User talk:SouthWriter/sandbox/An atheist's objections/@comment-1777104-20100811162632

Feg, Red got it about right. Science is indeed just a tool. To elevate knowledge above the unknown God is the apex of arrogance. Science has not failed, but scientists have. It is rather odd that we would assume that since we have theories of how the universe MAY have come into being without God doing it, that God didn't do it. If you want a scientist's point of view on how it could have been done by God, check out [|Starlight and Time] by Russell Humphreys. Using the tools of science - notably Einsteins theory of relativity - Humphreys lays down a theory based on both physical science and the Biblical text.

The assumption of Mary is not part of the Biblical record, and therefore is not part of this discussion on the accuracy of the Bible. When the pope declared this to be accurate history, he was not "adding" it to the Bible. The councils of the Church, in the early centuries, did not create the Bible, but only confirmed that those books we have ARE the Bible.

Pick up a Bible, Feg, and at least read the account of the feeding of the five thousand. It is the only miracle (apart from the resurrection) that is recorded in all four gospels. I won't 'spoil' it for you by giving the details. However, if it would have been a miracle (a work of an all-powerful God) to feed fifty, then why would it be any more difficult to feed five thousand. The account was recorded first by Matthew, an eye witness, and a generation later by John, another eye witness.

About the ark and "two of every kind" of animal, there are several things to consider. First, the "farm animals" largely came on in groups of SEVEN - these were the "clean" animals that are used in sacrifices and, apparently, later as food. But these would have taken up very little space compared to all the other land animals and birds included. John Woodmorappe's book, [|Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study] clearly lays out real science, showing how not only all the "kinds" of animals would fit -- the Ark was huge, and had three stories! -- but also a possible plan as to how it could be done.

And finally, it is my duty to warn potential readers of these books of the danger in this fiction. The faith of young Christians is indeed weak, for they usually only have an hour or two of Biblical training versus hundreds of hours of secular, humanistic and even atheistic teachings from schools, media, and their peers. Older, more mature readers can take up these books, and even enjoy them as stories, without having their faith shaken, as yours seems to have been. I say that, because you have confessed that you "choose" science over God, and now see "metaphor" and "hyperbole" (exaggeration) everywhere in the Biblical record, that you insist was written far later than the facts portrayed there. As you noticed, I have included two books by real scientists for you to consider. I doubt if you can find them in a public library, but you could have them do a search for you. Otherwise, visit the library of a large Baptist Church (independent or SBC) near you. If your mind is truly open, then these books might help you to see truth as an absolute - some things just "are" - rather than merely the accepted "majority" report.