Denis Lamoureux on the Bible and ancient science

Denis Lamoureux has written a good book. The title is The Bible & Ancient Science: Principles of Interpretation. (Note that there's an ampersand, not an "and" in the title.) The point, made over and over, by analyzing the original language of the Bible, is that the Bible was written from the standpoint of ancient science.

Lamoureux discusses the statement, by Jesus, that the mustard seed is the smallest seed (it isn't) in Mark 4:30-32. Jesus wasn't teaching botany, nor was He mistaken, or lying. He was speaking to the people of the day, using the knowledge that they had. The message, about the Kingdom, was far more important than the size of the seed.
 

The author also discusses the beliefs of Biblical writers on human reproduction. They thought that a woman was merely a sort of field, where the male implanted something which grew into a child. Infertility was always the "fault" of the woman. The Bible reflects that belief. Again, the Bible isn't a text on human reproduction. It's a text on God's plan of redemption, and false beliefs about peripheral issues are just that, peripheral.

Another item. The Biblical authors thought that the earth was circular and flat, surrounded by water, and that there was a solid firmament above it. But Genesis 1-2 isn't a textbook of astronomy, geology, meteorology or oceanography. It was written from the standpoint of the beliefs of the people of the day, and tells us that God is creator, that the creation was good, that humans sinned and need a Redeemer. There is no firmament, even though the Bible writers thought that there is. The earth is not flat -- careful study of the Hebrew of the Bible, which Lamoureux appears well-qualified to do, shows that the Bible does not teach that the earth is a globe, but describes it as if it was flat.

(The illustration above is not from the book)

Lamoureux, like many others, points out that the apparent sequences of events in Genesis 1 vs. 2 seem to be contradictory. But Genesis 1-2 was not meant to be taken as a literal, step-by-step account (or accounts) of what happened at the beginning, and it isn't that. Does this downgrade the Bible, or the Gospel? No, argues Lamoureux. The first part of Genesis was made to teach eternal truths, namely that one God created, without using stuff from some other entity, that creation was good, and that sin entered the world.

Although he doesn't mention Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis much, the book demonstrates that the AiG thesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old, is not really based on scripture, in spite of what AiG believes  the Bible says. Lamoureux directly criticizes the writings of Henry Morris, the most important young-earth creationist of the 20th century, for the same reason -- he took Bible passages that were not meant to be taken literally, and not meant to describe the world in terms that we would use now, and took them literally, and as if they describe the world as we now understand it.

There's more serious, and good, thinking and teaching in the book.

I was pleased to be able to read this in Kindle format, using my Kindle Unlimited membership. But the Kindle version's type size was almost too small to read on my 9 inch tablet, and, unlike most books in Kindle format, the type size can't be changed on this one. 

Thanks for reading. Read Lamoureux.