lordkalvan
Member
I'm sorry I missed replying to this post, having been distracted by other things in the thread. As usual, I found it thoughtful and interesting and have little to say except thanks for giving me something to reflect on. On your last para, though, if you understood that I was asserting that the Bible could only be the product of a pre-scientific, patriarchal society', that was not my intent, only that whatever its inspiration it would be viewed through the lens of that society's understanding of the natural world.I'll agree with you about the purpose of the bible and that I am likely stretching things when I look there first while trying to classify creation especially when we consider the poetic aspects. You're right about the classification of birds and bats but left out the 'unclean' flying insects mentioned together while discussing all the unclean flying creatures in Leviticus when God told Israel what to eat and what not to eat. I do find it interesting though that you should mention stars though. Early astronomers have tried to count them. Claudius Ptolemy counted 1,056 (30 more than what had been previously counted). The total number of stars visible to the naked eye is estimated today to be around 4,000, counting all that are visible from every point on earth.
But the bible says "the host of the heavens cannot be numbered" (Jer 33:22) and speaks about their number being uncountable like the number of grains of sand upon the seashore. These same multitudes (numbers of uncountable magnitudes) are also the number of offspring promised to Abraham. So, I do agree with you again, any writing that compares the numbers of stars to the number of grains of sand on the seashore to the number of offspring of a man isn't making literal 'scientific' statements about mathematics but it does point to a then unknown truth; the stars are uncountable in number.
There is also some interesting language regarding the "heavens" used when the bible speaks of God "streaching" them out. Contrary to popular opinion, Isaiah speaks of the earth being round, and the book of Job mentions it being "hung upon nothing."
You make a good point about what we should expect the bible to say though, if it were nothing more than a product of 'pre-scientific, patriarchal society ... expressed in terms that would make sense [only] to their frame of reference'.