|
Author
|
Topic: The Bible's Flat Earth
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
|
Message 35 of 473 (499239)
02-17-2009 5:12 PM
|
Reply to: Message 26 by Peg
02-16-2009 10:02 PM
|
|
Re: The Literal Interpretation is a Flat Earth
Gday,
Peg writes: find a verse that calls it flat...you cant because its not there. Find a verse that calls it a sphere ...you can't because it's not there. Kapyong
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 26 by Peg, posted 02-16-2009 10:02 PM | | Peg has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 37 by Buzsaw, posted 02-17-2009 8:01 PM | | Kapyong has not replied |
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
|
|
Message 80 of 473 (499659)
02-19-2009 4:54 PM
|
Reply to: Message 73 by Peg
02-19-2009 6:19 AM
|
|
Re: The Literal Interpretation is a Flat Earth
Gday,
Peg writes: the word circle has been translated from a hebrew word that can also mean sphere...this is significant. Just becuase the english translator chose to use the word 'circle' does not mean the writer intended for us think he mean 'flat' Incorrect. Peg - you keep ignoring the key fact which proves you wrong : Hebrew DOES have a word for SPHERE - it is used for the phrase "toss like a BALL". That is a sphere, not a flat round disk. Hebrew also has a word for a flat round disk. The bible DOES use the word for SPHERE when describing a ball. But when describing the earth, it uses the word for a flat round disk. The bible COULD have used the word for SPHERE for the earth, but it did not. This is clear and present evidence the writers thought the earth was flat. Will you ever address this point, Peg? Kapyong
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 73 by Peg, posted 02-19-2009 6:19 AM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 85 by Peg, posted 02-19-2009 5:52 PM | | Kapyong has replied |
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
|
|
Message 91 of 473 (499681)
02-19-2009 6:31 PM
|
Reply to: Message 85 by Peg
02-19-2009 5:52 PM
|
|
Re: The Literal Interpretation is a Flat Earth
Gday,
Peg writes: what is the hebrew word for ball and where in the scriptures is it used? Peg - it's already been cited above. Are you actually READING this thread ? There IS a word for "sphere" or "ball" in Hebrew (dwr), and it is used in Isaiah 22:18 - "He will surely turn violently and toss you like a ball into a large country;" But the word used for circle is "chuwg" - it means a flat circle, NOT a sphere. And the OT uses the word for "flat circle" for the earth when it COULD have used the word for "sphere". Clear and present evidence that the OT writers thought the earth was flat, NOT a sphere. Round, yes. Round and flat like a disk. But not a sphere. Coupled with the numerous other references which imply the earth as flat, this shows conclusively that the OT writers thought the world was flat. Kapyong
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 85 by Peg, posted 02-19-2009 5:52 PM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 92 by Peg, posted 02-19-2009 7:22 PM | | Kapyong has replied |
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
|
|
Message 96 of 473 (499720)
02-20-2009 12:47 AM
|
Reply to: Message 92 by Peg
02-19-2009 7:22 PM
|
|
Re: The Literal Interpretation is a Flat Earth
Gday,
Peg writes: and this is the dilema, One Hebrew word for generation is dohr, corresponding to the Aramaic dar. Dohr comes from a root verb meaning 'stack in a circle' or 'move around' and thus has a basic underlying meaning of 'circle.' and the related word dur means 'ball.' Yes, it means 'ball' or sphere. But now you are trying to redefine the word for 'sphere' to mean 'circle', after you redefined the word for 'circle' to mean 'sphere'. But the facts are clear : * there is a word for 'sphere' * there is a word for 'circle' * the OT uses the word for circle, NOT sphere Because the writers thought the earth was flat. Kapyong
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 92 by Peg, posted 02-19-2009 7:22 PM | | Peg has not replied |
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
|
|
Message 97 of 473 (499721)
02-20-2009 12:52 AM
|
Reply to: Message 95 by Buzsaw
02-20-2009 12:28 AM
|
|
Re: The Literal Interpretation is a Flat Earth
Hi all,
Buzsaw writes: I neglected to state also that there is not only no Hebrew sphere/spherical So, whereas in Peg's world : 'sphere' means circle, and 'circle' means sphere. In Buzsaw's world, 'sphere' doesn't even exist. Even after numerous posts discussing the word, it's meaning, it's translation, and even it's usage in the bible - even then, Buzsaw can claim with a straight face there is no such word. How can one possibly answer that? Kapyong Edited by Kapyong, : Minor fixes.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 95 by Buzsaw, posted 02-20-2009 12:28 AM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
|
|
Message 125 of 473 (499820)
02-20-2009 7:58 PM
|
Reply to: Message 123 by Buzsaw
02-20-2009 7:24 PM
|
|
Re: Flat Not FeasibleHi
Hiya,
Buxsaw writes: I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of an intelligent mature adult person in ancient times. I believe I would look at the moon and the sun and assume that the stars and all bodies in the cosmos would be spherical. It would not be (abe:likely) for thin discs to be positioned exactly parallel to the face of the earth (abe: and to each other. Nor would it be as likely for a flat disc to be fiery hot as it would be for a sphere.) It would be more logical to think that they were spherical and that the earth would be shaped like they were. So - first you said Hebrew didn't even have a word for "sphere" (by simply ignoring the Hebrew word for "sphere".) But now, you say it was obvious back then that astronomical bodies were spherical? If it was so obvious they were spheres, why didn't they have a word for "sphere" (according to you) ? Kapyong
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 123 by Buzsaw, posted 02-20-2009 7:24 PM | | Buzsaw has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 140 by Buzsaw, posted 02-21-2009 6:17 PM | | Kapyong has replied |
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
|
|
Message 138 of 473 (499969)
02-21-2009 5:17 PM
|
Reply to: Message 128 by Peg
02-21-2009 12:49 AM
|
|
Gday all,
Peg writes: Admittedly, chewing the cud is done by an animal with two stomachs in which the food is processed twice. While the rabbit does not have two stomachs it does process its food twice Indeed - a rabbit does NOT have a 2nd stomach, and does NOT chew the cud. Chewing the cud does NOT mean eating feces. The bible is wrong.
Peg writes: by the time man came on the scene, the earth was a very different place. Pardon? So now you are claiming it started flat, then God made it spherical? Or what?
Peg writes: They mean completely different things yet an 'immovable earth' is being translated as 'a flat earth' False. No-one - NOT ONE SINGLE person here translated 'immovable' as 'flat'. You appear unable to read for comprehension, whether it be the bible or posts here. Kapyong Edited by Kapyong, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 128 by Peg, posted 02-21-2009 12:49 AM | | Peg has not replied |
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
|
|
Message 143 of 473 (499996)
02-21-2009 8:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 140 by Buzsaw
02-21-2009 6:17 PM
|
|
Re: Flat Not FeasibleHi
Gday,
Buzsaw writes: Sigh. Kapyong, I'm not posting my messages to ancients. I'm posting them to moderns like you and me. My message was (to moderns) that likely the (ancients) would have regarded the planet shaped like what we moderns call spherical, i.e. having curvature or ball like. That I'm telling you that they regarded it as what you know as spherical, does not mean I'm saying that the Hebrews used the word spherical. Get it? Sigh. We get it. You'll do anything to avoid admitting you were wrong that Hebrew had no word for 'sphere'. You will never address the actual use of the word for 'sphere' (dwr), right there in Isaiah ("toss you like a ball") to refer to a spherical object. Kapyong
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 140 by Buzsaw, posted 02-21-2009 6:17 PM | | Buzsaw has replied |
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
Re: ball
Gday Here we go again.
thingamabob writes: as the earth is not a sphere. Nonsense. It IS a sphere (as distinct from FLAT, the specific subject under discussion), it's just not a PERFECT sphere. So what? Who said it was?
thingamabob writes: Isaiah says in 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:" Where does that verse say anything about the shape of the earth? Right there in the text - "THE circle of THE earth." You sound like Peg : A sphere is not a sphere. A circle is not a circle. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. Kapyong
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
|
|
Message 156 of 473 (500014)
02-21-2009 11:21 PM
|
Reply to: Message 147 by ICANT
02-21-2009 9:40 PM
|
|
Re: Isaiah
Gday,
ICANT writes: It could possibly be the circle the earth takes around the sun but there would still be a problem. It could possibly be the circle the sun and the earth take around the Milky Way but there would still be a problem. The only circle I can think of that would work would be the circle around the universe which would be the third heaven where God sits on His throne. But it couldn't POSSIBLY be the circle of a flat disk earth, could it? As sceptics claim. You don't even MENTION that possibility, even though it's been argued in this very thread. In fact, you tell us you can't even THINK OF any such possibility! In other words, you literally cannot even consider that the bible could be wrong. Kapyong
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 147 by ICANT, posted 02-21-2009 9:40 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
|
|
Message 202 of 473 (500232)
02-24-2009 1:15 AM
|
Reply to: Message 191 by Black
02-23-2009 9:20 PM
|
|
Gday,
Black writes: Is it not reasonable to suggest that the Hebrews had a very limited understanding of our earth? Yes, they thought the world was flat, a common limited understanding of the times. Kapyong
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 191 by Black, posted 02-23-2009 9:20 PM | | Black has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 204 by Black, posted 02-24-2009 3:42 AM | | Kapyong has replied |
|
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3470 days) Posts: 344 Joined: 05-22-2003
|
|
|
Message 205 of 473 (500244)
02-24-2009 5:58 AM
|
Reply to: Message 204 by Black
02-24-2009 3:42 AM
|
|
Actually Black, it was YOUR claim : "Is it not reasonable to suggest that the Hebrews had a very limited understanding of our earth? " Kapyong
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 204 by Black, posted 02-24-2009 3:42 AM | | Black has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2