Four corners flat earth

[AmericanChristian91]

It does, actually, if the original readers believed them to be true because there was no indication otherwise.

So you know for sure the original writer(s) of the creation story intended it to be as historical as possible?

 

[Hammster]

Being inspired does not mean one is free of all errors of thinking. Especially when it comes to matters of science.

Um, yes it does.

 

[Hammster]

So you know for sure the original writer(s) of the creation story intended it to be as historical as possible?

Yes. So did God. Read the Ten Commandments.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

Um, yes it does.

Says who? Because it is clear in the bible that the writers understood ancient cosmology, not a more correct modern cosmology. Being inspired does not automatically give people future knowledge. The bibles point is also to not teach correct science (and everything about the world), which is why we can still believe there are important truths that God is trying to teach us through the bible while acknowledging the writers were still men of their times, and the cultures/beliefs did influence them (like how our modern world influences us even when being influenced by God, also people now who are influenced, does not mean they will learn future knowledge/discoveries).

 

[Hammster]

Says who? Because it is clear in the bible that the writers understood ancient cosmology, not a more correct modern cosmology. Being inspired does not automatically give people future knowledge. The bibles point is also to not teach correct science (and everything about the world), which is why we can still believe there are important truths that God is trying to teach us through the bible while acknowledging the writers were still men of their times, and the cultures/beliefs did influence them (like how our modern world influences us even when being influenced by God, also people now who are influenced, does not mean they will learn future knowledge/discoveries).

Wow. That was a red herring. Where have I said that the bible's point was to teach science?

 

[AmericanChristian91]

We'll you seem to think that the writers have to be correct in everything (including science) since God is inspiring them. Of course if that is the case, there must have been a reason for God to give them this future knowledge they Would not have had otherwise.

 

[Hammster]

We'll you seem to think that the writers have to be correct in everything (including science) since God is inspiring them. Of course if that is the case, there must have been a reason for God to give them this future knowledge they Would not have had otherwise.

The writers were correct in everything, including a six day creation. God even affirmed it in His own words.

 

[Hammster]

I guess quoting God isn't good enough for some. Makes you wonder why they believe anything in scripture.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

The writers were correct in everything, including a six day creation. God even affirmed it in His own words.

The writers did lack certain knowledge about the world, and show me Where God said genesis was history.

 

[Hammster]

The writers did lack certain knowledge about the world, and show me Where God said genesis was history.

Here's the options. Either the writers wrote down what God said, or they made it up. So if He said "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day," you either need to believe that Moses wrote it down right, or you have to discard all he wrote because he's proven himself untrustworthy.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

The “myth” exposed in the article is that late in the Middle Ages scholars still believed in the flat-earth cosmology taught in the Bible. However, that was not a myth at all—but a significant misconception held by people who had not studied the issue. By the late Middle Ages, scholars, even Christian scholars, believed the scientists who had been, for centuries, arguing against the flat-earth cosmology taught in the Bible.

Knowledge of the earths spherity goes at least back to ancient Greece, and this knowledge did not disappear with the rise of Christianity. Throughout 2000 years of church history, we find but two flat earth advocates: Lactantius and Cosmas Indicopleustes.

These were the only prominent Christians that we know of who believed that a flat earth was biblical. I see no reason to believe that they had any special insight into the Scriptures that the rest of the body of Christ did not. The consensus among the church has always been that there is no discrepancy between the earth's spherity and Scripture. I'm in pretty good company there.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

Here's the options. Either the writers wrote down what God said, or they made it up. So if He said "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day," you either need to believe that Moses wrote it down right, or you have to discard all he wrote because he's proven himself untrustworthy.

As I said earlier, the Bible is written across various time periods, by many people, for various reasons, influenced by various cultures, full of different types of literary genres (in other words Genesis's genre not being historical does not mean I can't trust what the Gospels say).

And being inspired by God, does not always have to mean, "God told someone to write something down.....word for word....and the man did exactly that"

Therefore I don't have to follow some slippery slope fallacy, that if God did not inspire the biblical writers through dictation, that means all that they write down is useless crap.

 

[Hammster]

As I said earlier, the Bible is written across various time periods, by many people, for various reasons, influenced by various cultures, full of different types of literary genres (in other words Genesis's genre not being historical does not mean I can't trust what the Gospels say).

And being inspired by God, does not always have to mean, "God told someone to write something down.....word for word....and the man did exactly that"

Therefore I don't have to follow some slippery slope fallacy, that if God did not inspire the biblical writers through dictation, that means all that they write down is useless crap.

So you're saying that when writers quote God, you don't trust what they wrote?

 

[Bluelion]

Being inspired does not mean one is free of all errors of thinking. Especially when it comes to matters of science.

A man of an early time period, even one who is inspired is not going to have sudden knowledge of future discoveries when it comes to medicine or modern cosmology (unless God tells them info about the future, but he doesn't have to do that, even when he is inspiring someone), or even the theory of evolution (Paul lacked the knowledge on the scientific evidence which showed at least biologically speaking, we came from an early population).

It is understandable that Paul and other people took the Genesis myth as an historical account, but that does not necessarily mean it is, nor does it mean that the writers of said myth believed it was history.

It is also understandable why many people back then believed in a flat earth, and other parts of the ancient cosmology, because they lacked the knowledge of later times.

Inspiration from the holy spirit does not have to cause said person to become correct in everything they believe.

Paul said if any one comes preaching something other than what he preached they are a false teacher and the doctrine false. It would appear some here are doing just that preaching against the doctrine of God. How do you answer Paul's Judgement against those who say other than what he Preached?

 

[Bluelion]

As I said earlier, the Bible is written across various time periods, by many people, for various reasons, influenced by various cultures, full of different types of literary genres (in other words Genesis's genre not being historical does not mean I can't trust what the Gospels say).

And being inspired by God, does not always have to mean, "God told someone to write something down.....word for word....and the man did exactly that"

Therefore I don't have to follow some slippery slope fallacy, that if God did not inspire the biblical writers through dictation, that means all that they write down is useless crap.

The definition of inspired by God I have already told you. I'll say it again, it is by Towns, and Liberty College and also the Southern Baptist and probably more that is just off the top of my head.

Being Inspired by God means written by men under the guidance of The Holy Spirit, The writers personality was retained in the writings.

What that means is The Holy Spirit spoke through these men, just as He did when God's servants were tested and the Holy Spirit came through them and spoke. This is Biblical God tells us don't think of what you will say when you are brought before leaders for I will speak through and give you the words to speak. These men did not write their Own words, but The Holy Spirit was speaking through them. This is why no part of the Bible can have any errors, because it would be to call God flawed to say such a thing and we know God is perfect.

That is what inspired by God means.

 

[Bluelion]

AC i would urge you to do a study of the History of the Jews. The Jews never did believe in a flat earth, that was a European belief that came about by mythology. They believe it was were the gods lived in some cases.

 

[Bluelion]

Was it the Paul question which cleared out the thread?

 

[now faith]

Which one of the four different accounts of Peter’s denial of Jesus is “the good stuff,” and which ones should we leave behind in the cafeteria? I vote for the account written by Luke, even though it expressly contradicts the accounts by Matthew, Mark, and John. Why do I believe Luke’s account rather than the accounts by Matthew, Mark, or John? Primarily for this reason:

Luke 1:1. Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us,
2. just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word,
3. it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus;
4. so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught. (NASB, 1995)

The Gospels are narratives from different authors.

If all four were exactly the same,we would have one Gospel according to....

The purpose of the Gospels is the events are recorded by different people,they are a witness.

If you take and have four people witness a event then describe the event,there would be differences among the individuals.

Those who authored the Gospels,all told the same events that transpired.

I would hope the reader would understand how to apply induction.

 

[now faith]

I guess quoting God isn't good enough for some. Makes you wonder why they believe anything in scripture.

 

[now faith]

The definition of inspired by God I have already told you. I'll say it again, it is by Towns, and Liberty College and also the Southern Baptist and probably more that is just off the top of my head.

Being Inspired by God means written by men under the guidance of The Holy Spirit, The writers personality was retained in the writings.

What that means is The Holy Spirit spoke through these men, just as He did when God's servants were tested and the Holy Spirit came through them and spoke. This is Biblical God tells us don't think of what you will say when you are brought before leaders for I will speak through and give you the words to speak. These men did not write their Own words, but The Holy Spirit was speaking through them. This is why no part of the Bible can have any errors, because it would be to call God flawed to say such a thing and we know God is perfect.

That is what inspired by God means.

Amen,as well Matthew,Mark,Luke,John,and Paul walked with our Lord in person.
Paul met him in a different way but still in person.

It is getting bad when Christians refer to the Bible as crap.
some of these post look like the open Forums.