THE BIBLE AND SCIENCE.
"There is a beautiful harmony between the principles of science and
the teachings of the Bible."--Dr. Cheever.
Bibliolaters, unacquainted with the principles of science, and
scientists unacquainted with the teachings of the Bible, may accept
this statement; those conversant with both cannot. In the Bible a
thousand scientific errors may be found. The limits of this work
preclude a presentation of them all. Enough will be given, however,
to show that the teachings of the Bible conflict with the teachings
of the ten principal sciences--Astronomy, Geology, Geography, Botany,
Zoology, Ethnology, Physiology, Chemistry, Physics, and Mathematics.
Astronomy.
"And God said, Let there be light, and there was light" (Gen. i, 3).
"And God called the light day, and the darkness he called night. And
the evening and the morning were the first day" (5).
"And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day and
the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also ... and
the evening and the morning were the fourth day" (16, 19).
The cause is supposed to precede the effect; but here the effect
precedes the cause. Light and darkness, morning and evening, day and
night exist before the sun.
The Bible teaches us that the earth is older than the sun; science
teaches us that the sun is older than the earth.
In the creation of the universe God devoted five-sixths of his time
to the creation of this little world of ours, while but a fragment
of the remaining time was needed to create the countless worlds that
exist outside of our solar system. Five brief words, "He made the
stars also," record the history of their creation.
According to the Bible, the oldest star is less than six thousand
years old. What says the scientist?
"I have observed stars, of which the light, it can be proved, must
take two millions of years to reach this earth."--Sir William Herschel.
"Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley
of Ajalon."
"So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go
down about a whole day" (Josh. x, 12, 13).
"Behold, I [the Lord] will bring again the shadow of the degrees,
which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So
the sun returned ten degrees" (Isaiah xxxviii, 8).
The Bible teaches the geocentric theory that the sun revolves around
the earth; Science teaches the heliocentric theory that the earth
revolves around the sun.
Luther, accepting the Bible and rejecting science, wrote:
"The fool [Copernicus] wishes to reverse the entire science of
Astronomy. But sacred Scripture tells us that Joshua commanded the
sun to stand still and not the earth."
"Biblical astronomy," says the celebrated Jewish commentator,
Dr. Kalisch, "is derived from mere optical appearance."
Geology.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Gen. i, 1).
"And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed,
and the fruit tree yielding fruit" (i, 11).
"And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving
creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth"
(i, 20).
"And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after
his kind, cattle and creeping things" (i, 24).
"And God said, Let us make man in our image" (i, 26).
"In six days the Lord made heaven and earth" (Ex. xx, 11).
According to the Bible, the earth was created in six days about
six thousand years ago. Geology tells us that the earth was old six
million years ago.
To make room for the earth's development, theologians now contend
that a vast period of time elapsed between the work recorded in the
first verse and in those following. To this Bishop Colenso replies:
"We are plainly taught in the book of Genesis, according to the simple,
straightforward meaning of the words, that Elohim created the heaven
and the earth in the beginning of these six days--that is, taking
into account the chronological data of the Bible, about six thousand
years ago" (The Pentateuch, Part IV, p. 94).
Again, theologians claim that these six days were not six literal
days, but six long epochs of time. The Rev. Moses Stuart, Professor of
Sacred Literature in Andover Theological Seminary, one of the ablest
Hebrew scholars, says:
"When the sacred writer in Genesis i says, the first day, the second
day, etc., there can be no possible doubt--none.... What puts this
beyond all question in philology is that the writer says specifically,
the evening and the morning were the first day, the second day,
etc. Now, is an evening and a morning a period of some thousands
of years? Is it, in any sense, when so employed, an indefinite
period? The answer is so plain and certain that I need not repeat
it. If Moses has given us an erroneous account of the creation, so
be it. Let it come out, and let us leave the whole. But do not let
us turn aside his language to get rid of difficulties that we may
have in our speculations."
The Jewish scholar, Dr. Kalisch, not only rejects this interpretation
of the word day, but admits that it would not reconcile Genesis with
science if allowed. He says:
"The device that the days denote epochs is not only arbitrary, but
ineffective, for the six epochs of the Mosaic creation correspond in
no manner with the gradual formation of cosmos."
According to Genesis the creation of organic life occupied but three of
these six days. The order of creation for these three days, or periods,
is as follows: 1. (3d day) Land plants; 2. (5th day) aquatic animals,
birds; 3. (6th day) Mammals, reptiles, man.
Is this confirmed by science? Passing Lyell by, let us cite our more
orthodox Dana. Dr. Dana, who professed to believe that the study of
Geology tended "to strengthen faith in the Book of books," gives the
several geological ages, together with the successive appearances of
organic life, as follows: 1. Archæan Age--Lowest marine life, if any;
2. Silurian Age--Invertebrates, marine plants; 3. Devonian Age--Fish,
earliest appearance of land plants; 4. Carboniferous Age--Luxuriant
vegetation, lowest forms of reptiles; 5. Reptilian Age--Highest forms
of reptiles; 6. Tertiary Age--Birds, mammals; 7. Quaternary Age--Man.
Even Dana cannot reconcile Genesis with Geology. Genesis tells us
that the earliest organic life was terrestrial vegetation; Geology
tells us that ages of organic life passed before terrestrial plants
appeared. Genesis tells us that fish and fowls were created at the same
time; Geology tells us that the finny tribes existed ages before the
feathered tribes appeared. Genesis tells us that mammals and reptiles
were created at the same time; Geology tells us that while reptiles
existed in the Carboniferous age, mammals did not appear until the
close of the Reptilian age. Genesis tells us that birds appeared before
reptiles; Geology tells us that reptiles existed first. Genesis tells
us that life existed first upon the land; Geology tells us that the
sea teemed with animal and vegetable life ages before it appeared
upon the land.
The seven ages of Geology comprise twenty-five geological
periods. Genesis recognizes but six periods in the creation of
the entire universe; Geology recognizes twenty-five periods in the
formation of earth's crust alone. According to Bible chronology, the
universe is less than six thousand years old; according to Geology,
the mere existence of life upon earth's crust, which is as but a day
compared with the existence of the universe, is probably nearly fifty
millions of years. Dr. Dana says:
"If time from the commencement of the Silurian included 48 millions
of years, which some geologists would pronounce much too low an
estimate, the Paleozoic part [Silurian, Devonian, and Carboniferous],
according to the above ratio, would comprise 36 millions, the Mesozoic
[Reptilian] 9 millions, and the Cenozoic [Tertiary and Quaternary]
3 millions" (Text Book of Geology, p. 329).
When Geology was in its infancy scientists attempted to reconcile
its teachings with the teachings of the Bible. No scientist worthy
of the name attempts to reconcile them now.
Writing over thirty years ago, Carl Vogt thus records the triumph of
Geology over Genesis:
"It is hardly twenty years since I learned from Agassiz: transitional
strata, palæozoic formations--kingdom of fishes; there are no reptiles
in this period, and cannot be any, because it would be contrary to the
plan of creation; secondary formations (Trias, Jura, chalk)--kingdom of
reptiles; there are no mammals and cannot be any, for the same reason;
tertiary strata--kingdom of mammals; there are no men and cannot be
any; present creation--kingdom of man. What is become of this plan of
creation, with its exclusiveness? Reptiles in the Devonian strata,
reptiles in the coal, reptiles in the Dyas. Farewell, kingdom of
fish! Mammals in the Jura, mammals in Purbeck chalk, which some reckon
as the lowest chalk formation; good-by, kingdom of reptiles! Men in
the highest tertiary strata, men in the diluvial forms--au revoir,
kingdom of mammals!"
Geography.
"The world also shall be stable, that it be not moved" (1 Chron. xvi,
30).
"Who laid the foundations of the earth that it should not be removed
forever" (Ps. civ, 5).
"For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he hath set the
world upon them" (1 Sam. ii, 8).
"I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth"
(Rev. vii, 1).
"The devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth
him all the kingdoms of the world" (Matt. iv, 8).
The science of Geography describes the earth as spherical in form,
with a daily revolution on its axis and an annual revolution around
the sun. The Bible describes it as stable, flat, and angular.
"And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence
it was parted, and became into four heads.
"The name of the first is Pison" [Indus or Ganges] (Gen. ii, 10, 11).
"And the name of the second river is Gihon [Nile]: the same is it
that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.
"And the name of the third river is Hiddekel [Tigris]: ... And the
fourth river is Euphrates" (ii, 13, 14).
Bible geography makes the Nile and the Euphrates both branches of
the same river.
"Then cometh he to a city of Samaria, which is called Sychar" (John
iv, 5).
Samaria contained no city of this name.
"These things were done in Bethany beyond Jordan" (John i, 28,
New Ver.).
Bethany was a suburb of Jerusalem and not located beyond the Jordan.
"He departed from Galilee, and came into the coasts of Judea beyond
Jordan" (Matt. xix, 1).
The dead sea and the Jordan formed the eastern boundary of Judea,
and no coasts of Judea existed beyond the Jordan.
"Which was of Bethsaida of Galilee" (John xii, 21).
Bethsaida was not of Galilee, but of Perea.
Botany.
"And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after
his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself,
after his kind" (Gen. i, 12).
"And the evening and the morning were the third day" (i, 13).
"And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day"
(i, 16).
"And the evening and the morning were the fourth day" (i, 19).
The Bible states that the earth was covered with vegetation, that
grass and herbs and trees flourished without the heat and light of
the sun. Science denies it.
"Cursed is the ground for thy sake.... Thorns also and thistles shall
it bring forth to thee" (Gen. iii, 17, 18).
Thorns and thistles are represented as resulting from a curse. They
are no more the result of a curse than are grapes and corn.
"And again he sent forth the dove out of the ark; and the dove came
in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf
plucked off" (Gen. viii, 10, 11).
Hebrew commentators state that it was a fresh olive leaf. The Bible
writer supposes that the earth could be submerged for nearly a year
without the vegetable kingdom being destroyed. Had this deluge really
occurred, all vegetation, save, perhaps, a few aquatic plants, would
have died.
"He planteth an ash, and the rain doth nourish it" (Is. xliv, 14).
Not in Western Asia, for the tree does not grow there. Bible
commentators believe that the pine is meant.
The authors of Genesis (xxx, 37) and Ezekiel (xxxi, 8) both mention
the chestnut-tree. But it is admitted that the chestnut did not grow
where they stated. Referring to this error, Smith's Bible Dictionary
says: "The 'plane-tree' ought probably to have been substituted. The
context of the passages where the word occurs indicates some tree
which thrives best in low and rather moist situations, whereas the
chestnut-tree is a tree which prefers dry and hilly ground."
"Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone:
but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit" (John xii, 24).
If it die it bringeth forth no fruit.
Zoology.
"Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and
of everything that creepeth upon the earth, there went in two and two
[or by sevens of clean according to another account] unto Noah into
the ark" (Gen. vii, 8, 9).
The animal kingdom, including insects, etc., comprises more than
1,000,000 species. According to the Bible, two or more of every species
from every clime--polar animals accustomed to a temperature of fifty
degrees below zero, and tropical, to one hundred degrees above--were
brought together and preserved for a year in an ark. If the teachings
of Natural History be true, this Bible story is false.
The Bible pronounces unclean and unfit for food the following animals:
"The camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof"
(Lev. xi, 4).
"The coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof"
(xi, v).
"The hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof"
(xi, 6).
"The swine, though he divideth the hoof, and be cloven-footed, yet
he cheweth not the cud" (xi, 7).
Every statement proclaims the writer's ignorance of the simple facts of
Zoology. The camel does divide the hoof; the coney does not chew the
cud; the hare does not chew the cud; the swine is not cloven-footed
(bisulcate), but four-toed.
"All ruminants have the foot cleft, and they only have it."--Cuvier.
"Every one of the four instances or illustrations brought forward by
the Biblical writer is necessarily erroneous; any attempt at defending
them implies an impotent struggle against Science."--Dr. Kalisch.
Scarcely less erroneous are the following passages: "And these are
they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls: ... the stork,
the heron after her kind, and the lapwing and the bat.
"All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination
unto you.
"Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth
upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon
the earth;
"Even these of them may ye eat: the locust after his kind, and the
bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the
grasshopper after his kind. But all other flying creeping things, which
have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you" (Lev. xi, 13-23).
"And the Lord said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this,
thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field;
upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days
of thy life" (Gen. iii, 14).
The serpent does not eat dust, while Science shows that it crawled
upon its belly before the curse just as it did afterward.
Ethnology.
According to the Bible, all mankind have sprung from a single pair
created by God six thousand years ago. Science does not admit that
man is the result of a divine creative act, that all the races have
descended from a single pair, or that his existence here is confined
to the brief period of sixty centuries. She is not able to tell yet,
even approximately, when man's advent upon the earth occurred, but
she has long since proved the Biblical record false, and shown that
instead of his having occupied the earth but six thousand years he
has been here at the least from ten to fifty times six thousand years.
Referring to the Biblical origin of man, Professor Huxley says:
"Five-sixths of the public are taught this Adamitic monogenism as
if it were an established truth, and believe it. I do not; and I am
not acquainted with any man of science, or duly instructed person,
who does" (Methods and Results of Ethnology).
"There were giants in the earth in those days" (Gen. vi, 4).
The Bible, like the mythical records of other early nations, represents
the earth as peopled with a race of giants. Yet the stature of man
is as great to-day as it was five thousand years ago.
"And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years"
(Gen. v, 5).
The Bible says that for a period of two thousand years men lived
for centuries, that at least seven patriarchs attained to an age of
nearly 1,000 years. The Egyptian records of that period show that
man's longevity was no greater then than it is now.
Not only the size and age of men, but their numbers are exaggerated by
Bible writers. The Israelites, at the time they settled in Palestine,
numbered, it is claimed, two or three millions. Out of this country,
to make room for them, God cast "seven nations greater and mightier
than" the Israelite nation (Deut. vii, 1). Palestine must then have
sustained a population as great as Spain does now with a territory
thirty times as large.
The census of Israel and Judah, taken in the time of David, places
the number of warriors at 1,570,000 (1 Ch. xxi, 5). This makes the
whole population twice as great as that of Illinois with an area nine
times as large as Palestine and a soil ten times as fertile.
"And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech"
(Gen. xi, 1):
"Let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may
not understand one another's speech" (Gen. xi, 7).
The origin of the various languages of men is here attributed to a
miraculous confusion of tongues. Science shows that languages had no
such origin. Renan says:
"Far from placing unity at the beginning of language, it is necessary
to look at such a unity as the slow and tardy result of an advanced
civilization. In the beginning there were as many dialects as
families."
This Bible account of the confusion of tongues is contradicted by
the preceding chapter of Genesis (x, 5, 20, 31), which, referring to
the children of Japheth, Ham, and Shem, says they were divided "every
one after his tongue," "after their families, after their tongues."
Physiology.
"And the ark rested in the seventh month ... upon the mountains of
Ararat" (Gen. viii, 4).
"And in the second month [of the following year] was the earth dried"
(viii, 14).
Here on the top of Ararat, three miles above the surrounding country,
and three thousand feet above the region of perpetual snow, for months,
the respiratory organs of man and all the animals of earth performed
their functions without difficulty!
"Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?" (Matt. ix, 4).
"What reason ye in your hearts?" (Luke v, 22).
Jesus recognizes the heart as the seat of reason and intelligence.
"In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children" (Gen. iii, 16).
"She was found with child of the Holy Ghost" (Matt. i, 18).
"Come out of the man, thou unclean spirit" (Mark v, 8).
"And the prayer of faith shall save the sick" (James v, 15).
Attributing the pains of parturition to a curse, recording the
generation of a child without a natural father, ascribing nervous and
other disorders to demons, and healing the sick by prayer are Biblical,
but not scientific.
"And all the first-born males [of Israel] ... were twenty and two
thousand two hundred and three score and thirteen" (Num. iii, 43).
As the population of Israel was about 3,000,000, this would give
130 persons to each family and an average of 128 children to each
mother. Faith may accept this, but physiological science rejects it.
Chemistry.
"And he lifted up the rod and smote the waters that were in the river,
... and all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood"
(Ex. vii, 20).
"Jesus saith unto them, Fill the water-pots with water. And they filled
them up to the brim. And he saith unto them, Draw out now and bear
unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. When the ruler of the
feast had tasted the water that was made wine," etc. (John ii, 7-9).
"But his wife looked back from behind him, and she became a pillar
of salt" (Gen. xix, 26).
"And he took the [golden] calf which they had made and burnt it in
the fire, and ground it to powder, and strewed it upon the water,
and made the children of Israel drink of it" (Ex. xxxii, 20).
Turning a river into blood, water into wine, flesh into salt, and
burning and grinding gold into powder and holding it in solution,
cannot be harmonized with the teachings of science.
But it is not merely to a few Biblical passages, to a few so-called
miraculous changes in the elements of nature, that the science of
chemistry is opposed. It is opposed to the entire Bible as a divine
revelation. The central ideas of this book, a Creator, a Providence,
and a Mediator, are all overthrown by this science.
Referring to this, Comte truthfully observes:
"However imperfect our chemical science is, its development has
operated largely in the emancipation of the human mind. Its opposition
to all theological philosophy is marked by two general facts, ... first
the prevision of phenomena, and next our voluntary modification of
them" (Positive Philosophy, Book IV., chap. i).
"In this way, Chemistry effectually discredits the notion of the
rule of Providential will among its phenomena. But there is another
way in which it acts no less strongly: by abolishing the idea ... of
creation in nature" (Ibid).
Physics.
"I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a
covenant between me and the earth. And it shall come to pass, when
I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the
cloud: and I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you
and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more
become a flood, to destroy all flesh" (Gen. ix, 13-15).
The Bible writer did not know that it was the refraction and reflection
of the sun's rays on the drops of water which produced the prismatic
colors of the rainbow; he did not know that the phenomenon was as
old as rain and sunshine, but believed it to be a postdiluvian sign
thrown on the dark canvas of clouds by the Almighty.
"It seems plain," says the Bishop of Natal, "that the writer supposes
the bow to have been seen for the first time when the deluge was over."
"The words which Moses spake unto all Israel" (Deut. i, 1).
"And Moses called all Israel and said unto them" (v, 1).
"There was not a word of all that Moses commanded, which Joshua read
not before all the congregation of Israel" (Josh. viii, 35).
Nature's temple must have possessed wonderful acoustic properties
to enable Moses and Joshua to reach the ears of a multitude of three
millions.
"Let us build a city, and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven"
(Gen. xi, 4).
God himself, ignorant of pneumatics, believes the project possible,
and confounds their language to prevent it.
"And the waters were divided. And the children of Israel went into
the midst of the sea upon the dry ground: and the waters were as a
wall unto them on the right hand, and on their left" (Ex. xiv, 21, 22).
A fundamental principle of hydrostatics is the following: "When a
pressure is exerted on any part of the surface of a liquid, that
pressure is transmitted undiminished to all parts of the mass, and
in all directions."
Mathematics.
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word,
and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one" (1 John v, 7).
"The incomprehensible jargon of the Trinitarian arithmetic, that
three are one and one is three!"--Thomas Jefferson.
Matthew concludes his genealogy of Jesus as follows:
"So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations;
and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen
generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are
fourteen generations" (Matt. i, 17).
This genealogy, including both Abraham and Jesus, contains but
forty-one generations. Here we have an inspired scholar performing
the mathematical solution of dividing forty-one generations by three
and obtaining fourteen generations for a quotient.
"The whole congregation together was forty and two thousand three
hundred and three score" (Ezra ii, 64).
This number, 42,360, is given as the whole number of persons belonging
to the families that returned from Babylon. Adding together the numbers
given in the census register, of which the above is declared to be the
sum total, we find the whole number to be only 29,818--a difference
and a discrepancy of 12,542.
The foregoing are but three of three hundred mathematical errors to
be found in the Bible.
It is not merely in a few unimportant scientific details, but in the
fundamental principles of the most important sciences--of astronomy,
of geology, of geography, and of man--that the Bible errs. Its writers
evince no divine knowledge of the facts of nature. Their works exhibit
the crude notions of the age in which they lived. Some of their
teachings are in harmony with the accepted truths of Science; but
these prove no more than a human origin. The wisest of mankind do not
know all; the most ignorant know something. While there are phenomena
too complex for the mind of a Newton or a Darwin to grasp, there are
others regarding which the first impressions of a child are correct.
To assert that the Bible is in harmony with the teachings of Modern
Science is to assert that no advancement has been made in Science for
two thousand years, when all know that many of the most marvelous
scientific discoveries are less than two hundred years old. The
scientific attainments of Bible writers were not above those of
the age and country in which they lived, and probably far below;
for the Bible is largely the work of theologians, and theologians
have ever been behind their age in scientific knowledge. The mission
of theologians is not to advance, but to retard Science. They have
waged a relentless but ineffective warfare against it. In the words
of Huxley: "Extinguished theologians lie about the cradle of every
science, as the strangled snakes beside that of Hercules."
"The Hebrew Pentateuch," says Gerald Massey, "has not only retarded the
growth of science for eighteen centuries, but the ignorant believers
in it as a book of revelation have tried to strangle every science
at its birth. There could be and was but little or no progress in
Astronomy, Geology, Biology, or Sociology until its teachings were
repudiated by the more enlightened among men."
Of the Bible and Science thus writes America's eminent scientist and
author, Dr. John W. Draper:
"It is to be regretted that the Christian church has burdened itself
with the defense of these books, and voluntarily made itself answerable
for their manifest contradictions and errors.... Still more, it is to
be deeply regretted that the Pentateuch, a production so imperfect
as to be unable to stand the touch of modern criticism, should be
put forth as the arbiter of science" (Conflict Between Religion and
Science, p. 225).
"The world is not to be discovered through the vain traditions that
have brought down to us the opinions of men who lived in the morning
of civilization, nor in the dreams of mystics who thought that they
were inspired" (Ibid, p. 33).
"For her [Science] the volume of inspiration is the book of
Nature, of which the open scroll is ever spread forth before the
eyes of every man. Confronting all, it needs no societies for its
dissemination. Infinite in extent, eternal in duration, human ambition
and human fanaticism have never been able to tamper with it. On the
earth it is illustrated by all that is magnificent and beautiful,
on the heavens its letters are suns and worlds" (Ib., p. 227).