Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8942 total)
27 online now:
Diomedes, dwise1, jar, kjsimons, PaulK (5 members, 22 visitors)
Newest Member: John Sullivan
Post Volume: Total: 863,628 Year: 18,664/19,786 Month: 1,084/1,705 Week: 336/518 Day: 12/88 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   There you Go,YECs...biblical "evidence" of "flat earth beliefs"
LudvanB
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 243 (5557)
02-26-2002 2:37 PM



Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by gene90, posted 02-26-2002 4:31 PM LudvanB has responded
 Message 5 by Peter, posted 02-27-2002 7:11 AM LudvanB has responded
 Message 20 by Brad McFall, posted 02-27-2002 4:06 PM LudvanB has not yet responded
 Message 53 by w_fortenberry, posted 04-19-2002 3:53 AM LudvanB has not yet responded
 Message 81 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-07-2002 7:55 AM LudvanB has not yet responded
 Message 87 by Jon, posted 01-22-2007 9:10 AM LudvanB has not yet responded
 Message 94 by doctrbill, posted 01-23-2007 12:29 AM LudvanB has not yet responded
 Message 207 by DorfMan, posted 03-25-2007 10:14 AM LudvanB has not yet responded
 Message 241 by Juraikken, posted 04-15-2007 7:31 PM LudvanB has not yet responded

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 2109 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 2 of 243 (5565)
02-26-2002 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by LudvanB
02-26-2002 2:37 PM


And don't forget, circles are flat.

(Pre-emptive strike on the Creationist response)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by LudvanB, posted 02-26-2002 2:37 PM LudvanB has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by LudvanB, posted 02-26-2002 4:34 PM gene90 has not yet responded

  
LudvanB
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 243 (5567)
02-26-2002 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by gene90
02-26-2002 4:31 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
And don't forget, circles are flat.

(Pre-emptive strike on the Creationist response)


Indeed....Using the word SPHERE might have indicated undertanding of the world's actual form. I'm waiting for some YEC to explain to me how i am misreading those quotations


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by gene90, posted 02-26-2002 4:31 PM gene90 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by toff, posted 02-27-2002 6:17 AM LudvanB has not yet responded

  
toff
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 243 (5660)
02-27-2002 6:17 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by LudvanB
02-26-2002 4:34 PM


quote:
Originally posted by LudvanB:
Indeed....Using the word SPHERE might have indicated undertanding of the world's actual form. I'm waiting for some YEC to explain to me how i am misreading those quotations

The usual response is that the word used COULD mean sphere...since the hebrews had no word for 'sphere'. Unfortunately, this is untrue, but it's the standard response frmo creationists who don't expect their opponents to know much ancient hebrew.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by LudvanB, posted 02-26-2002 4:34 PM LudvanB has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by doctrbill, posted 02-27-2002 11:08 AM toff has not yet responded

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 2210 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 5 of 243 (5664)
02-27-2002 7:11 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by LudvanB
02-26-2002 2:37 PM


quote:
Originally posted by LudvanB:
http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=dan+4:10-11

http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=mat+4:8

http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=1+chr+16:30

http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=psa+93:1

Those passages clearly demonstrate that the writers thereof firmly believed that the earth was flat and stationary.


I'm sorry (especially as an evolutionist), but I'm not convinced
that any of those point to flat earth or static earth beliefs.

Which, considering flat earth beliefs arose during the dark ages,
and prior to this (i.e. during the time the bible was written) it
was well-known that the earth was round, is not suprising.

The world not being moved seems more of a metaphor for
'It exists, live with it!'


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by LudvanB, posted 02-26-2002 2:37 PM LudvanB has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by LudvanB, posted 02-27-2002 9:46 AM Peter has responded

    
RetroCrono
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 243 (5671)
02-27-2002 8:07 AM


Those last two you posted didn't make any sense for a flat earth. I didn't get it. The first two I don't know, but when I get the chance I'll think about it some more.

Anyway, here's a place I know of in the Bible that speaks correctly about our earth and solar system (I know there's some others and I'll post them later, I'm a little tired at the moment).

"And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, Until the nation had avenged themselves of their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jashar? And the sun stayed in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day." Joshua 10:13

I find this one very interesting. Even though I find it hard to believe (come on, that just sounds ridiculous), I can't scoff at the fact that if this was just made up, they knew this was no flat earth and that we are not the center of the universe. Notice the moon stayed still to. If the sun was rotating around the earth and this is what you suppose they believe, than if this was made up, why did they say the moon stopped to?

Here's my conclusion, if they did just make this up than they knew earth is not flat nor the center of the universe. Or, this really happened and he was just putting down what he observed.

Now, don't just say you have to take it 100% literally and the sun really stood still. It's written from an observation stand point. Do you believe there really is a SUNSET and SUNRISE when they say so on the weather?

Anyway, I've never really understood this flat earth stand point. If I were you, I wouldn't just go dismissing it because of some little detail. If you really went about trying to nut it out you would either nearly go insane or realise you misunderstood it and worked out what it means. The Bible is a bitch like that, I don't seem to be able to find anything to dissaprove or approve it upon. It just sits there in this neutral position freaking me out that it might be right. It's not fair, why can't things be more simple?


Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by gene90, posted 02-27-2002 9:10 AM RetroCrono has responded
 Message 8 by toff, posted 02-27-2002 9:33 AM RetroCrono has not yet responded

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 2109 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 7 of 243 (5679)
02-27-2002 9:10 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by RetroCrono
02-27-2002 8:07 AM


RC,

Both the Sun and the Moon appear to rise out of the ground in the east, cross the sky, and return to the ground in the west. That is why they mentioned both the Sun and the Moon staying still. Also remember that the passage refers to both bodies moving, not the Earth.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by RetroCrono, posted 02-27-2002 8:07 AM RetroCrono has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by RetroCrono, posted 02-28-2002 2:38 AM gene90 has responded
 Message 99 by Inilam, posted 02-24-2007 3:04 PM gene90 has not yet responded

  
toff
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 243 (5684)
02-27-2002 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by RetroCrono
02-27-2002 8:07 AM


I don't see how the passage you cite suggests either that the writer knew the earth to be spherical or that it wasn't the centre of the universe. All it states is that both the moon and sun stood still in the sky (I'm quite happy to view that as 'poetic', in the same we talk of sunrise and sunset, when we know it doesn't really move, the earth does. Perhaps the author of the passage knew that too...but I don't see anything in the passage to indicate he does). What is in that passage is perfectly in accord with the idea that the earth is flat, round (like a pizza) and that both the moon and the sun orbit around it.

[This message has been edited by toff, 02-27-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by RetroCrono, posted 02-27-2002 8:07 AM RetroCrono has not yet responded

  
Punisher
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 243 (5685)
02-27-2002 9:46 AM


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"

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by LudvanB, posted 02-27-2002 9:48 AM Punisher has not yet responded
 Message 12 by joz, posted 02-27-2002 9:57 AM Punisher has not yet responded

  
LudvanB
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 243 (5686)
02-27-2002 9:46 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Peter
02-27-2002 7:11 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Peter:

I'm sorry (especially as an evolutionist), but I'm not convinced
that any of those point to flat earth or static earth beliefs.

Which, considering flat earth beliefs arose during the dark ages,
and prior to this (i.e. during the time the bible was written) it
was well-known that the earth was round, is not suprising.

The world not being moved seems more of a metaphor for
'It exists, live with it!'


Actually,the text of the Bible were writen well before the dark ages,whom' occured between the 12th and 16th century. Most of the ancient textament was writen 300 BC and the new testament was writen a mere few century after the death of christ. The many parts of the Bible were ASSEMBLED in the middle ages and TRANSLATED from the hebrew and greek to latin and then english...their content however was not altered,at least according to the church. But to adress your points,the first two passages mentionned refer to first an object tall enough that it can be seen by the whole world and second,to a vantage point high enough to allow one to look onto the whole world. This illustrates not only their belief that the earth was a flat circle but that the world was actually quite small,since they wrote that there could be a place where you could have a line of sight onto all areas of the world. The second two passages i agree dont refer to a flat world but rather an UNMOVING one,which is quite untrue,since the planet is hurtling around the sun at a whopping 29,8 km/second. So not only is it moving...its moving extremely fast. As for your metaphor comment,i always have problems with that position. The Bible is clearly an either/or proposition...either the entire thing is a work of literal truth,or the entire thing is a book of metaphore. If we say that unmoving world is a metaphore for the world exists,then why couldn't we say created in 6 days is a metaphore for the world rose to what it is today in 6 ages? Because there is no clear indication which part is to be taken literaly and which part is to be taken metaphoricaly,then this is all subject to personal interpretation,which makes it irrevocably flawed as a message from our God to us...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Peter, posted 02-27-2002 7:11 AM Peter has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Peter, posted 02-27-2002 11:10 AM LudvanB has responded
 Message 16 by Mister Pamboli, posted 02-27-2002 12:00 PM LudvanB has responded

  
LudvanB
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 243 (5687)
02-27-2002 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Punisher
02-27-2002 9:46 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Punisher:
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"

That quotation says nothing about weather or not the world is a SPHERE and is MOVING in space...a circle by its nature IS FLAT.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Punisher, posted 02-27-2002 9:46 AM Punisher has not yet responded

  
joz
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 243 (5688)
02-27-2002 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Punisher
02-27-2002 9:46 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Punisher:
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"

Yeah bud circle not globe, sphere, etc (3D) but circle (2D)....

If they meant sphere they should not have said circle


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Punisher, posted 02-27-2002 9:46 AM Punisher has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by John Paul, posted 02-27-2002 4:50 PM joz has responded

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 1051 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 13 of 243 (5693)
02-27-2002 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by toff
02-27-2002 6:17 AM


quote:
Originally posted by toff:
The usual response is that the word used COULD mean sphere...since the hebrews had no word for 'sphere'. Unfortunately, this is untrue, but it's the standard response frmo creationists who don't expect their opponents to know much ancient hebrew.

The Hebrews did indeed have a word which was used to indicate spherical shape.
The word is GULGOLETH from the Babylonian GULGULA, meaning head or skull.
Babylonians applied this word to their globular water jars.
The Hebrews used a variant of it, GULLAH, to describe pommels and bowls.
GOLGOTHA (place of the skull) is the name of the hill on which Jesus was crucified.

(pommel is the rounded knob on the hilt of a sword)

----------
db


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by toff, posted 02-27-2002 6:17 AM toff has not yet responded

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 2210 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 14 of 243 (5694)
02-27-2002 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by LudvanB
02-27-2002 9:46 AM


quote:
Originally posted by LudvanB:

Actually,the text of the Bible were writen well before the dark ages,whom' occured between the 12th and 16th century. Most of the ancient textament was writen 300 BC and the new testament was writen a mere few century after the death of christ. The many parts of the Bible were ASSEMBLED in the middle ages and TRANSLATED from the hebrew and greek to latin and then english...their content however was not altered,at least according to the church.

I think you mis-read me ....

I said::

Flat earth was a dark ages concept

PRIOR to this [the dark ages] (during the time the bible was written)

By the above I meant that the Bible was written prior to the
dark ages.

Ancient cultures knew that the earth was round, some of them even
calculated its circumference (and got it within a few yards). There
are even ancient depictions of a helio-centric solar system.

quote:
Originally posted by LudvanB:

But to adress your points,the first two passages mentionned refer to first an object tall enough that it can be seen by the whole world and second,to a vantage point high enough to allow one to look onto the whole world. This illustrates not only their belief that the earth was a flat circle but that the world was actually quite small,since they wrote that there could be a place where you could have a line of sight onto all areas of the world.

The first clearly states it is describing a vision.

The second one says ONLY that the devil took Jesus to a high mountain
and showed him all the kingdoms of the earth. It doesn't say they
were within line of sight. The new testament was written at a time
when the world was known to be too big to see all of at once (I
believe it was written in the 1st Century CE any how)

quote:
Originally posted by LudvanB:

The second two passages i agree dont refer to a flat world but rather an UNMOVING one,which is quite untrue,since the planet is hurtling around the sun at a whopping 29,8 km/second. So not only is it moving...its moving extremely fast. As for your metaphor comment,i always have problems with that position. The Bible is clearly an either/or proposition...either the entire thing is a work of literal truth,or the entire thing is a book of metaphore. If we say that unmoving world is a metaphore for the world exists,then why couldn't we say created in 6 days is a metaphore for the world rose to what it is today in 6 ages? Because there is no clear indication which part is to be taken literaly and which part is to be taken metaphoricaly,then this is all subject to personal interpretation,which makes it irrevocably flawed as a message from our God to us...

The quote for the second two is the same, and since one of them
is from psalms (i.e. poetry) I think metaphor is acceptable.

I am an EVOLUTIONIST and an atheist.
I do not believe that the Bible should be taken literally.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by LudvanB, posted 02-27-2002 9:46 AM LudvanB has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by LudvanB, posted 02-27-2002 11:57 AM Peter has not yet responded

    
LudvanB
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 243 (5701)
02-27-2002 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Peter
02-27-2002 11:10 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Peter:
The quote for the second two is the same, and since one of them
is from psalms (i.e. poetry) I think metaphor is acceptable.

I am an EVOLUTIONIST and an atheist.
I do not believe that the Bible should be taken literally.


Yes,ancient cultures DID know about the earth and the helio-centric solar system...they were called the Sumerians. they even knew about neptune and uranus,which cant be seen by the naked eye from earth and pluto,which requires the most powerfull telescopes we have. They also spkoe of a tenth planet outside the orbit of Pluto circling the sun in a large eliptical orbit which brings it back near earth every 3600 years. They called that Planet Tiamat and were somehow convinced that the Earth was at one time much larget,before it collided with one of Tiamat's satellites. On one of their ancient tablets,which is about 5000 years old,they have a pictograme of the solar system,with all the planets rotating around the sun in their correct position(their name for the earth was KI). No one know how they came about this knowledge with their limited technological means but the Sumerians often refered to their Gods having come down from "heaven" to impart their wisdom of man. One such Diety,refered to as Ishtar,is proeminently mentionned in the epic of Gilgamesh,which,interestingly enough,is the first writen account of a flood legend known to man...only the savior of animals in that story was Gilgamesh himself...no mention of any Noah in that story and that flood was not send to punish mankind...it was a natural catastrophy that the Gods warned Gilgamesh against out of concern. But most of their knowledge was lost when the Babylonians took over their empire. Only their legends,writen on their clay tablets survived the fall of their empire and those were recycled and transformed by the Babylonians,and then by the Hebrew who lived under their rule. At the time of the Hebrew,no one believe that the world was this large ball of dirt mostly covered by water and knowledge of other planets was also lost.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Peter, posted 02-27-2002 11:10 AM Peter has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019