The Bible is an archaic book, a hodge podge of fairy tales and inconsistencies concoted by humans over a long period of time and of little relevance today.
OR
The Bible is a religious book filled with stories and other information that may be helpful to us today, but it was never meant to be taken literally, and when it is, it causes people to become fanatics and unrealistic in what is expected of themselves and of others.
These are two variations of the same argument that is made today about the Scriptures. This argument grows out of the fact that people do not want to accept the authority of the Scriptures in their lives. The best way, from their viewpoint, to reject that authority is to belittle the source of it, the Bible.
Science is often cited as the principle source to support this claim. After all, science has proven that miracles such as the sun standing still and people coming to life after they are dead cannot happen. So when the Bible describes such events, it is unscientific and therefore not valid. In today's thinking, the only things that have validity are things which can be proven scientifically.
Of course, if people were consistent in the application of that statement about science, they would have to reject evolution, since it cannot be proven scientifically to be the way things came into being. But that's another problem for unbelievers to face.
The fact is, science cannot prove many things. There are limitations on what science can do. In spite of efforts to submit human behavior to scientific principles and thus control it, human behavior remains grossly unscientific. People often do not behave in a predictable, demonstrable method. Human behavior often is erratic and impossible to predict or control.
Science has no power to predict the future. Currently it is popular to get on the bandwagon against global warming, something which may actually be happening, but cannot be predicted by the scientifc method. There are so many possibilities that could dramatically change the future.
As I write this (late June, 2007), here in central Ohio we have not had any significant rain for several weeks. The weather predicters on TV last night, this morning, and just a few minutes ago were using all their scientific methods and technology to predict a significant rain fall for us today. As I look out my study window, I see the sun is shining and the driveway is as dry as it has been for several days. It may rain later today. It may not. My point is, using scientific methods, no one can predict accurately what is going to happen next.
This is not to say science is useless and evil. It is neither. Science is a useful tool for understanding and, to a limited extent, manipulating our world for our use. If it doesn't rain this afternoon, my wife is going to ask me to go out tonight and water the flowers she planted earlier this summer. And I will do it for her. I will manipulate the distribution of water using scientific methods of doing so for the benefit of my wife and myself and our flowers.
