Biology versus Theology. The Bible: irreconcilable with Science, Experience, and even its own statementsJulian
Religion
Biology versus Theology. The Bible: irreconcilable with Science, Experience, and even its own statements
Julian
Bible and science
Lastly, it is said that science at present is unsettled, and therefore it
is too early to pronounce upon the scientific teaching of the Bible. No
doubt there are questions in science still _in nubibus_, and others _sub
judice_, but what of that? Because a science is still not fully
developed, is it worth nothing? has it no voice, no authority? It is
still doubtful whether some of the nebulæ are unfinished stars, or stars
so thickly clustered together that at this distance they look like a
“cloud.” Because this question is not fully determined, must we ignore
the fact that the earth is a globe; that the planets roll round the sun;
that the clouds are due to evaporation, and rain to a change of
temperature? The Bible says the earth is a plane, and the clouds a solid
flooring; that the sun, moon, and stars are set in the atmosphere between
the upper and lower waters. We are told to suspend judgment on these
points, because there are problems of astronomy and geology yet unsolved.
This indeed is clinging to a hopeless hope; it is the obstinacy of a
Gambetta, who finding no help in man, dreamt in his enthusiasm that the
stars in their courses would fight for France against the Prussians.
To return to the Mosaic notion of creation. The writer tells us that man
was made in the image of God—a male and a female. “Let us make man in
our image, after our likeness. So God created man in his own image; in
the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” This
seems to imply an Isis as well as an Osiris, a female as well as a male
deity, and no doubt Moses, who derived his inspiration from the Egyptian
priests, believed this sexual divinity. But what is meant by “the image
and likeness of God?” We are told over and over again that God has no
image, no bodily form, and we are forbidden to make any likeness of any
creature and look on it as a likeness of God. Theologians tell us the
likeness referred to is righteousness and true holiness. But why say
“the image and likeness?” _image_ seems to point to bodily form.
Besides, Adam was not like God in holiness and true righteousness, for he
hearkened to temptation, and if he was “like God,” it implies that Satan
might delude even God, and that God might by possibility fall like Adam.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account