essentialsaltes
Stranger in a Strange Land
- Oct 17, 2011
- 33,599
- 36,918
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Legal Union (Other)
Upvote
0
Or he just let the authors indulge in phenomenological language as doing no harm to His literary intentions. No, the Bible does not teach about the shape of the Earth.And yet, it went out of it's way to describe in detail our surroundings as flat stationary and motionless. If God took the time to put that in there, it's important enough to believe.
What do you have?
A Bible which has a more important purpose than teaching us whether the Earth is flat or round.
And yet, it went out of it's way to describe in detail our surroundings as flat stationary and motionless. If God took the time to put that in there, it's important enough to believe.
Absolutely ...
There's not one verse in the Bible which says that the Earth is "flat", ... and it also says this ...
Isaiah 24:19 The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly. (KJV)
Or he just let the authors indulge in phenomenological language as doing no harm to His literary intentions. No, the Bible does not teach about the shape of the Earth.
It does, and evidence supports it.
This model of the earth(Image1) supportsWell, it does. But I literally cannot make you see or understand it.
I literally cannot make you see or understand it.
If you argue from a point of Biblical interpretation and the inerrancy of this specific interpretation, none of that counts.This model of the earth(Image1) supports
these past and predicted events in the future (image 2):
Compare these past and predicted events with the flat earth model.
Please visit the area of the total eclipse predicted events just to
insure they are not fake news created by media, or Trump.
Good luck convincing me that these sciences are boring and not complex enough.
SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES ESTABLISHED
BY CREATIONIST SCIENTISTS
DISCIPLINE / SCIENTIST
ANTISEPTIC SURGERY JOSEPH LISTER (1827-1912)
BACTERIOLOGY LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)
CALCULUS ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)
CELESTIAL MECHANICS JOHANN KEPLER (1571-1630)
CHEMISTRY ROBERT BOYLE (1627-1691)
COMPARATIVE ANATOMY GEORGES CUVIER (1769-1832)
COMPUTER SCIENCE CHARLES BABBAGE (1792-1871)
DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS LORD RAYLEIGH (1842-1919)
DYNAMICS ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)
ELECTRONICS JOHN AMBROSE FLEMING (1849-1945)
ELECTRODYNAMICS JAMES CLERK MAXWELL (1831-1879)
ELECTRO-MAGNETICS MICHAEL FARADAY (1791-1867)
ENERGETICS LORD KELVIN (1824-1907)
ENTOMOLOGY OF LIVING INSECTS HENRI FABRE (1823-1915)
FIELD THEORY MICHAEL FARADAY (1791-1867)
FLUID MECHANICS GEORGE STOKES (1819-1903)
GALACTIC ASTRONOMY WILLIAM HERSCHEL (1738-1822)
GAS DYNAMICS ROBERT BOYLE (1627-1691)
GENETICS GREGOR MENDEL (1822-1884)
GLACIAL GEOLOGY LOUIS AGASSIZ (1807-1873)
GYNECOLOGY JAMES SIMPSON (1811-1870)
HYDRAULICS LEONARDO DA VINCI (1452-1519)
HYDROGRAPHY MATTHEW MAURY (1806-1873)
HYDROSTATICS BLAISE PASCAL (1623-1662)
ICHTHYOLOGY LOUIS AGASSIZ (1807-1873)
ISOTOPIC CHEMISTRY WILLIAM RAMSAY (1852-1916)
MODEL ANALYSIS LORD RAYLEIGH (1842-1919)
NATURAL HISTORY JOHN RAY (1627-1705)
NON-EUCLIDEAN GEOMETRY BERNHARD RIEMANN (1826- 1866)
OCEANOGRAPHY MATTHEW MAURY (1806-1873)
OPTICAL MINERALOGY DAVID BREWSTER (1781-1868)
PALEONTOLOGY JOHN WOODWARD (1665-1728)
PATHOLOGY RUDOLPH VIRCHOW (1821-1902)
PHYSICAL ASTRONOMY JOHANN KEPLER (1571-1630)
REVERSIBLE THERMODYNAMICS JAMES JOULE (1818-1889)
STATISTICAL THERMODYNAMICS JAMES CLERK MAXWELL (1831-1879)
STRATIGRAPHY NICHOLAS STENO (1631-1686)
SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY CAROLUS LINNAEUS (1707-1778)
THERMODYNAMICS LORD KELVIN (1824-1907)
THERMOKINETICS HUMPHREY DAVY (1778-1829)
VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY GEORGES CUVIER (1769-1832)
This model of the earth(Image1) supports
these past and predicted events in the future (image 2):
Compare these past and predicted events with the flat earth model.
Please visit the area of the total eclipse predicted events just to
insure they are not fake news created by media, or Trump.
The Bible doesn't tell us the boiling point of water, nor what energy source makes the sun shine.And I want one that teaches the earth is a ball hurling through space.
What I do have are verses that describe an immovable earth, inscribed into the foundation as a seal to wax, and with a firmament overhead, attached to the earth, in which the sun, moon and stars are contained, and an earth that sits on pillars.
What do you have?
More like ...
"I cannot make you see or understand it literally."
Which is appropriate ... since the majority of that language is figurative ...
The Bible doesn't tell us the boiling point of water, nor what energy source makes the sun shine.
But the sun shines because God made all that is -- including His perfect design of nature, physics.
We learn instead in the Bible things that are profound. Adding science to the text would have caused at least 2 very significant harms, a medium-large harm and a huge harm.
The medium-large harm would have been to divert attention from what really matters.
Genesis chapters 1 through 3 are about profound things that deeply matter for our souls, not mere numbers like theories about 144 or 156 hours (trivial stuff). So, only profound things are being given here.
The huge harm that presenting mere science stuff in the Bible would have caused: It would have prevented faith.
Because faith is believing in things you cannot yet see.
(oh, remembering a verse on this too:
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of what we hope for and the certainty of what we do not see.
)
If you can already see it, that's not the 'faith' God wants us to have right now, here and now.
It would be lying would be if someone consciously, knowingly asserted what is really only a theory about how much time passed during Genesis chapter 1, as if their theory was God's word, instead of only their theory, because the Bible doesn't say how much time passed during verse 1, before verse 2 and 3 happened. Asserting it was little or no time see is an added idea or added assumption. It's not in scripture (though I know some try to take the wording in Exodus about the Sabbath day of rest to somehow mean no time passed during verse 1 of Genesis before verse 2 and the first special day of creation on Earth). We can only say "I think during verse 1 that ___ time passed, though we are not told", or "My guess is____". Those would be honest ways of talking about verse 1.I get it. I see this a lot more than I care to. In a nutshell...
"God lied. Primitive people were too dumb to understand more than two things at once, and one of those had to be breathing."
This kind of crap I understand from unbelievers, but not from those who claim to be believers. Just can't wrap my head around it.
Sorry, do you mean an astrolabe? I couldn't find anything relevant for "astroblade".They used to be predicted using an astroblade, a flat representation of the earth. That seemed to work as well.
Which is exactly what you do yourself in assuming that God's intention was to write literal history.That's nice of you two placing yourselves as judges over the intentions of God when He inspired His word to be written down.