Science and Scripture

[Larniavc]

I'm not sure what there is to address. The Bible is the word of God but it's also a human work. It was written by humans living in a particular place at a particular time and written to humans living in a particular place at a particular time. This means that it's going to have some distinctively human elements. For example, the Bible is phenomenological. It speaks of the sun rising and setting. Of course we know that the sun does not actually rise and set. But from our vantage point it appears as if the sun rises and sets. Phenomenological language condescends to human understanding. I don't believe it poses a serious threat to the veracity of the text. The same is true with number approximations. It was not necessary for the authors of Scripture to be so precise that they would specify pi, when they could approximate without any serious consequences.

Then you would agree that Genesis does not need to be wholly accurate neither does the story of the resurrection?

 

[Tree of Life]

Then you would agree that Genesis does not need to be wholly accurate neither does the story of the resurrection?

No. I would not call an approximation inaccurate. I couldn’t think of an example of how the creation or resurrection account would be inaccurate.