Is all science in the Torah Ancient Out-dated knowledge?

(Edward Miller) #21

I am afraid that a 62 year old does not think as quickly as he once did. Leviticus 17:11-14 is the verse I meant. It is implied in Leviticus that life is in the blood. That is not the only place that we need something for life, e.g., the brain and heart are very important; however, if too much blood is drained, you are going to be deceased. Henry VIII, my ancestral great-granduncle and King of England and Ireland died from several causes including diabetes; however, blood was drained from him until he died. The life of a creature is in the blood, and that is a good scientific observation. But it does not mean that taking some blood for tests, e.g., is always bad. It happens to me abut every three months. But if you take all my blood, I will be with my late parents in Meadowbrook. I am simply demonstrating that the ancients were not completely stupid. They observed that taking too much blood could kill one. The life is partially in the blood. I wonder why the doctors did not use vampire bats::grinning: Bad joke. You have made a good point.



First, I was referring to the book “Animal Farm” which is a bit different than the movie “Animal House”, although both are very enjoyable in their own way. Second, no analogy is perfect.

All I was saying is that Genesis is not meant as a science textbook. Any science it might get correct is secondary to its main purpose. The sheep and pigs in Animal Farm move about on four legs, but I hardly see how that scientifically accurate description of mammalian locomotion indicates that Animal Farm was meant as a treatise on the biological sciences. I would also think than finding faulty science in Genesis would negate the truths it was trying to convey.


Take someone’s kidneys out and they die. Agreed?

Does this mean that life is found in the kidneys?

Life being found in the blood really doesn’t make any sense in a scientific sense. Life is simply the interaction of many systems, blood being one of them. It’s a bit like taking the spark plugs out of your car, and after the car stops working proclaiming that the life of your car is found in the spark plugs.

(Edward Miller) #24

I understand that the book of Genesis is a book of teaching principles of right and wrong. I really do no know that I put Animal House; on the contrary, that is down right funny to me. I meant Leviticus 17:11. The life of a flesh and blood being is in the blood. Please read my last note to Pevaquark. Perhaps I should switch from Evolutionary Creation to Progressive with Intelligent Design Theory. I do like Aristotle and a following of him by the name of St. Thomas Aquinas of the Catholic Church. I told those medical men in the enlightenment era to use vampire bats (Bad Joke).

(Edward Miller) #25

Bill, I liked your answer. God bless you.


That still doesn’t make any sense. “The life” is not an actual thing found in blood. It seems to harken back to the idea of vitalism.

But these are all small quibbles, so no worries. I will certainly agree that the biblical authors were not completely ignorant of biology and some of their knowledge made it into the Bible. Some will be accurate, some will be outdated. I would fully agree that one should never argue that if it comes from the Bible it must be wrong.

(RiderOnTheClouds) #27

Babylonian texts also claim that blood is the source of life, it is the material which man is made from.

(RiderOnTheClouds) #28

Compared to other religious texts, especially the Quran, the Tanakh is probably the most scientifically accurate. Whilst it may contain a few inaccuracies, there is nothing on the same level as the sun setting in a muddy pond, Hail coming from mountains in the sky and pieces of the sky falling and hitting people.

(Matthew Pevarnik) #29

I’ll have to expand a bit since you are still reading into the text that somehow Leviticus 17:11 is speaking to the medical practice of blood letting. But first, let’s look at a few quick things about blood:

Blood essentially functions as a delivery system between cells for oxygen and nutrients and a transport network for the immune response to name a few things. Blood of far from the ‘source of life.’ Cells, for example, can survive perfectly fine in the absence of blood provided there are nutrients nearby. And in general, vertebrates need a lot of things to live! Take away oxygen and poof, we’re all dead. Take away nutrients, and again, we die. Is oxygen the source of life? Are nutrients the source of life? Blood is more analogous to a delivery truck bringing essential supplies to regions that need them but in no way shape or form is the life-force or essence of life.

Furthermore, the majority of living things do not actually have blood! Most insects for example don’t have blood, but instead have a fluid called hemolymph. Plants also lack blood but yet are clearly ‘living.’ Single celled organisms or jelly fish, or sponges, or fungi and all bacteria are also clearly alive, yet also do not have any blood.

Back to the Scripture though… I don’t see how anyone can argue that this Scripture clearly is speaking about the medical practice of blood letting. Ultimately, I must disagree with you Edward in that this Scripture does appear to be ‘ancient out-dated knowledge.’ It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that blood is important to animals that have blood. The vast majority of living things don’t have blood however. Out of those that do, even ‘non-sentient’ animals tend to react negatively to their blood gushing out so it doesn’t take a divine revelation to see that it is important.

To the credit of the writers of the text, they did the best they could have given limited knowledge. Was what they said wrong? Well certainly not! But in the same sense that Aristotle was not wrong in how he explained why certain things float and rise and others sink and fall. He explained the world in the best way he could and really was on to something!

(Edward Miller) #30

I does make sense. Remember, death occurs without blood unless you are the vampire Barnabas Collins on Dark Shadows in the 1960’s :grinning:. Bad Joke.

(Edward Miller) #31

I know but there fluid is still a type of blood. It is life giving.


Death occurs without food, water, oxygen, electrolytes, surfactant in the lungs, and many, many other things. You can have blood but no red blood cells and die immediately.

(Edward Miller) #33

That is the red blood cells are a structure of the blood and they are part of the body. I have enjoyed the debate here, but I am not feeling well. My wife is ill, and I am afraid I may end up alone.


(George Brooks) #34


Edward, “Animal House” is not the same thing as “Animal Farm”…

Animal Farm was a George Orwell book published in 1945. In contrast, Animal House was a movie released in 1978.

(Edward Miller) #35

Hi George, I am aware of what you are saying, and you are correct. I simply just typed the wrong word. We all do that now and then. God bless. I am a Democratic Socialist too. I would support Senator Sanders for president in 2020.

(Phil) #36

Edward, regarding blood and Biblical thoughts, one of the most comforting thoughts I have read, and what goes through my mind at taking communion, is that the significance of the wine at the Lord’s supper is not that wine to changed to Christ’s blood, but rather that the forbidden blood was made wine, which can be freely taken by all, and through it we are given life eternal.

(Andrew M. Wolfe) #37

We pray that the Lord will lay His healing hands upon her and be gracious to you all. So sorry to hear of your troubles, brother.

(Matthew Pevarnik) #38

Amen, and please @Edward, don’t go getting any leeches for some blood letting!

(Edward Miller) #39

I believe I will try the vampire bats instead. God bless.

(Edward Miller) #40

I appreciate all of you. You are nice people and siblings in the Lord Jesus.