The Flat Earth Society
Other Discussion Boards => Technology, Science & Alt Science => Topic started by: Feralkitten on July 11, 2006, 01:24:00 PM
-
** I am not poking fun of any religion, nor am i insulting the core of your beliefs **
I hear the Bible being brought up a few times. FE'ers are Christian based i am assuming. (i could be assuming wrong.) Coming from a highly Christian upbringing, turned atheist, i'm wondering how the Bible can be seen as a Scientific text.
The Bible is a great book. It has been reproduced easily more times than any other publication. It's social effects are vast, and for some, answers questions that can't be answered by science.
Politically it gives a church that controls people and gives them structure and foundation for society
Mentally it gives a higher power to answer to, and ultimately controlling ones actions for and against the fellow man.
Historically it is an account on what happened on Earth for thousands of years.
I'm a firm believer that the world is a better, more organized place because of the Bible. Just imagine if the average person didn't have anyone to answer to, and couldn't be held accountable for anything. This can be said for most all writings of Faith.
Having said that, and firmly believing:
I can not for the life of me see how the Bible can be used as Scientific fact. I can't apply what i have learned in my Calculus book to the psychology of humans. I apply Math when Math is needed. I apply psychology where psychology is needed. I apply history when history is needed. I don't pull out the US History book when i need to know the density of lead. So i can't see pulling out a socio-political-religious book out when i need answers to the physical world around me.
The Bible was written thousands of years ago. And whether you believe it is Divinely inspired or not, you can't refute the fact that it was scribed by man. Interpreted by man. Reproduced by man. And past on from generation to generation by man. Since it has been in the hands of man and men are sometimes wrong, I can't see believing this few thousand old document as Scientific fact.
ie. Lightning is caused by static electricity in the clouds. But the ppl in the Biblical ERA believed Lightning came directly from God and showed his wrath. Now whether or now God created the storm itself for whatever purpose is irrelevant. The ppl saw the lightning as coming directly from God, where as today we see it coming from a storm.
How can a ppl so ignorant of today's modern day Science write and reproduce a book of science when their faith was not based on scientific fact? And how come ppl continue to use a religious text as scientific fact, when it doesn't follow or support our modern day findings?
-
I thought the bible made some references to the earth being round.
Also, I believe you've made the 1000th topic in this section of the forum.
-
I thought the bible made some references to the earth being round.
Also, I believe you've made the 1000th topic in this section of the forum.
Not counting the stickies, it's #996.
-
the bible isn't a book, it's a library.
-
the bible isn't a book, it's a library.
what!?? :!:
-
I think what he is pointing out is that the bible itself is a collection of many different books.
Or he is an idiot
one of the two perhaps
-
How can a ppl so ignorant of today's modern day Science write and reproduce a book of science when their faith was not based on scientific fact? And how come ppl continue to use a religious text as scientific fact, when it doesn't follow or support our modern day findings?
Because FEs are fucktards. Man, I am having way too much fun with that word, but it's pretty much true. They're all fucktards, or else they wouldn't be FEs.
-
Because FEs are fucktards. Man, I am having way too much fun with that word, but it's pretty much true. They're all fucktards, or else they wouldn't be FEs.
Why are you so violently against the idea that your government is lying to you?
-
I'm not violent against the idea that my government is lying to me. I know it is about some things. What I can't stand is how you FEs can just look in the face of plain evidence and say, "Well it's a conspiracy. It disproves our theory (which is fact to you people) and is therefore wrong." That is the only logic you people use, and it is very flawed at that.
-
For about the 100th time, the Bible does not prove that the earth is flat. Quit being an idiot. The Bible is a Testiment of Jesus Christ and God's ministry. When it comes to "proving" that the earth is flat, all that the Bible "proves" is that the people of the time did not know that the earth was round yet. It was written THOUSANDS of years before Christopher Columbus or Magellan. That is like saying "the Bible PROVES that the Pistons will win the 2007 NBA Championship".
BTW, I am a Christian who KNOWS that the earth is round. So quit associating the FE idiots to me.
-
Why are you so violently against the idea that your government is lying to you?
Why are you against the fact that the Earth is round?
-
Why are you against the fact that the Earth is round?
Because a round Earth is counter-intuitive (since it seems approximately flat).
Government lies are many and obvious.
-
Suppose the earth is flat. What do you care, FE'ers? It obviously doesn't affect you personally, seeing as if it did (say, you were a pilot, which is more mainstream of a job/skill than you guys are making it out to be) you'd already realize that the earth was round.
Suppose you unmask the government conspiracies. What happens next?
I'm just trying to understand FE'ers motivation (as in, I could have worded all this as an "angry ranting" type of post, but chose to be decent not for fear of being banned, but for the sake of decency). Is it simply to seek out the 'truth'? Personally, having to choose between "Blissfully naive" and "Miserably wise", I'd pick "Blissfully naive". If FE is discovered to be true, are you going to look to use that as a reason to accept more of the bible's science? Will you look to clear the slate of accumulated universal laws and theories and start from scratch? How will that give us any more of an advantage in understanding reality, than simply continuing to expand on RE-ism which we've already worked so far to prove?
-
Suppose the earth is flat. What do you care, FE'ers? It obviously doesn't affect you personally, seeing as if it did (say, you were a pilot, which is more mainstream of a job/skill than you guys are making it out to be) you'd already realize that the earth was round.
Suppose you unmask the government conspiracies. What happens next?
I'm just trying to understand FE'ers motivation (as in, I could have worded all this as an "angry ranting" type of post, but chose to be decent not for fear of being banned, but for the sake of decency). Is it simply to seek out the 'truth'? Personally, having to choose between "Blissfully naive" and "Miserably wise", I'd pick "Blissfully naive". If FE is discovered to be true, are you going to look to use that as a reason to accept more of the bible's science? Will you look to clear the slate of accumulated universal laws and theories and start from scratch? How will that give us any more of an advantage in understanding reality, than simply continuing to expand on RE-ism which we've already worked so far to prove?
The world must know, because there is, in my opinion, a very sinister reason for the cover-up. You know "global" warming, right? (it's technically disc warming but anyway). Well, on a Round Earth, it's not that big a deal. Sure, the polar ice caps melt a bit and sea levels rise. So what? It's not like it could kill us all or anything.
But what's the function of the polar areas of ice in the true model of the Earth? One of them literally holds in the oceans and atmosphere. If these melt, we'll all suffocate, and the oceans will bleed into space. That's a much bigger deal, and the conspiracy wants to cover this up so they can carry on polluting and making money (they probably have an escape plan of some kind).
The public MUST know the truth, for the safety of the human race (and all life on Earth)!
(This view isn't a universal FE one, just my own personal conviction). Why else would the con be so desperate to cover it up?
-
The world must know, because there is, in my opinion, a very sinister reason for the cover-up. You know "global" warming, right? (it's technically disc warming but anyway). Well, on a Round Earth, it's not that big a deal. Sure, the polar ice caps melt a bit and sea levels rise. So what? It's not like it could kill us all or anything.
But what's the function of the polar areas of ice in the true model of the Earth? One of them literally holds in the oceans and atmosphere. If these melt, we'll all suffocate, and the oceans will bleed into space. That's a much bigger deal, and the conspiracy wants to cover this up so they can carry on polluting and making money (they probably have an escape plan of some kind).
The public MUST know the truth, for the safety of the human race (and all life on Earth)!
(This view isn't a universal FE one, just my own personal conviction). Why else would the con be so desperate to cover it up?
Nonsense.
For one, the Global Warming Theory claims that the melted ice would cause a dramatic salinity content drop (the ratio would be skewed) in the ocean. The effects of this would have very large changes to the climate systems on our planet. It wouldn't be as chaotic and fictional as "The Day After Tommorow", but it certainly wouldn't be good.
Notwithstanding, there is no evidence that suggests that this is not a natural cycle of Earth. We don't have accurate temperature readings which date back far enough to give us anything conclusive. If this is the case, then the last ice age would have had the same effect, yet obviously on the FE the icewall is still there and you are still alive.
-
Nonsense.
For one, the Global Warming Theory claims that the melted ice would cause a dramatic salinity content drop (the ratio would be skewed) in the ocean. The effects of this would have very large changes to the climate systems on our planet. It wouldn't be as chaotic and fictional as "The Day After Tommorow", but it certainly wouldn't be good.
Notwithstanding, there is no evidence that suggests that this is not a natural cycle of Earth. We don't have accurate temperature readings which date back far enough to give us anything conclusive. If this is the case, then the last ice age would have had the same effect, yet obviously on the FE the icewall is still there and you are still alive.
An ice age would freeze much of the Earth's water so that it wouldn't roll off the edges. Actual circular (global) warming, which many prominent scientists do consider a possible threat, would melt the ice wall. Wouldn't it?
-
.....But what's the function of the polar areas of ice in the true model of the Earth? One of them literally holds in the oceans and atmosphere. If these melt, we'll all suffocate, and the oceans will bleed into space. ....
Erhm, how could a 150 ft high wall possibly hold in the atmosphere? If this would mean the atmosphere is 150 ft thick (otherwise it would spill over the edge), quite a lot of people would suffocate while standing atop some skyscraper or the Eiffeltower (or are these also fake?). Even better, the tops would explode because of the lack of air pressure outside. I think some people would notice that. Unless, of course, they are (like pretty much every man, animal, plant, bacteria, guinea pig and plant) part of the conspiracy.
-
.....But what's the function of the polar areas of ice in the true model of the Earth? One of them literally holds in the oceans and atmosphere. If these melt, we'll all suffocate, and the oceans will bleed into space. ....
Erhm, how could a 150 ft high wall possibly hold in the atmosphere? If this would mean the atmosphere is 150 ft thick (otherwise it would spill over the edge), quite a lot of people would suffocate while standing atop some skyscraper or the Eiffeltower (or are these also fake?). Even better, the tops would explode because of the lack of air pressure outside. I think some people would notice that. Unless, of course, they are (like pretty much every man, animal, plant, bacteria, guinea pig and plant) part of the conspiracy.
I believe the ice wall to be thousands of feet high.
-
I believe the ice wall to be thousands of feet high.
Well, if the ice wall is thousands of feet high, high enough to keep in the atmosphere, why can't it be seen from a great height with a telescope? Even if the vast conspiracy could keep you from nearing the ice wall, tyhe only way to block it visually from great distances would be some sort of cloaking device. You aren'[t suggesting that the governement has used some sort of cloaking device on the ice wall, are you? And prior to the advent of this apparent cloaking device, someone would have seen it during some point in time and it would have been mythicized to some extent, like the sea serpent.
-
Suppose the earth is flat. What do you care, FE'ers? It obviously doesn't affect you personally, seeing as if it did (say, you were a pilot, which is more mainstream of a job/skill than you guys are making it out to be) you'd already realize that the earth was round.
Suppose you unmask the government conspiracies. What happens next?
I'm just trying to understand FE'ers motivation (as in, I could have worded all this as an "angry ranting" type of post, but chose to be decent not for fear of being banned, but for the sake of decency). Is it simply to seek out the 'truth'? Personally, having to choose between "Blissfully naive" and "Miserably wise", I'd pick "Blissfully naive". If FE is discovered to be true, are you going to look to use that as a reason to accept more of the bible's science? Will you look to clear the slate of accumulated universal laws and theories and start from scratch? How will that give us any more of an advantage in understanding reality, than simply continuing to expand on RE-ism which we've already worked so far to prove?
The world must know, because there is, in my opinion, a very sinister reason for the cover-up. You know "global" warming, right? (it's technically disc warming but anyway). Well, on a Round Earth, it's not that big a deal. Sure, the polar ice caps melt a bit and sea levels rise. So what? It's not like it could kill us all or anything.
But what's the function of the polar areas of ice in the true model of the Earth? One of them literally holds in the oceans and atmosphere. If these melt, we'll all suffocate, and the oceans will bleed into space. That's a much bigger deal, and the conspiracy wants to cover this up so they can carry on polluting and making money (they probably have an escape plan of some kind).
The public MUST know the truth, for the safety of the human race (and all life on Earth)!
(This view isn't a universal FE one, just my own personal conviction). Why else would the con be so desperate to cover it up?
So apparently the government is planning on moving to another location in the universe since, well, apparently they don't thrive whatsoever off of the people they govern. Maybe there's a better place to live out in the universe - maybe there are Alien Megasluts who are willing do things to us that'd make the Kama Sutra seem like a pop-up book (no pun intended). Not to mention investing the money they scammed off of earthlings on the Mars stock market.
Or, reality is nice too.
-
(no pun intended).
I think you're lying.
-
:wink:
-
dont be hating on the bible, if it wasnt for the good book, you wouldent be here.
-
what about those born outside of wedlock?
-
dont be hating on the bible, if it wasnt for the good book, you wouldent be here.
why wouldnt i ? i got this far without it, as did my parents.
i think the bible is crap. its boring to read.
-
There are some decent parts to the bible, but I agree, most of it is fucking boring..
Revelations is fun for symbolism.
Romans has some good quotes.
Judges is good to point out when people claim the bible is sexist (with the female judge and everything)
-
I believe the ice wall to be thousands of feet high.
You also believe that penguins are genetically engineered and/or robots and that dinosaurs made boats.
-
That would be an ecumenical matter.
-
That would be an ecumenical matter.
Which exactly?
-
That would be an ecumenical matter.
"YES"
"THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER"
-
About the ice wall being thousand of feet high, could it be that you simply cant tell the difforence between it and the sky? It could be the same color.
-
That would be an ecumenical matter.
"YES"
"THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER"
The word "yes" is an ecumenical matter?
-
i believe that the 150ft ice wall is part of a FE conspiracy 2 avoid answering how high it reli is i believe like others that it is thousands of feet high and i believe that its is impossible 2 see as once u get close enough the antartic/immediate vicinity of the icewall climate is so harsh that it isnt visible i have considered that these conditions may b synthesised but a complete lack of evidence is one fatal flaw
-
** I am not poking fun of any religion, nor am i insulting the core of your beliefs **
I hear the Bible being brought up a few times. FE'ers are Christian based i am assuming. (i could be assuming wrong.) Coming from a highly Christian upbringing, turned atheist, i'm wondering how the Bible can be seen as a Scientific text.
The Bible is a great book. It has been reproduced easily more times than any other publication. It's social effects are vast, and for some, answers questions that can't be answered by science.
Politically it gives a church that controls people and gives them structure and foundation for society
Mentally it gives a higher power to answer to, and ultimately controlling ones actions for and against the fellow man.
Historically it is an account on what happened on Earth for thousands of years.
I'm a firm believer that the world is a better, more organized place because of the Bible. Just imagine if the average person didn't have anyone to answer to, and couldn't be held accountable for anything. This can be said for most all writings of Faith.
Having said that, and firmly believing:
I can not for the life of me see how the Bible can be used as Scientific fact. I can't apply what i have learned in my Calculus book to the psychology of humans. I apply Math when Math is needed. I apply psychology where psychology is needed. I apply history when history is needed. I don't pull out the US History book when i need to know the density of lead. So i can't see pulling out a socio-political-religious book out when i need answers to the physical world around me.
The Bible was written thousands of years ago. And whether you believe it is Divinely inspired or not, you can't refute the fact that it was scribed by man. Interpreted by man. Reproduced by man. And past on from generation to generation by man. Since it has been in the hands of man and men are sometimes wrong, I can't see believing this few thousand old document as Scientific fact.
ie. Lightning is caused by static electricity in the clouds. But the ppl in the Biblical ERA believed Lightning came directly from God and showed his wrath. Now whether or now God created the storm itself for whatever purpose is irrelevant. The ppl saw the lightning as coming directly from God, where as today we see it coming from a storm.
How can a ppl so ignorant of today's modern day Science write and reproduce a book of science when their faith was not based on scientific fact? And how come ppl continue to use a religious text as scientific fact, when it doesn't follow or support our modern day findings?
tl;dr
-
Okay...
-
For about the 100th time, the Bible does not prove that the earth is flat. Quit being an idiot. The Bible is a Testiment of Jesus Christ and God's ministry. When it comes to "proving" that the earth is flat, all that the Bible "proves" is that the people of the time did not know that the earth was round yet. It was written THOUSANDS of years before Christopher Columbus or Magellan. That is like saying "the Bible PROVES that the Pistons will win the 2007 NBA Championship".
BTW, I am a Christian who KNOWS that the earth is round. So quit associating the FE idiots to me.
You're not a Christian unless you believe the Earth is flat, the Bible even says it is! It is Satanists like you that make Christians look bad! Columbus and Magellan had their souls taken over by demons send from the pits of Hell to try to convert Christians into round Earthers!
-
You're not a Christian unless you believe the Earth is flat, the Bible even says it is! It is Satanists like you that make Christians look bad! Columbus and Magellan had their souls taken over by demons send from the pits of Hell to try to convert Christians into round Earthers!
Why did the demons have to come to Earth? I'm sure they could have found plenty of Christians in hell.
-
Why did the demons have to come to Earth? I'm sure they could have found plenty of Christians in hell.
There are no real Christians in Hell! Hell is reserved for Atheists, witches, native americans, round Earthers, and those who deny Jesus and God.
-
Why did the demons have to come to Earth? I'm sure they could have found plenty of Christians in hell.
There are no real Christians in Hell! Hell is reserved for Atheists, witches, native americans, round Earthers, and those who deny Jesus and God.
And women with "careers."
-
And women with "careers."
I forgot all about them, thanks for reminding me!
-
Why dose god kare about humanity?
-
Feralkitten (damn this thread is old!), according to Ubuntu Statistics, 97% of members of this site are brights (http://www.the-brights.net/). Your post reminded me of Sam Harris:
"Just imagine how breathtakingly specific a work of prophecy could be if it were actually the product of omniscience. If the Bible were such a book, it would make specific, falsifiable predictions about human events. You would expect it to contain a passage like, 'In the latter half of the twentieth century, humankind will develop a globally linked system of computers-the principles of which I set forth in Leviticus-and this system shall be called the Internet. The Bible contains nothing remotely like this. In fact, it does not contain a single sentence that could not have been written by a man or woman living in the first century."
http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=sharris_26_4
-
The irony of that non-working link implies these people do not exist. I smell a tom-run.
-
Ubuntu just wrote bad code, the link is;
www.the-brights.net
-
The Bible proves science wrong, the Bible is based on logic and reason. While science on the other hand, is based on ignorance and lies.
-
You flipped the definitions over there, and still you got it wrong. Religion is not based on lies so much as metaphors and beliefs. Science is logic and reasoning.
-
The Bible proves science wrong, the Bible is based on logic and reason. While science on the other hand, is based on ignorance and lies.
Blanket statements do not really give you any credence.
-
Genesis
# God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day (1:14-19). 1:3-5
# God spends one-sixth of his entire creative effort (the second day) working on a solid firmament. This strange structure, which God calls heaven, is intended to separate the higher waters from the lower waters. 1:6-8
# Plants are made on the third day before there was a sun to drive their photosynthetic processes (1:14-19). 1:11
# In an apparent endorsement of astrology, God places the sun, moon, and stars in the firmament so that they can be used "for signs". This, of course, is exactly what astrologers do: read "the signs" in the Zodiac in an effort to predict what will happen on Earth. 1:14
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htm
-
The irony of that non-working link implies these people do not exist. I smell a tom-run.
You stole my material.
-
The Bible proves science wrong, the Bible is based on logic and reason. While science on the other hand, is based on ignorance and lies.
Yes, that is why the church quells technological advances and calls them satanic, ::)
Not an insult to christianity, just a remark on topic, that the bible can't be taken as a scientific text.
-
I'm pretty sure the ancient peoples of the world would have had to use science to tell them how to make hhouses and cook stuff... coz God sure as hell didn't.
-
First of all, the bible as you said is written by Man. But it is divinely inspired so therefore it originates from the creator. The bible is not a scientific text but it is a Historical text. The creation account in Genesis can be read as a poetic way of writing earth's early history.
Second I am relieved to say that most Flat Earthers are nonreligious, and believe earth is flat for some other mysterious reason. There is no biblical reason to believe earth is flat. There are however some verses which imply a round earth.
Yours sincerely, The Rational Theist
-
How can a ppl so ignorant of today's modern day Science write and reproduce a book of science when their faith was not based on scientific fact? And how come ppl continue to use a religious text as scientific fact, when it doesn't follow or support our modern day findings?
Believing the bible is true, also means (to me) incorporating the modern scientific discoveries, understanding how diffrent parts of language and speech were used in the times it was written, and the context itts being used in.
heres a few thing i believe, understanding that the bible, although i believe everything is literally true, has to be cross examined from and modern day, and a not so modern-day standpoint
1) creationism, this is the biggun. in the origninal bible, the word used in the sentence " god created existance in 7 days" for day, was Yom (spelling?) the ancient hebrew word for day, but this word has a double meaning, and can also mean, period of time. asuming this, would it therfore not be to unreasonable to believe that these "days" or "yoms" could have taken place over million, even billions of years? that evolution was god transforming and perfecting his creatures? (meteor=undo ;D )
2) the flood, another biggun. most people do not believe the entire earth could have flooded, i dont, but theres a good reason this. when the bible, or this section of it, was written, to them the known world was only the middle east, parts of europe...and i dont think China, but i may be wrong (still only 16 here). there is scientific data of a massive flood in ancient times happening in Isreal, and since this was the world to them, could this not be what they were talking about?
I could give other examples, but im tired of typing, ask more if yah wanna know, i enjoy debating religion
-
For about the 100th time, the Bible does not prove that the earth is flat. Quit being an idiot.
The Bible does prove the Earth is flat. Try reading it a few times and you will realize the Bible is superior to your satanic religion of "science".
There is no such thing as a Christian that is a round Earther. You're a false Christian, taken over by the devil.
-
How can a ppl so ignorant of today's modern day Science write and reproduce a book of science when their faith was not based on scientific fact? And how come ppl continue to use a religious text as scientific fact, when it doesn't follow or support our modern day findings?
2) the flood, another biggun. most people do not believe the entire earth could have flooded, i dont, but theres a good reason this. when the bible, or this section of it, was written, to them the known world was only the middle east, parts of europe...and i dont think China, but i may be wrong (still only 16 here). there is scientific data of a massive flood in ancient times happening in Isreal, and since this was the world to them, could this not be what they were talking about?
The problem with that viewpoint is that, whatever the Bible writers may have known, the God who inspired/dictated the text of the Bible to them certainly should have known all these things.
In the end, if you concede that anything in the Bible is false, how can you possibly judge between what in it is false and what is true?
-
First of all, the bible as you said is written by Man. But it is divinely inspired so therefore it originates from the creator.
What's your evidence for that?
The bible is not a scientific text but it is a Historical text.
In the same way that Lord Of The Rings is a "historical text" I would agree. If you're saying that any part of it can be believed as events that have actually happened, I would have to ask what evidence you have for that being true.
The creation account in Genesis can be read as a poetic way of writing earth's early history.
It's not accurate to call something completely made up "history" - what evidence do you have that any part of Genesis is actually "history" and not fiction?
-
Why dose god kare about humanity?
gOD DOESN'T KAREE about hunamity.
God chares ONLY about the Good Ol' US of A.
Ask Bush if you don't believe me! ;D
-
For about the 100th time, the Bible does not prove that the earth is flat. Quit being an idiot. The Bible is a Testiment of Jesus Christ and God's ministry. When it comes to "proving" that the earth is flat, all that the Bible "proves" is that the people of the time did not know that the earth was round yet. It was written THOUSANDS of years before Christopher Columbus or Magellan. That is like saying "the Bible PROVES that the Pistons will win the 2007 NBA Championship".
BTW, I am a Christian who KNOWS that the earth is round. So quit associating the FE idiots to me.
People of the time also didn't know coveting your neighbor's wife was fine.
-
For the record, Christopher Columbus had absolutely nothing to do with proving the world was round. That's completely a myth. People at the time of Columbus knew that the world was round, and had done since the time of the Greeks (or even earlier).
-
First of all, the bible as you said is written by Man. But it is divinely inspired so therefore it originates from the creator.
What's your evidence for that?
The bible is not a scientific text but it is a Historical text.
In the same way that Lord Of The Rings is a "historical text" I would agree. If you're saying that any part of it can be believed as events that have actually happened, I would have to ask what evidence you have for that being true.
The creation account in Genesis can be read as a poetic way of writing earth's early history.
It's not accurate to call something completely made up "history" - what evidence do you have that any part of Genesis is actually "history" and not fiction?
Sort of, by how accurate and historical the bible is.
Many historical events are recorded in the bible (Fall of Jerusalem, Jewish exile in Babylon, Reign of King David etc.). And lastly what I meant be "early history of the earth" is its formation and evolution over the past four and a half billion years as well as the Big Bang.
Also scientists have discovered a "mitochondrial Eve" which most of humanity descendad from a hundred thousand or so years ago. Which gives evidence that atleast one of the Abrahamic Religions might be true (I'll study further).
-
Sorry for the necropost, but I wanted to respond to some stuff here.
Sort of, by how accurate and historical the bible is.
Many historical events are recorded in the bible (Fall of Jerusalem, Jewish exile in Babylon, Reign of King David etc.).
Yes, and many historical events are recorded in the Iliad, Gone With the Wind, etc. Doesn't lend credence to other specific events contained therein.
And lastly what I meant be "early history of the earth" is its formation and evolution over the past four and a half billion years as well as the Big Bang.
Except the Bible is drastically wrong about the dates for all of those, as well as the order. The sun is created at the same time as all the other stars, and not only is the Earth created before them, but plants are as well. All the heavens are created to light the Earth? Does that include stars, galaxies, etc, we can only see with a telescope? How about quasars and other stuff we can only see with a radio telescope? How about stuff we can't see at all?
Also scientists have discovered a "mitochondrial Eve" which most of humanity descendad from a hundred thousand or so years ago. Which gives evidence that atleast one of the Abrahamic Religions might be true (I'll study further).
Except a hundred thousand years ago (140,000 actually) is way before the Earth should have been around (and I don't care how you count the genealogies, different scholars obtain different dates, but there's no way you're getting a 140,000 years). Also, mitochondrial Eve is only the ancestor of all living humans. She's just the most recent common ancestor, and humans (or proto-humans) existed long before her. Mitochondrial Adam, by the way, would have lived 80,000 years later. Their existence is simply a dact of the way heredity works in any sexually reproducing species; in any such species, if you go back far enough, you will find two common ancestors from which all living members of the species are descended. There was also at some point one bacteria from whom the whole human race is descended.
-
Re; the original Q.
This Bibleon can be used as a "Scientific Text" within the context of comparitive Religion/ Philosophy.
This Bibleon could also be used as a "Scientific Text" within the context of comparative regional history to a limited extent.
The only way that It can be used as a "Scientific Text" within the context of any other arena is if said "User" operates from a fundemental mis-conception of what constitutes Science and/or scientific method.