Who cares about the age of the earth, or space?

[ivebeenshown]

I am perplexed as to how you still believe that the earth is fixed in space with all of the universe rotating around its center. This is rather like science 101, the earth does not have a large enough gravitational pull to cause the sun, all the planets, and all the stars to orbit around the earth. Additionally, Galileo understood that the earth could not be the center of the universe by merely observing and tracking the orbits of the planets and he did with out any knowledge of gravity.

The larger issue is that nearly everyone is in consensus that the earth orbits around the sun. Even the most conservative Young Earth Creationist believe the earth orbits around the sun. How have you come to interpret the bible in such a way that it requires that one affirm a geocentric view of the universe?

God has the power to keep the earth fixed in place and set everything in motion around it. He has the power to create Adam as a mature and capable adult, and he has the power to create the earth in the same fashion.

We take physics, and then we have to have quantum physics to describe those, and string theories to describe those, when does it end? When can we just accept the law and the prophets and what they have to say?

 

[Chris81]

God has the power to keep the earth fixed in place and set everything in motion around it. He has the power to create Adam as a mature and capable adult, and he has the power to create the earth in the same fashion.

We take physics, and then we have to have quantum physics to describe those, and string theories to describe those, when does it end? When can we just accept the law and the prophets and what they have to say?

Why can you not accept the truths uncovered by science and accept the truths that have been preserved in the bible? Why must they be mutually exclusive? If you deny all science, why do you not believe that the earth is flat?

 

[ivebeenshown]

If you say that the bible does not describe the earth as flat then how do you interpret the passages in the bible that I had provided in an earlier post? What was the author intending to convey in those passages?

"Four corners of the earth" would have to be an expression, otherwise it would contradict the "circle" of the earth in Isaiah.

In Job 38:13, we know the wicked will be severed from among the just, but we know the judgment will come as fire and destruction on the earth from other verses, so it must be an expression about "shaking the ends of the earth."

"The ends of the earth" must be an expression, once again due to the "circle" of the earth mentioned in Isaiah, because a circle only has one edge to it. If we count every point on the circumference of a disc as the "ends", the "ends" would then be infinite, but I've never heard of counting the infinite "ends" of a circle. It is most likely a figure of speech, which does happen to be used still today, though not so frequently.

Good questions, I would say that the authors did not have any knowledge that the earth was a globe so they wrote with the understanding that the world was flat.

The moon shows its same 'face' due to the nature of its path through in the heaven above, yet we can see variations and slight changes in the positioning of its 'face'. The Hebrews, who would have taken the time to personally watch the moon more than many of us, surely would have noticed this and realized that the moon was spherical.

Why wouldn't they think the earth was spherical?

 

[Chris81]

"Four corners of the earth" would have to be an expression, otherwise it would contradict the "circle" of the earth in Isaiah.

In Job 38:13, we know the wicked will be severed from among the just, but we know the judgment will come as fire and destruction on the earth from other verses, so it must be an expression about "shaking the ends of the earth."

"The ends of the earth" must be an expression, once again due to the "circle" of the earth mentioned in Isaiah, because a circle only has one edge to it. If we count every point on the circumference of a disc as the "ends", the "ends" would then be infinite, but I've never heard of counting the infinite "ends" of a circle. It is most likely a figure of speech, which does happen to be used still today, though not so frequently.

If you are understanding that passages that describe the earth with four corners is meant to be understood as an expression, why then are you insistent that we interpret the passages that describe the earth as motionless in a purely literal sense? Wouldn't it likewise follow that we should interpret the motionless earth passages as similar expressions of speech.

The moon shows its same 'face' due to the nature of its path through in the heaven above, yet we can see variations and slight changes in the positioning of its 'face'. The Hebrews, who would have taken the time to personally watch the moon more than many of us, surely would have noticed this and realized that the moon was spherical.

Why wouldn't they think the earth was spherical?

The problem is you are apply your own understanding to how authors would have understood the nature of our earth. However in ancient times the Egyptians believed the sun and the moon to be disks and it would not be surprising is the Israelites also had the same beliefs about the sun and the moon.

 

[ivebeenshown]

If you are understanding that passages that describe the earth with four corners is meant to be understood as an expression, why then are you insistent that we interpret the passages that describe the earth as motionless in a purely literal sense? Wouldn't it likewise follow that we should interpret the motionless earth passages as similar expressions of speech.

I don't know any true "motionless earth" passages but I am intrigued if you have them for me. Also, I hope you didn't just look at my "it must be an expression" remarks without looking at the "due to" statements regarding each occurrence. I'm using scripture to interpret scripture here. A circle as mentioned in Isaiah 40:22 does not have corners or ends, so to interpret these verses between each other without contradiction, the circle wins out and the others are expressions.

Line upon line, precept upon precept, et cetera ad infinitum (to abuse latin, lol.) I believe the scriptures must interpret the scriptures.

The problem is you are apply your own understanding to how authors would have understood the nature of our earth. However in ancient times the Egyptians believed the sun and the moon to be disks and it would not be surprising is the Israelites also had the same beliefs about the sun and the moon.

I think the Hebrews would understand that the entirety of the heaven is not one disc and that in observing the libration of the moon, the moon is not a disc. How can you support the Hebrews believing the celestial bodies are discs? Do you have any scriptures to prove this?

If a Hebrew can look at the spots on a stone, and shift it a little bit and see how the spots shift from his perspective, would he not assume the same is true for the moon which he probably observes nightly for his entire life?

 

[yeshuasavedme]

What translation of the bible are you reading in which the word 'globe' is used in Daniel chapter 4? I went through about 10 different translations of the bible and I found none that used the word 'globe'.

I said it is a "globe" in the Bible, for the Hebrew word, "tebel", means globe, and I used the Daniel 4 chapter which you referred to, to prove that the chapter context speaks of Nebuchadnezzar being the king of kings of the entire globe, because wherever man, beast or fowl dwelt Nebchadnezzar ruled over them, and they dwelt over the entire globe at that time, and Nebuchadnezzar ruled them, as the king of their kings.
Look at the passage in Daniel 4, and read history and see that Nebuchadnezzar ruled the entire globe, wherever man, beast, or fowl dwelt. The Olmec civilization, of the part of the world now called "Mexico", was already waning, in the western world at that time.
From the time of the confounding of the tongue to the many at Babel, the sons of Adam spread over the entire land mass of the globe.
No one of the ancients of the Bible ever believed in a flat earth, and the Bible teaches that the earth is a globe/tebel.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

.....are you serious?

Are you kidding? What does God say? Do you not believe God?

 

[yeshuasavedme]

You have a really negative view of science and the good it does for humans. Would you have go back to a time before modern medicine where life was full or much more death and pain?

The laws of physics are beautiful things and can lead people to give glory to God for how amazing He is.

The Bible is the source for God's "laws/ordinances" for the creation, and the man made theories do not "work" in His heavens. See "The Electric Universe" pages for reasons why the universe is "electric".

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Did the Hebrews think the heaven was a flat circle? Did the Hebrews even know what a sphere or even a dome-like object was? Why don't the words 'globe', 'sphere', or 'dome' appear?

No they did not. Tebel means "globe", and was translated "world" to English, because of translator bias.
See my thread on Genesis 1, to see what God said about stretching out the heavens on day 2, from the created earth, by dividing the waters and making the stretched out heavens between them.

 

[BlackBox]

I agree that if you take the bibles word, there may be no reason to care about space and all. But i think all that stuff is very interesting. Especially the ages of space, the universe and everything. It is a matter of what you take from scriptures. Personally i think they are better suited to earth related matters, rather than universal ones.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

What then do you believe the author meant to convey in the passages describing the earth with four corners and ends?

They already knew what was meant for they had the writings of Enoch, to tell them, so no interpreting was needed to describe the extremes of the earth and the heavens, or the powers that hold the earth fixed in its place and bring the heavens and the hosts in them revolving daily around the earth, which is fixed in its place and from which earth the heavens were stretched out between the divided waters on day 2 of creation week.


Jesus is God the Word, and He tells us through the prophets that He fixed the earth in its place, and made it first, and stretched out the heavens from the earth, between the divided waters of the created earth, on day 2 of creation week. See my thread on "Genesis 1 refutes all OEC theories".

The earth will one day move out of its fixed place, says the Word of God, but till then, it is fixed, unmoving; and from the earth, the heavens were stretched out between the divided waters of the created earth, says the Word of God, and half of those waters are above the heaves which He stretched out, says the Word of God; and in those stretched out heavens He set the sun, moon, and stars, says the Word of God.
Biblically, the heavens revolve around the earth, and the sun, moon, and stars have their own courses/paths/highways within the stretched out heavens, to follow.
Earth is the center of creation, and is a "tebel" -a globe- and is fixed in its place and held by forces which Enoch describes as "winds" =currents/powers.

The Bible always states that the sun rises and sets, as the moon does, and there is no way that a sun can rise/ascend over a "flat" earth or set/descend over a flat earth, and the Bible calls the earth a globe, when it speaks of it as the "tebel". The Bible teaches the truth about the creation, and to deny that the earth is fixed in its place is to call God a liar and a deceiver.

 

[solarwave]

At what cost? I bet scientific developments have led more astray from Christ than they have led to Christ.

But alot of science has been proven to be correct, so the reason people leave Christianity because of science would be because their understanding of Christianity was too narrow before. People shouldn't have to believe things outside the core of Christianity to have faith, that way people don't lose faith because of science or reason. If I wasn't able to be flexable with my beliefs I would have turned atheist by now because I have faith in science more than individual denominations understanding of the Bible.

Now they're winding up with this:

Theory of everything - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
M-theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When does it end? We can't understand the infinite mechanics of this universe -- only God knows them. We can only know absolute truths, and the word of God is the truth. We can't define dark matter into categories and rules. It is simply darkness. The universe is more complex than we can even imagine, yet people spend so much time trying to find some 'answer' when we have the answer in Genesis: God gave man dominion over the earth, not the heavens.

It may turn out to be true, or maybe false. But science has done alot of good for humankind. There are alot of things we still don't understand, but we will continue to learn more and more as time goes by.

Also I don't believe that Genesis was trying to say that we should concern ourselves with only the earth. Heaven was a very different idea to hebrews back then. Also I think Genesis expresses many spiritual truths that are more important.

I feel that faith has been poisoned on a large scale, and I must undergo a fast very soon to 'sweat out' a lot of things, so to speak. I don't know what to do, I probably ought to pray a lot more than I do, huh...

I agree that science doesn't save ones soul, but it is possible to know science, reason and faith.

Maybe you can grow your passion for God and try to learn about the core of Christianity (love, faith, hope, the Kingdom of God) and then tell people about it.

Did the Hebrews think the heaven was a flat circle? Did the Hebrews even know what a sphere or even a dome-like object was? Why don't the words 'globe', 'sphere', or 'dome' appear?

I think they would have seen rocks that were spheres.

 

[Chris81]

The bible says that the earth rests on pillars. How would that be possible if the the earth is a globe?

1 Samuel 2:8:
He raises the poor from the dust,
He lifts the needy from the ash heap
To make them sit with nobles,
And inherit a seat of honor;
For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's,
And He set the world on them.

Job 9:6
He shakes the earth out of its place,
And its pillars tremble;

Psalm 75:3
The earth and all who dwell in it melt;
It is I who have firmly set its pillars.

 

[Chris81]

I don't know any true "motionless earth" passages but I am intrigued if you have them for me. Also, I hope you didn't just look at my "it must be an expression" remarks without looking at the "due to" statements regarding each occurrence. I'm using scripture to interpret scripture here. A circle as mentioned in Isaiah 40:22 does not have corners or ends, so to interpret these verses between each other without contradiction, the circle wins out and the others are expressions.

Line upon line, precept upon precept, et cetera ad infinitum (to abuse latin, lol.) I believe the scriptures must interpret the scriptures.

As you requested the I have provided bible verses that seem to support the idea that the earth is motionless.

"He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 104:5)"
"The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and is armed with strength. The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 93:1)"
"Say among the nations, "The LORD reigns." The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 96:10)"
"The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises. (From the NIV Bible, Ecclesiastes 1:5)"

Regarding your interpretation of the earth having four corners and ends being an expression of speech by the author due to the earth also being described as a circle in the bible. That logic could be understood in the reverse. You have started with the premise that the truth of the bible states that the earth is round but one could also start from the premise that the earth is a flat rectangle. I could say that the bible is very distinctive in its understanding that the earth is a flat rectangle with ends and edges and therefor an description of the earth as a circle is a figure of speech.

I think the Hebrews would understand that the entirety of the heaven is not one disc and that in observing the libration of the moon, the moon is not a disc. How can you support the Hebrews believing the celestial bodies are discs? Do you have any scriptures to prove this?

If a Hebrew can look at the spots on a stone, and shift it a little bit and see how the spots shift from his perspective, would he not assume the same is true for the moon which he probably observes nightly for his entire life?

The problem is that you already know that the moon is a sphere so when you look at the moon and see the changes on the surface of the moon as it rotates around the earth you know that that is due to it being a sphere. However, people of ancient times did not have that knowledge to begin with and so when they observe the changes on the face of the moon as it rotates around the earth they would not understand it to be as a result of the moon being a sphere.

Ancient Israel imagined the earth to be a flat disk (Isa 42.5) resting on a foundation or pillars (Job 9.6). It is surrounded by the ocean (Pss 24.2; 136.6). It has four corners (Isa 11.12; Ezek 7.2; job 37.3; 38.13) and an edge (Isa 24.36) or ends (Isa 40.8; Job 28.4; Ps 48.11; Jer 6.22; 25.32). It also has a center or navel (Ezek 38.12). Except for the implication that Jerusalem is the earth’s center, ancient Israel’s view of the world did not differ from that of other ancient Near Eastern peoples.

 

[ivebeenshown]

As you requested the I have provided bible verses that seem to support the idea that the earth is motionless.

"He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 104:5)"
"The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and is armed with strength. The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 93:1)"
"Say among the nations, "The LORD reigns." The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 96:10)"
"The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises. (From the NIV Bible, Ecclesiastes 1:5)"

I could say that the bible is very distinctive in its understanding that the earth is a flat rectangle with ends and edges and therefor an description of the earth as a circle is a figure of speech.

Off topic but I find it funny that you copied and pasted those from a Muslim critic.

You could say that, but then you would have to explain why the circular shape is mentioned if it was their solid belief that the earth was rectangular. The four directions are north, south, east, and west and could be referred to as "the corners of the earth" but they still apply to our spherical earth. It makes more sense to apply the 'four corners' or 'directions' to our spherical earth due to the compass than to try and apply the concept of something spherical or circular to a rectangular form. It doesn't really make sense to use a circle as a metaphor for a rectangle, does it?

Seriously, they could see that the moon and the sun were circular or spherical. These were God's chosen people, his revelations to them are not going to be primitive and fallible.

The problem is that you already know that the moon is a sphere so when you look at the moon and see the changes on the surface of the moon as it rotates around the earth you know that that is due to it being a sphere. However, people of ancient times did not have that knowledge to begin with and so when they observe the changes on the face of the moon as it rotates around the earth they would not understand it to be as a result of the moon being a sphere.

Ancient Israel imagined the earth to be a flat disk (Isa 42.5) resting on a foundation or pillars (Job 9.6). It is surrounded by the ocean (Pss 24.2; 136.6). It has four corners (Isa 11.12; Ezek 7.2; job 37.3; 38.13) and an edge (Isa 24.36) or ends (Isa 40.8; Job 28.4; Ps 48.11; Jer 6.22; 25.32). It also has a center or navel (Ezek 38.12). Except for the implication that Jerusalem is the earth’s center, ancient Israel’s view of the world did not differ from that of other ancient Near Eastern peoples.

How do you know this? "The problem" is that they could have easily seen the spots on a rock as they held it in their hand and wobbled it and compared it to the moon. I have yet to see any scriptural support saying any of the celestial bodies are flat disks.

I don't think you give the Israeli people enough credit here -- Genesis was a revelation, a revealing of information from God. The creation story could have been left out entirely, left up to science to explain later, had God intended it.

Isaiah 42:5 says he stretched the heavens and spread the earth. Assuming the Israeli people understood that the heaven is not a single flat object, it cannot be deduced from this verse that the earth was spread 'flat'. You would have to add to it.

Psalms 24:2 could just as easily apply to a spherical earth.

Psalms 136:6 could also apply to a spherical earth. We can guess that there was a 'big bang' and try to hypothesize about how the earth came to be, but we can never see for sure how it happened. The bible says God said "let the dry land appear" and I believe it.

Ezekiel 38:12 says 'in the midst of the land'. Midst is a very flexible word, it does not in itself imply in any way that the inhabitants dwell in the navel or center of a flat earth disk or rectangle.​

As for the references to 'pillars', what would you do with Job 26:7, where he "hangeth the earth upon nothing"? Just like the "circle" of the earth, the truth is that the earth sits or hangs on nothing, because its "swaddlingband" is darkness (Job 38:9.) And this is in the same book, Job, that refers to 'foundational pillars' of the earth. Is the book contradicting itself or is one concept a truth and the other a metaphor?

Just like with the circle vs. rectangle, where the rectangular references (north south east west) can apply to our spherical earth as metaphors but not really the other way around, this case is 'setting on foundational pillars' versus 'hanging on nothing, with darkness as a swaddlingband'. Which one is the reality? The "hanging on nothing." Pillars would then be the figurative example.

God called his people from among the pagans, the sun and moon worshipers. God wanted them to know his reality, not a false pagan reality. Moses and the prophets wrote by inspiration of the Holy Ghost -- not in the "I'm feeling inspired, let me write this book sense" but in the "writing every word down as God wanted it" sense. That is why they are 'prophets.'

 

[yeshuasavedme]

The bible says that the earth rests on pillars. How would that be possible if the the earth is a globe?

1 Samuel 2:8:
He raises the poor from the dust,
He lifts the needy from the ash heap
To make them sit with nobles,
And inherit a seat of honor;
For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's,
And He set the world [tebel] on them.

Job 9:6
He shakes the earth out of its place,
And its pillars tremble;

Psalm 75:3
[after the "laqach" of the Congregation, in verse 2]
The earth and all who dwell in it melt;
It is I who have firmly set its pillars.

The word translated as world is tebel, which means "globe" in the passage you cite. the Hebrew B-L etymons, together, mean "to swell". The translator of the DSS, Florentino Garcia Martinez, translates "tebel" as "globe", in the hymns. It means "globe".

18 I saw the treasuries of all the winds: I saw how He had furnished with them the whole creation and the firm foundations of the earth. 2And I saw the cornerstone of the earth: I saw the four winds which bear the earth and the firmament of the heaven. 3And I saw how the winds stretch out the vaults of heaven, and have their station between heaven and earth: these are the pillars of the heaven. 4I saw the winds of heaven which turn and bring the circumference of the sun and all the stars to their setting. 5I saw the winds on the earth carrying the clouds: I saw the paths of the angels.

In the cosmology of the creation shown to the "prophet Enoch, the seventh from Adam", the "pillars of the earth" are "winds", which are "forces/powers/intelligent created spirits" who answer to the Creator through the created "hosts" set over them".

Hannah's psalm of praise is taken directly from the writing of the "Enoch the prophet, the seventh from Adam", who wrote the cosmology of the creation as shown to him by the angel Uriel .
In Enoch, the thrones of honor are the thrones of glory that the righteous will inherit, laid up for them in heaven, and which the stars are parables of, as "Enoch the prophet, the seventh from Adam" says, and as Daniel -among many other inspired writers- corroborates.

Psalm 75:2,3, in the Hebrew original, tells that the "laqach" to glory =rapture of the Church/congregation of YHWH will happen before the "melting/dissolving" of the world's inhabitants [as Jesus corroborates] and the resetting of the pillars in righteousness. That means that the elohym, addressed in Psalm 82 who are the rulers/judges who are not obeying their ordained orders and who are set over the earth, who "hold the earth" will "die/muwth" -as created "sons of God" and be cast down [nephal][to earth, from the heavenlies], as "Adam, the one sar/prince" was [from Eden, in earth's heavenly realm], and the "pillars/forces" holding the earth will be established in righteousness, for the millennial reign.

Look at Psalm 82 in the Hebrew to see the pillars that will be reset after the rapture/laqach [in Psalm 75] takes place, before the inhabitants of the earth are "dissolved/melted -with fear, as Jesus says in Luke-

Luk 21:26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken/saleuō.
1) a motion produced by winds, storms, waves, etc...
b) to cause to totter

2) to shake down, overthrow
a) to cast down from one's (secure and happy) state

That psalm passage will be an encouragement to those on earth after the "laqach" rapture of the Church, who repent and believe in the name of the Son of Man -as "Enoch the prophet, the seventh from Adam", writes, in chapter 50, after they see the change to glory of the righteous saints before the tribulation, who will then repent and believe in the Name of the Son of Man [as Enoch writes], and will trust the Creator when the earth moves out of its place and is turned upside down, and the seasons are backwards, and the earth jumps about as a hunted roe, and staggers as a drunken man [as Enoch and Isaiah speak of], when the stars fall to the earth and the sun burns hotter on the earth, in the tribulation coming [after Enoch and John and Isaiah write of], after the "laqach/rapture of the saints to glory, when the angel smites it with the incense bowl mixed with the prayers of the saints, taken from the altar of the LORD [as the prophets write about], after the rapture/laqach of the Saints.

 

[Chris81]

Off topic but I find it funny that you copied and pasted those from a Muslim critic.

Ya you noticed my cut and paste job. I have a familiarity with the verses before having found the Muslim critic site, they just made it easy for a lazy person such as myself to cut and paste their work.

You could say that, but then you would have to explain why the circular shape is mentioned if it was their solid belief that the earth was rectangular. The four directions are north, south, east, and west and could be referred to as "the corners of the earth" but they still apply to our spherical earth. It makes more sense to apply the 'four corners' or 'directions' to our spherical earth due to the compass than to try and apply the concept of something spherical or circular to a rectangular form. It doesn't really make sense to use a circle as a metaphor for a rectangle, does it?

I tend to believe that the Israelites more likely believe that the earth was circular rather than a rectangle. This was more of a common belief that was held by other near east ancient cultures. However the bible still uses the word circle and not sphere. So we can not say with any certainty that the they viewed the earth as a sphere. It is more likely that they would have believed it to be a flat disk as did other cultures of that time.

Seriously, they could see that the moon and the sun were circular or spherical. These were God's chosen people, his revelations to them are not going to be primitive and fallible.



How do you know this? "The problem" is that they could have easily seen the spots on a rock as they held it in their hand and wobbled it and compared it to the moon. I have yet to see any scriptural support saying any of the celestial bodies are flat disks.

I don't think you give the Israeli people enough credit here -- Genesis was a revelation, a revealing of information from God. The creation story could have been left out entirely, left up to science to explain later, had God intended it.

Isaiah 42:5 says he stretched the heavens and spread the earth. Assuming the Israeli people understood that the heaven is not a single flat object, it cannot be deduced from this verse that the earth was spread 'flat'. You would have to add to it.

Psalms 24:2 could just as easily apply to a spherical earth.

Psalms 136:6 could also apply to a spherical earth. We can guess that there was a 'big bang' and try to hypothesize about how the earth came to be, but we can never see for sure how it happened. The bible says God said "let the dry land appear" and I believe it.

Ezekiel 38:12 says 'in the midst of the land'. Midst is a very flexible word, it does not in itself imply in any way that the inhabitants dwell in the navel or center of a flat earth disk or rectangle.
​

As for the references to 'pillars', what would you do with Job 26:7, where he "hangeth the earth upon nothing"? Just like the "circle" of the earth, the truth is that the earth sits or hangs on nothing, because its "swaddlingband" is darkness (Job 38:9.) And this is in the same book, Job, that refers to 'foundational pillars' of the earth. Is the book contradicting itself or is one concept a truth and the other a metaphor?

Just like with the circle vs. rectangle, where the rectangular references (north south east west) can apply to our spherical earth as metaphors but not really the other way around, this case is 'setting on foundational pillars' versus 'hanging on nothing, with darkness as a swaddlingband'. Which one is the reality? The "hanging on nothing." Pillars would then be the figurative example.

God called his people from among the pagans, the sun and moon worshipers. God wanted them to know his reality, not a false pagan reality. Moses and the prophets wrote by inspiration of the Holy Ghost -- not in the "I'm feeling inspired, let me write this book sense" but in the "writing every word down as God wanted it" sense. That is why they are 'prophets.'

When you understand that the bible is speaking in metaphor in regards to describing the earth resting on pillars, how do still come to insist that one affirm a geocentric view of the universe? I would agree with you that the bible is likely speaking in metaphor when describing the earth as a rectangle or as resting on pillars. I also believe that the authors of the bible are using well known figures of speech when they describe a fixed motionless earth. For example we still in modern times speak of a rising and setting sun, not because we believe in fixed earth model but because that is a figure of speech that we have come accustomed to using since ancient times. The authors of the bible can use an understanding of the earth as an immovable fixed object for the purposes of teaching infallible theological truths. I do not believe that the authors were intending to provide a scientifically accurate model of the universe, instead they are teaching theological truths using the earth as a metaphor based on the understand of that time. Therefor the scientific statements in the bible are really of no importance because it is a text meant to teach all that is needed to understand god and for the purposes of salvation and not a science book.

 

[Chris81]

The word translated as world is tebel, which means "globe" in the passage you cite. the Hebrew B-L etymons, together, mean "to swell". The translator of the DSS, Florentino Garcia Martinez, translates "tebel" as "globe", in the hymns. It means "globe".
In the cosmology of the creation shown to the "prophet Enoch, the seventh from Adam", the "pillars of the earth" are "winds", which are "forces/powers/intelligent created spirits" who answer to the Creator through the created "hosts" set over them".

Hannah's psalm of praise is taken directly from the writing of the "Enoch the prophet, the seventh from Adam", who wrote the cosmology of the creation as shown to him by the angel Uriel .
In Enoch, the thrones of honor are the thrones of glory that the righteous will inherit, laid up for them in heaven, and which the stars are parables of, as "Enoch the prophet, the seventh from Adam" says, and as Daniel -among many other inspired writers- corroborates.

Psalm 75:2,3, in the Hebrew original, tells that the "laqach" to glory =rapture of the Church/congregation of YHWH will happen before the "melting/dissolving" of the world's inhabitants [as Jesus corroborates] and the resetting of the pillars in righteousness. That means that the elohym, addressed in Psalm 82 who are the rulers/judges who are not obeying their ordained orders and who are set over the earth, who "hold the earth" will "die/muwth" -as created "sons of God" and be cast down [nephal][to earth, from the heavenlies], as "Adam, the one sar/prince" was [from Eden, in earth's heavenly realm], and the "pillars/forces" holding the earth will be established in righteousness, for the millennial reign.

Look at Psalm 82 in the Hebrew to see the pillars that will be reset after the rapture/laqach [in Psalm 75] takes place, before the inhabitants of the earth are "dissolved/melted -with fear, as Jesus says in Luke-
That psalm passage will be an encouragement to those on earth after the "laqach" rapture of the Church, who repent and believe in the name of the Son of Man -as "Enoch the prophet, the seventh from Adam", writes, in chapter 50, after they see the change to glory of the righteous saints before the tribulation, who will then repent and believe in the Name of the Son of Man [as Enoch writes], and will trust the Creator when the earth moves out of its place and is turned upside down, and the seasons are backwards, and the earth jumps about as a hunted roe, and staggers as a drunken man [as Enoch and Isaiah speak of], when the stars fall to the earth and the sun burns hotter on the earth, in the tribulation coming [after Enoch and John and Isaiah write of], after the "laqach/rapture of the saints to glory, when the angel smites it with the incense bowl mixed with the prayers of the saints, taken from the altar of the LORD [as the prophets write about], after the rapture/laqach of the Saints.

That was a well researched and thoughtfully interpretation in regards to understanding the context in which the pillars are to be used in bible.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

That was a well researched and thoughtfully interpretation in regards to understanding the context in which the pillars are to be used in bible.

Thanks, but prove all things, and look at the references I gave, for yourself, as just the beginnings of study on the subject.

 

[ivebeenshown]

I tend to believe that the Israelites more likely believe that the earth was circular rather than a rectangle. This was more of a common belief that was held by other near east ancient cultures. However the bible still uses the word circle and not sphere. So we can not say with any certainty that the they viewed the earth as a sphere. It is more likely that they would have believed it to be a flat disk as did other cultures of that time.

The KJV does not contain the words sphere, orb, or dome, so it does make it less obvious; however, I have some points:

1. The word used for "circle" in Isaiah 40:22 is the same word used for "circuit" in Job 22:14, as in "the circuit of heaven." A 'flat' nature would not have been applied to the heaven itself.

2. If they understood the celestial bodies to be spherical, there would have been no reason to assume the earth was not spherical as well. However, if they understood the celestial bodies to be flat disks, they may have assumed the same for the earth. Still, there does not appear to be any statements within the scripture stating that the earth is flat, or any of the other celestial bodies for that matter.

3. The libration of the moon is observable with the naked eye -- we can see a total of about 59% of the moon's surface as it 'wobbles' over the course of the lunar month. Again, the 'spots on the apple' analogy: they were more than likely to have observed the libration of the moon and understood that heavenly bodies are spherical. Of course, this is not based on scripture but it is something I find very entertaining.

When you understand that the bible is speaking in metaphor in regards to describing the earth resting on pillars, how do still come to insist that one affirm a geocentric view of the universe?

Well, using scriptures only, we can determine that they would not teach a flat earth. That would be ignorant on God's part, because the prophets did write by direct inspiration of the Holy Ghost. However, using scriptures only, one cannot find a possibility of the movement of earth itself through space. And due to General Relativity and our perception, the earth might as well be the center of the universe, and it would also agree with scripture.

So "orb earth vs. flat earth in the scriptures" has examples of both views due to some isolated interpretation. Then we figure out how to make them work together with each other, and then reality. (if you only look at the "four corners of the earth" verse all by its lonesome, you may believe it teaches a flat rectangular earth. If you look at 'circle of the earth' you may believe it teaches a flat disk earth, until you see that the Hebrew language doesn't even have 'orb' or 'sphere' in it, and the word used for 'circle' is in fact used to describe the heaven itself in another verse.)

However, "heliocentrism vs. geocentrism in the scriptures" does not appear to have anything siding for heliocentrism, but a couple or a few verses side with geocentrism. But once again due to General Relativity it works with reality. (Do note that some of the verses are actually talking about after the judgement if I recall correctly, as in he establishes the new earth in righteousness and it will not be moved, or something to that effect.) And due to General Relativity, and the fact that the whole study of 'the theory of physics' can never reach an absolute truth (due to the infinitely complex mechanisms involved, it will never be fully understood) the earth can be assumed as the center of the universe and it cannot be disproved.

I'd rather take that stance, that the earth is the immovable center of the universe, than believe that the universe has no center point. It makes more sense to me and everything goes on the same. Besides, I love this:

Isaiah 38
8Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down.

With geocentrism, we can see how God would have reversed the movement of the heavens. With heliocentrism, God would have had to held everything on the earth with his invisible omnipresent power as it reversed its roughly 66600MPH motion hurtling through space, and then done the same thing a second time to resume its normal motion. Of course this can be viewed either way and I think it's a really fun thing to dwell on.