Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What does the flat earth theory have to do with Genesis 1 being literal or not? I guess Genesis 1:6 refers to the vault of heaven, but that is how the sky is described to this day. There is no reason that Moses would have described it differently unless God transported him into space. Imagine Moses standing in the night with all of the stars and moon around him. He is just saying that the beautiful sight in the sky that looks like a vault is the creation of our wonderful God. It is not even a metaphor, because he is describing what all can see in a way Moses and the people could understand. Moses and the Israelites were familiar with Ancient Egyptian cosmology with the earth being flat and the movement of the moon, sun and stars in the vault. However, you will notice that the gods and goddesses are not flying around doing what the Ancient Egyptian cosmology said they did, because God corrected that for the sake of the important revelation. Moses sticks to what can be easily seen to set the stage for Chapter 2. It is interesting to discuss, but it doesn’t threaten the validity of the Bible in any way. It is a literal description of creation from Moses’s perspective, which was proper for the situation.I think the only thing that's going on is that this is the Conspiracy theories section of the forum, and Apple sky, by her own admission, is addicted to Conspiracy theories.
Also, she seems to genuinely believe that unless Genesis 1 is taken as a literal description of God's creation, then people are doubting God and the Bible.
You're getting more obnoxious by the post.
“If you say so” is not an agreement, but a brush off. Stop pretending otherwise.No I'm not, I'm just agreeing with you.
Also, she seems to genuinely believe that unless Genesis 1 is taken as a literal description of God's creation, then people are doubting God and the Bible.
Asking a question is, by default, looking for discussion.
Or perhaps it’s just a figment of your imagination. Because there’s no evidence that the sun and moon are moving lights in a dome.Enoch wrote about portals through which winds and waters pass.
Since I see the sun and moon as moving lights in the dome, could they also travel through their own channels? Perhaps the dome is honeycombed with circuits, tunnels, and other components?
Or perhaps it’s just a figment of your imagination. Because there’s no evidence that the sun and moon are moving lights in a dome.
The Book of Enoch is not Scripture.This is not what it says in the book of Enoch.
The Book of Enoch is not Scripture.
![]()
What is the book of Enoch and should it be in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org
What is the book of Enoch and should it be in the Bible? If the Book of Jude quotes from the book of Enoch, why isn’t the book of Enoch in the Bible?www.gotquestions.org
No, you said you were not going to quote Scripture to try to prove a flat earth.Is it literal or is it not ? As I have stated 'I'm not discussing Scripture on this thread.
If you read the link I gave you, or even listened to the video on the page, you would learn that even though the Book of Enoch is mentioned in Jude, it only means that particular quote is true, not the whole book. It is not considered as the Word of God. If it was, it would be in the Bible, but it isn't.Doesn't mean it's no true as Enoch is mentioned in Scripture.
Are you now going to tell me that it is the Word of God but was kept out of the Bible by "they"?
Well now you are implying that the Book of Enoch is the Word of God but was kept out of the Bible by the mysterious "they". If that's the case then the Bible could not be trusted as books would have been inserted or removed depending on what "they" wanted.Who was it that determined the 66 books of the Canon ?