Scientific ACCURACIES in the Bible

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

...
So ask yourself where does the passage in question "invoke science?" Or is that something someone else has done by taking a literal english interpertation of one verse while ignoring the rest of the passage? Science was invoked and the contextual meaning of the passage was changed to fit an arguement. That is the defination of a straw man.

We're looking at the passages to see how, when correctly read, they relate to reality. The reason why we're looking at these verses in the first place is because creationists cite them as showing advanced scientific knowledge from people in a pre-scientific age. We're showing in this thread how the creationists are wrong, and that these verses when read properly and in their historical context don't actually show any advanced scientific understanding, and in some cases even have completely wrong information about reality.

So far in this thread, in the cases where biblical cosmology are concerned, your defenses have mostly comprised of switching out words in verses with alternative lexicon meanings of words with little if any justification for such a change. You seem to be trying to reinterpret these verses as being entirely metaphor that serves some greater point but you haven't shown why the literal simpler interpretation cannot also demonstrate the same point just as well as the metaphorical. In essence, it appears to me that you're just favoring a metaphorical rather than a literal interpretation because the literal interpretation contradicts reality. You've also ignored the historical context of the controversial statements in question.