By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
theprof00 on 31 August 2009
Edit Thread
theRepublic said:
theprof00 said:
@naraku, the point is, the church could have translated it in a metaphorical way that coincided with science and evolution but instead chose to look like retards once again. Remember when the earth was the center of everything?

What do you mean by this?  The New Testament is about 2000 years old and the Old Testament is much older than that.  Science is really only about 500 years old.  There is no way the authors of the Bible could have made the Bible coincide with science.

Do you mean that the interpretations of the Bible stories should be changed to coincide with science?  If so, it is not as easy as it sounds.  Religions are generally resistant to change.

I mean that the church should have made an official statement way back saying that the days of creation is not literal. They could have said that it actually was millions and millions of years and coincided with evolution because the pattern in the days of creation is close to the actual appearance of animals according to evolution.

They could have used that in showing just how real the Bible is because it correctly listed the sequence of animal appearance even though it was 2000+ years ago.

they were completely right. fish and birds, and then mammals and humans. Birds is correct because dinosaurs became birds or were the ancestors to birds. They do leave out reptiles, but whatever, it's a 2000 year old book.