Are the scientific discoveries of the past relevant to the Bible? In such that Man was created (Bible) versus Man evolved from Homo Habilis or Neanderthal? Or could they be relevant to the Bible but in a way misinterpreted by humans?
Express your thoughts!
My thought is that progress in science compels religious teachers to adjust constantly their interpretations to fit the scientific conclusions. The way we understand religion depends (partly) upon science.
Therefore, such understanding is built on unstable grounds.
Scientific discovery is as relevant to the Bible as it is to the Rock of Gibraltar, namely, not at all. Scientific discovery can’t even put a dent in how certain religious sects and ministers choose to use the Bible. With all the scientific information available, there are still people who believe that the Bible was written by God and should be taken literally. That opinion is so respected in the United States that you can believe it, preach it and get elected president! Anyone with half a brain, upon reading the Bible, would realize that taken literally it is a jumble of confused, convoluted contradiction. If it was written by God and meant to be read literally, then the only acceptable explanation is divine humor. Like putting a funhouse mirror in the chimpanzee cage at the zoo and watching the chimps jump around.
the bible wasnt written by god, yet somehow states his rules (some of which include immoral opinions to my opinin)
darwinism has no line…social darwinism is immoral, yet isnt too different from darwinism.
i say, stop trying to figure out WHY were here on earth and what our purpose here is, and do whatever the hell you want. after all, i trust instinct waaaay more than i trust some papers written decades ago, or an idea that can be interpreted incorrectly and cause destruction.
deleted