"In the Beginning...": the Lucky Guess

This site is truly pathetic. The logical fallacies in many of the attempts at discrediting the Bible are dizzying and similarly weak to the circular reasoning that, conversely, some Christians, unfortunately, resort to when they are trying to defend God. The "50/50" arguments in many examples fall apart when real logic is applied. So, to recite Richard Dawkins’ “God Delusion Debate” answer circularly, regardless of context, as a slogan, when it doesn’t fit the context of these further questions that have been answered with the same cookie cutter rebuttal Dawkins used, hurts your validity. (I am trying to be honest not antagonistic!)
A few examples:
• "Isaiah 40:21 - the earth is either circular or some other shape and while the Bible had a less than a 50/50% chance… it just got lucky”
-: There can be much more specificity to the description of the earth's shape than simply "some other shape" (weak) which, necessarily, by itself, is more than "50/50" (DUH!)(I almost hate to say, but this is a simple childish taunt) Other civilizations spoke of pyramid or cube shapes, still others had no idea. Christians, for years, were called "flat-earthers", but it was human interpretation by the church that initiated it. "Four corners" obviously refers to directional divisions N-S-E-W. (Why am I even having to say this?) All that these responsible parties had to do was read the Bible that they had beneath their noses to see that God said it was round all along. "The Lord sits upon the circle of the Earth", read the Bible!
Next:
• "Job38:31 - the Pleiadian star system is either bound together by mutual gravitational attraction or not and so the Bible had a 50/50% chance…"
• “Job38:31 - the Orion system either has a belt or it does not and so the Bible had a 50/50% chance…”
-: The other constellations form the positionings or "shapes" that they do because of a perspective and the distance from which we see them. This gives the illusion by distance perception that they are together when, in fact, they're not (it’s not a 50% either/ or!). There is no gravitational influence in the others except for Pleiades and Orion's belt. Only God could have known this (no modern astronomy or Hubbell). The phrases "bind the cluster" and "loose the belt" are obviously (and couldn’t be more plainly) declaring a force holding them together that was unknown (specifically from a science stand point) and, especially unknown from a space/cosmic understanding as gravity. The precise nature in which this “control” is described is astonishing. “Bind” is a specific description to a force that is central or radial causing a “cleaving” to the cluster. A cluster is a linear formation such as Orion’s belt. Linear is a more consecutively directional description such as a belt or kite string that would (if being held together ei.-gravity) realistically be let go or “loosed” from the linear bond as a pearl necklace being held vertically with a broken end clasp. The observation about Orion’s belt in the Bible is not about having a belt (hello, there is no belt ,it conjures up the mental image simply through a symbolic form, that’s just how ancient people can envision them much like seeing shapes in clouds as children (God is humoring them with an ancient symbolic , representational understanding. It’s about loosening, not observing, the belt. In essence, God’s hand of gravity is binding Pleiades and Orion’s belt with proximital gravity that is solely exercised on them .These specific cosmological understandings (millions of miles, light years, etc) would be, needless to say, impossible for the people of that day to, not just fathom, but have the ability to know predictably about. Which comes to the whole point: this knowledge had to have come from outside the boundaries of man’s abilities and from God’s alone through deterministic influence.
Finally, (must I go on, if one can’t see it by now, help is in order!)
• “Gen 1:1 - either the universe consists of time, space, and matter or it does not and so the Bible had a 50/50% chance…”
-: Time, space, and matter are principles of physics and reality that must all come into being simultaneously. They are foundational for existence in dimensional reality that establishes a where, a when, and a what that gives existence: foundations, format, and parameters. For example, if one had matter but no space, where would one put it? Let’s say one had matter but no time, when would one put it? And say one had time and space but no matter, when and where would one put what doesn’t exist. There is no one without any of the others. The latest scientific cosmological contrivance proposes, and is widely known as, a moment of elemental “fervent” violence from a quantum physics level brought forth by an explosion of nothing into the existence of all matter, order, science, logic, reason in the cosmos that rules and governs the universe with no apparent causality. The ancient account that addresses this trinity of being and existence is a narration that uses the events that occur in dynamic, powerful account of occurrences that were written as a record of determinant power that weren’t called ‘time, space, and matter” but the caused (by God) structure of the creation was the embodiment of reality that formed those facets as a gauge for what reality is.
The real truth is there is one Bible perspective that is, in a way, sad for the people whom it speaks about. These are the people who apparently have this site and many humans in general just as the people in Romans:1 “For the wrath of God is revealed against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth of God because of their unrighteousness, because what is known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world, His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the thing that are made, especially His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without an excuse . Because although they knew God (everyone who posted on this site intrinsically knows that there is an ultimate cause to the effect of our universe – my arguing is just reiteration of what God has revealed), they worshipped Him not as God nor were thankful, but became futile in there thinking and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools (got there PhDs in controlled naturalist evolutionary curriculums)…!!!

Well, it is true that by picking the example of Orion's belt, I was going after the "low-hanging fruit". It seems obvious to me (and you don't argue the point) that anyone with normal eyesight can see that Orion has a belt. As an example of divine perception, this is a pretty weak example. Since you were the one to cite this, my criticism of your example hardly seems out of bounds.So let's look at some of the other examples you've cited, just to be thorough. 1. "The earth hangs on nothing" (Job 26:7). To start with, this really isn't a terribly accurate for the description of the Earth's station in the Solar System. If you or I were asked, we would be able to say that the Earth orbits the Sun, and that the Sun's gravity keeps the Earth from flying off into interstellar space. Statically "hanging on nothing" doesn't seem like a great description of what's really happening.Moreover, the Bible isn't really consistent on this point, anyway. According to the Bible, the Earth also rests on "pillars", which tremble when God shakes the Earth (Job 9:6), and it also has a foundation" with bases and a cornerstone (Job 38:6). And that's all just from Job! The Bible isn't even internally consistent in its description of the Earth, let alone being consistent with the Copernican model.2. "The earth is circular" (Isaiah 40:22). I'll concede the point that in ancient Hebrew, the same word was used for "circle" and "sphere"-I really don't know anything about ancient Hebrew, so I'll take your word for it here. So, where does that take us? Well, sailors even in ancient times had a pretty good idea that the Earth was spherical. The curvature of the Earth is visible to anyone who sails out of sight of land, and then back again. So like Orion's Belt, this doesn't seem like an insight that bespeaks a divine origin.3. "The universe expands" (Job 9:8). The whole verse is "Which alone spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea." It doesn't sound like the author is describing outer space so much as he's talking about controlling the weather, "the heavens" in this context meaning the sky or the atmosphere. Sorry, but it seems a real stretch to get the expanding Universe from this passage. The passages in Psalms and Isaiah refers to "stretch[ing] out the heavens like a curtain". I've never heard of a curtain that kept stretching out infinitely, as if it were made from elastic. This sounds like a poetic description of the "curtain" of the stars covering the sky. Again, there's no expanding Universe here. 4. "The Pleiadian star system is bound together by mutual gravitational attraction" (Job 38:31). The passage in question reads "Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?" Sorry, but there is NOTHING here about mutual gravitational attraction among the Pleiades. 5. Orion we have already discussed.6. "The universe consists of time, space, and matter" (Genesis 1:1). The actual passage is "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." It goes on to say that there was water before there was light, there was light before there were the Sun and the stars. Sorry, but this is just wrong. The Earth is only about 4.5 billion years old, quite a bit younger than the oldest known stars, which are about 11.5 billion years old.Well, that's all of your examples. I have to say, it doesn't establish a great track record for the Bible providing great cosmological insights.