Much compelling evidence exists for faith in the God of the Bible. One type of evidence is that of scientific insight in the Bible. The Bible consists of scientific foreknowledge reflecting natural facts and healthy practices before scientific discovery. Therefore, the Bible was either guided by God or written by very intelligent people who in this case believed in God and thought that they received these facts from God. If the Bible is the production of ancient superstitious minds of men who spoke of nature and their own medical practices, then this would mean that the Bible would most likely err from proven science. However, there are no errors.
Scientific foreknowledge is an old evidence to those who know Christian evidences, and this is just as compelling now. Here are some scientific facts first appearing in the Bible before being discovered scientific study more than 2000-3500 years later:
Cosmology
- The cause of the universe must transcend the natural laws of the universe (Gen 1:1; Heb 11:3).
- The cause of the universe must be more powerful than the universe (Gen 1:1; Heb 11:3).
- The laws of the universe were set after each part of creation (Exod 20:11; Heb 4:4).
- The universe is precisely balanced for the existence of intelligent life (Gen 1; Jer 10:12; 51:15).
- The universe is in the state of entropy and wearing out as affirmed by the Second Law of Thermodynamics (Ps 102:25–26; Isa 51:6; Heb 1:10–11).
- The universe permits humanity to observe the universe and to reason from causality (Ps 19:1; Rom 1:20).
- The universe is stretched out (Job 9:8; Ps 104:2; Isa 40:22; 42:5; 44:24).
- The earth is a sphere (Job 26:10; Prov 8:27; Isa 40:22).
- The earth hangs upon nothing (Job 26:7).
- The stars are too numerous for people to be number (Jer 33:22).
- The states of constellations Pleiades and Orion differ in nature despite casual observation (Job 38:31).
- The sun has an orbit of its own around the center of the Milky Way galaxy (Ps 19:4–6).
Geoscience
- The universe exists in a mature state (Gen 1).
- Billions of dead things are buried in layers of rock laid down by water all over the world (Gen 6–9; 2 Pet 3:5–6).
- The discoveries of currents in the sea and oceanography came from when Matthew Fontaine Maury investigated Psalm 8 read (Ps 8:8).
- Fresh water springs release in the seas (Job 38:16).
- Lightning has a natural path and is the cause of thunder (Job 38:25; Jer 10:13; 51:16).
- Wind has weight and a regular course (Job 28:25; Eccl 1:6).
- Water moves through the water cycle (Job 36:27–28; Eccl 1:7; Amos 9:6).
Biology
- Biology exists in an advanced developed state (Gen 1; Mark 10:6).
- Life only comes from life, and one genus only comes from its own genus. Louis Pasteur established the Law of Biogenesis affirming that life only comes from life and life of its own kind (Gen 1:11, 12, 21, 24; cf. 30:30–43).
- The complex order of life is far greater than human design, and whatever is more complex than design is also designed (Gen 1; Heb 3:4).
- Blood is essential to the life of the flesh of man and animals (Lev 17:11–14; cf. Gen 9:4–6).
- Humanity is fearfully and wonderfully made (Gen 1:26; Ps 139:14).
Anthropology
- The universe supports intelligent life that is able to observe the universe (Ps 19:1; Rom 11:36).
- Humanity is distinct with a moral conscience and recognizing natural moral laws (Gen 1:26–27; Rom 2:14–15).
- Humanity has a universal agreement that fairness exists and expects agreement for justice based on objective moral values (Rom 2:14–15).
- Human beings rely upon reason and unchanging laws of logic (1 Tim 6:20).
- No primitive language existed (Gen 11:1, 8).
Medical
- The Bible describes infections for diagnosis (Lev 13:24–25).
- The biblical diagnosis of skin diseases prevents the spread of disease such as smallpox (Lev 13).
- Quarantining helps stop the spread of certain diseases (Lev 13:45–46; Num 5:1–4).
- The Bible gives instructions for recognizing and using clean water (Lev 11:33–36).
- Israel was to wash infectious wounds with clean water (Lev 15:13).
- Contagious clothing should be washed, altered and, or burned to prevent spread of disease (Lev 13:34, 46–59).
- Growths in houses should be cleansed with prescribed soap. If such growths remain, then remove portions of the house to prevent the spread of diseases (Lev 14:39–41, 49–53).
- People should avoid the uncleanness of dead bodies and become clean by washing with water containing antiseptic, antibacterial soap described in a recipe of ashes from cedar, hyssop, and scarlet (Num 19).
- The ideal time for surgery of an infant boy is on the eighth day after his birth (Lev 12:3).
- The human body may be opened for surgery (Gen 2:21).
Applied Physics
- The ideal ratio for a seaworthy barge is 30 x 5 x 3 (Gen 6:15)
Conclusion
One or two facts may be interesting or even a coincidence, but the number of facts predating the times of recognized discovery compounds probability. How could the writers of the Bible continue to know such things about the world without advanced technology to observe such things? The book of God revealed these things to the people of God. The biblical writers claim God as their source. No other ancient book claims God’s guidance and presents such foreknowledge to scientific discovery.
The Breath of God 
It’s pretty obvious that the Bible thinks the Earth is a flat disk, that the sky is a solid dome above the disk, that it is supported on pillars, that the seas are fed from below (“the fountains of the deep”), that the stars are small lights attached to the dome (such that 1/3rd are able to fall to Earth in Revelations), and so on. Your attempts to find scientific “foreknowledge” in the Bible are very weak, and smack of desperation. Similar efforts have been made on behalf of the Vedas (ancient Hindu scriptures), and though the Vedas get some things blatantly wrong (e.g., thinking the Sun is nearer the Earth than the Moon is), it is clear that the understanding of the Cosmos in the Vedas is much more advanced well thought-out than that in the Bible.
Your other examples are equally pathetic. Jens has given a pretty good explanation as to why.
Why not just face up to reality, and admit what is obviously the case, namely, that the Bible was written, edited, and compiled by human beings, who possessed no magical knowledge either of science, or of the future, or of any supernatural realm?
You are clinging, with painful nostalgia, to a dead hypothesis. Why? Is there some niggling fear that if you stop believing, you will be punished?
That is a good article though I don’t know about the Asteroids passage. Thank you.
Here is an excellent article on Bible scientific foreknowledge
Good question. Well, I first looked at the immediate context and saw in the pretext that wisdom existed before the creation of the world (23-26), then in verse 27, I see that wisdom was there when God set a circle upon the deep. What deep? Remember in Genesis that the earth was first void and just water. Genesis 1:2, “And the earth was waste and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep: and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” Also see Genesis 1:6-9 to see that the waters were then organized, which is exactly what is seen in Proverbs 8:28-29. It is very clear that a circle, as is in the Hebrew, was established upon the Earth as a whole consisting of only water at this time. There was no moon, sun, nor stars yet either according to the Genesis account, which it is very clear what this passage is referring to and that being that for the earth a boundary was set being water into a circle. Look also again at “When He [God] gave to the sea its boundary, That the waters should not transgress His commandment”.
Grace and peace to you in Christ,
Scott
I was just curious as to how you get the earth is round from Proverbs 8:27? Isaiah 40:22 does show the earth is round, but I had a hard time finding it in the other verse. Thanks.
Not to discuss and not to ignore the comment before last. If someone else is reading these comments, these articles presented are true that seeds can be active between dispersion and germination.
Thank you as well for the discussion. As always you are a worthy argumentative rival.
Here are some other journal sources which prove that a seed responds to stimuli and has a metabolism. How can that be the case and still consider it dead during dormancy?
You totally misread the article I cited. The idea of redefinition of dormancy relates not to redefining the process of dormancy but placing this pysiological fact into ecological perpsective since ecology has up to now not focused on the fact that seeds respond to stimuli in ecologically relevant ways which effect the way the species survive in their environment.
http://tinyurl.com/33bg5w
Here is the relevant sentence. “Both dormant and stratified embryos rapidly metabolize abscisic acid to phaseic acid, dihydrophaseic acid, and an unidentified polar metabolite apparently derived from dihydrophaseic acid.”
If it has metabolism is it not alive by all standards? The embryo’s they are talking about are seed embryo’s, or radicle’s in dicots. I don’t know if these are dicots or monocots really. If you doubt me read the article.
http://tinyurl.com/24et3z
Relevant sentence : “The present study indicates that Cvi D and ND seeds can be easily distinguished by their ability to synthesize ABA following imbibition.”
Anything that can synthesize a chemical is by definition metabolizing. If you read the article D is short for dormant seeds Cvi is the cape verde variety and ND stands for Non-Dormant.
http://tinyurl.com/2mogmg
Here is the relevant sentence: “Dormant seeds of Avena fatua, which do not germinate when allowed to imbibe water, have a respiration rate only about 20% less than that of imbibed nondormant (after-ripened) seeds in the period before actual germination and are capable of synthesizing protein at a rate comparable to that of the nondormant seeds”
This is pretty clear language and shows without a doubt that dormant seeds respire and are thus alive by almost all standards.
If you have any research saying that seeds aren’t alive while dormant I’d love to see it.
I did say that E. coli was the simplest, which is true of an independent organism not needing a host, but the actual simplest is Mycoplasma genitalium. My point above is that viruses and mycoplasma genitalium are parasites needing a host and thus could not have evolve on their own and independent of a living host, thus these would have died without other life already existing, which the simplest independent life form to evolve is E. coli, and this knowledge may change.
You’re right that other ancient civilizations did practice things before their time and understanding. I was always personally interested the evolutionist 7th century Greek philosopher Anaximander.
You’re also right that one being able to see a flat horison could thus see a exact circle in distance from their point of view. This would be even more possible at sea (I’m not refering to the curve of the Earth). I just don’t see how someone would look around the sea and see it as a circleescpeically in Proverbs when it became one.
You may have the last words. Thanks for the discussion.
Here is my comment mentioned above moderated for foul language:
Scott, I’m not sure where you are going with some of your rebuttals. You’ve argued yourself in a circle in a couple.
#1: Did you read the link to the Parallel Bible I gave you? There is no mention of a globe, a circle is not a globe. The fact that you find evidence in metaphoical passages in other parts of the Bible is not proof. They are scattered throughout and metaphorical. As I said I am not going to argue metaphor, it’s a lost cause. I have not seen, based on the paralele bible hebrew translation and others, that the word used is used in the sense of a globe. Prove me wrong.
#2 First, you’ve argued yourself in a circle. Your proof of forknowledge was that a seed “died” when a plant sprouted. Now you say a seed is dead? where are you going with this?
Check out this link to learn a bit more about seed dormancy.(http://tinyurl.com/2xddy9). A seed is indeed alive, the metabolism is just extremely slow. If you’d like I can look up journal articles as primary sources.
#3 So Abraham went #2 in the corner of his tent? Animals can figure it out but we can’t? The fact that not every culture understood it doesn’t negate that others did, before Moses’ decrees. Also, using excrement for medicine is not the same as going #2 in the corner although I don’t advocate trying it. The first flush toilet we know of was built into a major sewage and freshwater system in Mohenjo-Daro in the Indus valley 2500 years BC (http://tinyurl.com/2cd434)Something similar is thought to have been in place at Skara Brae in Scotland in a similar era (http://tinyurl.com/yv8cxw) To my knowledge this is 1200-1350 years before Moses was even born and another 120 before he gave out these laws in the months before he died (if you believe Biblical ages). Do you think they figured out not to go #2 in their house before they figured out sewage systems in these ancient cities or did they figure them out by accident?
#4 The article you cite sets egyptians up as the foil and then shows that the isrealites had better medicine. Show me citations proving that no culture understood these same things before Moses did and you will have a point. I already showed that lye soap is older than the isrealites. Also, you missed the real point of my argument. The argument is not that ancient cultures had things wrong, it is that they did get some things right without science or Gods “foreknowledge”. The fact that many medicinal plants as well as Neem and Licorice sticks were used implys that people did figure things out, although they didn’t have it all solved. The possibility that they would find some medicinal things that worked on their own is obvious. Saying that the Bible proves that it was invented by God before science is ridiculous. Of course it was! People figured it out, they didn’t need Pasteur to explain the mechanism all they cared about was the effect. Did people figure out the wheel without God’s help before science was invented? Yes! Saying their successes were preordained by God while pointing to their lack of understanding as proof of this is absurd. In order to prove my premise using your logic ancient cultures would have had to have figured out every conceivable remedy in medicine in order to disprove that the ones that did work in the Bible were not preordained. You haven’t convinced me.
#5 A statement on the water cycle from ~500B.C. in Greece. “…what happens in the sky is caused by the heat of the sun; for when the moisture is drawn up out of the sea, the sweet part, which is distinguished by it’s fine texture, forms a cloud, and drips out as rain by compression like that of felt, and the winds spread it around…The sea is the source of water, the source of wind. For in the clouds, neither would the force of wind, which blows outward, originate without the great sea, nor the flowing of streams, nor the rainwater from the sky; but the great sea is the originator of the clouds, winds, and streams…” Xenophanes of Colophon 570-460 B.C.(http://tinyurl.com/3bey54 see page 13) Although you are correct in part about Perrault (Halley and others did their part too) it appears Xenophanes got it figured out in a much more concise and precise form than anything you referenced in the Bible. True the Job and Amos writings may be older than Xenophanes the era of the writing of Ecclesiastes is not. In order for your argument to work all those passages must have been understood together before Xenophanes figured it out, however they do not. In the face of proof that a more comprehensive and coherent narrative of the water cycle was completed within this time period I have a hard time calling this foreknowledge.
#6 So you started your argument by saying that the stars could not be numbered but now you say that they are not infinite but instead finite? You just argued yourself into a circle. Which do you believe? If the number is finite then you can assume that eventually, with the right tools, they could be counted, thus there is no forekowledge in the Bible. If they are infinite then this is foreknowledge. Which do you believe, your rebuttal doesn’t make sense.