|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: The Bible's Flat Earth | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shalamabobbi Member (Idle past 2849 days) Posts: 397 Joined: |
I realize that it is not a new perspective that theoretically the Bible portrays a flat earth. I simply disagree with that ideology.
Nothing wrong with disagreeing with a viewpoint, but this is a debate forum with rules in place for participation. We are to present the 'evidence' for our viewpoints. I came across this erudite conclusion from a paper on this topic: From their geographical and historical context, one would expect the ancient Hebrews to have a flat-earth cosmology. Indeed, from the very beginning, ultra-orthodox Christians have been flat-earthers, arguing that to believe otherwise is to deny the literal truth of the Bible. The flat-earth implications of the Bible were rediscovered and popularized by English-speaking Christians in the mid-19th century. Liberal scriptural scholars later derived the same view. Thus, students with remarkably disparate points of view independently concluded that the ancient Hebrews had a flat-earth cosmology, often deriving this view from scripture alone. Their conclusions were dramatically confirmed by the rediscovery of 1 Enoch. refhttp://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm I like your appeal to common sense. The problem I have discovered with it is that other people have differing views as to just what constitutes common sense. The ones that come to my mind in the forefront are those who claim the universe as well as the earth was created recently, that starlight was created in transit etc, and then go on to teach this to children all of ten years of age. What happens to the teachings that they want these children to receive such as "treating others in the manner they would like to be treated"? Or "sacrifice of self for the greater good"? When these children grow to maturity and discover with their own thinking that last Thurdayism has made them the laughing stock, what happens to the rest of their foundation for responsible behaviour within society?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Black Member (Idle past 5183 days) Posts: 77 Joined: |
BUMP
Edited by Black, : edit Edited by Black, : edit Edited by Black, : edit
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shalamabobbi Member (Idle past 2849 days) Posts: 397 Joined: |
Sorry black, your previous two posts conceded the point, now you change your mind?? It seems to turn on whether or not you perceive GM's argument to affect the veracity of other teachings in the bible.
Looking back at your original post you presented no evidence there either. You picked a few of the scriptures that were presented by GM and quibbled about them not being directly to the topic when they were used to support a corresponding aspect of the flat earth model, immobility. Some more evidence for those who have "eyes to see and ears to hear"
"that it might take the earth by the edges and shake the wicked out of it? (From the NIV Bible, Job 38:13)"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Black Member (Idle past 5183 days) Posts: 77 Joined: |
BUMP
Edited by Black, : edit Edited by Black, : edit Edited by Black, : edit Edited by Black, : edit
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shalamabobbi Member (Idle past 2849 days) Posts: 397 Joined: |
I have presented it in my original post. There is no reason to believe that the scriptures of the Bible present a flat earth creation event or ideology. The scriptures portray the opinions of the authors in that respect however it is not the intended purpose of those passages(to display their personal scientific perspectives). Is it not reasonable to accept that the Bible is a holy book, not a scientific book? So why decieve people with misquoted context? quoted before you change your statement again with an edit..
There is no reason to believe that the scriptures of the Bible present a flat earth creation event or ideology.
Quite a few scriptures have been presented that support this view as well as the book of Enoch as well as evidence from what bible fundamentalists read into the bible as well as what scholars think it says as well as what the historical context says.
The scriptures portray the opinions of the authors in that respect however it is not the intended purpose of those passages(to display their personal scientific perspectives).
The point is now conceded, the authors are limited in their scientific understanding.
Is it not reasonable to accept that the Bible is a holy book, not a scientific book?
More agreement here. So if not a science primer then it is OK if the authors did not know the science.
So why decieve people with misquoted context?
How is anybody being deceived by presenting the context of the biblical world view?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
dont give up so quickly.
the cited scriptures do not 'prove' that the writers believed the earth was flat GM says that part of the evidence is that "it was the prevailing view of the time" (msg 180)This is not evidence for what Hebrews believed. Actually the hebrew writings show a completely different mind set in many instances and on many subjects...completely contradictory to prevailing views of the time which proves that the Hebrews were not influenced by the beliefs of the nations around them. quote: We are being told that these scriptures prove beyond any doubt that the writers believed in a flat earth. look closely at the last scripture... if we are to take this literally then we must also agree that the Hebrews also believed that all humans were in fact grasshoppers and the sky was a curtain. Seriously! ...its merely the way the writers chose to describe the natural world, in a way that could be visualized by their readers. The writers never claimed to be scientists, they were'nt teaching people about the sun and the earth...they had a completely different purpose for writing and so did not need to be scientifically specific. It in no way proves that they believed the earth was flat. GM also states that when the bible says 'All the World' it means it literally. Which world? The bible talks about the 'world of mankind' and this is surely figurative...once again proving that it is not to be taken out of context... If someone cannot discern the context, then its best not to speculate on what is being spoken of dont you think? The world of mankind and the World one in the same? Other versus say 'the restless sea of humanity' and 'people are waves of the sea' The book of Enoch has been mentioned repeatedly as evidence but this book is not even part of the bible... yet its contents are somehow being used to prove what bible writers believed...ok now im confused! Over and out.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 836 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
Peg writes: Seriously! ...its merely the way the writers chose to describe the natural world, in a way that could be visualized by their readers. The writers never claimed to be scientists, they were'nt teaching people about the sun and the earth...they had a completely different purpose for writing and so did not need to be scientifically specific. Well that very thing which you have so eloquently described is the primary purpose of this forum. As one involved in the education of beginning college students, I vastly prefer that such an education is not compromised by having to address every minutiae of any given scripture in providing information concerning science. The problem is the demand that any given 'cult' explanation of any given 'religion' is supposed to supplant all mathematics, physics, chemistry, geology, and biology in a science class soon crowds out, given equal time to all religions, all education in usable facts. The very fact that this thread concerns a flat earth is the ultimate stupidity when religious fanatics attack genetic therapy. My question would be the same as the Baptists here say "what would Jesus do?" Apparently some here feel Jesus would be all about an argument concerning the shape of the earth. Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
look closely at the last scripture... if we are to take this literally then we must also agree that the Hebrews also believed that all humans were in fact grasshoppers and the sky was a curtain. Why?
quote: I appreciate that this is not English (and its from Isaiah isn't it?) but every translation I've seen renders this as a simile.
...the Hebrews were not influenced by the beliefs of the nations around them. That's just not true at all is it? Do you really need proof that the Hebrews were influenced by the beliefs of the nations around them? I thought that being influenced by the beliefs of the nations around them was largely the point of a great deal of the OT! Edited by Modulous, : subtitle
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.0 |
Hi Peg,
quote: It is a little annoying when you bear false witness about what I have said. I am not saying that the case for a flat-Earth Bible is proved beyond doubt. In fact, I have made it clear that this is not my opinion.
Granny writes: You can't prove what the authors thought one way or another. All that either of us can do is producing a convincing argument one way or another. I have presented the argument for a flat Earth Bible. I find it convincing. You are free to hold whatever opinion you wish. quote: Of course it is. The claim that the Hebrews had knowledge that was totally contrary to the cultures around them is the only extraordinary claim being made here. The beliefs of surrounding cultures are not proof that the Hebrews believed in a flat earth, but it is strong evidence.
quote: This is a fantasy. All cultures are influenced by their neighbours. As Modulous has said, are you really going to force us to prove this to you? It ought to be obvious. (Hint; both have flood myths)
quote: Again, I am in agreement with Mod. The text, in English at any rate, has these comparisons as similes. A simile can be literally true. The sky can be literally like a curtain, without literally being a curtain.
quote: How do you know? The Bible makes a great many concrete claims about the world and the cosmos. Why make such claims if they were not to be believed? And why take any such claim seriously when you are saying that they might be mere metaphor? Another important point is that just because a passage is metaphorical or symbolic, does not mean it is useless to my argument. You say that the language was chosen to appeal to its audience in a way they could understand. The intended audience was the Jewish people. If you are saying that the Jewish people best understood an argument made in terms of a flat Earth, you are making my point for me. If the Jews best understood the earth when it was described as flat, that would mean that the Jewish authors would have thought the same way. If they knew better, they certainly kept quiet about it. No-one would communicate using flat earth imagery if they did not believe in a flat earth, at least not in a holy book that was intended to be believed. Use of flat earth allegories is evidence that the culture of both audience and author(s) was a flat earth culture.
quote: Why is it surely figurative? The Bible has God leaving mankind as stewards of this world. It seems like a pretty clear reference to this world to me.
quote: But we do have the context. You have a Bible. Look it up. If you want context, how about dropping your refusal to acknowledge the importance of the beliefs of other ancient Near East cultures? How about accepting the importance of works such as 1 Enoch? That should provide plenty of context.
quote: Perhaps you would be less confused if you addressed my rebuttal of this point from the last time you made it. The Book of Enoch is an incredibly close match for the canonical Bible in its cosmology. It uses the exact same language to describe the same things, including the firmament, the four winds, the windows of heaven, the cornerstone of the earth and more. In the Ethiopian church, it actually is canon. It was well respected enough to be quoted in Jude. It was written by Jews for a Jewish audience, just as the Bible was. It dates to around the inter-testamental period, so it gives a good idea of what Jews of the time thought. It clearly describes a flat earth, making it very clear that the Jews who came before it very likely believed the same. Ask yourself this; if the author of Jude knew the Earth to be a sphere, would he have had any respect for the prophecies of Enoch? Wouldn't Enoch's cosmic grand tour have made someone who knew the truth of the earth's shape a little suspicious? Anyone with knowledge of a spherical Earth would have known that 1 Enoch could not possibly be true. So why quote a lying prophet? Mutate and Survive "The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
We are being told that these scriptures prove beyond any doubt that the writers believed in a flat earth. By whom? What people are saying here is that the most natural reading of the verses themselves is that the writers of the Old Testament used flat earth imagery in their writings. Now one can sort of twist things around and explain how the writings are really describing a spherical earth, but that seems like a rather strained interpretation. Then the nonsense like that "foundations" and such refer to the earth in orbit around the sun are just plain nuts. Now given that the writers wrote passages that describe a flat earth, the question becomes whether they actually believed that the earth is flat or whether they were merely using poetic metaphor. Personally, considering that much of the imagery is very similar to other traditions that believed in a flat earth, especially that of the surrounding peoples who had a flat earth cosmology, then I think that most obvious answer would be that the writers of the Old Testament really did believe that the earth is flat. - Personally, I don't see what the big deal is, but some people seem to think that it is a very big deal. What I find interesting is when people try to "prove" the literal accuracy of the Bible by citing Isaiah to "show" that the Hebrews knew the earth is a sphere. Now if these versed don't prove that the Hebrews believed the earth was flat (although I think that they are pretty darn good evidence of it), then they certainly don't prove that the Hebrews knew the earth was a sphere. Speaking personally, I find few things more awesome than contemplating this vast and majestic process of evolution, the ebb and flow of successive biotas through geological time. Creationists and others who cannot for ideological or religious reasons accept the fact of evolution miss out a great deal, and are left with a claustrophobic little universe in which nothing happens and nothing changes. -- M. Alan Kazlev
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shalamabobbi Member (Idle past 2849 days) Posts: 397 Joined: |
We are being told that these scriptures prove beyond any doubt that the writers believed in a flat earth. The earth was believed to be flat. It has been proven. Any dissenters will now be eliminated by inquisition..
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Hi GM
Granny Magda writes: 2) Are you suggesting that the intent of Genesis was to tell us that God only created the Known World? Granny I agree with thingamabob's message 115, so let me insert foot in my mouth and put forth what I believe the Bible teaches about the then known world. In Genesis 1:1 God created the heaven and the earth. A completed universe with a completed earth. God created it to be inhabited. Isaiah 45:18. In Genesis 1:2 the planet earth was not fit to be inhabited and God had to do some work on it. Genesis tells us:
Genesis 1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. We have water in one place. We have land in one place.
Genesis 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. The dry land God called Earth. The waters God called sea. I believe that earth would look something like my avatar. Although the land mass could have been much smaller as more could have been covered with water. I believe you could stand on the four corners of that earth. This earth lasted until between 2200BC and 2000BC.
Genesis Gen 11:8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. The people were scattered abroad over the face of the earth that was shaped something like my avatar. After this event sometime in the lifetime of Peleg the earth (land mass was divided).
Genesis Gen 10:25 And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan. 1Ch 1:19 And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg; because in his days the earth was divided: and his brother's name was Joktan. How was these people who had been scattered and then the earth divided supposed to know their piece of land they were on was not all there was? So naturally everyone would probably think the earth was flat and that influenced their writing as they wrote from their experiences. The problem is that the Bible does not teach a flat planet although they had every right to believe in one. Isaiah was correct when he said God sat on the circle of the earth.
Isaiah 40:22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in: God sits on His throne in the third heaven.
2Cor 12:2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth) such an one caught up to the third heaven. The first heaven is where our Galaxy exists. The second heaven is where our Galaxy and all the other Galaxies in the universe exist. The third heaven is where God is on Hia throne, sitting on the circle of the earth. God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 734 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
The first heaven is where our Galaxy exists. The second heaven is where our Galaxy and all the other Galaxies in the universe exist. The third heaven is where God is on Hia throne, sitting on the circle of the earth. ROFL. In the scale model I show grade-school kids, the Sun is a beach ball and the Earth a BB 155 feet away. Sirius, the nearest star visible fom Snyder, is 12,000 miles away. Our scale-model galaxy is, hmm, maybe 150,000,000 miles across - beyond the real Sun. The scale-model Andromeda Galaxy - the nearest big one - is out around the real Neptune. If your third heaven is "above" those other two, the Big Guy must have an odd-looking support for his throne. Very odd-looking. "The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shalamabobbi Member (Idle past 2849 days) Posts: 397 Joined: |
dont give up so quickly.
He didn't give up. He failed to follow his own advice 'to use common sense' and told a moderator to go fertilize himself..
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
deadendhero Junior Member (Idle past 5446 days) Posts: 5 From: The great state of Right Over There. Joined: |
First off, I'm new. So please tell me if I screw up anywhere. I'm also young so forgive any misspelling, I'm recovering from texting.
I would like to say that it is belived by many Christians that Heaven is infinite. So therefore, it can cover all of the known galaxy quite easily. But, who said the bible must be taken literally? Even if the bible was "divinely" inspired by a supreme deity, he/she/it didn't write the bible. It was written by humans whoA) Tend to exaggerate, and (B) were not as educated as the modern day grade schooler. Does anybody in this place take Herodotus literally too?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024