I think in the spirit of the question, many fundamentalists would affirm that the Bible is true in the literal sense, and that presents some problems when you compare it to modern scientific knowledge. If you hold that the Bible was authored, through human intermediaries, by an omniscient being with the intent of providing a literally true account, nearly every observation of the natural world that requires more than a face value assessment to be correct is just wrong.
The authors clearly did not know that the earth is roughly spherical and orbits the sun, or that the stars are other suns, or how heredity works, and so on. They had the current knowledge of their time, and they were wrong where you might expect an iron age agrarian culture to be wrong, and right when you would expect them to be right.
A case where the ancient Hebrews are often criticized is their biological taxonomical classifications, but there is simply no reason to expect them to be following a Linnaean classification system. What is translated as 'birds' in Hebrew is more like 'vertebrates that fly by flapping their wings' so it's no big deal that they lump bats and birds together. That's a matter of language, not science.
The authors clearly did not know that the earth is roughly spherical and orbits the sun, or that the stars are other suns, or how heredity works, and so on. They had the current knowledge of their time, and they were wrong where you might expect an iron age agrarian culture to be wrong, and right when you would expect them to be right.
A case where the ancient Hebrews are often criticized is their biological taxonomical classifications, but there is simply no reason to expect them to be following a Linnaean classification system. What is translated as 'birds' in Hebrew is more like 'vertebrates that fly by flapping their wings' so it's no big deal that they lump bats and birds together. That's a matter of language, not science.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
