Is Eschatology based on the Book of Enoch like a "Flat Earth"?

A71 · Aug 14, 2018

God tells us that the heavens speak to us. What do they tell us? They tell us that world is spherical, not flat, as the southern hemisphere sees completely different stars to the northern hemisphere

Psalm 19
19 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.2 Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.3 There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.

NeedyFollower · Aug 14, 2018

Sanoy said:
What comes to my mind is the part where God explains why humans have mates and Angels do not in the judgement part of the first section. To paraphrase it is something along the lines of ' you were eternal in heaven and did not need offspring, they will perish and so I gave them offspring.'

Ha, I actually guessed the right chapter on my first try, it's chapter 15.

And I can see where there is a possibility that flesh produces flesh and spirit produces spirit so that Jesus' words that a man must be born again is of course true ..not by the will of man but the will of God . Our first birth is due to lust ( in or out of a marriage bond ) and our second birth is due to LOVE at a great cost to God our Father through and by the blood of His Son ( who gave himself for us . ) This love , produces love for it is a product of love by the Spirit of God . It is why the unmarried and celibate Christ has more children than anyone who has ever lived and it is why the scripture says that the barren will have more offspring than the married . ( I am paraphrasing so check the scriptures . ) Anyway , grace and peace in the name above all names .

NeedyFollower · Aug 14, 2018

Dkh587 said:
The book Revelation says the devil deceives the whole world, yet you are flabbergasted at the idea of a global deception. The irony

No brother ..the global deception is the subtleties of the adversary to deceive believers into rabbit trails that may or may not be true ...The tree of the knowledge of good and evil still brings death when we eat from it ...that tree contains orthodox doctrine and false doctrine , good works and bad works , but it can not produce humility nor brokenness . So , the deception is greater than one thinks and has nothing to do with the shape of the earth . As you must be aware , Scriptures , like the parables which Jesus spoke , were told to a simple people in a context with which they were familiar ..things were explained to accent a spiritual truth ...Rightly dividing the word of truth ..understanding the difference between a gnat ( unclean ) and a camel ( unclean ) One will kill you and one will not . Paul discusses those who debate about words etc ..that love debate . Let us be ones who love . Do we provoke one another to love and good works ? Or do we provoke one another to being flabbergasted ?

NeedyFollower · Aug 14, 2018

Ken Rank said:
I am not familiar off the top of my head with that section of Enoch. It's been a number of years since I read it. To throw this out there to consider as well... it is my understanding, which is studied but certainly not infallible, that the readings each week in the synagogue were of a 3 year cycle of the first five books of our bible (if in Judea) and a one year cycle of the same when outside the land. I should note... it might very well have been a 3.5 year cycle.... I personally believe that was the case. Anyway, in addition to that, there was also a prophetic set of verses (called the haftarah portion) that accompanied that particular Torah Portion and usually showed it applied that was read each week as well. When Jesus read from Isaiah and told them that those verses had been fulfilled in their ears on that day... he was reading from the hartarah portion for that particular week.

That said, there were also many books not in the bible, many of which were found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, that were widely read in that day as well. I would add that even Paul quoted often from some of these sources. I read this book a few years ago and it was very enlightening.

My personal rule of thumb is that the bible reveals the character of God and when we read something outside of Scripture, if it stands in harmony with His character and stated intent, we can consider it and weigh it into our studies. But when it stands outside of His character, even profanes it... like many of the Gnostic writings, we simply have to reject them and move on.

Blessings.
Ken

Hi Brother ..Yes ...I agree . ( What I find truly a paradox is that despite our advances in learning , it has produced a people almost devoid of wisdom . ) I see it in children who have been taught that knowledge is power verses understanding or the knowledge of God our Father and His Christ is the power to be nothing so that He may be everything . I see Gnosticism and humanism closely aligned. The power of Man . ( I read an interesting book on Erasmus and Luther. ) Very enlightening how humanism crept in through schools and church . ) Anyway , may He who keeps all who are called by His name , keep you and yours . May he give you grace and meekness and brokenness and above all faith which works by love . ( I look for these same things for I believe this to be the will of the Father ..even our sanctification. .

Oldmantook · Aug 14, 2018

BABerean2 said:
Don't you realize that the word "circle" is an English word, not found in the original Hebrew Bible?

That English word was chosen by the translators to approximate the Hebrew word.

.

Is that your reply? Based on your response, we can interpret the Hebrew any old way we want as the Hebrew word has no English equivalent. That is ridiculous. I'll ask you again, show me one verse in the entire Bible that supports a round earth, heliocentric model. Shall I keep waiting?

Oldmantook · Aug 14, 2018

Foxfyre said:
But what does it mean to be inspired by God? Take Genesis 1 and 2 for instance. In the first creation story water existed before there was day and night. Light existed before there was day and night. Plants and animals existed before the sun was placed in the sky. No reasonable person believes that is accurate science--God is the author of science as well as all things of course. But Genesis 1 is believed to be one of the newer manuscripts included in the Old Testament. It was not intended to be science but intended to be a theological statement that God is the Creator of all that is and has power over all that is. At least it has God creating man in the proper sequence after the sun, moon, plants, animals etc. were already in place.

Now go to the second creation story--believed to be among the oldest manuscripts in the Old Testament--that omits most of the Earth science but goes straight into the creation of man and then woman and is obviously--to me anyway--an explanation of why things are the way that they are. Among some finer details, it explains the original sin and, as we follow the story, we see that original sin spread into the family via Cain and then into the community via the story of Noah and then into the entire world via the story of the Tower of Babel.

All written by people of faith and deep certainty of the presence and power of God, and inspired by God to teach through the scriptures? Of course. But they had to write from what they understood from their own experience without benefit of scientific logic or learning.

A story of faith from people of faith, inspired by God yes.
Scientifically accurate? No.

Given your premise, then you could just as easily believe in evolution as God didn't create man but we were evolved from lower forms of life. Is that what you believe because science teaches it? Is your primary source of truth the Bible or science? If it is the Bible, then you would have to point me to just one scripture which describes a spherical, rotating earth around the sun as the heliocentric model dictates. Frankly, there are none. On the other hand there are numerous scriptures which detail the exact opposite whereby the earth is stationary and the sun moves around it.

I find some holes in your attempt to prove Genesis contradictory. The fact that water existed before light is not a contradiction. Are they not basic elements independent of each other? The existence of water is independent of the existence of light and vice-versa. Regarding the light, plants and sun, in v. 14 God does not say, Let there be lights . . . to separate, as if there were no lights before this command and afterward the lights were created. Rather the Hebrew text reads, And God said, 'Let the lights in the expanse of the sky separate.' In other words . . . God's command assumes the lights were already in the expanse and that in response to his command they were given a purpose, to separate the day from the night and to mark seasons and days and years.. . . It suggests that the author did not understand his account of the fourth day as the creation of lights; but, on the contrary, the narrative assumes that the heavenly lights had already been created in the beginning (John H. Sailhamer, Expositors Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, Frank E. Gaebelein General Editor, Grand Rapids Mi: Zondervan, 1990, p. 34).

It is easy to dismiss the Genesis account as "unscientific" but I submit that it is a slippery slope once one ventures onto that interpretative path.

Foxfyre · Aug 14, 2018

Oldmantook said:
Given your premise, then you could just as easily believe in evolution as God didn't create man but we were evolved from lower forms of life. Is that what you believe because science teaches it? Is your primary source of truth the Bible or science? If it is the Bible, then you would have to point me to just one scripture which describes a spherical, rotating earth around the sun as the heliocentric model dictates. Frankly, there are none. On the other hand there are numerous scriptures which detail the exact opposite whereby the earth is stationary and the sun moves around it.

I find some holes in your attempt to prove Genesis contradictory. The fact that water existed before light is not a contradiction. Are they not basic elements independent of each other? The existence of water is independent of the existence of light and vice-versa. Regarding the light, plants and sun, in v. 14 God does not say, Let there be lights . . . to separate, as if there were no lights before this command and afterward the lights were created. Rather the Hebrew text reads, And God said, 'Let the lights in the expanse of the sky separate.' In other words . . . God's command assumes the lights were already in the expanse and that in response to his command they were given a purpose, to separate the day from the night and to mark seasons and days and years.. . . It suggests that the author did not understand his account of the fourth day as the creation of lights; but, on the contrary, the narrative assumes that the heavenly lights had already been created in the beginning (John H. Sailhamer, Expositors Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, Frank E. Gaebelein General Editor, Grand Rapids Mi: Zondervan, 1990, p. 34).

It is easy to dismiss the Genesis account as "unscientific" but I submit that it is a slippery slope once one ventures onto that interpretative path.

There is no slippery slope however if one keeps perspective of what is real, what is important, what is intended, what is honest. Do I believe everything that some teach as science is true? No. I don't believe it because it flies in the face of logic, reason, personal experience, or credible opposing argument.

But that we disagree on science makes neither of us foolish, ignorant, unreasonable, or evil.

Do I believe everything in the Bible as some teach it? No. I don't believe what flies in the face of logic, reason, personal experience, or credible opposing argument.

But that we disagree on interpretation of the Bible makes neither of us foolish, ignorant, unreasonable, or evil.

I will say you weaken your argument when you extrapolate that because I believe one thing automatically means that I must believe that something else is also true or false or whatever.

BABerean2 · Aug 14, 2018

Oldmantook said:
I'll ask you again, show me one verse in the entire Bible that supports a round earth, heliocentric model.

Since the sun is not in the center of the Milkyway Galaxy, the heliocentric model should not be in the Bible, because it is an outdated model of reality.

The earth is an oblate spheroid, whose diameter is a little greater at the equator than at the poles.

Have you ever found the English words "oblate" or "spheroid" in the Bible?

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblate_spheroid

.

Jipsah · Aug 14, 2018

Dave-W said:
Not really. The solar system is centered on the sun. But the sun and planets of our solar system are orbiting the center of the Milky Way galaxy. The galaxy is moving as well. Astronomy has us at no center of anything.

Yeah, that's because the Bible was written from a purely terrestrial viewpoint. We still talk that way even when we know it isn't technically accurate. We say "the sun rose", and not "the earth revolved enough that the sun became visible above the eastern horizon". The people who expect the Bible to also be an astronomy text are simply silly.

Jipsah · Aug 14, 2018

Dkh587 said:
The point is, the scriptures and so-called “science” teach different and opposing concepts.

So if I say that the sun rises in the east that I'm contradicting Science? Bull. That's the way we actually talk. The Bible writers weren't concerned with celestial mechanics, and to act as though they were is ridiculous whether it leads us to believe that the sun orbits the earth or that the Bible contradicts astronomical facts. One runs off the road on the right, the other on the left.

Jipsah · Aug 14, 2018

sdowney717 said:
Yes, sun moon stars all rotating about a fixed stationary earth, and is the best model to fit what the scriptures say.

Yep, which is what appears to us, and which happens not to be technically true.

This also agrees with all early cosmologies of many cultures and nations.

Probably all of them. If you're standing on the ground looking up, without a telescope, that's what you see, where ever you are. That's not what's happening, though.

Jipsah · Aug 14, 2018

Chinchilla said:
but you can zoom-in that disappearing boat with camera just like you can zoom-in stars with telescope , curvature has nothing to do with it it's just law of perspective .

Nope. That boat gets 12 miles away. and if you're standing in a rowboat t sea level, you're going to see its hull disappear below the horizon. If you're standing at the masthead of a windjammer or in the gun director of an old battleship, you'll see it several miles further away, but it's still going to drop below the horizon. whether you're using the world's biggest telescope or 10X50 binocs.

I'm a sometime ham operator, and we work with, and against, the curvature of the earth all the time. For instance, if I'm working the 2 meter band, my signal is, generally speaking, strictly line of sight. It's not going to skip off the ionosphere, and it there's nothing else to bounce the signal off of, or to carry it for me, it's going to zoom off into space never to be heard in this world again. If I want to talk around Middle Tennessee, a QTH on a good hill and a 30 foot stick will let me keep up with all my pals. If I want to talk to someone in Jackson, I'll need a much taller antenna, and if I want to reach Memphis, I have to switch to an HF band, because there's too big a chunk of planet between here and there for me to transmit through. It's not a matter of signal strength, I could, and have, bounced CW signals off the moon and talked to other hams that way. (Too much like work to do it a lot, some geezers love it, though.)

But here's one your flat earth concept can't explain. HF signals (10 meters and longer) will skip off the ionosphere and, under the right conditions, allow you to talk around the world. Say I'm trying to work VK4BWI in Queensland, but getting a lot of interference from stations between here and there, or just general atmospheric crud, what can I do? I have my beam (yagi) antenna pointed straight at him, but no luck. So I turn the beam around 180 degrees, and go around the world the other way. Boom, there he is, coming in 5 9, just like he was next door. (And again, I've done that, more than once.) How do you 'splain that without a spherical earth?

Why isn't the sun visible everywhere, all the time? We know it's always visible somewhere at any given time, and we know precisely where it is and isn't visible all the time That's important for hams as well, because other than charging up the ionosphere for us, the sun isn't our friend, and "greyline" areas, where it's dawn of dusk, provide some of the best signal propagation. None of that makes sense with a flat earth.

Why the varying length of days and nights in different hemispheres? Why white nights in Iceland with sunless days at Cape Horn, and vice versa? What makes the tropics tropical and the poles cold?

Any one of these these things seem to me to put paid to the idea of a flat earth.Add to that the fact that simple observation of astronomical bodies, and of the earth from space, show in all it's marvelous elegance the perfect interactions of God's design, all obeying the laws of physics that He has established to make everything work. The flat earth cosmos looks cartoonish in comparison.

Chinchilla · Aug 15, 2018

Jipsah said:
But here's one your flat earth concept can't explain. HF signals (10 meters and longer) will skip off the ionosphere and, under the right conditions, allow you to talk around the world. Say I'm trying to work VK4BWI in Queensland, but getting a lot of interference from stations between here and there,

BABerean2 · Aug 15, 2018

Chinchilla said:

And what material is the "Dome Firmament" made up of, based on the theories of the science fiction promoter in this video?

Is it made of glass?

Or is it polycarbonate?

Is it some magical transparent substance, never seen on earth?

Does it repair itself when a meteorite from outer space punches a hole through it?

.

Chinchilla · Aug 15, 2018

BABerean2 said:
And what material is the "Dome Firmament" made up of, based on the theories of the science fiction promoter in this video?

Is it made of glass?

Or is it polycarbonate?

Is it some magical transparent substance, never seen on earth?

Does it repair itself when a meteorite from outer space punches a hole through it?

.

Yahweh said it's made of glass .
Job 37:18 King James Version (KJV)
18 Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?

The firmament means solid structure .

A71 · Aug 15, 2018

So there is a glass ceiling to negotiate on the way to heaven?

Does the sun operate on a winch and pulley system?

BABerean2 · Aug 15, 2018

Chinchilla said:
Yahweh said it's made of glass .
Job 37:18 King James Version (KJV)
18 Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?

The firmament means solid structure .

The text does not say it is made of glass.
The text compares it to glass.

18 Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?

Do you understand the difference?

Are you going to answer the question about meteorites punching a hole through it, or are you going to try and ignore it?

.

A71 · Aug 15, 2018

I am guessing it is a retractable roof...Psalm 78:23

Yet he gave a command to the skies above and opened the doors of the heavens;

Jipsah · Aug 15, 2018

Yeah, the dome called the ionosphere. That's the only way to get an HF signal from Nashville to Brisbane, skipping the signal off that charged particle "dome". But that still doesn't explain why talking "long path", around the world the wrong way, works. At least without introducing some Rube Goldberg stuff.

That's a key thing to remember in the "flat earth" discussions. The universe as God has designed it is a beautifully put together thing, elegant and efficient. The universe flat earthers describe would make any engineer gouge out his own eyes. It really does sound like a universe designed by Rube Goldberg.

A71 · Aug 15, 2018

The simplest test would be for a ballistic superpower to sail to the edge and launch a missile with arange of several thousand km.

Either the missile will go over the edge, or it will land somewhere. I'm slightly worried though that it might shatter the glass dome

Is Eschatology based on the Book of Enoch like a "Flat Earth"?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Blood Drinker

Well-Known Member

Similar threads