There you Go,YECs...biblical "evidence" of "flat earth beliefs"

How so? break it down and say it using different ways
"The world is firmly established;" firmly established
how about saying, it's set, or it's firmly created."it can not be moved" another way of saying it is: You nore I can
move it, or change that which has been firmly established.yet none of it ever said it was not moving on it's own
which is what was being implied here."The world is firmly established; it can not be moved"
in no way means that it is not moving. show me where it means
that it is not moving? or has anything to do with being flat.Zcoder....

"Set on its foundation and can not be moved" does mean it is not moving. It says "can not be moved", not "can not be stopped". You're turning the Bible upside down. It says nothing of the kind. You're just making that up.It's sad that you feel you have to butcher the Bible to give it value.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I did not take it out of context, you did
by not fully reading the whole bible.Palms 104:5 "Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever."the above verse is the currect Hebrew translation.
and although King James translated it, you can see
that his choice of words is close to it, but lacks
true meaning to some extent.
But this in no way makes King James a bad guy.If you would learn more about the true Hebrew translation
you would find that the so called errors are not really
errors at all.Zcoder....

I'm not comparing translations at all. I'm only quoting what you said about the translation.You said that "can not be moved" means "can not be stopped":

quote:

---

... it is set on it's foundation and can not be moved. meaning that man can not stop it....

---

Nothing in any translation changes "can not be moved" to "can not be stopped".And anything set on a foundation does not move.Then you made up some nonsense about rotatation and moving around the sun:

quote:

---

the foundation being it's spot in our system, and it's rotation in that system around the sun.

---

There is nothing in any translation about rotation or "our system" or moving around the sun.The Bible was written with the point of view that the earth was fixed in space - and more to the point of the topic, it was flat. They didn't know any better. So what?You're bending over backwards trying to shoehorn some modern science into the Bible.
It doesn't work.Take the Bible for what it is. Don't mangle it.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

That sounds a lot like it means "The world is firmly established; it can not be moved" to me. I can't imagine where you get anything about "it's moving" out of that passage. There is only "The world is firmly established; it can not be moved" there.Church leaders, back before astronomy finally made it impossible to do so without their heads exploding, wrote things like this, from Robert Cardinal Bellarmine: Protestant forefathers like Luther and Calvin held similar views of a moving Earth and a non-Earth-centered universe. The "plain reading" of the Bible certainly calls for us to be the Immovable Center of Things - it's just that fact overwhelmed scripture a couple or three centuries ago in this matter, so some of you apologists like to hold to the fiction that "the Bible said this all along." The Bible actually taught an immobile and probably disc-shaped Earth all along.Internet History SourcebooksEdited by Coragyps, : include link

The moving around the sun was my translation of
what foundation was being talked about, and sence
we today understand more then they did back then
I used that to explain the foundation that was being
talked about.and the Hebrew Translation does mean that it can't be
stoped or moved, it can not be changed.Unless you want to say it can be if we was hit by a bigger
object someday.Zcoder....

I'm no Hebrew scholar either, but I'm something of an astronomer. I'm sure you probably haven't considered, zcoder, the fact that Earth's orbit is continually changing its shape. Wikipedia says: "For example, the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit today is 0.0167. Through time, the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit slowly changes from nearly 0 to almost 0.05 as a result of gravitational attractions between the planets."So what does "it can not be changed" mean in the light of that? Does "change" have a meaning along the lines of "stay the same" that the rest of us don't know about?

But you can't do that. You can't use today's understanding to retroactively claim that the Bible authors understood the same thing.You have to look at what the bible says to try to understand what the authors meant. You can't start by assuming what they meant and then go back and rearrange the words to suit yourself. I don't believe it. You'll have to give us more than just your word on that.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

My proof was the hebrew Translation
Palms 104:5 "Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever." (you just have to research this to see.)"should not be removed for ever" people back then could only
understand, what ever they could understand about this statment.but the meaning they could get was that god made the earth and
laid in on it's foundation and that it should not be removed.which I am sure they know that it can't be moved from what ever
they can invision of it's foundation.the same would go for saying "your faith should be built on a
firm foundation" which does not mean you should learn your faith
ontop of a good foundation in some building.you know what the word foundation means when used in that example.But you are of modern times and this phrase would be more easier
for you to understand.But you take it like a child when it works for you.
Yet those before you understood what foundation meant
even though they did not have the details you enjoy today.Zcoder....

That post makes no sense to me at all. Please try again.

No I don't. If you have a point, you have to make it. If you claim that the Hebrew backs you up, then you have to show that. There's a big difference between "moved" and "removed".A house built on a foundation does not move. That's the imagery that the Bible authors used. Some houses are removed from their foundations, but the earth can not be. That does not suggest in any way that the house moves on its foundation or that the earth moves.Using the word "remove" instead of "move" just weakens your case.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

again you assume, moving or not it is set, the bible does not
explain to man the mysterys of the universe. So they back then
did not know details of it's movment ect, but you do, and sence
this phrase does not say that which you know, you say it is
talking about it being still, none moving.You are playing with words, while the meaning gets lost for
your own benefit.You know what foundation means when used in different contexts
yet your playing this game.Play all you want.Zcoder....

The details of its movement are irrelevant. The Bible says it doesn't move. In every context I know, a "foundation" means something intended to prevent movement. That's clearly what the Bible authors meant. I'm just reading what the Bible plainly says. You're the one who's playing games, claiming that "can't be removed" means "moving" and making up fairy tales about rotation.If the Hebrew really does back up your case, just show us.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

No, Zcoder, you are the one playing with words. "Shall not be moved" means "shall not be moved" in English, and my bet is that the Hebrew isn't far from that same meaning. "Foundation" is frequently taken to mean a solid, non-moving base for a structure.The good Cardinal was quite firm about what the Bible meant here. And quite accurate about what it meant. It's just that what it meant is utterly out of sync with reality. That's fine for some old book, but seems less fine for The Revealed Truth Which Changeth Never.

If I said that god said "and the heavens came forth like a sroll" you
would say that, that does not mean the same thing as we know about
the expansion of space, just becouse the words universe or expansion
was not used.foundation can also mean as I have said.
examples:
"the foundation of EMF is firm, and can be proven with formulas"
Yet you can't tell me exactly what Electro Motive Force really is
just how to created it and it's behaver.
yet you know what the meaning is."We want our childs morals to be built on a firm foundation"
and here again you know the meaning. yet you do not know the
exact morals which are being talked about."The building should last long, being build on a firm foundation."
this one is really differnt then the other two. as this one is
the true meaning of the word foundation.Meaning is what you lack, if you can't see it. or refuse too.anyways are creatinist considered lower races of humans?
becouse they believe? as I have only seen posts that attack
not debate. debate should be done with repect for the other
person and not inject personal attacts.Zcoder....