The concept of an immovable earth is neither a foundation of our knowledge nor is it a true view of reality.
Upvote
0
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.
The concept of an immovable earth is neither a foundation of our knowledge nor is it a true view of reality.The ToE is the basis of all biological science, and the foundation of modern education, so say many scientists and educators. Personally I believe the bible to be the foundation of our knowledge of reality.
The problem is that you don't answer a simple question:And that folks, stands for anyone. Don't pretend you have evidence, based on the scientific method, for how humans exist on earth today.
ecco RE: How do you account for humans existing on the earth today?
From the others, either there is no response, as is the case with insitu, or they tap dance around it without ever admitting they also believe it is as written in genesis. It appears they are somehow embarrassed by their own beliefs.
ETA: Case in point is the comment made by justlookinla in post
#61:
"Depends on one's faith-based view."
The problem is that you don't answer a simple question:
How do you account for humans existing on the earth today?You refuse to answer and you certainly do not provide any evidence to support your unspoken views.
You said that it tries to explain all of reality. Perhaps you misspoke?
The concept of an immovable earth is neither a foundation of our knowledge nor is it a true view of reality.
The problem is, you don't wish to acknowledge it's dependent on one's faith-based view.
ecco RE: How do you account for humans existing on the earth today?
From the others, either there is no response, as is the case with insitu, or they tap dance around it without ever admitting they also believe it is as written in genesis. It appears they are somehow embarrassed by their own beliefs.
ETA: Case in point is the comment made by justlookinla in post
#61:
"Depends on one's faith-based view."
The problem is that you don't answer a simple question:
How do you account for humans existing on the earth today?
You refuse to answer and you certainly do not provide any evidence to support your unspoken views.
Of course I acknowledge that it depends on your faith based view. You believe god created humans due to a literal reading of genesis. In other words, I acknowledge that your belief is based on your faith based view.
I wouldn't color you anything. However, the bible, the true word of god, clearly states:The thought that the earth isn't moving (even though we know it is) is very practical, if you think about it (because it's one less thing we have to think about). Imagine yourself thinking about 'sunrise' each day, but 'conceptualizing' (reminding yourself) that it is the earth moving and not the sun.
I was in my tree stand when the sun went down today. Not for a second did I stop to consider that it was the earth moving and not the sun. Color me looney.
As you know, I do not believe in a Creator.I acknowledge that your belief is based on your faith based view also. We place our faith in different 'creators'.
As you know, I do not believe in a Creator.
I cannot remember any other person in these forums, or in other forums, or whom I have met and discussed this subject with in person, who will not state their beliefs.
I'll ask again, what do you believe? That is, of course, a rhetorical question. Everyone who has exchanged posts with you knows that you are a creationist. Everyone knows you are a creationist because of your literal reading of genesis.
What we don't know, is why you won't admit it?
I wouldn't color you anything. However, the bible, the true word of god, clearly states:
Sure, in everyday parlance, one can use terms like sunrise and sunset. But, if the bible is the true word of god, then the above clearly states that the earth is immovable. Some christians say the above are allegory. Your comments seem to imply that you also believe them to be allegory rather than literal truth. Is that correct?1 Chronicles 16:30: "He has fixed the earth firm, immovable."
Psalm 96:10: "He has fixed the earth firm, immovable ..."
The earth is moving right now. Heck, its even accelerating. I thing what you mean to say is that if the earth STOPPED moving we'd all be dead.If the earth were to move it would be the end of life. I don't think God is going to allow that to happen.
The earth is moving right now. Heck, its even accelerating. I thing what you mean to say is that if the earth STOPPED moving we'd all be dead.
So, you don't believe the earth revolves around the sun?If the earth were to move it would be the end of life. I don't think God is going to allow that to happen.
So, you don't believe the earth revolves around the sun?
ETA: Just saw the above post
"1Chron 16:30 states that the earth is stable and cannot be moved. This means that the course of the earth has beenestablished and cannot be changed."
That's your interpretation of...
1 Chronicles 16:30: "He has fixed the earth firm, immovable."
I guess you can interpret to mean that at one time the earth was "firm and immovable" and He FIXED it to go around the sun.
I guess one can interpret the bible any way one wants to interpret the bible.
One of the meanings of moved in this context is to be out of course. God won't allow the earth's established course to be changed. So yes, I can use a translation of the word so it makes sense in 2015. In 1600 few were aware that the earth moved, thus the simple translation.
The earth's course may be complex, but all the complexities can be and are explained by science.The earth's course around the sun is much more complex than is generally known. No doubt this is purposeful for some aspects of life on earth. It is my opinion that the sheer complexity of the creation is a way that God is revealing himself to science, or at least to some.
I don't think that any scientist, or even a scientifically aware layman, would use the phrase "created itself". But I do understand why you need to use terminology like that.At some point scientists must admit that this stuff is way too complex to have created and organized itself.
Are you suggesting that people who made translations of translations based their translations on what was, at the time, peoples awareness of nature?
In any case, let's see what you may have based your comment on...
He fixed(verb implying doing something to rectify/better) the earth firm, immovable.(sturdy, unchanging) .In any case, let's see what you may have based your comment on...
http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/q7.htm
1 Chronicles 16:30: "He has fixed the earth firm, immovable."
You will note that what is written in Chronicles is not really the same as the apologetics.
There is a big difference between:
-and-
- He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.
- The orbit of the earth is firm, immovable.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?