The Bible is not a science text book.
The writers of the Bible, or the characters are not scientist.
We can test the Bible though, with regard to its reliability.
We only need that, and if it stands up, we know we have a reliable source of truth.
I think the evidence shows it stands up pretty well.
nPeace, a large part of the Old Testament are stories, from Adam to Solomon.
You are right, it isn’t science textbook, but it is the modern creationists who have been treating them or interpreting them, particularly Genesis “Creation” as “science”. That’s whom I arguing with, creationists like you.
You have cited some verses in your OP, eg from Genesis, Job, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah & Amos, claiming that these verses have answers that science don’t have. You are not just treating these verses as science, that they are superior than science.
in what ways, these verses are superior? They explain nothing, and using analogies or metaphors, such as comparing the source of waters to the “womb”, those are not explanations, they are bloody metaphors or analogies, that often leads to many possible interpretations that take the verse out-of-context, further leading to confusion.
You wrote:
For example ...
The Bible says the universe had a beginning. (
Genesis 1:1)
The Bible says the earth is suspended in empty space. (
Job 26:7)
The Bible says rivers and springs are fed by water that has evaporated from the oceans and other sources and then has fallen back to earth as rain, snow, or hail. (
Job 36:27, 28; Ecclesiastes 1:7; Isaiah 55:10; Amos 9:6)
...and
more.
It's worth considering then, if the Bible does have an answer on the origin of water.
Surprisingly, it does .
Job 38:
8
And who barricaded the sea behind doors
When it burst out from the womb [No. It's not the womb of a woman]
,
9 When I clothed it with clouds
And wrapped it in thick gloom,
10 When I established my limit for it
And put its bars and doors in place,
11 And I said, ‘You may come this far, and no farther;
Here is where your proud waves will stop’?
Have you gone down to the sources of the sea
Or explored the deep waters?
The Bible long ago says that the source of the water is the earth's womb.
Do you know who uses metaphors and analogies? Poets, bards, songwriters, hymn writers, scriptural authors.
The problems with using analogies & metaphors, they are often comparing something with something else that are really unrelated, which are flimsy and open to very wide interpretation.
My first reply, I gave you a quote from Job (40:9) about thunder, and demonstrated how inaccurate that verse is.
I refuted that verse in my own words, explaining what thunders are natural phenomena, of the shockwaves, caused by both temperature & expanding of air pressures. What I did mention is that when people hear the low roaring or rumbling sounds of thunders, it is because from distance the thunder will echo, as the sounds bounce around many solid objects. What I failed to mention, is that real sound of thunder, the sound will sound like sudden crack for where the lightning strike in close vicinity to people.
So the closer people are to lightning strike, they will hear sudden crack. But the further away people are from lightning strike, the more thunder sounds long and low roaring or rumbling, due to reverberations of thunder, hence they are hearing echoes.
Whoever wrote Job have no understanding of natural phenomena, like the winds, rain, storm, sea, etc, so as any author of his time, he would use inaccurate metaphors or analogies.
but back to your silly womb analogy.
A womb is organic matter, which we know as uterus, while the Earth isn’t organic and has no uterus. Hence, not only is Job inaccurate and unreliable, so are your interpretations of Job’s womb verse.
Creationists, like you, also treated the Bible as if these stories (for examples, from Adam to Solomon) were “history“ too.
There are no history to any parts of Genesis or to Job.
In regards to reliability of history, it depends on two main things:
- Independent sources that can verify the events and the people involved in those events. Such sources, eg historical accounts or annals, etc, need to be contemporary or the very least “near contemporary” as possible to the events, for reliability.
- Or, physical objects that can be dated to those events, hence for archaeological evidence to be reliable, the evidence must be contemporary.
The Genesis and Exodus and Joshua cannot provide no such things, as they were written in the 6th century BCE, and not between the late 16th century (eg when Moses was born, Exodus) and early 14th century BCE (to the end of invasion of Canaan, hence book of Joshua).
why do you think I chose these centuries, from the 16th to 14th centuries BCE?
In 1 Kings 6:1, it claimed on day Solomon ordered to begin construction of the Temple, it stated that the exodus from Egypt started 480 years prior to his 4th year as king. Which would means the Israelites left Rameses in 1447 BCE, so that would put Moses‘ birth to about 1527 BCE, and death to 1407 BCE.
But there are no books, scrolls or tablets dating to 15th & 14th centuries as Exodus is attributed to Moses, and Joshua were attributed to Joshua. The story of Moses and Joshua don’t app in texts until the 6th century BCE, for example, when Jews were living in exile in Babylon.
Second. There are no independent sources, like from Egypt or from Canaan about either 2 leaders (respectively Moses & Joshua). I know more about Egypt than I do about Canaan, and if Moses was a real living historical figure, when why do the Exodus could never name the King and his daughter in Exodus 1 & 2?
they are nameless, but if Moses was truly born in 1527 BCE, then he as the author should know the name of princess that adopted him. 1527 BCE would put Moses’ birth in the reign of Ahmose I (reign c 1550 to 1525 BCE). Ahmose have 2 daughters, Meritamun & Sitamun, and neither of them were ever reported to adopting a Hebrew baby.
the Exodus couldn’t also name the king, when the Israelites left Rameses (exodus 12:37), which would have been Thutmose III (1479 - 1425 BCE).
not only that, Ahmose had never built Rameses, or in Egyptian Pi-Ramesses, which means “House of Ramesses“. Pi-Ramesses was named after Ramesses I, but the city only began construction by his son Seti I (reign c 1294 - 1279 BCE), but the city wasn’t completed until more famous grandson Ramesses II (1279 - 1213 BCE).
Ahmose was the founder of the 18th dynasty, Ramesses I was founder of 19th dynasty.
Since the Exodus cannot named the kings contemporary to Moses, it demonstrated that the author really didn’t know the history of Egypt, and the lives of Ahmose and Thutmose were well-documented. Their lives were commemorated on their respective stone stelae. Hence, exodus is unreliable, in historicity.
Maybe you. So we don't want to be stingy. 
