Anaxagoras knew that the moon shone by reflected light in the 5th century BC. He also described the sun as being "larger than the Peloponnese".
No-one ever claimed that the sun was one meter across, you made that up. Nor does the Bible give an accurate figure for the size of the sun, so I don't really see why you raise the issue.
The statement in the Bible about the sun and moon dimming is consistent with the authors knowing what had been discovered several centuries previously, but hardly proves it. You write:
Look at how once the Sun gets darkened, the moon also loses brightness as a result.
But the words "as a result" are your gloss on the text; they do not appear in the Bible.
As has been pointed out, the next bit of Matthew 24:29 proves that the author didn't know what a star is or how gravity works. Hence, the passage cannot be divinely inspired, because God would know these things.
Yeah, maybe because that's not what I am talking about. 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. God is not bound by science, therefore, you cannot prove the existence of God through science - let alone anything.
In the same way, the Qur'aan has some points that can be scientifically backed up. It says that the sun exists, and look, the sun does exist. Bully for Muhammad. And any point on which the Qur'aan disagrees with science? Well then, Allah performed a miracle. Bully for Allah.
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. 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.
You say your faith is "100%", but do you really have as much faith in your God as the 9/11 bombers had in theirs?
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.
Point taken. I meant to refer to Modern Science rather than the middle ages and earlier.
Well that's not true either. To take an example more or less at random, Francis Crick and James Watson, who discovered the structure of DNA, are both outspoken atheists, not Christians. Or does "Modern Science" exclude molecular genetics?
Do Einstein's discoveries count as "Modern Science"? Einstein, who wrote: "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."
I could go on ...
Moreove, if we restrict "modern" to meaning within the last hundred years or so, then whatever proportion of "Modern Science" has been contributed by Christians, even those who did profess the Christian religion have also been overwhelmingly of the opinion that Creationism is completely batshit crazy.