How does science disprove the Bible?

Thanks for your reply.First, if it is Satan then it can be taken literaly.Second, If it it not literal it does not necessitate against its historicity.Third, there are masc. personal pronouns used in the latter part of verse 15.Fourth, if you don't think this is a good probability and at least a possibilty then theres no hope for you.Michael Heiser has an article on the subject that would be helpful.Enjoy.Here is his website Welcome michaelsheiser.com - BlueHost.comHere the link to some of his short articles http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/dcpdflisting.htm - some are free and some are $2.00-6.00. Maybe you can learn somthing.

quote:

---

dan
Then ask him if he thinks bats are a kind of fowl.

---

Genesis places flying, crawling life forms as emerging following fish' appearence - allowing for in-transit species too. The texts requires wise deliberation. Don't scream Eureka! yet.

quote:

---

shilo
First, if it is Satan then it can be taken literaly.

​

Second, If it it not literal it does not necessitate against its historicity.

​

Third, there are masc. personal pronouns used in the latter part of verse 15.

---

Its not historical but metaphoric: the setting is not on a physical earthly realm, according to the texts. Serpent means more than a snake, and is a metaphor for the 'negative' force: there is no satan, and no one can account for another's good or bad deeds. All laws are prefixed 'THOU' - mening each person individually - this is accepted in all bone fide judiciary institutions:'THE SON SHALL NOT PAY FOR THE FATHER NOR THE MOTHER FOR THE DAUGHTER - ONLY THE SOUL THAT SINNETH IT SHALL PAY' (OT).The math to determine who is a sinner is awesome from a big picture view - one must account for all the impacts upon the accused, and how one would act in a similar situation. This means a greivious sinner can have greater merit than one who's sins and situation is not known: one can be sinless but only because he is untested - while one can be a harlot or murderer and come out with greater spiritual merit.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

So when the Bible speaks about a serpent, it is not satan, but a 'metaphorical negative force' according to you.Yet when Genesis says the earth was created in six days that means all natural science, including physics, chemistry, geology, and biology is wrong because it contradicts your non-metaphorical understanding of the Bible.So you are the one, according to you, to tell us mere mortals when the Bible is meant to be taken literally and when it is meant to be taken metaphorically.Yeah I heard that one before, and so has everyone else here.Watch out for that first commandment, it could burn your ass if you're not careful.

Preposterous! It's impossible to DISprove anything. All we can do is prove something to be something other than X. We cannot disprove Y. We cannot disprove the Earth to be 6000 years old, but we CAN prove it to be 4.5 billion years old, which gives us good reason to doubt the date of 6000, but science never says "Earth =! 6000" instead, it say "Earth = 4.5 billion"Jon

Impossible to disprove anything? Thats quite a stretch! Its almost like saying that we can know nothing. If so, all we are is a bunch of philosophers debating whether or not they exist!For example, we can say with a high degree of scientific certainty (based on our current assumptions) that starlight is coming at us from a greater distance than 6000 light years

If Y = the existence of an absolute disproof of YThus,"We cannot disprove the existence of an absolute disproof of Y."Which, to me, simplifies to (given that if a disproof of Y exists, we can disprove Y):"We cannot disprove that we can disprove Y."Which essentially means that your initial statement is unfounded by the conclusions of that self-same statement.Edited by Doddy, : fixed logic

---

Help inform the masses - contribute to the EvoWiki today! Contributors needed for the following articles: Pleiotropy, Metabolism, Promoter, Invertebrate, Meiosis, DNA, Transcription, Chromosome, Tetrapod, Phenotype, Messenger RNA, Mammals, Appendix , Variation, Selection, Gene, Gametogenesis, Homo erectus and others.

​

Registration not needed, but if desired, register here!

If two statements are mutually exclusive, doesn't proving one necessarily DISprove the other? Doesn't your example demonstrate this? If the earth is proven to be 3.4 billion years old, or even just much older that 6000 years, doesn't that disprove the statement that the earth was created 6000 years ago?

You seem to start out saying "Oh, but Jon-boy, it is possible to disprove things..." but then you end with an example that doesn't support that. We've positively proven X (starlight is coming from greater 6000 light years away), but we've also proven T (starlight is coming from greater than 19 light years away). We've never really disproven any of these dates; we've just not proven them. I've yet to see any scientist really set out to disprove the Earth being 15 seconds old. Instead, scientists look to find just how old the damn thing really is.It's not that we've scientifically shattered and disproven all the claims of the Bible; such claims just have yet to be backed up. If I tell you I'm watching Wheel of Fortune, do you think I'd ever leave evidence of not doing something I'm not doing? Would I instead leave evidence I had a grill out with my friends?Jon

Hehe Just so you know, it's !=.

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

quote:

---

anglard

​

So when the Bible speaks about a serpent, it is not satan, but a 'metaphorical negative force' according to you.

​

Yet when Genesis says the earth was created in six days that means all natural science, including physics, chemistry, geology, and biology is wrong because it contradicts your non-metaphorical understanding of the Bible.

​

So you are the one, according to you, to tell us mere mortals when the Bible is meant to be taken literally and when it is meant to be taken metaphorically.

---

Its to do with a more sobering premise called textual comprehension. You have disregarded that the texts itself says the adam-eve-serpent story is not an event which occured on earth: thus the metaphoric premise applies.Your other error is that the earth was created in six days, when the texts clearly mentions the earth was created in the opening first verse ('In the beginning Gd created the Heavens and the *EARTH*/V1-Gen). The subsequent days of creation are not 24-hour days, but cosmic days (epochs of time) - because the sun's luminosity occured later in the 4th cosmic day. This would have been clear to you if you checked the OT Calendar - it does not include the first six cosmic days. If your textual comprehension was correct, you would have also concluded that since the earth was already created in verse 1, the subsequent creation listed thereafter can only apply to other things created, like fish, birds, animals and luminosity.

I'm not sure it can, but my point was less ambitious: to point out that Genesis does not literally say that it's Satan, this is an interpretation of the text. Well, what can I say, yes it does. An allegorical story, even about something that actually happened, is not a historical fact. The Greek fable of Persephone, for example, is about the changing of the seasons, and the seasons really do change, but this is not to say that Pluton really did abduct Persephone and feed her a magic pomegranate. Yes, what of it? I quoted it correctly, didn't I? Woe is me, I have been judged and found wanting by ... some guy on the internet.It's not the first time this has happened.No hope for me, eh? Alackaday, rue!

But the texts do not say that.

No they don't.Not only do they not say that, but the very opposite is implied by Genesis 2, which relates the position of Eden to other terrestrial locations, e.g. Ethiopia and Assyria.And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

quote:

---

dr adequate:

​

No they don't.

​

Not only do they not say that, but the very opposite is implied by Genesis 2, which relates the position of Eden to other terrestrial locations, e.g. Ethiopia and Assyria.

---

The historical references relate to earth when adam is represented as a name, outside of the paradisical garden, which is not on earth:

quote:

---

23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. 24 So He drove out the man; and He placed at the east of the garden of Eden the cherubim, and the flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way to the tree of life.

---

Note, he drove the man out of the garden (in a different realm than earth, called Eden); placed him on the east of Eden (Eden: a spiritual realm); and barred re-entry with 'cherubim' (angelic beings not of earth); and flaming swords which turned every which way (a fastedious barring from the heavenly realm); to place man in a place where life is terminal (physical earthly realm).The term Adam applies as a 'human' (man) as well as a Pronoun (name) when the story becomes set on earth.Note also:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward, in Eden; and there He put the man whom He had formed.In Eden (not on earth). The term East also signifies another realm: 'Now the Lrd caused a strong easterly wind to blow..etc' (a divine force to split the sea in the Book of Exodus).Re Serpent:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.More subtle than any beast which the Lrd Gd had made: meaning different from any earthly being; even one able to talk (an attribute exclusive to humans in this physical realm).Also:
25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.The shame of being naked only applies on earth's physical realm; angels wear no attire and are not able to be ashamed - because good and evil is exclusive to this physical realm.Also:
26 And God said: 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness;The 'US' refers to spiritual beings alreasy created in Heaven, which came before earth. The Adam of essence is created and spoken of in a heavenly realm, from which he was cast down to earth by the expulsion.Re Tigris and historical rivers mentioned:10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became four heads.The scenario is now transfered upon earth, and separated from that paradical garden in Eden, signified by the words "and from thence it was parted" (parted from its heavenly realm.Thus:11 The name of the first is Pishon; that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold.Here we find the first earthly material, namely 'gold' is mentioned - which does not exist in the non-physical realm of Eden.