The Bible Contains Scientific Errors

I. GenesisI apologize for including a passage from the New Testament of the Bible. Here is a more relevant argument:"1. There is the internal evidence of the book of Genesis itself. As already mentioned, chapters 12–50 have always been regarded by the Jewish people as being the record of their own true history, and the style of writing contained in chapters 1–11 is not strikingly different from that in chapters 12–50. 2. Hebrew scholars of standing have always regarded this to be the case. Thus, Professor James Barr, Regius Professor of Hebrew at the University of Oxford, has written ‘Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that: (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience (b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story (c) Noah’s flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark. Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the "days" of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know. ’3. One of the main themes of Genesis is the Sovereignty of God. This is seen in God’s actions in respect of four outstanding events in Genesis 1–11 (Creation, the Fall, the Flood, and the Babel dispersion), and His relationship to four outstanding people in Genesis 12–50 (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph). There is thus a unifying theme to the whole of the book of Genesis, which falls to the ground if any part is mythical and not true history; on the other hand, each portion reinforces the historical authenticity of the other. "[1][2][3]Even if the Bible wasn't meant to be taken literally, my no-matters argument still stands. For example, if I say "Absolute zero is freezing point", even if it is in, say, the science fiction genre, it's still a scientific error. For another example, take Star Wars. There are obviously many scientific fallacies in those movies, but it is in the science fiction genre. However, it is still acknowledged that Start Wars contains scientific errors. Therefore, the Bible contains scientific errors, whether or not it is meant to be taken literally (which I have already proven it is literal). As for my opponent's first analogy, he is using a figurative phrase. Even so, that might be literal anyway. And his second isn't really that relevant because that isn't even a story. It's again a figurative phrase. Now on to countering my opponent's literal arguments:>> Genesis 1:1-3 One translation says "prepared", but most others say "created". Even so, preparing or creating, the heavens came before the Earth - by about nine billion years -, so they could not have been prepared simultaneously either. [4]2 the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness is on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters, 3 and God saith, 'Let light be;' and light is Therefore, the Earth existed before light. "God makes heaven and a formless earth, and light and dark. The earth was formed 9.2 billions years after the big bang, not even remotely close to each other in time periods. .. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Evening and morning the first day. .. hmm. .. that sounds like a 24 hour day (6 days of 24 hour periods). The timeline of the big bang however is in the billions of yearsGod raises up the land on a watery earth, and then he creates trees and grasses. Plants and grass were later arrivals in the history of life and earth. Grasses arose in the Cretaceous, angiosperms evolved in the Jurassic. This would put them past day 5 (after fish). "[4]This is an error. II. Light "The Moon is not a light source, it does not make its own light. The moon reflects light from the sun. We can see the Moon because light from the Sun bounces off it back to the Earth. If the Sun wasn't there, we wouldn't be able to see the Moon. "[5]It doesn't matter if the Bible doesn't say that the moon makes it's own light; it isn't a light; it is a reflector. If light from a light bulb shines on a mirror, the mirror isn't a "light" whatsoever. The moon is not a light. III. Noah's Ark The total number of non-bacterial species in the world has been estimated at 8.7 million. [6]There could not be so much genetic diversity if only two animals from each genus survived. For example, take the Felis genus:The genus Felis is currently considered to consist of six living species, although the domestic cat and Chinese mountain cat are sometimes considered subspecies of F. silvestris. Felis chaus – jungle cat Felis margarita – sand cat Felis nigripes – black-footed cat Felis silvestris – wildcat Felis catus – domestic cat Felis bieti – Chinese mountain cat Felis attica – (extinct) Felis lunensis – Martelli's cat (extinct) [7]Only one of those species would still be around; however, all but two are still around. And no, five species could not come out in four and a quarter thousand years. As for the it's too big claim, the biggest ship ever built was extremely unshipworthy, the USS Wyoming. And Noah's Ark was 50% bigger than that. "This vessel, which was, at 110 meters long, a full 50% shorter than Noah’s ark, was found to be so unstable that it could only be used for short coastal hauls to avoid rough conditions further out in the sea. The huge structural stresses that developed in the USS Wyoming made the ship sag and, well, it leaked. Water thus had to be pumped out continuously to prevent the ship from sinking. Now, here we have Noah’s ark, built with wood, before the invention of steel and hydraulic pumps, undergoing the turbulent conditions of the flood unscathed. It is simply an engineering impossibility. ”[8] Noah's ark was unseaworthy. As for the Mount Everest claim:"The top of Mount Everest is composed of fossil-bearing marine limestone (Mount Qomolangma Formation, the ancient seafloor of the Paleozoic Tethys Ocean) that is believed to be lower to middle Ordovician in age. "[9]"The Ordovician is a geologic period and system, the second of six of the Paleozoic Era, and covers the time between 485.4 " 1.9 to 443.4 " 1.5 million years ago. "[10][11]That was way before the flood. Why are marine fossils there then? Because Everest was once under the sea. And, my opponent doesn't seem to realize that the flood, according to the Bible, was around 2250 BC, so fossils from millions of years ago are irrelevant. The flood was around 4360 years ago, meaning fossils can't be used from before that. [12]Sources:[1]: Letter from Professor James Barr to David C. C. Watson of the UK, dated 23 April 1984. Copy held by the author. [2]: Adapted from J. Sidlow Baxter, Explore the Book, Vol. 1, pp. 27–29[3]: . http://creation.mobi...[4]: . http://en.allexperts.com...[5]: . http://resources.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk...[6]: . http://www.plosbiology.org...[7]: . http://en.wikipedia.org...[8]: . http://talkatheism.wordpress.com...[9]: . http://www.montana.edu...[10]: Gradstein, Felix M. ; Ogg, J. G. ; Smith, A. G. (2004). A Geologic Time Scale 2004. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press[11]: . http://en.wikipedia.org...[12]: . http://www.answersingenesis.org...;