The Bible's Flat Earth

When my sister was stationed in Italy in the late 80s there were several earthquakes and/or tremors. She wrote and said entertainment was sitting in her room watching the walls shake. That's what made me wonder about that possibility of the song.

quote:

---

It also seems a very odd choice of metaphor for someone who was aware that the Earth was indeed moving.

---

I guess one other issue I have with using Psalms as a means to discern the world view of the writer, is that in poetry writers can also pull terms from the past.Old terminology and phrases that have crept into regular usage are great resources for poets. They can also have a slightly or very different meaning than the original usage.Again, we speculate because we aren't the target audience.

I would think the answer is in the middle: maybe the bible simply does not talk about geocentricism or heliocentricism ...Reading this thread, I have the impression that there is a false dilemna being proposed: if he didn't believe in geocentricism, then he believed heliocentricism. I would maybe guess that David did not consider cosmology when writing the psalms, and I would certainly doubt that God would go up to him and tell him that the solar system is heliocentric.All in all, these arguments are the same than Galileo's in his time: the bible makes no clear statement about cosmology. You have to remember that even back then, christians had the tendency to compromise to the 'scientific facts' of the time, which was the geocentric view inherited by the Greeks, and so they searched for verses in the Bible that would support this. So the church defended geocentricism not because it was a biblical truth, but because it was the science of the time that they had fitted into the biblical truth. (analog to christians today who adapt genesis to accomodate evolution into it)

Hi PD,

quote:

---

I guess one other issue I have with using Psalms as a means to discern the world view of the writer, is that in poetry writers can also pull terms from the past.

---

I guess my only disagreement with this is that the geocentric interpretation of this phrase fits in absolutely with what we know of the Hebrew picture if the cosmos. We know that the foundations referred to in many passages are literal foundations, as they are explicitly described in 1 Enoch. This leaves us with a clearly geocentric and immobile Earth.Now the phrase "shall not be moved/shaken" could mean any number of things. It could mean that the civilisation will persist. Your earthquake theory could be correct (although it sounds unlikely to me). My point is that a simple literal interpretation fits right in with what we know of Hebrew cosmology and makes perfect sense in context.I agree that psalms are not an ideal way of getting at the authors beliefs about the world, but the big picture here is not dependant on psalms alone.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

Hi Slevesque,

quote:

---

I would think the answer is in the middle: maybe the bible simply does not talk about geocentricism or heliocentricism ...

---

But it does. Both the creation account in Genesis and Joshua's "Long Day" both speak of an unmistakably geocentric system. The Earth is described as being upon "foundations"; do you seriously imagine that a moving body requires foundations?It is not true that the Bible does not explicitly say that the sun goes around the Earth. Check out psalm 19:4-6;

quote:

---

Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,

​

Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.

​

His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

---

The picture painted here is very clearly of the sun moving above the earth.

quote:

---

Reading this thread, I have the impression that there is a false dilemna being proposed: if he didn't believe in geocentricism, then he believed heliocentricism.

---

Except that is not what I have proposed and it makes me wonder if you have actually read this thread at all.

quote:

---

I would maybe guess that David did not consider cosmology when writing the psalms, and I would certainly doubt that God would go up to him and tell him that the solar system is heliocentric.

---

a) There is no evidence that David wrote the psalms, this is mere tradition.
b) My argument is not dependant on psalms, there are plenty of references that support the cosmological model that I have described. Again, I find it hard to believe that you could say this having read any substantial portion of this thread, as opposed to just the last page or so.
c) I agree that the psalms (or the Bible as a whole) are not intended as a cosmology primer. However, where they touch upon cosmology, they do so in a way that is entirely consistent with a flat and geocentric Earth.

quote:

---

All in all, these arguments are the same than Galileo's in his time: the bible makes no clear statement about cosmology.

---

Total rubbish. I suggest that you go and read Genesis again. You also might like to try Ecclesiastes 1:5;

quote:

---

"...the sun rises and the sun sets; And hastening to its place it rises there again."

---

The sun hastens to its place? This is an explicit and utterly wrong statement about the behaviour of the sun. It makes zero sense from an anachronistically modern viewpoint, but it makes perfect sense when applied to a heliocentric system, as per the standard view of the time. It is also a perfect match for 1 Enoch, where the sun is kept in a storeroom overnight.

quote:

---

You have to remember that even back then, christians had the tendency to compromise to the 'scientific facts' of the time

---

At the time the OT was written, even the Greeks thought the Earth was flat and immobile. The Bible authors knew no better. If you think they had access to some special knowledge about the solar system.s heliocentricity, please show us some evidence of this.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

Greeting Friends,I have surveyed this very long thread and trust that I am not stepping on anyone's contribution when I say, The following has come to my attention:"four corners of the earth" is, in Hebrew, identical to: "four corners of the land."

quote:

---

"... thus saith the Lord GOD unto the land of Israel; An end, the end is come upon the four corners of the land." Ezekiel 7:2

​

"... set up an ensign for the nations ... gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth." Isaiah 11:12

---

I'm sure that some among you can deal with the simple orthographic comparison required to verify my claim.And then, I couldn't help but notice this tidbit of first century cosmology revealed in the Book of Revelation where, as it is in Genesis 1:10, the term "earth" is not inclusive of "sea" nor even "tree."

quote:

---

"And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. Revelation 7:1

---

Not to spoil the fun, I hope, but (as I have asserted here for at least a decade) The Bible never speaks of earth as if it were planet. I can now, with confidence, add to that statement saying:The Bible never speaks of "earth" or "world" as anything larger than the territories ruled by Caesar.Click on my avatar for a ready-made illustration of the fact. And yes.

---

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

Have you considered that the Genesis narrative may have been a creationist reaction to global theory?The latest date estimated for the writing of Genesis is 500 BC, a few years after Pythagoras had proposed the idea of earth and sea being wrapped upon, an enormous sphere. And, a couple of hundred years later, Aristotle offered physical evidence in favor of the idea.But, based on use of the word "earth" (ghi) in the Apocalypse, it seems that first century Christians had not accepted global theory. They continued, apparently, to think of "earth" and "sea" as separate realities rather than as an integrated whole.By the end of the thirteenth century, the Church had embraced elements of Aristotelian cosmology and with it the notion of a terraqueous globe. The Church persecuted, however, (burned at the stake) certain philosophers who imagined the existence of other continents, on the other side of, the Big Ball of Water.Thus, it seems highly unlikely that the divinely inspired writers of the Bible (and presumptive forebears of Church hierarchy), would be likely to have accepted or conveyed belief in what was at the time considered, even among goyim, to be godless theory.Yes?

---

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

It is theorized that much information about the ancient world was lost when the library at Alexandria was burned to the ground, particularly about celestial navigation and physics. I often wonder how much good information has been lost for various means.There are some verses that kind of make me question whether or not they had some concept of things like gravity and a round earth.From Isaiah: "Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood since the earth was founded? He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth..."From Job: "He spreads out the north over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing,"Seems they might have had some comprehension on the subject. Then again there are other versus stating that the earth is held up by a pillar. That sounds more like imagery and poetry, though. Whatever... Make your own deduction. Edited by Hyroglyphx, : Fixed italics bracketEdited by Hyroglyphx, : Fixed it for real this time

---

"The problem with Socialism is you eventually run out of other people's money." --Margaret Thatcher--

North, south, east, west... Sounds directional to me, not a description of how they thought the earth was flat. That seems like a pretty extraordinary leap in order to come to that conclusion.

---

"The problem with Socialism is you eventually run out of other people's money." --Margaret Thatcher--

Please refrain from capping my posts if you're not going to respond to what I say.Sincerely

---

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

I don't know what you mean by capping. Can you please elaborate so that I can correct any perceived deficiency you might have?

---

"The problem with Socialism is you eventually run out of other people's money." --Margaret Thatcher--

There. You have done it again. You have nothing to say but you have clicked your little button and gotten your name up in lights, as if you had something to say.

---

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

Are you being serious right now? I am respectfully requesting that you clarify what you said so that I can respond to you appropriately.

---

"The problem with Socialism is you eventually run out of other people's money." --Margaret Thatcher--

Appropriate choice of Avatar, I think.

---

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

All right, well, I see that you're on your period. Take two of these and call me in the morning.

---

"The problem with Socialism is you eventually run out of other people's money." --Margaret Thatcher--