Hi Jor-el,
Let me try to answer. If you mean *scientific* discussions, then your discussion has to be within the framework of scientific method. The latter is a set of "rules of engagement," one of which states that science always begins with a direct observation of some natural phenomenon. Every single word that you can find in all science journal articles or textbooks is necessarily based on someone's direct observations, followed by questions, hypotheses (or theories), predictions, and tests. All of the above - observations, questions, hypotheses (theories), predictions, and tests - must be such that all human beings should be able, independently of each other, repeat or reproduce them, or otherwise dismiss them. For example, if I read somewhere that Marcello Malpigi discovered blood capillaries in the early 1700's, I myself should be able to dissect a cat's kidney and, using a magnifying glass, see exactly the same thing that Malpigi saw 300 years ago. If I don't see the blood capillaries there, I have the right to say that these capillaries simply do not exist. Or, if I read that Charles Darwin in 1859 advanced the theory of evolution (or of the origin of species by common descent), I should be able to look critically at the SAME evidence Darwin looked at (plus new evidence), and see for myself, whether Darwin's theory is valid.
The Bible has a somewhat different nature. It is neither an article nor a textbook in science. It talks about God Who is principally, by definition, invisible, un-traceable through human sensory organs. God reveals Himself to those He chooses, but you and I cannot independently verify these revelations. The truths of the Bible are not necessarily of an empiric, scientific kind. The Bible does not invite people to evaluate its content critically and to dismiss it in the case we humans find it inconsistent with our empiric, sensory observation. Instead, it just asks us to believe.
Personally, I love the Bible, I read it almost daily and find a lot of wisdom and inspiration there. But I realize that one should not draw one's scinece from the Bible. To me, that would be something like drawing ideas about proper methods of forestry from Robert Frost's poem, "Whose woods these are, I think I know," or drawing ideas about how to make weapons from Hamlet's soliloque with its words, "whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune..." Just like Frost's poem is not exactly about woods, and Shakespeare's "Hamlet" is not exactly about slings and arrows, in much the same way, I think, the Bible is not about physical origins of our planet or of the humankind. Rather, it is about spiritual matters - life, death, love, faithfulness, deceit, human depravity, redemption, forgiveness, reconciliation with God etc. It certainly uses a lot of imagery of "making" the earth and man, but it is not a natural science or natural history textbook or account.
Sorry if I was not very clear. I am new on this forum. Thanks for bearing with me.
Richard
™ Version 4.2