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

It is a mythical critter inserted as a plot device. LOLAnd what makes you think I have NOT read the Bible. In fact I'm willing to bet that I have worn out more Bibles reading them than you have ever owned. Of course they do if they are honest. The only way to test the Bible is by testing it against the world and reality. There is no other honest way. First, no one builds geological structures, not the Egyptians, not the Romans, not the Israelites. However if you know of some human built structures that we can not explain, feel free to start a thread on them and we can discuss them.The topic of this thread though is whether or not the authors of parts of the Old Testament thought that the earth was flat. On that, the evidence is pretty clear that they did think that the earth was flat.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

a mythical critter used as a plot device, clever. you know, God said it existed... hence his example of stating "LOOK at the Leviathan"... not "let's just say there's this large creature called a Leviathan" -and personally, if God said, i'm gonna believe it.
and don't laugh at me about reading the bible, it's not a HOLIER THAN THOU ART competition... i know hundreds of people who READ the bible everyday, but the fact is there's a difference between reading and being able to quote, and actually understanding Who wrote it and why, what the intent was, whether its figurative, literal or poetic, what it means to salvation, what can be done with it... all sorts of things. i was making clear too many people nowadays, ESPECIALLY on forums like this DON"T really READ and understand what the bible is saying -and if you're going to argue anything about it, READ IT FIRST! chances are the snippets you pull out, having NOTHING to do with what you're trying to MAKE it say.
and jar, don't play cute with me, you know what i mean when i say that there are structures built by ancient civilizations we (as investigative scientists) can't even understand (how or why they were built). as stated before, the Old testament is PRE-Aristotle in the first place, it doesn't make them ignorant to anything if NO ONE BACK THEN had any idea likewise of a flat earth concept, it was irrelevant to ANYTHING going on back then.
that link that dorfman posted is really quite useful for this type of discussion if you want to use implications of logic and "reasoning". the author describes the verse:
Isaiah 40:22
It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,
Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.and notes the word circle (and depending on its context) translates from the hebrew word Chuwg to mean circuit or compass, indicating a spherical object.

Not true. It means circle. That is the problem with the Christian Cult of Ignorance. They seem to be Humpty Dumpty. A circle is NOT a sphere.And as to both reading and understanding the Bible, my experience has been that Atheists are far more likely to understand the Bible than any member of the Christian Cult of Ignorance. We get them here all the time, those who like Humpty Dumpty seem to think that they can make words mean whatever they want them to mean. But you don't. You do not believe it was "Leviathan" but rather like Humpty Dumpty you make the word mean dinosaur.Sorry but dinosaurs had been dead and gone for almost 65 million years by the time someone wrote that passge. That is the fact. No, I do not know what you are talking about and if it is anything other than more nonsense, start a thread on it. LOLOf course it makes them ignorant. They were ignorant of the fact that the earth was a sphere, that it revolved around the sun, of DNA, of airplanes, of root beer floats, of tv, of computers, of the sheer joy of a BLT.Ignorant does not imply dumb. Ignorant simply acknowledges something one doesn't know. You are pulling another Humpty Dumpty trying to make words mean what YOU want them to mean. Yes, we see such people here at EvC all the time. They are called Biblical Christians. So far it has been an almost universal truth that those who identify themselves as Biblical Christians are totally clueless about what the Bible actually says and means.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Dorfman writes:
Even today, scientists admit that they do not know how many stars there are. Only about 3,000 can be seen with the naked eye.

​

Depends upon where you are. Please double that number at least for skies in the desert southwest of the US away from city light.

​

All stars look alike to the naked eye.

​

and

​

We understand that people can perceive some slight difference in color and apparent brightness when looking at stars with the naked eye, but we would not expect a person living in the first century A.D. to claim they differ from one another.

​

I can't vouch for other people's eyes but to me Betelgeuse is clearly red, Rigel is clearly white, and Altair is clearly yellow as has been noted since ancient times. If you don't believe me, go look for yourself.

---

Well, I did go look for myself. Even kept my glasses on. I froze my butt off and that is all that happened.But, I'm glad the ancients were not color-blind.

quote:

---

dorfman, you bring up excellent points. early science wasn't about gaining wisdom and testing other people's THEOLOGICAL beliefs. it was about curiosity and understanding the workings of the world.

---

Yuppadoodle! Making observations, asking questions, and over again.From Job 12:
12:7 But ask now the beasts, and they shall teach thee; and the fowls of the air, and they shall tell thee:
12:8 Or speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee: and the fishes of the sea shall declare unto thee.I think this was/is done.

quote:

---

and jar, if it's not stating a dinosaur LIKE creature as i said, then what is it? those dimensions stated are that of a dinosaur to me, even the scientists who support your argument.

---

I find Jar a story unto himself. I know few who are as or more confusing than he is. I mean that as a compliment.

quote:

---

And what makes you think I have NOT read the Bible. In fact I'm willing to bet that I have worn out more Bibles reading them than you have ever owned.

---

There is a difference between reading and studying.2 Timothy 3:7
KJV: Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.You can even study until you are green, and never understand the subject. Which would apply to me and my efforts with algebra.

the word SPHERE didn't exist back then. Mathematicians made it up POST old testament. back the then word circle was used for MANY different figures... that had ANY amount of circularity to them. like say a hollow ring (we'd call it a hoop) that is placed on your head (like what we'd call a circlet) they'd simply call a CIRCLE. why? because the hebrew and greek languages don't make MORE THAN ONE word for more than one meaning like us americans have. HUMPTY DUMPTY? how about LINGUISTICALLY CHALLENGED. and your example of humpty dumpty doesn't imply.
Christian cult of ignorance? and you're calling ME ignorant? speaking from the standpoint of a BIBLICAL CHRISTIAN, i know what the writers were saying and how they were said, and what they meant from it. the problem with your scientists of today is THEY are humpty dumpty. they've twisted more fact out of context than ANY body of people since the first century, and this began with the power struggle of Galileo and the CATHOLIC church. NOT CHRISTIAN. the best people to understand this are HISTORIANS, they look at what REALLY HAPPENED from surrounding cultures and what they wrote from a day to day basis.
as far as dinosaurs being dead for 65 million years or however long you said, guess what, your dating methods have been long incorrect and always changes, that is to say, you'll never get the same year result 3 times (and thats been tested). next year (and i'll put money on this) they'll come up with a NEW dating system. and they'll reveal that it was 65 million years... they'll push it back and forth.
"if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and LOOKS LIKE A DUCK, ITS A DUCK!" so read job 41 over again and tell me what it looks like!
if your definition of ignorant means that which you stated, then guess what bud, WE'RE ALL IGNORANT. you're ignorant to biblical arguments, i'm ignorant to scientific arguments, she's ignorant to ford's new cars coming out in 2009, he's ignorant to dell's new computer - that analogy striking you as ridiculous yet?
"You are pulling another Humpty Dumpty trying to make words mean what YOU want them to mean."
am i? then read them to me and explain what they are "holier than thou art" Jar.
"So far it has been an almost universal truth that those who identify themselves as Biblical Christians are totally clueless about what the Bible actually says and means." PROVE IT. use accounts of "biblical christians" who read their bible and take it out of what you think is context or just plain have no idea what they're talking about IN REGARDS TO THE BIBLE. tell me what they said, what you THINK it means, why they're wrong. i want to see this. because i can tell you this, biblical christians don't strive to be "Mr. i know the universe and everything about it", they care in two basic principles NOT RELATING TO SCIENCE. however, scientists only strive for knowledge and what they think is wisdom - and from all of the professors i've talked to and confrences i've been at, including those that support creation science and Intelligent Design, they put their ego first. just like you. so i hope you don't mind i'll just start calling you guys "scientists wannabe knowitalls" since nobody seems to mind your slue of "christian cult of ignorance"

And what exactly makes you think I have not studied the Bible both formally and informally?Understanding is not becoming Humpty Dumpty where YOU get to decide what the words mean.The facts are that the authors of some of the Bible thought that the earth was flat. They thought that the sky was a solid dome with windows or openings in it that held back the waters above and could be opened or shut to allow rain. They thought that there was a solid platform called earth that sat on the waters below.These were not unintelligent or unreasoning people. The could actually support such beliefs with evidence. If you look up, the stars and the sun and the moon move. Sometimes it rains. If there is water coming down it first had to be up there. But it does not always rain, so there had to be something that opened and closed to allow intermittent rain. You dig a hole, you find water. If the water is down there, there must be some vast waters below.These were not illogical beliefs. Based on the knowledge they had at the time they were actually pretty reasonable.They simply happen to be WRONG.The authors of the Bible included their knowledge. It just happens that a lot of what they included was not true, it is false, it is incorrect.Trying to make it correct totally misses the whole point of what folk were doing, what they were trying to say. To understand the Bible, we need to be able to point to those places where it is wrong, acknowledge that it is wrong and then move on. To try to make such things true is to raise the Bible to an object of worship and to move further away from the search for GOD.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

oh dorfman, you really should have pulled the whole of that scripture out... so here goes
2Timothy 3:
1But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God” 5having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.
6They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. 8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth”men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. 9But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.//*the TRUTH that he's speaking about, isn't truth that's used for science, or logic, it's truth of God's word//10You, however, know all about my teaching, my way of life, my purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, 11persecutions, sufferings”what kinds of things happened to me in Antioch, Iconium and Lystra, the persecutions I endured. Yet the Lord rescued me from all of them. 12In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13while evil men and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, 15and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, WHICH ARE ABLE TO MAKE YOU WISE FOR SALVATION through faith in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

To understand the Bible, we need to be able to point to those places where it is wrong, acknowledge that it is wrong and then move on. To try to make such things true is to raise the Bible to an object of worship and to move further away from the search for GOD.-where the BIBLE is wrong? or the people IN it were? the people IN science WILL be wrong at one time or another, just like the Bible's writers, does that make THE BIBLE or SCIENCE as a whole, WRONG? what you're implying, and insinuating is that (clever analogy coming up) the tires on my car aren't suited for the weather, therefore my car is defective or useless. and no, you get this idea that people make the bible an object of worship, it has never been, but the Man who it's written after, IS that which is to be worshipped. and studying science does NOT bring you closer to God, studying his word, keeping his commandments, being a steward of His word WILL. once again, this is pointed MANY MANY times in scripture.the thing that teases me most is that you say "what makes you think i don't study it or haven't studied it"... how about pointing out some scripture for the topic! telling us you have doesn't prove anything. crack it open, let's go, i wanna see some scripture!Edited by Mikael Fivel, : No reason given.

Again, you are simply wrong. If you wish to look at making more than one word to show shades of meaning simply look at the number of different Greek words designed to show different types of love, or of knowledge.Actually, ancient languages tend to be more precise and limited than modern languages. That is one of the great inventions that has come about over time.Can you do me a favor. Can you try using punctuation, capitalization, line breaks, white space between paragraphs and thoughts. As it is, your messages are virtually unreadable.Are you saying that the Roman Catholic Church is not Christian? If so, then take that to another thread since it is irrelevant to this one.If you are as ignorant of dating methods as your post indicates, then we have a whole forum devoted to dating, but again, it is irrelevant to this thread.The fact is that this thread is about whether or not the authors of the Bible thought that the earth is Flat. The evidence is that they did.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

guess who's language came first... greek or hebrew? greek was more precise, yes. but the primary languages of the bible are hebrew and aramaic. because the dominant religion that the people in the old testament modelled the ten commandments after, was JUDAISM, and they spoke in hebrew. so translate old testament with hebrew, translate new testament with greek. why? because the people in the new testament spoke greek. that is why when you pick up a torah (which are the first four books of old testament), it's written in solid hebrew. and the hebrew word chuwg translated indicates a spherical object.

Yes where the Bible is wrong. And from there on your post is simply incorrect. I am not saying that your car is flawed, but simply that the tires are the wrong ones for some weather condition.The Bible is nothing more than a Map. It is NOT the Territory. And like all Maps, it will have places where it accurately reflects the Territory, where it is close to the Territory and other areas where it is just plain wrong.To understand the Bible, to read the Map, you must compare it to the Territory. When it is talking about the world we live in, we need to compare it to the Territory, the world we live in. Scripture has been posted in this thread many times. What we are doing is testing that against the real world.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

No, it indicates a circle.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

ONCE AGAIN...the writers IN the bible may be incorrect, just as scientists are... but that does not make the guiding principles taught as a WHOLE incorrect. it was science professors and evolutionists that spout this the most to me throughout college. if i flaw what i'm saying, it does not mean that what i'm saying is wrong, it means I AM. i've simply flawed it. and no the bible isn't a map of anything. it's an account of a master plan carried out by God from the beginning of man to the crucifixion of Jesus (who made the plan complete). whatever the people wrote ABOUT the plan, or their accounts of the plan in motion, does not INVALIDATE the plan as a whole. read GOD's word, not man's. he only accounted for it. the teachings of Jesus (aka GOD) are whole and complete. you can't test the teaching "but i say to you Love your neighbor as yourself" with science. that is the guiding principle. whether or not i take it out of context, does NOT make IT, THE TEACHING incorrect, i simply am.