If you mean: the bible is knowledge, I would agree to some degree. But science?
In its most rudimentary form science is a method. Follow the method, you arrive at an explanation subject to falsification based on rigorous testing with the following outline:
observed phenomenon -> hypothesis (assume, supposition, postulation, speculation) -> devise a test -> apply the test -> repeat the test -> compare outcomes. Each test should yield the same outcome. If so, then that is your explanation. The whole process is transparent and open and forensically traceable.
The bible fails that rigorous process. It is not science. It is a certain type of knowledge, either literal or symbolic.
If you mean: the bible is knowledge, I would agree to some degree. But science?
In its most rudimentary form science is a method. Follow the method, you arrive at an explanation subject to falsification based on rigorous testing with the following outline:
observed phenomenon -> hypothesis (assume, supposition, postulation, speculation) -> devise a test -> apply the test -> repeat the test -> compare outcomes. Each test should yield the same outcome. If so, then that is your explanation. The whole process is transparent and open and forensically traceable.
The bible fails that rigorous process. It is not science. It is a certain type of knowledge, either literal or symbolic.