(September 2, 2019 at 8:57 am)Fierce Wrote:(August 28, 2019 at 6:59 am)Belaqua Wrote: A purely literal reading of the Bible is the compliment that poorly-educated believers pay to science. They think that the only way to get important meaning from a book is to read it like a science text, so they read it that way. In this they ignore the history of their own religion and unknowingly agree that scientific statements -- ideally unambiguous, requiring no interpretation, and either true or false -- are the only good kind of statements.
I do not read the bible as a science textbook. Rather, I read the bible as the fictional mythology it is.
Yes, I agree this is the best way to read it.
Quote:When we refer to science and the bible what we mean is that our current understanding of science clashes with how the bible describes the natural world. After all, if a real divine being had chosen Messengers to write its Word, one would think that the contents of the book would align with our current understanding of science. Since it does not, it clearly means there was no divine inspiration; it means the bible is just mythology created by primitive fallible human minds.
I agree that the Bible doesn't describe the world in a way that fits with science. And I don't see any reason to think it's divinely inspired.
On the other hand, I see no reason to think that the authors of the Bible ever wanted to write something like science. It seems likely that the authors of Genesis, for example, knew they were writing myth for spiritual, moral, and propagandistic reasons.
And while I don't believe in divine inspiration, I don't agree with your reasoning here. You seem to be assuming that if there had been divine inspiration, the authors would have written a science book. But since they were more likely interested in writing different things for different reasons from the very beginning, merely the fact that it isn't science is no reason to conclude it's not divine. I think we have to use other arguments for that.
I want to avoid the simplified view that science=true=worthwhile and myth=false=waste of time. It's more complicated than that.