Monday, June 2, 2008

The Bible Confirmed Through Science?

This is a fun one. Here's what this man has to say about the Bible and science... Now lets refute, shall we?:

(0:00 - 0:10) Saying it twice doesn't make it true. Watch: Say it with me now, "Sarah Jessica Parker doesn't have a horse-face. Sarah Jessica Parker doesn't have a horse-face."... Did it work?... Nope, she's still all Sex And Mr.Ed.

(0:20) Oooh! He talked about me! I scoff, I scoff!

(0:28) Wrong. First off, "science" never made any announcement. Ever. "Science" is not a group, club or organization and there was never a time when "science" came out of it's lab and said "We now know... there are too many stars to count... Dr. Mathis tried earlier and said that it was just fucking crazy." I'll let you spout on before I follow up.

(0:40) If this is the heart of your argument, you need to check your history books. Ok, Isaiah said that, fine. But I'm an English Major and I can tell you from reading countless (almost as countless as the stars) early/ancient literature and I hate to spoil your sermon, but that's what any one who has read a book would call a "Simile". This is when two unlike things are compared using small similarities and prefaced with the words 'like' or 'as'. (You could also argue it as an analogy or, if your stretching, a metaphor)

This form of writing has existed... FOREVER. Read Gilgamesh, written around 2750 and 2500 BC. (Speaking of Gilgamesh, it's awfully familiar to Noah. Hmm.) Not to mention the birth of literature from the Greeks. you know, the guys that just about created Astronomy? (I would say they DID create the basis of what we call astronomy, however there is recent evidence that shows ancient India was working this stuff out a little earlier, but the juries still out.)

The Greeks went WAY further in this than "trying to count the stars" and created the calender that we STILL use today by calculating the earths rotation and the alignment of the planets. Not to mention early constellations and predicted solar and lunar activity. A little more 'scientific' than the 'grains of sand' theory.

Oh, and what about what Mathew has to say?

Mathew, 24:29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light..."

So the Moon gives light? But the 'Science' says it reflects the light from the sun?? (That's just one of many references to the moon's 'light' that can be found in the Bible. Just check the first page. Yeah, the FIRST PAGE.)

(1:29) Man, the Hubble Telescope was such a waste of money! We could have just read the Bible.

(2:05) Uh-oh, there's that tricky literary stuff again! See, what was said there has been said by EVERY religion and culture (at least those who have kept written records) in our entire history. Every "creation story" has a beginning point of 'what can't be seen', that goes for the whole Earth-on-the-turtle's-back thing, too. How is such a simple form of writing being missed? Literalism, as crazy as it is, has it's limits!

(2:17) "Quite frankly", if you base your entire structure of acceptance of reality on what the Bible supports, you must find it hard to function in the world.

(2:35) All scathing responses aside, the Bible is also not meant for the following:

- Field Guide to Birds
- First Aid Response Pamphlet
- News Paper
- Annotated Index of Human Organs
- Medical Textbook
- State Legislative Text
- Piano
- Underwear
- Person
- Reliable Historical, Scientific, Archeological, Cultural, basis for ANYTHING... Especially Reality or the basis there-in.

(2:53) I think its less How to go to Heaven and more Why you're going to Hell, really.

(3:02) The only book with Authority?! Have you READ Cash: An Autobiography of Johnny Cash by Johnny Cash?!

1 comment:

Mike said...

Um... science proves the Bible untrue! Nice try though!