拋開宗教感情，如何用現有的科學認識評價《聖經》？

01-07

在計算機裡面從無到有創造一個世界，沒事的時候按照設定好的規律運行，從一開始就可以設定裡面的社會逐步從原始走向進步。

至於那些神跡，稍微修改一下程序，可以把聖經裡面的神跡全都重現n遍。也可以對一部分人灌輸無神論，讓他們相信他們的世界是電腦裡面一個質量無限大體積無限小的物質炸出來的。

聖經是符合科學的。聖經雖然不是一本談科學的書，但其中涉及科學的內容都是準確無誤的。以下一些例子表明，聖經的記述符合科學事實，而且跟執筆者那個時代的人的普遍見解大不相同。

宇宙是有開始的。（創世記1:1）跟聖經不同，很多古代的神話描述宇宙不是創造出來的，而是從一片混亂中組織起來的。巴比倫人相信，天地的誕生源自兩個神，他們分別來自兩個海洋。其他傳說描述天地還未形成的時候，形狀像一隻巨蛋。
宇宙是由恆常的自然法則所支配，而不是由諸神隨意操縱的。（約伯記38:33；耶利米書33:25）世界各地的神話卻說有一些喜怒無常、麻木不仁的神祇在主宰天地，在他們面前人類是無能為力的。
大地懸在虛空之上。（約伯記26:7）古代有許多人都相信大地的形狀像一個碟子，由一個巨人或一隻動物承托著，有些人說是一隻水牛，也有些人說是一隻龜。
河流和水泉的水由降在地上的雨、雪或冰雹而來，而雨雪冰雹是從海洋和其他地方蒸發的水汽形成的。（約伯記36:27，28；傳道書1:7；以賽亞書55:10；阿摩司書9:6）古代的希臘人卻認為河流的水來自地底的海水，直到18世紀，仍然有人以為這是真的。
山嶽會上升和下沉，今日的高山一度在海洋下面。（詩篇104:6，8）跟聖經所說的不同，許多神話都說某些神把山嶽造出來，山嶽一開始就是現在的模樣。
注意衛生能保障健康。上帝給以色列人的律法包括一些衛生措施，例如:觸摸屍體後要洗手；要隔離患上傳染病的人；要掩埋糞便。（利未記11:28； 13:1-5；申命記23:13）可是，當時的埃及人卻把一些混和了糞便的物質塗在傷口上療傷。

聖經有不符合科學的地方嗎？

我們只要以合理的態度查考聖經，就可以看出聖經並沒有不符合科學的地方。雖然有些人認為聖經不符合科學，但其實都是由於對聖經有誤解。以下是一些常見的誤解:

誤解:聖經說宇宙是在六天內被創造出來，每天只有24小時。

事實:根據聖經，上帝在很久很久之前就創造了宇宙。（創世記1:1）此外，創世記第1章描述的各個創造日，是指幾段時期，但聖經並沒有透露每段時期的長短。事實上，聖經把創造天地的整個時期也稱為「一日」。（創世記2:4）

誤解:植物是需要陽光才能進行光合作用的，但聖經說上帝創造太陽之前已創造植物。（創世記1:11，16）

事實:聖經表明，上帝創造植物之前，就早已創造了「天」，顯然包括太陽在內。（創世記1:1）在第一個創造日，也就是第一段創造時期，已經有微弱的陽光透過雲層照射到地球表面。到第三個創造日，大氣層變得沒那麼混濁了，所以有充足的陽光讓植物進行光合作用。（創世記1:3-5，12，13）不過，到了第四個創造日，太陽才可以從地球表面清楚地看見。（創世記1:16）

誤解:聖經說太陽繞著地球轉。

事實:傳道書1:5說:「太陽升起，太陽落下，彷彿氣喘吁吁地回到原處，再從那裡升起。」可是，這句話只是描述人們從地球的角度去看太陽，太陽彷彿會升起和落下。雖然今天一般人都知道地球是繞著太陽轉的，但仍然會說「日出」和「日落」。

誤解:聖經說地球是平的。

事實:聖經提到「大地的邊緣」，意思是指世上最遠的地方，而不是指大地是平的或大地真的有個邊緣。（詩篇48:10）同樣地，聖經提到「地的四極」，這只是一個比喻的說法，指的是全地。今天一般人都會用「四處」或「四面八方」來泛指周圍各地。（以賽亞書11:12）

誤解:聖經說，一個圓形的周長剛好是直徑的三倍，但正確的圓周率（π）大約是3.1416。

事實:根據聖經《和合本》，列王紀上7:23和歷代志下4:2描述銅海的大小是「徑十肘，圍三十肘」。這些數字看來只是個約數。銅海是有厚度的，經文描述的也可能是銅海外圍的直徑和內圈的周長。

以賽亞說：「耶和華必成就他所說的。這是他給你的兆頭：你要日影向前進十度呢？是要往後退十度呢？」希西家回答說：「日影向前進十度容易，我要日影往後退十度。」先知以賽亞求告耶和華，耶和華就使亞哈斯的日晷向前進的日影，往後退了十度。 (列王紀下 20:9-11 和合本) 英國天文學家包愛文爵士是位天文學家，但是不信耶穌，專門研究太陽系的循環時間與周期。一天，忽然查出太陽系的循環當中，短少了整整廿四小時之久，使他覺得真是茫然莫解。於是定下許多虛構，欲證其理，然而總是不能得到滿意的答案。又有一天，這位天文學家和其同事美國耶魯大學教授特勞得先生以及其他虔誠信神的教授，研討短少二十四小時的原因，並且辯論聖經是否都是神的默示。他們便對這位天文學家說：「請你從頭查讀聖經，看看聖經能否說出你所核算的缺短的時間。』這位天文學家便起首查讀，果然在約書亞記第十章中找出解答，但是核對算式數目只能補上二十三點二十分鐘。還差四十分鐘。於是他又懷疑聖經，恐非神的默示。他又約同特勞德教授再查聖經，查出經上所記只系『約有一日之久。』『約有』二字證非整整二十四小時，釋天文學家的懷疑，繼續再讀聖經，讀到以賽亞書第卅八章，神允希西家的禱告，日晷後退十度，作為兆頭。十度恰是四十分鐘，與約書亞記第十章所短的時間合算起來整整二十四小時

Scientific errors in the Bible

Biological
[edit] Anatomy of insects

20 All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you.

21 There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that
you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground.

22 Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper.

23 But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest.

[1]

While some would see this as a scientific error, J.P. Holding has an "explanation",

Is this an error -- since insects have six legs, not four,
and since "fowl" have two legs, not four? The reference to "fowl" is
thought by some skeptics to refer to birds,
but the word used here is "owph, which merely means a creature with
wings -- it is the same word used in verse 21 (flying). The reference in
both cases is to insects. But there is an even better - and more
correct - answer.

Quite simply, the big back legs on the locust, etc. were not counted as
"legs" in the same sense as the other legs. Let"s use an illustration
from our popular literature, George Orwell"s Animal Farm. In this story,
Snowball the pig invented the slogan, "Four legs good, two legs bad" so
as to exclude humans from Animal Farm society. The geese and other fowl
objected, because they had only two legs. Snowball explained (more
clearly in the book than in the movie) that in animal terms, the birds"
wings counted as legs because they were limbs of propulsion, not
manipulation, as a human"s arms and hands were.

Now note the differentiation in Leviticus above -- referring to "legs
above the feet" for leaping. The "feet" are being differentiated from
the "legs above the feet" because of their difference in function. They
are legs, but in a different sense than the "four" legs which are just
called "feet." We are being told of two types of legs: The "on all four"
legs (which are nowhere called legs; they are only called "feet" [v.
23]), and the "leaping legs." It is clear that the Hebrews regarded the
two large, hopping hindlimbs of the locust and the other insects of the
same type, which are the only types of insects mentioned here (we now
translate "beetle" as "cricket"), as something different than the other
four limbs - perhaps because they were used primarily for vertical
propulsion, whereas the other limbs were for scurrying around. (Shifts
of terminology like this happen even today; check this proposal to
redefine "planet".)

[2]

The proposed rebuttal above, however, is a double standard. To claim
that birds or fowl by having wings have four legs, then the same is to
be applied to insects giving them a total of eight legs, rebutting his
own argument by internal inconsistency. It should be taken as a good
example of a theist attempting to make an argument that appears
intelligent, but in fact is poorly thought out and constructed.

[edit] The smallest seed

13:31 Another parable put he [ Jesus ] forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:

13:32 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it
is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of
the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

[3]

This is another old saw which argues that Jesus was wrong because
there are smaller seeds in existence, like the orchid. But the Greek
word here is mikros, which defines thusly:

398. mikros, mik-ros"; includ. the comp. mikroteros,
mik-rot"-er-os; appar. a prim. word; small (in size, quantity, number or
(fig.) dignity):--least, less, little, small.

So, it is also used in Luke 9:48 -

And said unto them, Whosoever shall receive this child in my name
receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me receiveth him that sent me:
for he that is least among you all, the same shall be great.

Obviously, Jesus did not mean here that he who was smallest in size
would be greatest! So we suggest that the mustard seed description is
not an evaluation of size at all (or exclusively), but an evaluation of
worth - which is a matter of personal judgment that is quite acceptable
and cannot be charged as erroneous.

Two other objections may crop out of this one. First, some
versions refer to the mustard as a "shrub" but the word here is
lachanon, meaning a vegetable or an herb. The KJV does get this closer
to correct. (Rom. 14:2 "For one believeth that he may eat all things:
another, who is weak, eateth herbs.") A second objection is that mustard
becomes a tree. Of course we need to remind objectors that the
scientific classification schemes of modern botany were not yet invented
-- classification was by appearance and function, not by biology. In
that regard, the mustard plant of Palestine (Sinapis nigra) could grow
to a height of several (2-6) feet and be considered a tree -- if not by
the scheme of modern science (Question: Is a bonsai a "tree"?), then
assuredly by the descriptive classification scheme of the ancients.

[4]

[edit] Bat classification

「」And
these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they
shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the
ossifrage, and the ospray, and the vulture, and the kite after his kind;
every raven after his kind; and the owl, and the night hawk, and the
cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, and the little owl, and the
cormorant, and the great owl, and the swan, and the pelican, and the
gier eagle, and the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing,
and the bat.

—Leviticus 11:13-19, KJV

Quite simply put, this is just false. Bats are not birds, they"re
mammals. Some translations of the Bible replace "fowls" or "birds" with
"flying animals". Sadly, until they can provide reasonable justification
for this switching of words found in supposedly Holy scripture, the
argument is poor.

[edit] Mathematical
[edit] The value of π (pi)

The mathematical number π is the ratio of a circle"s diameter to its circumference. The value of π truncated at 10 digits is 3.141592653.

[5]

The bible itself gives us a different value of π in 1 Kings 7:23:

Then he made the molten sea; it was round, ten cubits from brim to
brim, and five cubits high. A line of thirty cubits would encircle it
completely.

[6]

[7]

[8]

A circle with a diameter of 10 units should have a circumference of about 31.4159265358979(…) units (10×π) and not 30. Alternatively, if we used these numbers to calculate π (circumference ÷ diameter) we would get a result of precisely 3.

[9]

There is nevertheless some controversy over this error.

Some may take it as God being powerful enough to change the value
of π. In this case, however, it is a bronze-worker named Hiram that is
the "he"

[10]

—God only comes into it with the belief that the Bible is His inerrant word, in which case you would think he"d
He"d be a little more precise. On the other hand, the Hebrew of the
book doesn"t have capital letters, so ... if your head is not spinning
by now, you are abnormally inert and should seek medical advice.

On the other hand, perhaps the circumference is accurate at 30 cubits, and the diameter, 9.5492965855137(…)
cubits, has been rounded off to the nearest cubit, i.e, 10 cubits.
While from context it would appear that it is the diameter (the 10
cubits) that is most strongly defined, coming first and all with the
other measurement seeming more of an afterthought, it should be noted
that a few verses earlier we have:

1 Kings 7:15

For he cast two pillars of brass, of eighteen cubits high apiece: and a line of twelve cubits did compass either of them about.

…a circumference defined but not a diameter. We report, you decide!

[edit] Astronomical
[edit] Firmament

The "firmament" is claimed to be a solid "roof" over the world.

[11]

This is obviously untrue, unless all those satellites in orbit are a hoax. Considering the views of flat earthers, someone, somewhere probably thinks this is true.

[edit] Illumination

In Genesis, the moon is referred to as a "light" ("lesser light"
actually). The moon is merely a reflector of the sun"s light, and
produces no visible light, although it does shine in different
wavelengths not perceivable to the human eye, such as the infrareds. Of
course, when talking to tribal nomads and other desert-dwellers, the
concept of referring to the moon as a light was commonplace.

[edit] Stars

The Bible makes it clear that stars are tiny objects in the sky that will fall down when Jesus comes back:

Revelation 8:10
And
the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven,
burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the
rivers, and upon the fountains of waters;

However, other verses in the book of Revelation clearly use "stars" in a figurative sense (for example, see Rev. 9:1 and Rev. 12:3, 4),
so it is possible that the writer did not intend to make a statement
about literal celestial bodies in 8:10 either. Indeed, given the highly
allegorical and symbolic nature of apocalyptic literature
in general, any literal understanding of Revelation is generally
ill-advised until taking into consideration the idea that this is
supposedly divine inspiration to which laws, societies and lives are
proposed to be based upon.

[edit] Planetary formation

According to the Genesiscreation myth, the Earth was formed before the Sun. Aside from bio-mechanical problems, this flatly contradicts the nebular hypothesis of stellar formation, in which planets form in the accretion disk created by a young star.

It should be noted, however, that when the Sun, moon, and stars
are introduced in Genesis 1:16, they are said to be "made", which, in
the original Hebrew language, is different from the word "create" used
in Genesis 1:1. If this is the case, then it could be argued that the
Sun and moon were created in 1:1 as part of the collective "heavens"
(compare, for example, the summary given in Genesis 2:4), and only in
Genesis 1:16 (day 4 in the creative period) are they fully visible from
Earth"s surface.

The creation of the sun, moon, and stars on day four is meant to
be a theological point, rather than a scientific one. As other cultures
worshiped the sun and moon and divined by the stars (astrology), the
Hebrew authors are making the point that none of them is the source of
the light, but rather merely reflectors of the light (as lamps) whose
ultimate origin is in their God. The creation myth also uses poetic
parallelism to narrate the story: Day 1 and Day 4 are paired (light;
sun, moon, stars), Day 2 and Day 5 (seas and dry land; fish and fowl),
Day 3 and Day 6 (plants of the earth; beasts of the earth and humanity).
Furthermore, given the similarity of this narrative to the creation
myth of the Babylonians, whose god Marduk creates the cosmos by slaying
his sea-serpent mother Tiamat, the Hebrew presentation of God creating
over the deep (Hebrew: "tehom") by means other than violence and
declaring the creation to be "good" is a rebuke to the Babylonian myth.
The abundance of literary and theological devices in the narrative make
it clear that the text is not attempting to be a scientific account of
the origin of the world, but a theological declaration of the goodness
of the creation as against competing religious systems (Canaanite,
Babylonian, etc.).

[edit] Footnotes

↑Bible Gateway
↑ J.P. Holding: Four Legs Good, Six Legs Bad: An Entomological Error?
↑The Skeptics Annotated Bible
↑ J.P. Holding: I Pity Da Seed: Was Jesus Botanically Ignorant?)
↑ For even greater accuracy, see Pi to ten thousand digits and Pi to one million digits.
↑Hebrew scriptures - 1 Kings, 7:23
↑Creation Scientists Prove: Circles are of Satan
↑Rejecting Pascal"s Wager: Mathematical Errors in the Bible
↑ Compare with the Indiana Pi Bill"s 3.2.
↑ See 1 Kings 7:13, though the lack of a capital should have given it away.
↑Cosmogony, in the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia

史詩類神話？

題外話，很多人希望把宗教信仰和科學掛鉤，這既是對宗教的侮辱，也是對科學的褻瀆。