My Line Challenge

[AV1611VET]

Isaiah 40:22a It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers;

I draw a two inch line on a globe to explain that God can sit above that line and see us as grasshoppers.

Am I implying the Earth is flat?

 

[Speedwell]

Isaiah 40:22a It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers;

I draw a two inch line on a globe to explain that God can sit above that line and see us as grasshoppers.

Am I implying the Earth is flat?

No.

 

[durangodawood]

Isaiah 40:22a It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers;

I draw a two inch line on a globe to explain that God can sit above that line and see us as grasshoppers.

Am I implying the Earth is flat?

No you are not implying a flat earth. But your Isaiah quote is.

How does one sit "on a circle" anyway?

 

[AV1611VET]

No.

Wow! And I just finished praying!

 

[AV1611VET]

No you are not implying a flat earth. But your Isaiah quote is.

What if I drew a circle, instead of a two inch line?

 

[durangodawood]

What if I drew a circle, instead of a two inch line?

Same thing. You made a circle. Thats different from the "circle of the earth", which is a description of the nature of the earth.

 

[AV1611VET]

Same thing. You made a circle. Thats different from the "circle of the earth", which is a description of the nature of the earth.

So if I drew a circle on a globe, then said that God sits above that circle and sees us as grasshoppers, you would not construe that as I espousing a flat earth cosmology?

So if I'm not espousing it, why would God be?

 

[Friedrich Rubinstein]

Some people have difficulties with perspective. We say "the sun is low" to describe the position of the earth in relation to the sun, not saying that the sun is literally low. We also call it "sunrise" even though the sun is not even moving. It's rather silly to take perspective-based terms literally.

When you look at a globe from above it seems to be a circle.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I already said no, but you are missing the point in the other thread.

 

[durangodawood]

So if I drew a circle on a globe, then said that God sits above that circle and sees us as grasshoppers, you would not construe that as I espousing a flat earth cosmology?

So if I'm not espousing it, why would God be?

"A circle on the earth" describes where you chose to draw a circle.

"The circle of the earth" describes the nature of the earth.

Totally different, at least in plain language terms.

 

[driewerf]

Isaiah 40:22a It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers;

I draw a two inch line on a globe to explain that God can sit above that line and see us as grasshoppers.

Am I implying the Earth is flat?

A line is not a circle.
A circle is not the circle.
AV1611VET is not Isaiah.

 

[disciple Clint]

Isaiah 40:22a It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers;

I draw a two inch line on a globe to explain that God can sit above that line and see us as grasshoppers.

Am I implying the Earth is flat?

If the circle of the earth is the earth's orbit path, would that make the earth flat?

 

[AV1611VET]

If the circle of the earth is the earth's orbit path, would that make the earth flat?

If you tied the globe to a string and spun it around the room, would that make the globe flat?

 

[Speedwell]

A line is not a circle.
A circle is not the circle.
AV1611VET is not Isaiah.

And ח֣וּג in Isaiah 40:22 is not being used in a way which justifies reading it as making a precise statement about the geometrical shape of the Earth. ח֣וּג doesn't just mean "circle" and it is never used to mean "sphere."

 

[Mr Laurier]

The people who wrote the bible, thought that the Earth was a flat disk that rests on pillars. They thought the sky was a solid structure that supports weight. and that there was a city in top of it. They appear to have assumed that either the city of Jerusalem, or the Valley of Habrun, marked the physical center of both the Earth, and the universe. Something not possible if the Earth is a sphere.

And they do not seem to have looked up very much.
The bible fails to say anything about the night sky, beyond "It never changes". A statement that is contradicted by both;
-All the other sacred texts of antiquity... which all mention the seasonal procession of the constellations, the rise and fall of the north star over the course of the year, the peculiarities of planet movements, and the eclipse cycle.
-And modern scientific observation... which confirms what all those ancient peoples documented, albeit in secular and concrete terms.

 

[AV1611VET]

The people who wrote the bible, thought that the Earth was a flat disk that rests on pillars.

What's modern scholarship's excuse though?

Why can't modern scholarship understand that a circle (line, triangle, square, rectangle) can be drawn on a globe, with the person who drew it standing over that circle, looking down on the globe and commenting on what he sees?

And for the record, anyone who says Isaiah didn't write that passage, then claiming "the people who wrote the Bible ..." is just being facetious.

Scholars like to think they can put themselves inside of the minds of those who lived back then and think like they did, and that's about as ... well ... scholarly as you can get.

 

[Mr Laurier]

What's modern scholarship's excuse though?

For?

Why can't modern scholarship understand that a circle (line, triangle, square, rectangle) can be drawn on a globe, with the person who drew it standing over that circle, looking down on the globe and commenting on what he sees?

Because modern scholarship is not a person.

And for the record, anyone who says Isaiah didn't write that passage, then claiming "the people who wrote the Bible ..." is just being facetious.

Huh?

Scholars like to think they can put themselves inside of the minds of those who lived back then and think like they did, and that's about as ... well ... scholarly as you can get.

I know of no scholar who thinks this. And fewer who like it.
And anyone who likes to do something so absurd, is as un-scholarly as you can be.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Isaiah 40:22a It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers;

I draw a two inch line on a globe to explain that God can sit above that line and see us as grasshoppers.

Am I implying the Earth is flat?

Given that there is no English equivalent of ח֣וּג the word "circle" isn't really a great translation. You may make whatever argument you like concerning English words, it's not really addressing the original meaning.

If you want to argue that the bible was originally written in Jacobian English we can have a different discussion.

 

[AV1611VET]

Given that there is no English equivalent of ח֣וּג the word "circle" isn't really a great translation.

That's nice.

Now, back to the two-inch line please.

 

[Speedwell]

That's nice.

It's also critical to the discussion. Isaiah 40:22 does not imply, much less teach, anything definite about the shape of the Earth.

Now, back to the two-inch line please.

Why? I thought that question had been dealt with.