Total Posts:177|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

YEC Inerrancy is flat earth

Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 3:56:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
It's quite simple.

If you believe Genesis accurately describes how the world began using language understandable to the readers of the time, YOU BELIEVE IN A FLAT EARTH.

This isn't up for discussion unless you wish to claim knowledge is "embedded" in the text that would be entirely inaccessible to readers of the time.

Every non-land-locked civilization in existence, especially those surrounding and engulfing the areas where the Jews lived, posited the same general phenomology of a flat earth surrounded by water and covered by some kind of solid dome made of metals or crystals (sky).

Genesis specifically references that the sky above us is actually a solid dome which holds up waters. Early greeks thought the sky was made of crystal and iron.

As the Catholic Encyclopedia states-

"That the Hebrews entertained similar ideas appears from numerous biblical passages. In the first account of the creation (Genesis 1) we read that God created a firmament to divide the upper or celestial from the lower or terrestrial waters. The Hebrew means something beaten or hammered out, and thus extended; the Vulgate rendering, "firmamentum" corresponds more closely with the Greek stereoma (Septuagint, Aquila, and Symmachus), "something made firm or solid". The notion of the solidity of the firmament is moreover expressed in such passages as Job 37:18, where reference is made incidentally to the heavens, "which are most strong, as if they were of molten brass". The same is implied in the purpose attributed to God in creating the firmament, viz. to serve as a wall of separation between the upper and lower of water, it being conceived as supporting a vast celestial reservoir; and also in the account of the deluge (Genesis 7), where we read that the "flood gates of heaven were opened", and shut up" (viii, 2). (Cf. also IV 28 sqq.)"
http://www.newadvent.org...

A grammatical analysis of the root behind firmament confirms this: http://faculty.gordon.edu...

YECs who disagree are forced to explain the following verses relating to the firmament without using concepts/terms not accessible mentally to the readers/hearers of Genesis during the time of Moses.

6. And God saith, `Let an firmament be in the midst of the waters, and let it be separating between waters and waters.'
7 And God maketh the firmament, and it separateth between the waters which [are] under the firmament, and the waters which [are] above the firmament: and it is so.
8 And God calleth to the expanse `Heavens;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day second.
9 And God saith, `Let the waters under the heavens be collected unto one place, and let the dry land be seen:' and it is so.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 3:58:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
In conclusion, anyone who thinks Flat-earthers are stupid, insane, or deny all relevant evidence should reach the same conclusion about YEC inerrantists.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 5:17:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
There is no question as to whether people may have thought the earth to be flat, that is a given. The question is, does the Bible teach that?? The answer is no, it does not, but there is also no reference to a sphere either, but that doesn't mean that it's silent on the shape.

Job 26:7...He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

Isaiah 40:22...It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in

Jeremiah 6:22... Thus saith the Lord, Behold, a people cometh from the north country, and a great nation shall be raised from the sides of the earth.

How can a great nation be raised from the sides of a flat earth when a flat earth can't have sides?? It's obvious that the Bible doesn't teach a flat earth.

I suppose atheists will look at Leviticus, and say that YEC's also have to believe that the Bible teaches that Jews were 2-dimensional squareheads. :)

Leviticus 19:27...Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

This is why we don't turn to atheists to help us interpret the meaning of the Bible.
AbnerGrimm
Posts: 114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 5:35:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 3:58:36 PM, Wnope wrote:
In conclusion, anyone who thinks Flat-earthers are stupid, insane, or deny all relevant evidence should reach the same conclusion about YEC inerrantists.

So, you are saying that the Sumerians, Egyptians, and Hebrews believed the earth was flat? Have you no seen the hieroglyphs and tablets with rounds solar bodies? I doubt they believed the earth was flat.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 5:39:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 5:17:27 PM, medic0506 wrote:
There is no question as to whether people may have thought the earth to be flat, that is a given. The question is, does the Bible teach that?? The answer is no, it does not, but there is also no reference to a sphere either, but that doesn't mean that it's silent on the shape.

Job 26:7...He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

Isaiah 40:22...It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in

Jeremiah 6:22... Thus saith the Lord, Behold, a people cometh from the north country, and a great nation shall be raised from the sides of the earth.

How can a great nation be raised from the sides of a flat earth when a flat earth can't have sides?? It's obvious that the Bible doesn't teach a flat earth.

I suppose atheists will look at Leviticus, and say that YEC's also have to believe that the Bible teaches that Jews were 2-dimensional squareheads. :)

Leviticus 19:27...Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

This is why we don't turn to atheists to help us interpret the meaning of the Bible.

So, zero response to how Genesis 1 makes any sense or how the term firmament is derived etymologically?

Nice.

First off, a flat earth does have sides. No one in history has ever thought "flat earth" is "two dimensional." How could they make sense of digging into the ground and finding more dirt?

The earth was seen as a disc. Like a compass, not a sphere.
http://www.aarweb.org...

Wanna know what hebrew word Isaiah uses in reference to " circle of the earth,"? It's the hebrew word for a compass-shaped object.
http://www.crivoice.org...

Now, let's look at some passages of Job. See if they show a flat earth surrounded by water, supported by pillars, and covered by a solid dome.

Job 26:10 He has described a circle on the face of the waters, at the boundary between light and darkness. (circle again refers to the compass like instrument: http://www.crivoice.org...)

Job 22:14 Thick clouds enwrap him, so that he does not see, and he walks on the dome of heaven. (notice it's not heaven is above the earth as a layer, it is a dome encompassing the earth).

Job 28:24 For he views the ends of the earth and sees everything under the heavens. (you can't view the ends of a round earth, but you can view a flat one)

Job 37:18 can you join him in spreading out the skies, hard as a mirror of cast bronze? (same etymological reference to "dome" sky).

So, to Job 26:7 "He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing."

Ever drop clump of dirt in the ocean? What about a rock? Olden times people, like you, would notice that unsupported materials in water sink. The obvious question is "why the heck isn't the ground under us sinking?"

Hanging the earth upon nothing refers to supporting the earth on the waters.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 5:43:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 5:35:08 PM, AbnerGrimm wrote:
At 5/10/2013 3:58:36 PM, Wnope wrote:
In conclusion, anyone who thinks Flat-earthers are stupid, insane, or deny all relevant evidence should reach the same conclusion about YEC inerrantists.

So, you are saying that the Sumerians, Egyptians, and Hebrews believed the earth was flat? Have you no seen the hieroglyphs and tablets with rounds solar bodies? I doubt they believed the earth was flat.

The sun is a big ball that goes across the sky. So is the moon. They were considered gods by some, pulled by gods by others. Why should they think a round sun means a spherical earth?
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 5:58:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Not flat, flattened , meaning not perfectly circular, but translators did not know so they translate it flat ! it happens a lot.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 7:08:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 5:39:16 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 5/10/2013 5:17:27 PM, medic0506 wrote:
There is no question as to whether people may have thought the earth to be flat, that is a given. The question is, does the Bible teach that?? The answer is no, it does not, but there is also no reference to a sphere either, but that doesn't mean that it's silent on the shape.

Job 26:7...He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

Isaiah 40:22...It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in

Jeremiah 6:22... Thus saith the Lord, Behold, a people cometh from the north country, and a great nation shall be raised from the sides of the earth.

How can a great nation be raised from the sides of a flat earth when a flat earth can't have sides?? It's obvious that the Bible doesn't teach a flat earth.

I suppose atheists will look at Leviticus, and say that YEC's also have to believe that the Bible teaches that Jews were 2-dimensional squareheads. :)

Leviticus 19:27...Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

This is why we don't turn to atheists to help us interpret the meaning of the Bible.

So, zero response to how Genesis 1 makes any sense or how the term firmament is derived etymologically?

Nice.

We've had this talk before and I see no need to repeat it. You're free to believe as you wish but I've shown that it's not necessary for a YEC to believe that the Bible teaches a flat earth. You can show that people believed in a flat earth at one time, I don't dispute that, but it isn't what the Bible says, so what they thought is irrelevant.

First off, a flat earth does have sides. No one in history has ever thought "flat earth" is "two dimensional." How could they make sense of digging into the ground and finding more dirt?

The earth was seen as a disc. Like a compass, not a sphere.
http://www.aarweb.org...

Wanna know what hebrew word Isaiah uses in reference to " circle of the earth,"? It's the hebrew word for a compass-shaped object.
http://www.crivoice.org...

Now, let's look at some passages of Job. See if they show a flat earth surrounded by water, supported by pillars, and covered by a solid dome.

Job 26:10 He has described a circle on the face of the waters, at the boundary between light and darkness. (circle again refers to the compass like instrument: http://www.crivoice.org...)

Job 22:14 Thick clouds enwrap him, so that he does not see, and he walks on the dome of heaven. (notice it's not heaven is above the earth as a layer, it is a dome encompassing the earth).

Job 28:24 For he views the ends of the earth and sees everything under the heavens. (you can't view the ends of a round earth, but you can view a flat one)

Job 37:18 can you join him in spreading out the skies, hard as a mirror of cast bronze? (same etymological reference to "dome" sky).

So, to Job 26:7 "He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing."

Ever drop clump of dirt in the ocean? What about a rock? Olden times people, like you, would notice that unsupported materials in water sink. The obvious question is "why the heck isn't the ground under us sinking?"

Hanging the earth upon nothing refers to supporting the earth on the waters.

As I've said before, you're welcome to your interpretation.
Anti-atheist
Posts: 213
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 7:50:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
If the bible really does say the earth is flat then then the earth is flat Nothing can contradict the bible. Bible doesn't say that your quote is out of context. But its not that unreasoanable to believe in a flat earth. Theres no evidence that proves the earth is a globe. Read flat earth's wiki they have some good compelling proofs.
Anti-atheist

Registered genius
Certified butt-f*cker

imabench for fuhrer '13
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 10:09:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 7:08:48 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 5/10/2013 5:39:16 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 5/10/2013 5:17:27 PM, medic0506 wrote:
There is no question as to whether people may have thought the earth to be flat, that is a given. The question is, does the Bible teach that?? The answer is no, it does not, but there is also no reference to a sphere either, but that doesn't mean that it's silent on the shape.

Job 26:7...He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

Isaiah 40:22...It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in

Jeremiah 6:22... Thus saith the Lord, Behold, a people cometh from the north country, and a great nation shall be raised from the sides of the earth.

How can a great nation be raised from the sides of a flat earth when a flat earth can't have sides?? It's obvious that the Bible doesn't teach a flat earth.

I suppose atheists will look at Leviticus, and say that YEC's also have to believe that the Bible teaches that Jews were 2-dimensional squareheads. :)

Leviticus 19:27...Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

This is why we don't turn to atheists to help us interpret the meaning of the Bible.

So, zero response to how Genesis 1 makes any sense or how the term firmament is derived etymologically?

Nice.

We've had this talk before and I see no need to repeat it. You're free to believe as you wish but I've shown that it's not necessary for a YEC to believe that the Bible teaches a flat earth. You can show that people believed in a flat earth at one time, I don't dispute that, but it isn't what the Bible says, so what they thought is irrelevant.

First off, a flat earth does have sides. No one in history has ever thought "flat earth" is "two dimensional." How could they make sense of digging into the ground and finding more dirt?

The earth was seen as a disc. Like a compass, not a sphere.
http://www.aarweb.org...

Wanna know what hebrew word Isaiah uses in reference to " circle of the earth,"? It's the hebrew word for a compass-shaped object.
http://www.crivoice.org...

Now, let's look at some passages of Job. See if they show a flat earth surrounded by water, supported by pillars, and covered by a solid dome.

Job 26:10 He has described a circle on the face of the waters, at the boundary between light and darkness. (circle again refers to the compass like instrument: http://www.crivoice.org...)

Job 22:14 Thick clouds enwrap him, so that he does not see, and he walks on the dome of heaven. (notice it's not heaven is above the earth as a layer, it is a dome encompassing the earth).

Job 28:24 For he views the ends of the earth and sees everything under the heavens. (you can't view the ends of a round earth, but you can view a flat one)

Job 37:18 can you join him in spreading out the skies, hard as a mirror of cast bronze? (same etymological reference to "dome" sky).

So, to Job 26:7 "He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing."

Ever drop clump of dirt in the ocean? What about a rock? Olden times people, like you, would notice that unsupported materials in water sink. The obvious question is "why the heck isn't the ground under us sinking?"

Hanging the earth upon nothing refers to supporting the earth on the waters.

As I've said before, you're welcome to your interpretation.

"We've had this talk before and I see no need to repeat it. You're free to believe as you wish but I've shown that it's not necessary for a YEC to believe that the Bible teaches a flat earth. You can show that people believed in a flat earth at one time, I don't dispute that, but it isn't what the Bible says, so what they thought is irrelevant."

You've NEVER given a satisfactory account for how the Bible could be read literally without leading to a flat earth. You once tried to argue Newtonian Physics was embedded in Genesis. That's it.

If you are unable to come up with anything past that, feel free to stop posting on this thread.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 10:10:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 6:00:40 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
You need to speak to someone who master Hebrew and is honest ,for an accurate translation!

That's why I went to a historic-grammatical approach.

http://faculty.gordon.edu...
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2013 11:38:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 10:10:21 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 5/10/2013 6:00:40 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
You need to speak to someone who master Hebrew and is honest ,for an accurate translation!

That's why I went to a historic-grammatical approach.

http://faculty.gordon.edu...

I must tell you to points , you must know that Arabic and Hevrew are very close , there are even similar words ! and the ysay things about the same way we (arabs) say it.When in Arabic you say that something is solid, it doesn't necessarily mean it is made of solid metal, but it is strong and unbreakable !For flat earth, well it doesn't have to be the entire earth that is flat , cause earth can refer to ground, we have one word for 2 things . if something falls on the ground we'd literally sa:y it fell on earth in Arabic, and I expect it must be similar in Hebrew.please tell me if my statement makes any difference.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 1:01:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 7:08:48 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 5/10/2013 5:39:16 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 5/10/2013 5:17:27 PM, medic0506 wrote:
There is no question as to whether people may have thought the earth to be flat, that is a given. The question is, does the Bible teach that?? The answer is no, it does not, but there is also no reference to a sphere either, but that doesn't mean that it's silent on the shape.

Job 26:7...He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

Isaiah 40:22...It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in

Jeremiah 6:22... Thus saith the Lord, Behold, a people cometh from the north country, and a great nation shall be raised from the sides of the earth.

How can a great nation be raised from the sides of a flat earth when a flat earth can't have sides?? It's obvious that the Bible doesn't teach a flat earth.

I suppose atheists will look at Leviticus, and say that YEC's also have to believe that the Bible teaches that Jews were 2-dimensional squareheads. :)

Leviticus 19:27...Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

This is why we don't turn to atheists to help us interpret the meaning of the Bible.

So, zero response to how Genesis 1 makes any sense or how the term firmament is derived etymologically?

Nice.

We've had this talk before and I see no need to repeat it. You're free to believe as you wish but I've shown that it's not necessary for a YEC to believe that the Bible teaches a flat earth. You can show that people believed in a flat earth at one time, I don't dispute that, but it isn't what the Bible says, so what they thought is irrelevant.

First off, a flat earth does have sides. No one in history has ever thought "flat earth" is "two dimensional." How could they make sense of digging into the ground and finding more dirt?

The earth was seen as a disc. Like a compass, not a sphere.
http://www.aarweb.org...

Wanna know what hebrew word Isaiah uses in reference to " circle of the earth,"? It's the hebrew word for a compass-shaped object.
http://www.crivoice.org...

Now, let's look at some passages of Job. See if they show a flat earth surrounded by water, supported by pillars, and covered by a solid dome.

Job 26:10 He has described a circle on the face of the waters, at the boundary between light and darkness. (circle again refers to the compass like instrument: http://www.crivoice.org...)

Job 22:14 Thick clouds enwrap him, so that he does not see, and he walks on the dome of heaven. (notice it's not heaven is above the earth as a layer, it is a dome encompassing the earth).

Job 28:24 For he views the ends of the earth and sees everything under the heavens. (you can't view the ends of a round earth, but you can view a flat one)

Job 37:18 can you join him in spreading out the skies, hard as a mirror of cast bronze? (same etymological reference to "dome" sky).

So, to Job 26:7 "He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing."

Ever drop clump of dirt in the ocean? What about a rock? Olden times people, like you, would notice that unsupported materials in water sink. The obvious question is "why the heck isn't the ground under us sinking?"

Hanging the earth upon nothing refers to supporting the earth on the waters.

As I've said before, you're welcome to your interpretation.

If you can brush parts of the bible that can be interpreted as literal, as a metaphor, then why not brush the parts that conflict with science in other areas, such as evolution, as metaphor as well?
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 3:36:45 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
cause evolution is not an observable theory man, it has an axiom that was not verified, which is the Common Descent.
errya
Posts: 140
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 3:59:15 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Go to number 5.
The Most Noble Lord Horatio Nelson, Viscount and Baron Nelson, of the Nile and of Burnham Thorpe in the County of Norfolk, Baron Nelson of the Nile and of Hilborough in the said County, Knight of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath, Vice Admiral of the White Squadron of the Fleet, Commander in Chief of his Majesty's Ships and Vessels in the Mediterranean, Duke of Bront" in the Kingdom of Sicily, Knight Grand Cross of the Sicilian Order of St Ferdinand and of Merit, Member of the Ottoman Ord...
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 6:08:45 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 11:38:04 PM, Fruitytree wrote

I must tell you two points , you certainly must know that Arabic and Hevrew are very close , there are even similar words ! and they say things about the same way we (arabs) say it .When in Arabic you say that something is solid, it doesn't necessarily mean it is made of solid metal, but it is strong and unbreakable !For flat earth, well it doesn't have to be the entire earth that is flat , cause earth can refer to ground, we have one word for 2 things . if something falls on the ground we'd literally sa:y it fell on earth in Arabic, and I expect it must be similar in Hebrew.please tell me if my statement makes any difference.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 7:11:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/10/2013 11:38:04 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 5/10/2013 10:10:21 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 5/10/2013 6:00:40 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
You need to speak to someone who master Hebrew and is honest ,for an accurate translation!

That's why I went to a historic-grammatical approach.

http://faculty.gordon.edu...

I must tell you to points , you must know that Arabic and Hevrew are very close , there are even similar words ! and the ysay things about the same way we (arabs) say it.When in Arabic you say that something is solid, it doesn't necessarily mean it is made of solid metal, but it is strong and unbreakable !For flat earth, well it doesn't have to be the entire earth that is flat , cause earth can refer to ground, we have one word for 2 things . if something falls on the ground we'd literally sa:y it fell on earth in Arabic, and I expect it must be similar in Hebrew.please tell me if my statement makes any difference.

All I know is how genesis meant to use the term raqiya, to connote a solid. What wasn't clear in the link?

It explains the two definitions of earth as well as uses of metal as metaphor.
medv4380
Posts: 200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 7:11:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 4:24:22 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 5/11/2013 3:59:15 AM, errya wrote:
Go to number 5.

I did.

I'm talking about 5,000 bc not 200 ad. Try again.

You'll then come up against the Job references you've already looked at, and because you're making a language fallacy by assuming that the Hebrew word for Circle and Sphere aren't the same word. It's like Japanese and the word for blue and green actually being the same word. Knowing what people knew and know at a given point in time is difficult going back 1000 years, and you want to go back past 6000 to prove your point.

How about, instead of burning time trying to spread the lies of the conflict thesis by equating YEC to flat earthers, you go and look up the original source of your "flat earth" accusation. You'll find that "belief" as you're describing it only dates back to the 1800's, and the people who follow it now don't base squat on the bible.

I'm sure if you actually bother to pick up a history book on the subject you might mellow out.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 7:16:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 7:11:54 AM, medv4380 wrote:
At 5/11/2013 4:24:22 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 5/11/2013 3:59:15 AM, errya wrote:
Go to number 5.

I did.

I'm talking about 5,000 bc not 200 ad. Try again.

You'll then come up against the Job references you've already looked at, and because you're making a language fallacy by assuming that the Hebrew word for Circle and Sphere aren't the same word. It's like Japanese and the word for blue and green actually being the same word. Knowing what people knew and know at a given point in time is difficult going back 1000 years, and you want to go back past 6000 to prove your point.

How about, instead of burning time trying to spread the lies of the conflict thesis by equating YEC to flat earthers, you go and look up the original source of your "flat earth" accusation. You'll find that "belief" as you're describing it only dates back to the 1800's, and the people who follow it now don't base squat on the bible.

I'm sure if you actually bother to pick up a history book on the subject you might mellow out.

You wish to argue the earth was considered spherical at a time when the Greeks, Egyptians, and Babylonians all believed in a flat earth?

I dare you to find a source arguing for a spherical earth before 2,000 bc.

I've given a link to a historico grammatical analysis how about you provide a shred of evidence behind your assertion.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 7:41:45 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
when you use a metaphor usually the truth is not equal to metaphor ,

It just away to get the understanding close , so there is a difference between the reality and the metaphor, and there are resemblances. In Arabic we use metaphors a lot an Idea , if you say for example, I'm hungry like a Lion , then you can understand the following :

1- I'm not a lion.

2- lions do get hungry.

3- I am comparing my hunger to lions hunger in order to get the picture close or, in order to exaggerate the truth.
medv4380
Posts: 200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 8:19:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 7:16:58 AM, Wnope wrote:
You wish to argue the earth was considered spherical at a time when the Greeks, Egyptians, and Babylonians all believed in a flat earth?

I dare you to find a source arguing for a spherical earth before 2,000 bc.

I've given a link to a historico grammatical analysis how about you provide a shred of evidence behind your assertion.

I'm arguing that language is to temperamental for you to make a coherent argument, and your assertion is based on a very biased attack originating in the 1800's and not any further back.

The basis for the Egyptians believing that the Earth is flat is that they drew it as a flat circle. However, it's flat because it's on a flat surface. How does anyone draw the earth on a piece of paper. As a flat Circle. Not because the believe the world is flat, but because that's the limitation of their medium.

Without a native speaker of a language you're pretty much lost at figuring out any nuanced meanings behind words.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 8:38:20 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I agree with medv , language is complex you can not translate it then interpret it, you have to interpret it in it's original form only.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 10:18:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 7:41:45 AM, Fruitytree wrote:
when you use a metaphor usually the truth is not equal to metaphor ,

It just away to get the understanding close , so there is a difference between the reality and the metaphor, and there are resemblances. In Arabic we use metaphors a lot an Idea , if you say for example, I'm hungry like a Lion , then you can understand the following :

1- I'm not a lion.

2- lions do get hungry.

3- I am comparing my hunger to lions hunger in order to get the picture close or, in order to exaggerate the truth.

This began with you questioning whether or not the firmament was solid.

The word in question is raqiya, which is used in Genesis 1 as well as several other places.

The Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Definition involves "considered by Hebrews as solid and supporting 'waters' above"
http://studybible.info...

Gesenius's Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon says the same thing.
http://www.blueletterbible.org...

What evidence would be necessary before you could conclude that the firmament mentioned in Genesis was solid?
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 10:28:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 8:19:13 AM, medv4380 wrote:
At 5/11/2013 7:16:58 AM, Wnope wrote:
You wish to argue the earth was considered spherical at a time when the Greeks, Egyptians, and Babylonians all believed in a flat earth?

I dare you to find a source arguing for a spherical earth before 2,000 bc.

I've given a link to a historico grammatical analysis how about you provide a shred of evidence behind your assertion.

I'm arguing that language is to temperamental for you to make a coherent argument, and your assertion is based on a very biased attack originating in the 1800's and not any further back.

The basis for the Egyptians believing that the Earth is flat is that they drew it as a flat circle. However, it's flat because it's on a flat surface. How does anyone draw the earth on a piece of paper. As a flat Circle. Not because the believe the world is flat, but because that's the limitation of their medium.

Without a native speaker of a language you're pretty much lost at figuring out any nuanced meanings behind words.

First off, we know for a fact that civilizations based in India were describing the world as flat and on an infinite ocean. No hieroglyphics to misinterpret.

We know for a fact the Chinese described the earth as flat.

Secondly.....the Egyptians thought the world was a rectangle....not a circle.

Third, the "myth" you are trying to call me on is the claim that CHRISTIANS in the Medieval times thought the world was flat. I've never even come close to saying that.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 10:51:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
There's a very good reason that you find so much convergence between civilizations all over the world on a specific cosmology.

Namely, it derives from direct observation.

Pretend, you have absolutely no scientific knowledge. You don't know the moon is smaller than the sun. You don't know gravity is why things fall. You don't even know where the f*ck all this water in the sky is coming from (why doesn't it always fall down why only sometimes?).

Somebody says "Hey, what's the universe look like?"

Well, there's a lot of land and sea. If you are high enough to the see the horizon and you turn 360 degrees, it looks like the world "stops" at a certain point.

You look out at sea and notice the ocean seems to go forever until it meets the sky. The sky makes a "dome" around everything you see (where it hits the horizon line).

The dome over us that has these big bright objects that cast sunlight but don't fall onto us the way fruit dropped from a tree does.

So, the bright objects are probably stuck in the dome.

You can't see rain most of the time under the dome, so it's probably hiding above the dome and can come down when "gates" are opened.

The above describes the cosmology for nearly every known "flat earth" civilizations at the time.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 8:12:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I can't wait for an inerrantist to try and argue the theory of gravity is hidden in Genesis (i.e. an explanation for why people wouldn't fall off the bottom of a spherical object).

Or better, that people had no conception of gravity and yet thought it reasonable that one can live on the bottom of a spherical object without falling.

Just try to put yourself in their shoes and imagine the implications of a spherical world that rotates in a complete vacuum while moving at thousands of miles an hour.

The Jews would have been called absolute lunatics if the OT really contained that argument.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2013 10:51:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
An inspired author of the Bible is not relegated to the prevelant cosmological beliefs of any civilization, so all these claims are for naught. It's simply an atheist trying to convince people that the Bible says something that it doesn't.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2013 11:25:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/12/2013 10:51:24 AM, medic0506 wrote:
An inspired author of the Bible is not relegated to the prevelant cosmological beliefs of any civilization, so all these claims are for naught. It's simply an atheist trying to convince people that the Bible says something that it doesn't.

You refuse to actually address my arguments and state that you have no wish to engage me in them.

Yet now you do the opposite. I hope you have the ability to back up your claims.

Here's my statement:

"If you believe Genesis accurately describes how the world began using language understandable to the readers of the time, YOU BELIEVE IN A FLAT EARTH."

You disagree. Meaning you think Genesis can be taken literally within the context of the time period and suggest a spherical earth surrounded by a void instead of a flat earth with a solid firmament over it.

Multiple Hebrew lexicons referring to the "firmament" state it was a solid object. This includes Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Lexicon
and Gesenius's Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon. See above for links.

How do you explain Genesis 1:6 and these lexicons without considering the "firmament" to be a solid object?