Science’s Quarrel with the Bible

Science’s Quarrel with the Bible

Extracts from Lectures by Walter Rowton, Esq.

Without, so far as I can see, a single fact in support, it has been assumed that man’s earliest ideas of a God, of his own origin, of the earth’s age and form, of the sun, moon, and stars, originated with himself; that the cosmogony by Moses, if he wrote Genesis, was a mere jotting down of ignorant doctrines in themselves— the residuum of speculative traditional ideas which had been afloat in the world for ages ; ages whose backward reach did not terminate at Adam, but whose years in the aggregate, with their lost records o f pre-Adamic man, most probably amounted to millions.

But, on the other hand, there is a Book, believed to be the oldest in existence, which distinctly ascribes a ll man’s knowledge of God, himself, and the universe to the Divine Being ; not as it would seem superstitiously, but because such was the matter-of-fact experience of the then good men, and among them of those whose histories in part this record gives. Because the Book of Job happens to be one of the books of the Bible, is it, as evidence worthless! Please to remember that in Job’s day there was no Bible. You must consider therefore the history given as it originally stood, by itself; having none of our theories to advocate, and none to oppose; knowing, in short, nothing whatever about them.

Job’s one discreet friend, Elihu, said, “ The Spirit of “hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.” {Job xxxiii. 4.)

How did he know that; not a line o f the Bible being then in existence ? Was it borrowed from the heathen I We have no right to assume that so far there had been any heathen worship, excepting of the sun and moon.

Was the notion human? From its sublimity it would seem not.

The highest capability of notions, purely human, has not at any time shown itself equal to higher conceptions than the invention of atomism, culminating in Darwinism. Whenever men have left these conceits in search of higher, their exploration result less, they have had to return to them again. And the latest return was but yesterday.

Was Elihu’s notion a tradition ? Perhaps ; but its source seems more probably God Himself than man : for the latter, cultivated as he may be, whenever he gets away from the gross worship of idols, never witnesses for anything more definite than an “ unknown God ; ”a supposed, not a perceived or realised Being. Again : this, if tradition is traceable to God rather than man ; because the world’s tendency has ever been to prefer a god or god’s of its own invention; it has always objected to a revealed God. And again : this, if tradition, is traceable to God rather than man, because of its many subsequent reiterations, to all appearance officially, naming Him as the Authority.

Was it to Elihu an unauthenticated tradition ? There are good reasons for thinking it was not. Remembering that the inhabited earth according to the usual computation, was in existence for some 2,300 years before Moses wrote in God’s name to His chosen people— were these all that while left to their own notions ? Were they without communication of any kind from the could they are stated to have first known in Eden, and to !have thenceforward acknowledged ? The evidence of the book of Job is, that the relations of God with good men were as realisable then as at any subsequent time o f which we have particulars. So on the face of it we might infer ; otherwise it seems impossible to account for their religion having remained wholly uncorrupted for 2 for years; Job’s religion and that connected with the garden of Eden being as much one as though no interval had occurred.

Before the Christian era, the most difficult thing men ever tried was the remaining true to the unseen God. Left for awhile to themselves, the bulk of them invariably forsook Him for the worship of idols, and preferably idols of their own making. Moses but forty days absent, and down went the Israelites before a golden calf ! Repeatedly convinced that God was, directly He intermittent confirming His existence by signs and wonders, that instant men began to doubt His being and withdraw from His worship. Again and again shown that Dagon fallen upon his face, his head and hands cut off, and only the stump of Dagon left to him, ( i Sam. v. 3, 4), was nothing in the world but a sorry cheat, yet they set Dagon in his place again and bowed to him as usual. Yes ; even the children of Israel, who in this respect actually did worse than the heathen “ whom the Lord had destroyed before them ” (2 Chron. xxxiii. 9) ! These seem to be the common instincts o f men— and especially of those whose melancholy falling away from Aaron to Zedekiah are so minutely recorded in the Bible— I say that the unswerving loyalty o f the unseen God’s worshippers for 2,000 years, from Adam to Moses, is quite inexplicable unless the record be true; unless God, before a line was written in His name, really had the constant communications He is stated to have had with the elect families who professed His service. How was it that Job, towards the end of those 2,500 years, although tried to the utmost of human endurance, never once thought of denying God.

How was it there was not a single unbeliever in God amongst those “ miserable comforters ” who did their best to alleviate by aggravating his calamities ? It is impossible to account for it, except upon the hypothesis that the Being of God was, in those days, so indisputably confirmed to His worshippers by the habitual intercourse he is represented to have had with them, that denial of His being was simply out of the question. Had Job’s religion been merely the in organised superstition it is the fashion to consider it, severely tested as it was, and with nothing tangible to hold it together, surely, so empty, so powerless, so comfort-less a sham would not have retained his allegiance for an hour.

How is it that those we esteem our greatest philosophers seem quite unable to talk science without venting second-hand sarcasms at the expense of men’s religious delusions! I say “ second-hand sarcasm,” for whence gained they their superlative contempt? Every jot of it from the Bible ! Who has denounced the imbecilities of superstitious worship with such witheringly scorn as the Bible’s God ? He not a whit more real than the Baal he proves a myth ! So indeed they tell us ; but from such sticklers for least we expect conclusions according to evidence, not contrary. Whether they accept the Bible as from heaven or of men, this much is proved : its writers were as free from superstition, and as much alive to the follies of visionary and spurious religions, as the most enlightened free-thinker who ever lived.

Agreeably, then, with the marvellously concurrent testimony of the Book of Job and the Book of Human Nature, it appears that Eiihu knew God had made and given him life ; not of his own knowledge, but by reason of that information having been God’s revelation ; first, perhaps to his ancestors, and confirmed from their day to his own.

I f this be true, there should, one would think, be contemporaneous statements and evidences establishing that God gave it, and how it was given. Well, there are such statements and evidences.

Note: gods Of The New Age

There is a new video posted at this link on our website. It’s about occult infiltration in society. Click Here.

Also, a new post in the News section of this website, under 20th June.


About revealed4you

First and foremost I'm a Christian and believe that the Bible is the inspired word of Yahweh God. Introducing people to the Bible through the flat earth facts.
This entry was posted in Flat earth and science, Flat earth science and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s