The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Has anyone considered re-writing the bible scientifically?  (Read 4623 times)

Paul Anderson

  • Guest
Paul Anderson  asked the Naked Scientists:
Hi Chris and team,

I was listening to a past podcast from Naked Scientists concerning epilepsy. Have any scientists, psychologists, and sociologists tried re-writing the Christian Bible  using modern scientific terminology and suggesting explanations for miracles? I suppose there is someone doing this all the time.

I am thinking in terms of calling something epilepsy rather than possessed by demons¯, or having out of body experiences because of dehydration in the middle of a desert day, or lack of certain minerals in food because of life in an arid country, or because of eating betel nuts or that stuff the Somalis chew on, etc.
 
I am tempted to widen the queries here, but if you consider this email worthy of discussion you can divide it up. I do not go along with reading hands¯ other than Dr Watson observations that a chap may be a labourer , but the moon influences the tides. Humans are made up of a lot of water. Is it not reasonable to assume that the moon must have some influence on us as well?

This is not to say that I believe that my life is controlled by astrology. Just as I cannot understand how the Chinese agricultural calendar can apply to both northern and southern China, so I cannot see how astrologers can give the same reading¯ for 3 folk born on the same day in different parts of the world, maybe an NZ-er in NZ, a  Scot in Scotland and a chap in Nevada. Different time zones, different latitudes.

Regards
 
Paul
 
NZ

What do you think?


 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8126
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Has anyone considered re-writing the bible scientifically?
« Reply #1 on: 28/09/2008 02:34:43 »
As a NZ-er you may appreciate the "Strine" (Australian) version of the bible...

Quote
The 90-page phenomenon was promoted as a “ripping yarn about Jesus of Nazareth” in which Mary was “a pretty special sheila”,
Jesus was “God’s toddler,” and the Three Wise Men were “eggheads from out east.”
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/15388/strine-slang-bible-a-hit-in-secular-australia

Strewth  :)


Cockney rhyming slang bible.

SMS text-message bible: "In da Bginnin God cre8d da heavens & da earth".
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8126
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Has anyone considered re-writing the bible scientifically?
« Reply #2 on: 28/09/2008 02:43:51 »
There are controversial scientific hypotheses as to why people believe in gods and spirits...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurotheology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_gene
« Last Edit: 28/09/2008 02:45:55 by RD »
 

Offline stevewillie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 120
    • View Profile
Has anyone considered re-writing the bible scientifically?
« Reply #3 on: 30/09/2008 19:30:36 »
Q:Has anyone considered rewriting the Bible scientifically?

They're trying. It's called string theory; an attempt at a theory of 'everything' in physics.
« Last Edit: 09/10/2008 22:22:46 by stevewillie »
 

Offline Don_1

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6890
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • A stupid comment for every occasion.
    • View Profile
    • Knight Light Haulage
Has anyone considered re-writing the bible scientifically?
« Reply #4 on: 02/10/2008 18:09:18 »
OK, I've made a start.

BLACK - The original
BLUE - The Narrator
MAROON - The voice of God
GREEN - The voice of Daddy God
PURPLE - The voice of Adam
RED - The voice of Eve

Please don't take offence, none is intended. Just a bit of laugh.


1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Please do not ask where God came from or what he had been doing before.

2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

I’ll give this idea to someone one day so they can invent the hovercraft.

 3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.

Where’s that light switch?

 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness.

“Stop playing with the lights, this isn’t a disco” ---- Sorry Dad.

 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

And Cat Stevens sung ‘Morning has broken’.

 6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

Stone the Crows, boiling all them kettles has sent the electricity meter wild!

 9 And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.
 
Right, I’m off for a paddle. Now where did I put them trunks.

 11 Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

Suppose I’ll have to get the lawn mower out tomorrow.

 14 And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

That should save a packet on the electricity bill.

 20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

Would you Adam & Eve it! That bloody bird just crapped on my newly polished car. Hmmm, Adam & Eve, that gives me an idea.

 24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Opps, bit of a faux pas here, who’s going to look after all this rudy livestock. Ahhh! Adam & Eve! I’ll get on with that straight away.

 26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Oi! You, Adam, get in there and muck out all that livestock, to which Adam replied “Up yours!”

 27 So God created man in his own image,
       in the image of God he created him;
       male and female he created them.
 
Right Eve, nag him until he mucks out the livestock.

 28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."

At this juncture Adam pointed out to God that he wasn't a rabbit

If I've got to populate this entire planet I'll only have 6 inches left by the time I'm finished.

 29 Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food." And it was so.

“Can’t we just get a take-away?” asked Eve, “I’m not slaving over a hot stove for him every night when he gets back from the boozer.”

 31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

Oh! And Adam, do as Eve tells you, or she’ll give you a slap.

Right, it’s my day off now, so get on with it you two.
 

Offline Make it Lady

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4050
  • Hands-on fun for everyone!
    • View Profile
Has anyone considered re-writing the bible scientifically?
« Reply #5 on: 02/10/2008 18:37:56 »
Excellent Don but still not scientific enough....more sort of Monty Python. Oh, python, thats the next bit isn't it....naughty snake, Eve realises that Adam only had 3 inches before he started populating the earth. The snake was so bad that they had to start wearing clothes and he became a trouser snake.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8648
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Has anyone considered re-writing the bible scientifically?
« Reply #6 on: 02/10/2008 19:09:44 »
If someone really took the time to rewrite the bible scientifically (as oposed to a pythonesque parrody) who would read it?
The God squad wouldn't read it; they would burn it . The scientists wouldn't bother because, while it muight be amusing in a way, it would be a rather thick book that wouldn't tell them anything new.
The rest of the people probably wouldn't bother- principally because the first 2 groups woudn't read it.
If nobody is going to read it, why take the trouble to write it?
I think the parody is in with a better chance of getting published.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Has anyone considered re-writing the bible scientifically?
« Reply #6 on: 02/10/2008 19:09:44 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums