated as both "compass" in the King James and "circle" in the NAS. Although I guess "set a compass" and "inscribe a circle" means the same.

BTW, I found Davidson's lexicon available online here. The entry is on page 249 (CCXLIX) of the book, which is page 349 in the pdf file version. (There are a hundred pages preceeding on grammer and other front matter.)

[CondoleezzaProtege]

Okay Stultis, your interpretation of this one single word is enough to convince you that the Bible is false. Fair enough.

It’s not like I believe the Bible is divinely inspired based on that one verse alone—but on several other scientifically accurate verses. (did you know the book of Job mentioned there being springs at the bottom of the ocea thousands of years before we had instruments pressurized enough to find out for ourselves?)

I also believe archeology, external historical records, literary consistency, and a whole slew of other factors back the Bible as the credible revelation of the Creator of the Universe.

But ultimately, “it’s by faith that we trust and praise the SON, who was raised for our justification” (Shai Linne)

:)

[Raycpa]

But then how did the waters rise above the mountains without running over ? I think the flood story is a problem for that map,

Gen 7:

The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. 20 The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet.

[daniel1212]

The official Catholic Bible for the US, the NAB, also states that the stories such as the Tower of Babel, Jonah and the whale, and Balaam and the donkey are fables. And that Joshua’s conquests are folk tales. Yet the N.T. treats such as literal historical events.

[CondoleezzaProtege]

II. Christ’s Use of Scripture

As L. Gaussen has asserted, “We are not afraid to say it: when we hear the Son of God quote the Scriptures, every thing is said, in our view, on their divine inspiration we need no further testimony. All the declarations of the Bible are, no doubt, equally divine; but this example of the Savior of the world has settled the question for us at once. This proof requires neither long nor learned researches; it is grasped by the hand of a child as powerfully as by that of a doctor. Should any doubt, then, assail your soul let it behold Him in the presence of the Scriptures!” 1

1. He knew the Scriptures thoroughly, even to words and verb tenses. He obviously had either memorized vast portions or knew it instinctively: John 7:15. 2

2. He believed every word of Scripture. All the prophecies concerning Himself were fulfilled 3, and He believed beforehand they would be. 4

3. He believed the Old Testament (Tanakh) was historical fact. This is very clear, even though from the Creation (cf. Genesis 2:24 and Matthew 19:4, 5) onward, much of what He believed has long been under fire by critics, as being mere fiction. Some examples of historical facts:

* Luke 11:51 Abel was a real individual
* Matthew. 24:37-39 Noah and the flood (Luke 17:26, 27)
* John 8:56-58 Abraham
* Matthew 10:15; 11:23, 24 (Luke 10:12) Sodom and Gomorrah
* Luke 17:28-32 Lot (and wife!)
* Matthew 8:11 Isaac and Jacob (Luke 13:28)
* John 6:31, 49, 58 Manna
* John 3:14 Serpent
* Matthew 12:39-41 Jonah (vs.42 - Sheba)
* Matthew 24:15 Daniel and Isaiah

4. He believed the books were written by the men whose names they bear:

* Moses wrote the Pentateuch (Torah): Matthew 19:7, 8; Mark 7:10, 12:26 (”Book of Moses” the Torah); Luke 5:14; 16:29, 31; 24:27, 44 (”Christ’s Canon”); John 1:17; 5:45, 46; 7:19; (”The Law [Torah] was given by Moses; Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ.”) 5
* Isaiah wrote “both” Isaiah’s: Mark 7:6-13; John 12:37-41.
* Jonah wrote Jonah: Matthew 12:39-41.
* Daniel wrote Daniel: Matthew 24:15.

5. He believed the Old Testament (Tanakh) was spoken by God Himself, or written by the Holy Spirit’s inspiration, even though the pen was held by men: Matthew 19:4, 5; 22:31, 32, 43; Mark 12:26; Luke 20:37.

6. He believed Scripture was more powerful than His miracles: Luke 16:29, 31.

7. He actually quoted it in overthrowing Satan (Hasatan)! The O.T. Scriptures (Tanakh) were the arbiter in every dispute: Matthew 4; Luke 16:29, 31.

8. He quoted Scripture as the basis for his own teaching. His ethics were the same as what we find already written in Scripture: Matthew 7:12; 19:18, 19; 22:40; Mark 7:9, 13; 10:19; 12:24,29-31; Luke 18:20.

9. He warned against replacing it with something else, or adding or subtracting from it. The Jewish leaders in His day had added to it with their Oral Traditions: Matthew 5:17; 15:1-9; 22:29; (cf. 5:43,44); Mark. 7:1-12. (Destroying faith in the Bible as God’s Word will open the door today to a “new” Tradition.)

10. He will judge all men in the last day, as Messiah and King, on the basis of His infallible Word committed to writing by fallible men, guided by the infallible Holy Spirit: Matthew 25:31; John 5:22, 27; 12:48; Romans 2:16.

11. He made provision for the New Testament (B’rit Hadashah) by sending the Holy Spirit (the Ruach HaKodesh). We must note that He Himself never wrote one word of Scripture although He is the Word of God Himself (the living Torah in flesh and blood, see John, chapter 1). He committed the task of all writing of the Word of God to fallible men guided by the infallible Holy Spirit. The apostles’ words had the same authority as Christ’s: Matthew 10:14, 15; Luke 10:16; John 13:20; 14:22; 15:26, 27; 16:12-14.

12. He not only was not jealous of the attention men paid to the Bible (denounced as “bibliolatry” by some), He reviled them for their ignorance of it: Matthew 22:29; Mark 12:24.

13. Nor did Jesus (Yeshua) worship Scripture. He honored it even though written by men.

The above leaves no room but to conclude that our Lord Jesus Christ (Yeshua Hamashiach) considered the canon of Scripture (Tanakh) as God’s Word, written by the hand of men.

Although some religious leaders profess to accept Scripture as “God’s Word,” their low view of “inspiration” belies the fact. They believe and teach that Scripture is, to a very significant degree, man’s word. Many of their statements are in essential disagreement with those of Jesus Christ (Yeshua Hamashiach). From the evidence of their books, we conclude that some Christian leaders are opposite to Christ in His regard for the authority, the inspiration, and the inerrancy of Scripture.

And now, the most important point.

III. Jesus Christ Was Subject to Scripture

(to read more)

http://ldolphin.org/infallible.html

[anglian]

What kind of desperation would drive someone to even cite such a facially stupid example?

Get a clue.

[Stultis]

But then how did the waters rise above the mountains without running over ? I think the flood story is a problem for that map,

Genesis says the waters covered the mountains. It doesn't say the waters covered the pillars of heaven. The Hebrews probably wouldn't have thought of the pillars of heaven as being included among earthly "mountains". Besides, as I think I noted before, the waters would still be held in by the firmament, even if they rose above the "pillars".

In any case, this happened largely by God's will. It was God who originally set a limit on the waters, and "gathered" the waters to reveal the earth in the beginning. (He didn't, alternatively, raise the earth above the waters.) Bear in mind also that the pre-creation chaos was usually perceived as a watery chaos. The default condition of the world, before God imposed order on it, was, in effect, to be covered by water.

[Stultis]

Get a clue.

Sorry. I assumed it was entirely obvious that I do think think Ps 19 is referring to the Sun's daily movement across the sky as it's "circuit." I was merely pointing out the absurdity of the lead article in assuming this "circuit" to be the sun's movement through the galaxy, and that the Bible therefore "predicted" this scientific finding.

[Stultis]

IOW, I wasn't saying the Psalmist was “facially stupid.” The Psalm makes perfect sense. I was saying the author of the lead article was being stupid -- and really, quite incredibly stupid, and/or desperate -- in gratuitously imposing his ridiculous notion on the Psalm.

[anglian]

I agree. Sorry....

[Natural Law]

"Yet the N.T. treats such as literal historical events."

The New American Bible recognizes as allegory the instances you cited. It also doesn't refer to a whale, but rather to a large fish. The difference is irrelevant to the allegory and its message.

[anglian]

Here’s an article you might like also. THE BIBLE AND THE QUR’AN
AN HISTORICAL COMPARISON
http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/intro.htm

[CondoleezzaProtege]

Jesus did not treat those “allegorical” events as allegory, but as actual, historical, physical events.