Re: The Bible is not a scientific text??

From: Allen Roy (allenroy@peoplepc.com)
Date: Thu Mar 14 2002 - 20:15:59 EST

  • Next message: Allen Roy: "Re: ASA Perspective"

    From: Jan de Koning <jan@dekoning.ca>
    > The topic has been discussed many times before.

    I've been on this net for several years. Perhaps I missed something. I
    keep hearing that the Bible is not a scientific text, yet I have not really
    heard a good definition of what is meant by that. So far, none of the
    responses have really dealt with defining the issue. Even Terry Gray's
    article only skirts the issue by simply stating that the Bible isn't
    scientific. Just exactly what is ment by that. And in what way could it
    have been written so that it could be scientific? I am not saying that it
    is or should be used as a scientific text.

    > And, unfortunately, we cannot know what a "scientific" text written or
    inspired by God would look like.

    If we don't know what it could look like, then how do we know that the Bible
    doesn't look like it?

    > No human being could ever supply such a text.

    This impinges upon what the Holy Spirit can or cannot do through human
    agencies.

    > Another thing is: God talked to people in their own language at a certain
    time, giving directions for life.

    While I'll agree that God spoke through error prone humans using human
    langauges, it was not just for certain times but for all times.

    Allen



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 14 2002 - 20:18:05 EST