The Bible: Can it be scientifically proven?

Yes. Most of the bible, mainly first testiment, can be explained by science. For example, the ten plagues of egypt (Book of Exodus). Each can be explained by a volcanic euption:

1. Water to Blood (7:19) can be explained by either lava, gasses building up below the water, or a runoff with a lot of igneous sediment in it.

2. Frogs (8:2, 8:3, 8:4), due to the suddenly acidic soil and water caused by a volcanic eruption, can cause frogs to, for a short while at least, run away from the banks and pretty much end up anywhere nearby.

3. Gnats (18:16) can be explained simmilarly to the frogs. also, they, as well as the frogs, could have been stirred up because of an impending eruption.

4. Flies (18:21) can be explained just like the gnats.

5. Livestock Dead (9:3). Acidic soil and water, poisonous plants due to acidic water, the gnats and flies, and several other factors caused by an impending or occuring eruption can be used to explain this plague.

6. Boils (9:8, 9:9). (eww). These can be explained by acid water, and diseases carried by the various insects that were "brought on".

7. Thunder and Hail (9:18). When any extremely large fire burns for a long time, all the moisture on the ground collects in the clouds and mixes with the gases and Tephra (the dust, stones, ashes, and bombs that make a pyroclaustic cloud), and create one hell of a rainstorm (if it was real rain). They don't, however, mention rain, so it's possible that the "Hail and thunder" can be explained by the explosion and pyroclaustic cloud given off by Cinder-Cone and Composite volcanoes.

8. Locust (10:4, 10:5) there bugs! they can eat pretty much anything. It's possible that the locust weren't affected as much as the other animals "brought on" by the plauges. They could have been scared off by the eruption and flew in any direction away from the volcano. Either that, or the same explaination used on the other bugs can be used here.

9. Darkness (10:21, 10:22). Wow. PYROCLAUSTIC CLOUD! MY GOD (no pun intended)! The cloud could have, and probably did, black the sun.

10. Death of First Born (11:14, 11:15) can be explained by any ash in the air. Kids are usually affected by airborne particles more than adults. However, the whole thing about putting the lambs blood on the door frame doesn't make any sense at all to me. Some people suggested it was used as a sealent to keep the ash from coming in through the gaps in the doorframe.

So, a volcanic eruption a good couple of miles away could explain each of the plagues one way or another. Either that, or something really F!%#ed up happened there a long time ago. or, they were all killed by this guy
You Decide.

Also, the parting of he red sea can be explained by siesmic activity. The whole thing about Moses asking god to give them a path seems a tad bit corny. Heck, a tidal wave, tsunami (unlikely), or could VOLCANO could explain it: a sandbar leading across the red sea becomes visible because the water recedes for some reason. Then, when they finally get across, perhaps out of pure luck, the sea came crashing down on the egyptians who were following them.

I didn't mention anything in the main article, but could you please post any other incidents such as this that can be explained by science?
TY

When you think of proving bible stories with science, you always come with using the story of the great flood. Might have been a cataclysmic event that made itself into the bible somehow. But i seriously dont believe that the entire earth was covered with water, and Noah was one of the few survivors. Come on, that is hard to believe.

Then also, Noah putting 2 of each species on his ship, virtually impossible. He was normal human, many species had not yet been discovered, and many species would be native to certain parts on the world. To collect a male and female of each species is even harder. The ship would have to be enormous to store so many animals on. Aside that, he would've had to travel the entire world
to accomplish in his mission.

I think we can all agree that the 2nd story remains what it is, a story.

[edit on 26-4-2007 by Mammoth]

Ok, doesn't mean much to me. So science can explain by what mechanism something occurred. So what? It really doesn't change anything that I believe, if that was your aim.

Originally posted by TheSixthString
Also, the parting of he red sea can be explained by siesmic activity. The whole thing about Moses asking god to give them a path seems a tad bit corny. Heck, a tidal wave, tsunami (unlikely), or could VOLCANO could explain it: a sandbar leading across the red sea becomes visible because the water recedes for some reason. Then, when they finally get across, perhaps out of pure luck, the sea came crashing down on the egyptians who were following them.

I didn't mention anything in the main article, but could you please post any other incidents such as this that can be explained by science?
TY

Are you serious? I don't believe in religion, the bible, god, or anything along those lines... but I would believe in god over believing a bunch of people got lucky and walked across the sea because for some reason(as you say) a sand bar forms, then all the sudden the water comes back and crushes the egyptians pursuing them. You can't honestly believe this?

If you think you can explain or prove the old testament strictly scientifically, within the known laws of nature, why would there still be the need for god? God's only real function these days is as an explanation for things we don't understand ("God of the gap"), but as those gaps are filled in by the steady march of science, we need him less and less. If you want to explain the Bible in naturalistic terms you're only helping to dig the grave faster. If that's your intention then I'm all with you, although I think the stories are probably made up, based on even older myths, or at most are lavishly embellished events that may have happened on a much smaller and more natural scale.

i know this isnt what you are asking, but you do have to consider the way that stories came to be in the bible- they were passed down by word of mouth. much like the stories from ancient greece, which i think most people will agree are mostly fictional, these things aren't entirely reliable, and you can't make a scientific judgement on something like this. i do realise this isn't what you were asking....

just to throw something else in here- and i suppose it is scientific- i did hear once that many bible stories can be explained if you consider that their judgement was affected by some kind of intoxicating substance... ill try to find where i read that! it was something to do with the feeding of the fve thousand.

can anyone scientifically explain to me howadam was able to father a child at the age of 130? he died at the very respectable age of 930 according to my bible.

what im saying is- you could possibly explain some of the bible with a possible scientific explanation, but there are always going to be more questions...

Originally posted by Densha82
God's only real function these days is as an explanation for things we don't understand ("God of the gap"), but as those gaps are filled in by the steady march of science, we need him less and less.

That certainly does not apply to me.

[edit on 27-4-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Originally posted by Densha82
If you think you can explain or prove the old testament strictly scientifically, within the known laws of nature, why would there still be the need for god? God's only real function these days is as an explanation for things we don't understand ("God of the gap"), but as those gaps are filled in by the steady march of science, we need him less and less.

Im pretty sure I still need God. If you are saying that science is taking over God then you are horribly misinformed and misguided. Without God then those things in the old testament wouldnt be possable at all.
If we went into the new testament then the need for God for the happenings has dramiticaly (sorry about the spelling) increased. Id love to see anyone prove through science what happened in the new testament though. It was a little hard to raise people from the dead last time I cheaked.

-fm

Originally posted by TheSixthString
Yes. Most of the bible, mainly first testiment, can be explained by science. For example, the ten plagues of egypt (Book of Exodus). Each can be explained by a volcanic euption:

Erm, no.

1. Water to Blood (7:19) can be explained by either lava, gasses building up below the water, or a runoff with a lot of igneous sediment in it.

The originator of the article actually hasn't been near a volcano. I've been near a number of them. Lava doesn't do that to water. Red mud (like we have in West Texas) can color it, but nobody would mistake that for blood.

2. Frogs (8:2, 8:3, 8:4), due to the suddenly acidic soil and water caused by a volcanic eruption, can cause frogs to, for a short while at least, run away from the banks and pretty much end up anywhere nearby.

Actually, they die instead. They're very fragile creatures.

3. Gnats (18:16) can be explained simmilarly to the frogs. also, they, as well as the frogs, could have been stirred up because of an impending eruption.

Gnats are weak flyers and can't move when there's any wind around. Personal experience says you get them in an area with or without eruptions going on.

6. Boils (9:8, 9:9). (eww). These can be explained by acid water, and diseases carried by the various insects that were "brought on".

I've seen some of the explainations, and they rely on a lot of "iffing" and "maybe-ing" rather than real situations.

7. Thunder and Hail (9:18). When any extremely large fire burns for a long time, all the moisture on the ground collects in the clouds and mixes with the gases and Tephra (the dust, stones, ashes, and bombs that make a pyroclaustic cloud), and create one hell of a rainstorm (if it was real rain). They don't, however, mention rain, so it's possible that the "Hail and thunder" can be explained by the explosion and pyroclaustic cloud given off by Cinder-Cone and Composite volcanoes.

Tephra doesn't create rainfall. The particles are too big and most of them never get into the right area of the atmosphere.

8. Locust (10:4, 10:5) there bugs! they can eat pretty much anything. It's possible that the locust weren't affected as much as the other animals "brought on" by the plauges. They could have been scared off by the eruption and flew in any direction away from the volcano. Either that, or the same explaination used on the other bugs can be used here.

That's kind of stretching it. Locusts are seasonal pests and don't just show up because school's out and they're bored and tired of hanging with the homies.

9. Darkness (10:21, 10:22). Wow. PYROCLAUSTIC CLOUD! MY GOD (no pun intended)! The cloud could have, and probably did, black the sun.

Yes, it does... for about 20 minutes. Not 3 days. And pyroclastic clouds suffocate people.

10. Death of First Born (11:14, 11:15) can be explained by any ash in the air. Kids are usually affected by airborne particles more than adults. However, the whole thing about putting the lambs blood on the door frame doesn't make any sense at all to me. Some people suggested it was used as a sealent to keep the ash from coming in through the gaps in the doorframe.

In that case, it would be the youngest who died. The most vulnerable. Not the oldest child.

So, a volcanic eruption a good couple of miles away could explain each of the plagues one way or another. Either that, or something really F!%#ed up happened there a long time ago. or, they were all killed by this guy

You Decide.

Or, option #3, it's a morality tale taken from a lot of sources and is not actually based on any real incident. The Egyptians (and other people) don't mention this rather newsworthy event, and there's little evidence that any Hebrews were enslaved as a large group in Egypt.

through archeology it has been proven scientificly to be historicly accurate

Im pretty sure I still need God. If you are saying that science is taking over God then you are horribly misinformed and misguided. Without God then those things in the old testament wouldnt be possable at all.

I'm not saying that any particular individual doesn't need God or will forfeit the idea of God in the favor of science. I think it's quite obvious, at least in the United States and the Arab world, people are still going to believe what their parents and most of the culture surrounding them believes, regardless of reason, science, logic, and pure common sense.

I'm talking more about the philosophical or theological level of debate. God is no longer needed to explain any naturalistic event. Many people want to think that the final hurdle, life, is still only explainable by God, but that belief faces billions of pieces of evidence (including the big ones like DNA and fossils) which are elegantly explained by evolution. Now God only "needs" to exist for A) things that science has yet to explain (which will be explained in time) and B) as an explanation for the beginning of the universe (which is not actually an explanation, but a re-doubling of the problem [where did this "god" come from, then?]).

And for the record, science could come up with possible theories on how the "dead" were raised and other miracles in the New Testament, but the truth is that they were probably all made up. Written by many people, unknown now to history aside from their probably not-real names, a hundred or more years after the death of Christ, the books in the New Testament are about as accurate a recording of actual history as Lord of the Rings is of World War II. But of course you are free to believe as you will! It's just that religious belief has become practically useless and unneeded in the modern world and will continue to dwindle as America and the Arab world are the final strongholds of pure, blind, dangerous faith.