Could Science have possibly found out later, what the Bible already knew?

• What are your thoughts: THE BIBLE (2,000–3,000 years ago) The earth is a sphere (Isaiah 40:22). SCIENCE THEN The earth was a flat disk. SCIENCE NOW The earth is a sphere. THE BIBLE (2,000–3,000 years ago) Innumerable stars (Jeremiah 33:22). SCIENCE THEN Only 1,100 stars. SCIENCE NOW Innumerable stars. THE BIBLE (2,000–3,000 years ago) Free float of earth in space (Job 26:7). SCIENCE THEN Earth sat on a large animal. SCIENCE NOW Free float of earth in space. THE BIBLE (2,000–3,000 years ago) Creation made of invisible elements (Hebrews11:3). SCIENCE THEN Science was ignorant on the subject. SCIENCE NOW Creation made of invisible elements (atoms). THE BIBLE (2,000–3,000 years ago) Each star is different (1 Corinthians 15:41). SCIENCE THEN All stars were the same. SCIENCE NOW Each star is different. THE BIBLE (2,000–3,000 years ago) Light moves (Job 38:19,20). SCIENCE THEN Light was fixed in place. SCIENCE NOW Light moves.

• Answer:

  I see absolutely no reason whatsoever for name-calling. This woman, whom many of you should only be fortunate enough to know, is asking a question she has thought out to the best of her knowledge. Nowhere does she ask for all the things in the Bible that are either proved incorrect or unsubstantiated; instead, she makes a few good points about the Bible and science and inquires of her findings so as to gain greater knowledge. This is not a "kick in the face" to atheists. Trust me. I am one. I don't see EyeLovesJesus telling all non-Christians we're going to hell in a handbasket or threatening us with some terrible punishment. She is taking the knowledge she has of the Bible and science and asking questions, not making statements. The name-calling is completely undeserved. There are some absolutely wonderful people of all religions here. To call someone an "imbecile" because they don't know what you do translates to utter conceit. If you really know what you know there is a way to teach it without hurting people's feelings, period. I see too often lately how we as atheists attack too quickly. Sure, you may be tired of the "same old questions" but so are they. And this one is well-thought out absolutely NOT a violation of Yahoo's TOS. Anyone who speaks like that, however, moves automatically to my blocked list. This is not a Nazi regime. As for my answer to your questions, EyeLJ, I can say only that if you look at each answer you will learn something new and different about science. Many people proposed differing ideas long before the Bible was written and like the men who wrote the Bible (according to God's word, yes, but translated by common men), different ideas were pushed about. Daniel believed in a flat earth. Elihu believed much the same. Not all things reported in the Bible are endorsed by the Bible, so much of it comes down to picking and choosing. The same can be said for many learned scholars of the day who failed to realize the earth was spherical. The main difference between the two is that as technology has improved and science can prove many of its points, those who would still believe the earth is flat may be proved wrong. These are a few other Biblical mistakes that scientists have proved incorrect beyond a reasonable doubt: "The Bible states that the origin of the great coal deposits of the world were formed from plant material that was floating on the seas during the Flood. Unknown forces caused the plant material to collect in great, broad mats and then to rapidly sink to the bottom and be covered over with uniform layers of sediment. This story reaches the point of total absurdity when we realize that in most coal fields there is a vertical sequence of beds of coal, one above the other, separated by several thick strata of sedimentary rock of different types, including limestone. In some coal fields certain of these limestone strata are of freshwater origin, and others are of marine origin, with marine fossils... The Bible is said to teach that the entire great era of the dinosaurs occurred during the life of the human race... Stories attempt to explain the vast deposits of marine fossils in the strata of the earth's crust and sea floor. (Others) make the claim that most plants and many animals, especially marine animals, were able, before the Flood, to grow and reproduce dozens or scores of times faster than they can now. The (Bible states that the Earth's) magnetic field has allegedly undergone a simple, rapid process of decay over a period of approximately 10,000 years. The large number of magnetic reversals that are permanently recorded in the strata of so many rock formations of the world are said to be meaningless with regard to the age of the rock formations, or of the earth." The Bible is unfortunately limited to the knowledge of the people who wrote it and thus must be looked at in the era it was written. We knew far less then and we are just beginning to learn ever so much more. If God is indeed an all-knowing entity then He too must be aware that any translation given to man will be received only within the capacity of that man's gift for memory and ability to retain and comprehend new things. This is what leaves it so lacking in the minds of many non-Christians, though the same can be said to be true for ALL religions. I find your questions extraordinary however; it is obvious you took time to write your inquiries and you were, as ever, intelligent and kind in your explanation. I hope that some of the explanations from those who know science far better than I have helped. I can tell you that while it seems impossible to me that a god created the universe all around us (especially as the regions outside the earth are hardly mentioned at all) I also understand that many writers and even proclaimed scientists speak in equivocal language and attempt to make fact from metaphor. I admit that I have done this previously in arguing with a Christian. The real question should have been, "What in the Bible can be interpreted literally, and who's to say so?" If it all can then we know for sure there are huge mistakes and gaps in the Biblical account. If not, then only the men who wrote it can know where the metaphors lie. In Job 38:13 it is written thusly: "That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it." Now, as well all know, there are no "ends" to the earth as the earth is not flat. The Old Testament writings point to the fact that people then believed there were indeed "ends' to the earth by which they may fall off, and the idea that there were living creatures at the antipodes of the earth was considered heresy. Still, I believe the quote from Job can be taken metaphorically. It is about wickedness, not the circumference or shape of the earth itself. It is much like me saying "I've got the whole world in my hands". Obviously, this is not possible. It is metaphorical. Still, I am certainly not able to interpret what is or isn't literal in the Bible. None of us are. That is left with its authors and translators. I think you are wonderful, EyeLovesJesus. Please don't let the rudeness and egoism of a few ruin your day. Many of us speak without thinking; I have been known to "stick my foot in it" at least once a day. Forgive, as is your nature, and realize that sometimes people's real lives spill over into the way they respond to questions here. I've made a number of off-putting comments when I've had a bad day too. The trick is to catch oneself doing it and to apologize the moment one realizes he or she has. I hope these cookies and a nice cup of hot tea will bring you back to yourself in no time. (((EyeLovesJesus)))