Creation DOES need to be taught with evolution

quote:

---

(4) By advocating "balanced" presentation, I am NOT advocating "equal time". It would be silly to spend equal time on flat-earth hypotheses as on round-earth ones.

---

Good thread, David, especially you being an evolutionist. You think better and advocate a more fair and balanced education than most evos here in town.Btw, the Bible is likely the oldest literature existing to describe a spherical earth and is not a flat earth religious book.Isaiah 40:22
"It is he that sits above the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretches out the heavens as a curtian." Date -- the 7th century BC!Yes, the Bible also speakes of the four corners of the earth, but that sort colloquial talk is still used today to depict things, in this case the four directional areas of the earth.Any flat earth folks who taught a flat earth (certainly not all Christians of the day) were ignorant of Biblical truth in this matter.[This message has been edited by buzsaw, 11-08-2003]

quote:

---

One is also led to question if we teach creationism as an alternative to evolution then why not include all the other myths worldwide......

---

Because as David said, creationist is the major other view, the one making sense, and the major view worldwide for centuries: in fact he could've said, for milleniums.

Sideline, people then were't that stupid. All Isaiah and other thinking fundamentalist folks of the Bible need do was observe the sun and moon to assume the earth also was a sphere. Please document otherwise.

quote:

---

If the Bible is so good then why do you keep twisting the text ? The verse you quote speaks of a circle, not a sphere. You even emphasise the word circle. If it is held to speak of the overall shape of the Earth at all it clearly refers to a flat disk.

---

1. It doesn't say disk either, does it. Both a disk and a sphere are circular, so here we are back at square one.2. All people of the Bible, as well as many other cultures have believed in a world flood. This belief would require a sphere so as for the flood to occur, especially for people of the Bible who believed it was worldwide, killing all. Even if a world flood were somehow possible on a disk, Noah's ark would be in great danger of falling off the edge along with the overflowing water which would not be able to be confined to a disk.3. Humans were able to observe that different parts of the moon were visible in different positions so as to know it was a sphere.No,PaulK, imo it was likely the ejukated elite like some folks I know who think everything complex assembled itself by and of itself void of intelligent design, who insisted on prevalence of the flat earth myth.[This message has been edited by buzsaw, 11-08-2003]

quote:

---

So you think it is a simple thing.Please explain to us how you can tell that the Earth is a sphere by observing the sun and the moon?

---

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but it would be impossible for the sun, moon and earth, all to be disk circles and for the sun to light both the moon and the earth at the same time. Why? Because for both the sun and the moon to appear as perfect circle disks at any one time both would have to be exactly parallel to the earth. Otherwise one or the other or both would have to be egg shaped. It would be impossible for the moon to be lighted, appearing from earth as a circle disk if both the sun and the moon were parallel to the earth.

quote:

---

The problem you have is that there is no Hebrew word for 'Sphere', unless you know of one. So, which Hebrew word is used by Isaiah for 'sphere' in your opinion?

---

We're getting into a new subtopic here, so I don't want to keep straying off, but there's no need imo, for the text to say sphere, plus your post actually inforces my argument, for if there's no word for sphere in Hebrew, the writer would of necessity need to use the word circle to describe either a disk or a sphere..This is relative to the topic in that my argument enforces the validity of the creation Biblical account being taught in school and refutes the negative statement in the opening post of the thread concerning flat earth creationists.

One final short comment on this circle controversy: The text does not say the earth is a circle, perse. It says "circle (i.e. curvature) of the earth." (which is a sphere).

quote:

---

If you take out the untestable hypotheses of creationism, exactly what do you think is left?

---

The tested and unproven hypotheses of evolution which totally dominates education in America.

quote:

---

So you admit that you were wrong. Isaiha does NOT say that the Earth is spherical.

---

The Hebrew has far fewer words than the English or Greek. The rendering the words is determined by the context. Actually, since there is not word "sphere" in Hebrew, he could be either saying:1. The sphere of the world.
or
2. The curvature (circle) of the world. (which is a sphere)People all the time refer to the world as circular or round. In fact if you will note the opening statement of this thread, David Fitch, the poster who initiated the thread spoke of the "round" earth in reference to a sphere.I'd like to get off this. Nobody's gona convince anybody, it appears.

quote:

---

Precisly what part of creationism would we introduce that would help teach how science is done? I think that lots of generalized discussion has gone by now. How about some specific details.

---

For equal time, the same as evolution -------all of it. Creationism implys the supernatural. Creationist curriculum would involve interpreting what is found/observed with the supernatural sudden appearance of things full grown or of age like Adam, the original Animals, some rocks, minerals, crystals such as diamonds, other precious stones, etc.Imo, according to Genesis one, there is no need to teach a young earth, because it doesn't necessarily say the earth was created on day one. It simply says when the heavens and the earth were created, God did it.

Uh Brad, with all due respect, for grade and high school, you'd first have to expand their vocabulary immensly before ever embarking on your curricula. An astounding number of these kids can't even read and write simple stuff efficiently when they enter high school.

I see Ned and I agree on something as we posted simultaneous responses.

quote:

---

The facts are that you claimed that it was a reference to the sphericity of the Earth but you cannot back that up in any way which does not rely on assuming that it does mean that. Not much of an argument.

---

Ok, and nor did anyone prove Isaiah was referring to it as a disk or flat, so yes not much of an argument for either side as to sphere. At any rate Isaiah's statement was scientifically correct, in view of the Hebrew word he had to work with.Bottom line is that David Fitch's last paragraph of his opening post should not be taken seriously so far as teaching Creationism in PS.