Would believers of the bible please respond?

Have not looked at the movie but accept your comments as a valid summary of that point.

Nobody in their right mind would profess the Bible to be a scientific document. Even the Genesis account only states THAT God created the heavens and the earth, and it says a little about creating order out of chaos, light out of darkness etc, but it does not attempt to say HOW God did that, or how long it took to do all of that.

The Bible deals with the theology of why things are they way they are on earth.

Science deals with the theory of how things are the way they are on earth.

To compare one with the other would be like trying to compare apples with Arizona.

Put both together, however, and we get a more well-rounded grasp of life which provides the Creator's perspective - a viewpoint that we mortals could never get without God communicating that to us. And that's what the Bible is - God's written communication, showing how he has broken into time and history to have selected dealings with us, whom he created in his image.

As far as I know, the Catholic church officially endorsed the Big Bang theory a long time ago, in 1955, and most Catholics are very happy to go with scientific developments in this field of theory. Lots of Protestants are also comfortable with scientific findings as they don't see how they clash with their belief that God created the heavens and the earth. Check out the book below for 15 British scientists who explain why they can hold both together.

And don't forget that it was a Belgian Catholic priest, Georges Lemaitre, who first thought of the Big Bang theory (in 1584 - along with Giordano Bruno.) Ironically, when Lemaitre proposed the idea, atheists scorned it and said it was wishful thinking based on a biblical interpretation, and that it wasn't science! They favoured the "steady state" theory, which has now been roundly shown up to be false. No offense taken as I'm not a Catholic!

Were you under the impression that the Bible was a definitive scientific book? I do not know how you got this idea but it certainly is not nor is it intended to be. Any scientific data in the Bible would be from a pre-scientific age contemporary with its writing and writers. The Bible is written by inspired men and is not dictated by God.

I think that you are probably wrong when you say that "most" Christians reject evolution theory. I have a undergraduate degree in biology and I accept those things in evolution theory that are scientifically sound such as genetic mutations according to the allele frequency. However, I reject any ridiculous suggestion that such sound science is not the design of God but instead developed randomly through time. Science does not even suggest that God did not create all things but simply observes those miraculous designs of our creator. Christians have nothing to fear from science which indeed is also God's creation. God bless!

In Christ

Fr. Joseph

Clearly, the good Dr. Coyne missed the passage in the bible at Job 26:7 where it refers to "the one who is hanging the earth upon nothing". How exactly did the writer know this thousands of years before exploration and at a time when quite the opposite was the prevailing scientific "wisdom"?

The fact that he is an astronomer makes his statement even more mind-boggling.

PS: Absolutely no offense taken. Questions are good as long as they have substance and are respectful. Yours is both.

The bible was not meant to be a scientific textbook. Nevertheless, it is full of scientific facts. Dr. Coyne should try reading it before making a comment on it.

For example(in addition to the ones already mentioned) the fact that teeth have skin has only been "discovered" recently. The fact that rabbits chew cud is another recent "discovery".