You cannot pick and choose, and then even bend what you choose.
As was pointed out the language was 'gave her light'. If God was overseeing the formation of this scripture, why not simply state the indirect nature of the Moon's light?
You completely ignore, the very next clause "and the stars shall fall from heaven", which demonstrates complete ignorance of the reality of the nature of the universe. If I apply your method I can find similar amazing insights in many earlier scriptures of religions you probably disdain.
As comparison go read the "scientific" insights that Muslim's claim the Koran contains. They do the same song and dance - quite convincingly, to those who want to be convinced.
Consider this: Not one a single scientific revelation of the nature of reality has come about by the literal or inspired reading of the bible - not one. It is always in retrospect that one can find the amazing supposed insight.
I am showing that the Bible does have some points that can be scientifically backed up.
My point it that one can do the very same thing with the ancient scriptures of Islam, Hindu and Buddhism. It is not really that hard to squint as some scripture and imagine some deep meaning that is not there. There are many Islamic websites that lay it all out and even demonstrate that the Koran describes embryology, is checksummed with numerology, etc.
OFF TOPIC below this point!- Please Do Not Respond to this portion of the message or continue in this vein. Take comments to the Moderation Thread. AdminPD
For people like you, that is very bad news because you wont accept that He does exist without proof. For me, I have 100% faith that God does exist.
That is, IMHO a very arrogant position that must be born out of ignorance. I have no such certainty and willing admit to it.
I do not need proof of His existence. He has worked so many miracles in my life that to say that He does not exist, is idiocy. I can list some of them for you if you want, however it would be off topic. I'll go to the chat room or something, I don't care.
That last statement is contradiction. First you say you don't need proof and then you say the miracles you have witnessed are proof.
There is good thread on here that discusses miracles and the subjective fallacy of confirmation bias.
So I have done my job and told you that He does exist. You are not my responsibility. Your blood is on your own hands now. I have done what I needed to do - that is it.
You character and attitude reminds more of the pharisees; than of Jesus or the apostles.
Edited by iceage, : No reason given.
Edited by iceage, : Removed points that would led of topic
I am showing that the Bible does have some points that can be scientifically backed up. Of course there are things in there that are supernatural, like stars falling from the sky. So what? They are supernatural.
So the biblical quotes that are absurd are supernatural, but those fragments, that if given some liberal interpretation, demonstrate amazing rational scientific insights.
Other religious fundamentalists do the same thing with their "holy scripture". The Muslim's claim that the Koran describes embryology.
What about stopping the Sun or even moving the Sun's shadow backwards. Do these passage demonstrate insight or ignorance of cosmology.
God is not bound by science, therefore, you cannot prove the existence of God through science - let alone anything.
Evidently not, since stopping the Sun would require the suspension of all the laws of conservation of momentum just so Joshua could take his revenge. Why not just stop the beating of the black evil hearts of these enemies of god.
It is odd that this being that could evoke such far reaching supernatural powers at will, found iron chariots formidable in Judges 1:19.
Judges 1:19 writes:
And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.
Consider this: Not one a single scientific revelation of the nature of reality has come about by the literal or inspired reading of the bible - not one.
When did man discover that life was in the blood?
Life is not in the blood. The blood is but one of components required by blood borne life.
Is life in Bile? for surely you cannot live without Bile.
Nevertheless ICANT you are doing a fine job of illustrating the point that the Bible reveals nothing beyond the contemporary state of knowledge at the time of writing.
Homer wrote the following...
Achilles glared at him and answered, "Fool, prate not to me about covenants. There can be no covenants between men and lions, wolves and lambs can never be of one mind, but hate each other out and out an through. Therefore there can be no understanding between you and me, nor may there be any covenants between us, till one or other shall fall and glut grim Mars with his life's blood.