the_cloaked_crusader
Servant ofthe Secret Fire
- Jun 25, 2003
- 248
- 17
- 37
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Republican
Actually, in Job the earth is said to be hung upon nothing. and one might say that the earth (as in the land) rests upon pillars.
I had already answered your post regarding the fixedness of the earth: I was going to ask my pastor. (I'll have an answer from him soon). That statement was referring strictly to the bit about the sun.
granted. But I don't claim that my additions are the inspired word of God; my "changes" are mutable. Nor do I claim that the Scripture is meant as nothing more nor less than a myth.
Again, this is from the perspective of the observer. I should ask my Pastor what Hebrew word for "nothing" is used here . . .
My point is that the geocentric model had not been as completely refuted at that time as it has now. This is a useless discourse, since we don't know for sure what any of us would have said or done had we lived then. it would depend largely on our previous experience, education, and upbringing.
But the theistic evolutionist would be wrong, since the passages in Genesis have to be delegated to the "parable" class before they can become "accurate" by that definition. I would never claim that a passage was meant to be a myth unless it were specifically said to be so by the Author.
I think that, in the passages in Job, God was making a point even there: Job knew so little that he didn't even know that there was no storehouse in the sky. You will probably ask why I find myself able to "parable-ize" this passage, but not Genesis; I shall pre-emptively respond that God had a reason to say this, whereas he had no reason to make up a creation myth (or, at least, no logical one that I have seen). And again, I would never, ever argue this idea of Job over another, more reasonable one . . .
But it does directly state that God created the earth in Six days! it also directly states that there was a certain number of generations between Genesis 1:1 and Mathew 1:1.
lol You guys crack me up. But seriously, folks, I don't know how many other ways I can explain this. There is a diference between my "interpretation" (as you would call it) of the text and the theistic evolutionist's interpretation of Genesis 1-3. Alas, my verbal powers are not yet equal to the task of explaining it clearly enough that even people with their hands over their eyes can understand it.
I will say this: from what I have seen, it is still not as scientifically certain that the earth is billions of years old as you would have me believe. (Bandersnatch, I know you're going to post a very long list of links, but I don't have time to get into a really serious debate now . . . they'll have to wait until after August 1st, at which time I will no longer be studying Hebrews constantly.)No it doesn't.Speaking of flat earth, a literal reading of the bible more strongly points to a flat earth than it does a 6000 year old one.
Maybe God had the earth in his workshop for the first couple of days, then built the solar system around it. and I think the plants can go 24 hours without sunlight.
You stil hven't explained why God would make Moses go to all the trouble of writing down specifically what happened on each day without its having been true.
I usually stretch out my tent over a sleeping-bag shaped object.
I don't think God is limited to normal tents, do you? And this is actually a fairly good description of the earth's magnetic field and ozone layer, which protect us from the solar wind and UV rays respectively . . .Did the ancient Hebrews even have a word for sphere? And really, what the ancient Hebrews believed about the earth is entirely irrelevant. they can have mis-interpreted the Bible's meaning just as easily as you have.
in this case I think it was referring to the land being stretched over the waters of the earth, rather the way the rubber of a basketball is stretched over the air within. (some think this is what hte earth was like preflood . . oh, nuts, my credibility just disappeared again! )
Maybe God didn't want to hit themwith too much at once. I mean, come on, Isaiah would have lost all credibility with his listeners if he started talking wacky (if accurate) science. (Again, just another idea which may have been a slight factor . . .)
best of regards
the_cloaked_crusader
Upvote
0
I'll put it this way: the Bible directly states that the earth was created in 6 days. I personally think that the earth is closer to being 10,000 years old than 6,000. May I say that this is irrelevant? Or should I put it this way:
