Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,585 Year: 4,842/9,624 Month: 190/427 Week: 0/103 Day: 0/0 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   There you Go,YECs...biblical "evidence" of "flat earth beliefs"
ringo
Member (Idle past 492 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 181 of 243 (391182)
03-23-2007 7:04 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by Mikael Fivel
03-23-2007 6:56 PM


Mikael Fivel writes:
notice how he says "visible to the WHOLE EARTH... didn't repeat ENDS OF EARTH. it's merely to describe it's size, that EVERYONE could see it.
But the tree could only be visible to the whole earth if the whole earth was flat. Everyone could see it only if the earth was flat.
That's the logic. It doesn't matter if that was the focus of the story or not - logically, Daniel described the earth as flat.
All I'm asking is: Why would he use that imagery if he knew it was inaccurate? And why do you assume that he knew it was inaccurate?

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 6:56 PM Mikael Fivel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 7:09 PM ringo has replied
 Message 184 by anastasia, posted 03-23-2007 7:12 PM ringo has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 6033 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 182 of 243 (391184)
03-23-2007 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by Mikael Fivel
03-23-2007 6:56 PM


I agree with you that because these type of phrases are tossed around in our language to this day, there is no evidence that Daniel was not using common nonsense phrases then. We say 'our whole heart' and 'the ends of time' merely to describe a size, and I don't know if Daniel had any idea of the actual shape of the earth just from this.
But, you say he did not repeat 'ends of the earth'.
I do not see the point. If he later said 'whole earth' wouldn't this include the same ends? The tree would be visible to everyone anyway if the earth was flat and the tree covered it. So why would he need to repeat the 'ends' part again anyway?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 6:56 PM Mikael Fivel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 7:12 PM anastasia has not replied

  
Mikael Fivel
Member (Idle past 6169 days)
Posts: 70
Joined: 03-23-2007


Message 183 of 243 (391187)
03-23-2007 7:09 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by ringo
03-23-2007 7:04 PM


it's not innacurate and thats beside the meaning. stop thinking literal about size. we know rome's empire was the largest in the world, in fact one of the emporers said it reached "to the corners of the earth". the point is that it was a HUGE empire that nebuchadnezzar was going to have. and the imagery is just imagery. he's not stating anything. it was in a DREAM. and it wasn't daniel's dream. it was nebuchadnezzar's and daniel interpreted it.
it's all figurative to explain how neb's empire was going to be the largest ever.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by ringo, posted 03-23-2007 7:04 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by ringo, posted 03-23-2007 7:24 PM Mikael Fivel has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 6033 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 184 of 243 (391188)
03-23-2007 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by ringo
03-23-2007 7:04 PM


Ringo writes:
But the tree could only be visible to the whole earth if the whole earth was flat. Everyone could see it only if the earth was flat.
Haha! I see I am imagining a whole different tree than you are. In my mind, everyone could see the tree if the width of its branches covered the entire earth, even if that earth was round. In your mind, the height of the tree is what is making it so visible, no?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by ringo, posted 03-23-2007 7:04 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by ringo, posted 03-23-2007 7:18 PM anastasia has not replied

  
Mikael Fivel
Member (Idle past 6169 days)
Posts: 70
Joined: 03-23-2007


Message 185 of 243 (391189)
03-23-2007 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by anastasia
03-23-2007 7:08 PM


look, he never REPEATED the phrase "ends of earth". that was HIS way of saying that it was "visible to the whole world" (that was direct quote). he changed the way it was said, even though the meaning still stands - it's huge, and everyone will see it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by anastasia, posted 03-23-2007 7:08 PM anastasia has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 492 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 186 of 243 (391190)
03-23-2007 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by anastasia
03-23-2007 7:12 PM


anastasia writes:
In your mind, the height of the tree is what is making it so visible, no?
Well, Daniel mentioned the height twice and the width not at all.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by anastasia, posted 03-23-2007 7:12 PM anastasia has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 492 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 187 of 243 (391194)
03-23-2007 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by Mikael Fivel
03-23-2007 7:09 PM


Mikael Fivel writes:
stop thinking literal about size.
Well, that's what I'm trying to get at: Why should I stop thinking literally about one part of the story?
I have asked several times now: Why do you assume that the flatness of the earth was not intended to be taken literally?
and the imagery is just imagery.
And once again, again: How do you know when imagery is "just imagery" and when it is literal?
it's all figurative....
And once again again, again: How do you know it's "all" figurative? Can't a story have some figurative elements and some literal? How do you distinguish?

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 7:09 PM Mikael Fivel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 7:49 PM ringo has replied

  
Mikael Fivel
Member (Idle past 6169 days)
Posts: 70
Joined: 03-23-2007


Message 188 of 243 (391201)
03-23-2007 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 187 by ringo
03-23-2007 7:24 PM


this is why i can't stress enough the importance of READING what you're arguing. the greater picture of all of this, is that ITS A DREAM, and what he's (nebuchadnezzar, not david) saying is MERELY HIS IMAGERY to describe to DANIEL, who understands what nebuchadnezzar is talking about, his dream. and asking all the WHY's doesn't make it false. read daniel 4:19-22:
Dan 4:20-22
20 "The tree that you saw, which grew and became strong, whose height reached to the heavens and which could be seen by all the earth,
21 whose leaves were lovely and its fruit abundant, in which was food for all, under which the beasts of the field dwelt, and in whose branches the birds of the heaven had their home ”
22 IT IS YOU, O king, who have grown and become strong; for your greatness has grown and reaches to the heavens, and your dominion to the end of the earth.
the whole tree thing, is NOT saying anything about the earth being flat.
how can i distinguish what's figurative in this? easy, the tree and the earth and the *yadda yadda yadda* IS ALL A DREAM. nothing has to be true in a dream. it was a metaphor for nebuchadnezzar's kingdom. thats it.
and if all you do is answer in questions, ive got some for you, that might help you see things the way i do (just as how neb describes things :-)
why do scientists, who don't believe in God speak of the sky in the term "the heavens" if they know full well that the sky is not heaven or a part of?
why do people ask questions instead of looking for answers? why do people argue the bible WITHOUT using the bible?
why do people think asking rhetorical answers makes their point of view correct when really it just keeps things the same?
Edited by Mikael Fivel, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by ringo, posted 03-23-2007 7:24 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by ringo, posted 03-23-2007 8:11 PM Mikael Fivel has replied
 Message 202 by Phat, posted 03-24-2007 6:37 AM Mikael Fivel has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 492 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 189 of 243 (391207)
03-23-2007 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by Mikael Fivel
03-23-2007 7:49 PM


Mikael Fivel writes:
how can i distinguish what's figurative in this? easy, the tree and the earth and the *yadda yadda yadda* IS ALL A DREAM. nothing has to be true in a dream.
No, nothing "has" to be true in a dream, but that doesn't mean that nothing can be true in a dream.
Daniel described a very tall tree. He could have described a very tall ostrich instead.
He also described a flat earth and he used that image logically to reinforce the height of the tree: the tree was so tall that it could be seen from every part of the earth. That logical connection suggests quite strongly that the whole image - tree and earth - was not just some arbitrary, made-up mumbo-jumbo imagery.
Where there is logic there is a literal foundation.
why do scientists, who don't believe in God speak of the sky in the term "the heavens" if they know full well that the sky is not heaven or a part of?
Scientists are allowed to use figurative language. Notice that what they say about "the heavens" is not figurative, but literal - just like what I've been saying about Daniel.
why do people ask questions instead of looking for answers?
Because you have to ask good questions before you can get good answers.
why do people argue the bible WITHOUT using the bible?
I am using the Bible. I'm pointing to what the Bible says.
why do people think asking rhetorical answers makes their point of view correct when really it just keeps things the same?
I ask questions to get you to think.
So far, it doesn't seem to be working. But I'm patient.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 7:49 PM Mikael Fivel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 8:52 PM ringo has replied

  
Mikael Fivel
Member (Idle past 6169 days)
Posts: 70
Joined: 03-23-2007


Message 190 of 243 (391210)
03-23-2007 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by ringo
03-23-2007 8:11 PM


and once again, i have to say:
notice that NEBUCHADNEZZAR was the initial source "touched the sky" and "ends of the world". and "ends of the world" back then PROBABLY meant "the entire world" as DAVID pointed out while he stated neb's dream back to him. DAVID didn't say anything about the earth being flat , he was interpreting neb's dream using what neb said, which in fact, IN THE BIGGER PICTURE was about how his kingdom was gonna be so great, but eventually fall.
and NO, he did not describe a flat earth.
Dan 4:20-22
20 "The tree that you saw, which grew and became strong, whose height reached to the heavens and which could be seen by all the earth,
21 whose leaves were lovely and its fruit abundant, in which was food for all, under which the beasts of the field dwelt, and in whose branches the birds of the heaven had their home ”
22 it is you, O king, who have grown and become strong; for your greatness has grown and reaches to the heavens, and your dominion to the end of the earth.
THAT is what david said.
and the reason why he didn't use OSTRICH is because the analogy of a tree is that which fits the format of a kingdom. trees grow tall, sprout branches, bear fruit, but eventually die... in this case he's saying that neb's tree, HIS KINGDOM was going to be the biggest, but still EVENTUALLY FALL
Edited by Mikael Fivel, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by ringo, posted 03-23-2007 8:11 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by ringo, posted 03-23-2007 9:22 PM Mikael Fivel has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 492 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 191 of 243 (391216)
03-23-2007 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Mikael Fivel
03-23-2007 8:52 PM


Mikael Fivel writes:
DAVID didn't say anything about the earth being flat
First of all, I don't know what David has to do with any of this....
Second, it doesn't matter that it was Nebuchadnezzar's dream. Daniel repeated the description of a flat earth:
quote:
Dan 4:20 The tree that thou sawest, which grew, and was strong, whose height reached unto the heaven, and the sight thereof to all the earth;
and Daniel (or whoever wrote the Book of Daniel) wrote it down.
If you just read the story and don't worry about the interpretation of the dream, it sounds like Nebuchadnezzar thought the world was flat and Daniel thought the world was flat. There simply is no indication to the contrary.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 8:52 PM Mikael Fivel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 10:05 PM ringo has replied

  
Mikael Fivel
Member (Idle past 6169 days)
Posts: 70
Joined: 03-23-2007


Message 192 of 243 (391227)
03-23-2007 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by ringo
03-23-2007 9:22 PM


the moon is visible to all the earth... is the earth flat?
trees have branches... width is a factor.
don't use rational logic to explain IRRATIONAL behavior, it doesn't work.
"if you just read the story" - it's a dream. if i described a DREAM in which the world is flat, it DOES NOT MEAN that i believe it is, NOR DOES IT COME ACROSS AS TRUTH. do you have control over what you dream about? can you tell yourself "i don't believe the world is flat, i'm never going to have dreams about the earth being flat" and make it so? it's an irrational dream. you're trying to use rational thinking and logic to explain that which is irrational. not only that, but the dream was metaphoric to begin with.
Edited by Mikael Fivel, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by ringo, posted 03-23-2007 9:22 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by ringo, posted 03-23-2007 10:23 PM Mikael Fivel has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 492 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 193 of 243 (391229)
03-23-2007 10:23 PM
Reply to: Message 192 by Mikael Fivel
03-23-2007 10:05 PM


Mikael Fivel writes:
the moon is visible to all the earth...
Not all at once.
And a treetop is a fixed position - it doesn't orbit the earth like the moon does.
trees have branches... width is a factor.
As I already said to anastasia, it's not a factor that was mentioned in the story. The image in the story is certainly not one of a wide tree engulfing the whole earth.
don't use rational logic to explain IRRATIONAL behavior
Again, it was (the Book of) Daniel who brought up the logic: the height of the tree was significant only in its relationship to the surface of the earth.
do you have control over what you dream about? can you tell yourself "i don't believe the world is flat, i'm never going to have dreams about the earth being flat"
Well, I never do have dreams about a flat earth, because I know consciously and subconsciously that the earth is round.
if i described a DREAM in which the world is flat, it DOES NOT MEAN that i believe it is, NOR DOES IT COME ACROSS AS TRUTH.
Nor does it mean that the earth is not flat. A dream about a flat earth seems to indicate something in the back of Nebuchadnezzar's mind about a flat earth.
I don't know how much plainer it can be: there is nothing whatsoever in the story to indicate that they didn't all believe the earth was flat.
you're trying to use rational thinking and logic to explain that which is irrational.
Rational thinking is the only way to explain the irrational.
Edited by Ringo, : Spelling.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 10:05 PM Mikael Fivel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 11:21 PM ringo has replied

  
Mikael Fivel
Member (Idle past 6169 days)
Posts: 70
Joined: 03-23-2007


Message 194 of 243 (391232)
03-23-2007 11:21 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by ringo
03-23-2007 10:23 PM


a figurative and metaphoric phrase for a deeper meaning, describing the relationship between trees and kingdom's is not relevant to the "earth is flat".
please note that when it says "reaches the ends of the earth" or "all the world will see" IS pointing out width. if you have a square, and you're saying that an object reaches all of its ends, then you're referencing its WIDTH.
and you made an excellent point, "there is nothing whatsoever in the story to indicate that they didn't all believe the earth was flat." but guess what, even if ONE of them believed it, guaranteed they didn't care THERE - that does NOT mean EVERYBODY believed it was.
the brainteaser is that he probably USED the MODEL of the earth being flat to reference the size of nebuchadnezzar's kingdom to come. we just don't know, he never said outright (none of them, for that matter) "the earth is flat", funny thing about the bible; it cross references itself to prove points, and implications aren't cross referenced into FACTUAL statements.
Edited by Mikael Fivel, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by ringo, posted 03-23-2007 10:23 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by ringo, posted 03-24-2007 12:41 AM Mikael Fivel has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 492 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 195 of 243 (391238)
03-24-2007 12:41 AM
Reply to: Message 194 by Mikael Fivel
03-23-2007 11:21 PM


Mikael Fivel writes:
a figurative and metaphoric phrase for a deeper meaning, describing the relationship between trees and kingdom's is not relevant to the "earth is flat".
And vice versa, the deeper meaning is not relevant to whether or not they thought the earth was flat.
please note that when it says "reaches the ends of the earth" or "all the world will see" IS pointing out width.
And you please note that width usually refers to a flat surface. One does not refer to the "width" of a sphere or the "ends" of a sphere.
The imagery is consistently flat.
... even if ONE of them believed it, guaranteed they didn't care THERE - that does NOT mean EVERYBODY believed it was.
Nobody said that everybody believed it. I'm only saying that the guy who wrote the Bible believed it.
... he probably USED the MODEL of the earth being flat to reference the size of nebuchadnezzar's kingdom to come.
Or he might have been refering to the Bohr model of the atom, but there's no evidence of that either.
funny thing about the bible; it cross references itself to prove points....
Yeah, funny thing is that the New Testament uses exactly the same imagery:
quote:
Mat 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and showeth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
The imagery is consistently flat across the centuries.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-23-2007 11:21 PM Mikael Fivel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 196 by Mikael Fivel, posted 03-24-2007 2:00 AM ringo has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024