Reading science into scriptures

[Faithword]

I am writing in regards to modern scientific terms revealed in
scripture. Is it the case that creation scientist are reading to much in
to scripture in regards to modern scientific terms.

For instance the claim that Job 28:25 refers to the modern science discovery of weight in the air. But could not Job 28:25 just refer to the force of the wind as quoted below

Job 28:25 - "The weight of the wind"

"Morris states that Job 28:25 is another anticipation of modern knowledge (p.276). He interprets this to mean "atmospheric pressure" which was unknown in ancient times. The Hebrew word öql means weight, or shekel. It corresponds to the Akkadian öiqlu, and Aramaic and Ugaritic tql (NIDOTTE Vol.4, 235-7). The NIV translates, "the force of the wind." Job is not talking about the atmospheric pressure, but the force of the wind"

"Number of Stars


Jeremiah 33:22 says, "As the host of heaven can not be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured" (also Genesis 15:5, & 22:17). On a clear night in the middle east the stars look like they are innumerable. The point of this hyperbole is that David will have many descendants. If we use a computer to estimate the amount of sand or the number of stars, this does not mean we will then know the exact number of descendants of David or Abraham. This is poetical language, and not a scientific statement. This was a common ancient hyperbole (Bullinger, 426-7).

Akkadian Literature

Shalmaneser I was king of Assyria about 1280 BC. He had an inscription engraved upon a stone tablet (KAH,I,No.13) that describes the rebuilding of the Temple Eharsagkurkurra. It says, "Thereupon, the land of the Kuti, whose numbers are countless as the stars of heaven, who know how to plunder, came down upon me and fought with me, and stirred up enmity" (Luckenbill 1926, 40, #117; Grayson 1972, 83). "

Many more examples found at the website below

Institute for Biblical & Scientific Studies

 

[juvenissun]

I am writing in regards to modern scientific terms revealed in
scripture. Is it the case that creation scientist are reading to much in
to scripture in regards to modern scientific terms.

For instance the claim that Job 28:25 refers to the modern science discovery of weight in the air. But could not Job 28:25 just refer to the force of the wind as quoted below

Job 28:25 - "The weight of the wind"

"Morris states that Job 28:25 is another anticipation of modern knowledge (p.276). He interprets this to mean "atmospheric pressure" which was unknown in ancient times. The Hebrew word öql means weight, or shekel. It corresponds to the Akkadian öiqlu, and Aramaic and Ugaritic tql (NIDOTTE Vol.4, 235-7). The NIV translates, "the force of the wind." Job is not talking about the atmospheric pressure, but the force of the wind"

How can you be sure that the NIV interpretation is a better one? Why is the "weight of the air" interpretation any less desirable?

 

[juvenissun]

I am writing in regards to modern scientific terms revealed in
scripture. Is it the case that creation scientist are reading to much in
to scripture in regards to modern scientific terms.

For instance the claim that Job 28:25 refers to the modern science discovery of weight in the air. But could not Job 28:25 just refer to the force of the wind as quoted below

Job 28:25 - "The weight of the wind"

"Morris states that Job 28:25 is another anticipation of modern knowledge (p.276). He interprets this to mean "atmospheric pressure" which was unknown in ancient times. The Hebrew word öql means weight, or shekel. It corresponds to the Akkadian öiqlu, and Aramaic and Ugaritic tql (NIDOTTE Vol.4, 235-7). The NIV translates, "the force of the wind." Job is not talking about the atmospheric pressure, but the force of the wind"

"Number of Stars


Jeremiah 33:22 says, "As the host of heaven can not be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured" (also Genesis 15:5, & 22:17). On a clear night in the middle east the stars look like they are innumerable. The point of this hyperbole is that David will have many descendants. If we use a computer to estimate the amount of sand or the number of stars, this does not mean we will then know the exact number of descendants of David or Abraham. This is poetical language, and not a scientific statement. This was a common ancient hyperbole (Bullinger, 426-7).

Akkadian Literature

Shalmaneser I was king of Assyria about 1280 BC. He had an inscription engraved upon a stone tablet (KAH,I,No.13) that describes the rebuilding of the Temple Eharsagkurkurra. It says, "Thereupon, the land of the Kuti, whose numbers are countless as the stars of heaven, who know how to plunder, came down upon me and fought with me, and stirred up enmity" (Luckenbill 1926, 40, #117; Grayson 1972, 83). "

Many more examples found at the website below

Institute for Biblical & Scientific Studies

In science, "can not be numbered" and "many" have big difference. If we understand the verse by "many", then we are not seeing it through science. Then there is no question. But if we consider it as "can not be numbered", then we are interpreting it by science. And we are reading science into the verse. Then there is one question: "Is the verse also scientifically true"?

As human has logic thinking built in, we can not blame people who are reading Bible verses critically with a scientific mind. The question to ask is: Can the Bible verse also stand for this type of scrutiny.