What does the bible really teach about the shape of the earth?

I've done some reading and apparently there is a case to be made from the bible that the earth is flat.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

As well as a strong case that the earth is round:

http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html#A5

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path. To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct. However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth? 

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path.

So then which True Christian Church is the REALLY TRUE Christian Church?

To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct.

Incorrect. The vast majority of Christians are capable of understanding the concept of metaphor. You do not seem to be one of these Christians.

However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another

They do contradict each other.

The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives.

If God wanted us to work hard at seeing the truth, you'd think he would have included a lot more about free-thinking and rational observation. He didn't.

If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man

What?

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth?

Only tangentially. FES prefers to base its beliefs on logical, falsifiable science. Most of our members are atheists/agnostics.

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path.

So then which True Christian Church is the REALLY TRUE Christian Church?

The 1st True Christian Church is lead by some seriously misguided people. When we split, it seemed more practical to call ourselves the Second True Christian Church, since the other name had already been taken and we didn't want to be confused with those heretics.

I've done some reading and apparently there is a case to be made from the bible that the earth is flat.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

As well as a strong case that the earth is round:

http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html#A5

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path. To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct. However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth? 

If you want to post about the Bible, please post in the Religion Philosophy forum.

Not trying yo be rude, but if you are only here to scorn and not to listen... it would be helpful to at least post in the proper forums.

also, The bible contradicts itself in several places. Explain these few for me please. I am only here to read. Not to scorn.

EX 9:3-6 God destroys all the cattle (including horses) belonging to the Egyptians.
EX 9:9-11 The people and the cattle are afflicted with boils.
EX 12:12, 29 All the first-born of the cattle of the Egyptians are destroyed.
EX 14:9 After having all their cattle destroyed, then afflicted with boils, and then their first-born cattle destroyed, the Egyptians pursue Moses on horseback.

GE 17:15-16, 20:11-12, 22:17 Abraham and his half sister, Sarai, are married and receive God's blessings.
LE 20:17, DT 27:20-23 Incest is wrong.

GE 11:7-9 God sows discord.
PR 6:16-19 God hates anyone who sows discord.

God created light before he created the Sun or the stars. I'd say the bible starts off on pretty shaky ground there.

Quote from: Mykael on December 20, 2009, 07:52:31 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path.

So then which True Christian Church is the REALLY TRUE Christian Church?

The 1st True Christian Church is lead by some seriously misguided people. When we split, it seemed more practical to call ourselves the Second True Christian Church, since the other name had already been taken and we didn't want to be confused with those heretics.

What did they believe that was so heretic? Not being a jerk here or anything, I'm just curious.

Quote from: Mykael on December 20, 2009, 07:52:31 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path.

So then which True Christian Church is the REALLY TRUE Christian Church?

The 1st True Christian Church is lead by some seriously misguided people. When we split, it seemed more practical to call ourselves the Second True Christian Church, since the other name had already been taken and we didn't want to be confused with those heretics.

Oh why did i even think about taking you seriously. You're ridiculous.

To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct.

Incorrect. The vast majority of Christians are capable of understanding the concept of metaphor. You do not seem to be one of these Christians.
[/quote]

I understand the concept of metaphor, but why would God use metaphor in the bible? The bible is the Holy Gospel, not a literary work. The bible was not meant to go out of date, as so many people today seem to believe. A metaphor used a few thousand years ago can easily lose the clarity of its meaning over time. Metaphors tend to be cultural, and they tend to reference things outside the scope of the immediate text. The bible is a message in a bottle, meant to be understood clearly by anyone who reads this message at any time or place, independent of cultural context. 

The great tragedy of the current era is that the text of the bible is not taken seriously because much of it is viewed as irrelevant to current times. Yet it is of paramount relevance. Every word of it.

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct.

Incorrect. The vast majority of Christians are capable of understanding the concept of metaphor. You do not seem to be one of these Christians.

I understand the concept of metaphor, but why would God use metaphor in the bible? The bible is the Holy Gospel, not a literary work. The bible was not meant to go out of date, as so many people today seem to believe. A metaphor used a few thousand years ago can easily lose the clarity of its meaning over time. Metaphors tend to be cultural, and they tend to reference things outside the scope of the immediate text. The bible is a message in a bottle, meant to be understood clearly by anyone who reads this message at any time or place, independent of cultural context. 

The great tragedy of the current era is that the text of the bible is not taken seriously because much of it is viewed as irrelevant to current times. Yet it is of paramount relevance. Every word of it.
[/quote]Even the obvious contradictions?

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I've done some reading and apparently there is a case to be made from the bible that the earth is flat.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

As well as a strong case that the earth is round:

http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html#A5

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path. To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct. However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth? 

If you want to post about the Bible, please post in the Religion Philosophy forum.

Not trying yo be rude, but if you are only here to scorn and not to listen... it would be helpful to at least post in the proper forums.

Sorry, still learning the rules on where to post what here. Only been here 2 days. Sometimes one learns a little through trial and error.

also, The bible contradicts itself in several places. Explain these few for me please. I am only here to read. Not to scorn.

EX 9:3-6 God destroys all the cattle (including horses) belonging to the Egyptians.
EX 9:9-11 The people and the cattle are afflicted with boils.
EX 12:12, 29 All the first-born of the cattle of the Egyptians are destroyed.
EX 14:9? After having all their cattle destroyed, then afflicted with boils, and then their first-born cattle destroyed, the Egyptians pursue Moses on horseback.

I agree that the Bible seems to contradict in many places. As I said, it is often difficult to interpret. As I general rule, I am first interested in interpreting those passages which seems to have the greatest relevance in terms of message. If I ever get around to it, I will more about the smaller details like the one above, which in most cases is merely an academic exercise.

GE 17:15-16, 20:11-12,? 22:17 Abraham and his half sister, Sarai, are married and receive God's blessings.
LE 20:17, DT 27:20-23 Incest is wrong.

Incest is wrong, but Abraham received God's blessings in this case. Therefore it was not wrong in this case.

GE 11:7-9 God sows discord.
PR 6:16-19 God hates anyone? who sows discord.

Clearly God does not hate himself, so clearly "anyone" only refers to mortals. God is not anyone.

God created light? before he created the Sun or the stars. I'd say the bible starts off on pretty shaky ground there.

Now what GOOD would the Sun or the stars have been without the existence of light? The Sun and the stars are only transmission mechanisms.

Quote from: Mykael on December 20, 2009, 07:52:31 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path.

So then which True Christian Church is the REALLY TRUE Christian Church?

The 1st True Christian Church is lead by some seriously misguided people. When we split, it seemed more practical to call ourselves the Second True Christian Church, since the other name had already been taken and we didn't want to be confused with those heretics.

am I the only one that became convinced he was a troll after this post?
A true christian should not say he is on Gods side. He should hope he is on gods side, for who can know the mind of god?

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 08:31:28 PM

Quote from: Mykael on December 20, 2009, 07:52:31 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path.

So then which True Christian Church is the REALLY TRUE Christian Church?

The 1st True Christian Church is lead by some seriously misguided people. When we split, it seemed more practical to call ourselves the Second True Christian Church, since the other name had already been taken and we didn't want to be confused with those heretics.

am I the only one that became convinced he was a troll after this post?
A true christian should not say he is on Gods side. He should hope he is on gods side, for who can know the mind of god?

Did you see my post right after that? you are not alone.

Quote from: theonlydann on December 20, 2009, 08:34:19 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I've done some reading and apparently there is a case to be made from the bible that the earth is flat.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

As well as a strong case that the earth is round:

http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html#A5

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path. To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct. However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth? 

If you want to post about the Bible, please post in the Religion Philosophy forum.

Not trying yo be rude, but if you are only here to scorn and not to listen... it would be helpful to at least post in the proper forums.

Sorry, still learning the rules on where to post what here. Only been here 2 days. Sometimes one learns a little through trial and error.

Quote

also, The bible contradicts itself in several places. Explain these few for me please. I am only here to read. Not to scorn.

EX 9:3-6 God destroys all the cattle (including horses) belonging to the Egyptians.
EX 9:9-11 The people and the cattle are afflicted with boils.
EX 12:12, 29 All the first-born of the cattle of the Egyptians are destroyed.
EX 14:9? After having all their cattle destroyed, then afflicted with boils, and then their first-born cattle destroyed, the Egyptians pursue Moses on horseback.

I agree that the Bible seems to contradict in many places. As I said, it is often difficult to interpret. As I general rule, I am first interested in interpreting those passages which seems to have the greatest relevance in terms of message. If I ever get around to it, I will more about the smaller details like the one above, which in most cases is merely an academic exercise.

Quote

GE 17:15-16, 20:11-12,? 22:17 Abraham and his half sister, Sarai, are married and receive God's blessings.
LE 20:17, DT 27:20-23 Incest is wrong.

Incest is wrong, but Abraham received God's blessings in this case. Therefore it was not wrong in this case.

Quote

GE 11:7-9 God sows discord.
PR 6:16-19 God hates anyone? who sows discord.

Clearly God does not hate himself, so clearly "anyone" only refers to mortals. God is not anyone.

Quote

God created light? before he created the Sun or the stars. I'd say the bible starts off on pretty shaky ground there.

Now what GOOD would the Sun or the stars have been without the existence of light? The Sun and the stars are only transmission mechanisms.

those are some awful answers.

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 08:31:28 PM

Quote from: Mykael on December 20, 2009, 07:52:31 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path.

So then which True Christian Church is the REALLY TRUE Christian Church?

The 1st True Christian Church is lead by some seriously misguided people. When we split, it seemed more practical to call ourselves the Second True Christian Church, since the other name had already been taken and we didn't want to be confused with those heretics.

am I the only one that became convinced he was a troll after this post?
A true christian should not say he is on Gods side. He should hope he is on gods side, for who can know the mind of god?

One should attempt to know the mind of God from reading the bible. I did not say it was easy. I agree anyone can say they are on God's side and that saying it means nothing.

I call the 1st Christian Church heretics because I discovered over time that their leaders were more interested in making money off the congregation than in teaching the true gospel. They were ultimately lazy in attempting a deep understanding of scripture, and I grew to doubt they are actual Christians at all. I do not belong to major organized religion because I do not believe the major organized religions are interested in sincerely spreading the true word of God. They have mainly become big corporations.  

Quote from: optimisticcynic on December 20, 2009, 09:03:20 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 08:31:28 PM

Quote from: Mykael on December 20, 2009, 07:52:31 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path.

So then which True Christian Church is the REALLY TRUE Christian Church?

The 1st True Christian Church is lead by some seriously misguided people. When we split, it seemed more practical to call ourselves the Second True Christian Church, since the other name had already been taken and we didn't want to be confused with those heretics.

am I the only one that became convinced he was a troll after this post?
A true christian should not say he is on Gods side. He should hope he is on gods side, for who can know the mind of god?

One should attempt to know the mind of God from reading the bible. I did not say it was easy. I agree anyone can say they are on God's side and that saying it means nothing.

I call the 1st Christian Church heretics because I discovered over time that their leaders were more interested in making money off the congregation than in teaching the true gospel. They were ultimately lazy in attempting a deep understanding of scripture, and I grew to doubt they are actual Christians at all. I do not belong to major organized religion because I do not believe the major organized religions are interested in sincerely spreading the true word of God. They have mainly become big corporations.  

You attempt to know the mind of God, an omnipotent being... by reading a contradictory book... written by God. Right.

I really think it is a sin to profess to know what God thinks. By that i mean in Christianity. Not in reality.

I've done some reading and apparently there is a case to be made from the bible that the earth is flat.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

As well as a strong case that the earth is round:

http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html#A5

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path. To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct. However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth? 

How about this, stop caring what people over 2000 years ago thought about the shape of the Earth. That literally has nothing to do with christianity, and its people like you that are everything that is wrong with religion. Instead of caring about the insignificant portions of the bible perhaps you should be paying attention to the important parts.

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I've done some reading and apparently there is a case to be made from the bible that the earth is flat.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

As well as a strong case that the earth is round:

http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html#A5

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path. To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct. However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth? 

How about this, stop caring what people over 2000 years ago thought about the shape of the Earth. That literally has nothing to do with christianity, and its people like you that are everything that is wrong with religion. Instead of caring about the insignificant portions of the bible perhaps you should be paying attention to the important parts.

Obviously he can't, because he is pretending to be a bible literalist, and that would blow his troll.

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I've done some reading and apparently there is a case to be made from the bible that the earth is flat.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

As well as a strong case that the earth is round:

http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html#A5

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path. To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct. However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth? 

How about this, stop caring what people over 2000 years ago thought about the shape of the Earth. That literally has nothing to do with christianity, and its people like you that are everything that is wrong with religion. Instead of caring about the insignificant portions of the bible perhaps you should be paying attention to the important parts.

It has nothing to do with caring about what people over 2000 years ago thought, only a question of what the bible says. But I will grant this point: the bible does not seem to say anything about the shape of what the earth might be 2000 years later. God intervenes in the universe on a daily basis. The laws of physics might apply at sometimes and not at others. Or the laws of physics might change over time. Many theoretical physicists are starting to question whether universal constants may have changed over time. All physics can do is attempt to explain --as best it can -- the state of the universe as it exists today. But they are clearly wrong on many facts such as the crazy idea that the earth orbits the sun and not the other way around. Unless God has changed that recently. Perhaps there is a good reason for God changing the nature of the universe over time. As human society has advanced there now be good reason why there are so many more celestial objects. But I don't believe God would make any changes in the universe such as to render the Holy Gospal obsolete.

Quote from: Raist on December 20, 2009, 09:23:14 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I've done some reading and apparently there is a case to be made from the bible that the earth is flat.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

As well as a strong case that the earth is round:

http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html#A5

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path. To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct. However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth? 

How about this, stop caring what people over 2000 years ago thought about the shape of the Earth. That literally has nothing to do with christianity, and its people like you that are everything that is wrong with religion. Instead of caring about the insignificant portions of the bible perhaps you should be paying attention to the important parts.

It has nothing to do with caring about what people over 2000 years ago thought, only a question of what the bible says. But I will grant this point: the bible does not seem to say anything about the shape of what the earth might be 2000 years later. God intervenes in the universe on a daily basis. The laws of physics might apply at sometimes and not at others. Or the laws of physics might change over time. Many theoretical physicists are starting to question whether universal constants may have changed over time. All physics can do is attempt to explain --as best it can -- the state of the universe as it exists today. But they are clearly wrong on many facts such as the crazy idea that the earth orbits the sun and not the other way around. Unless God has changed that recently. Perhaps there is a good reason for God changing the nature of the universe over time. As human society has advanced there now be good reason why there are so many more celestial objects. But I don't believe God would make any changes in the universe such as to render the Holy Gospal obsolete.

So when he wouldn't change anything in the bible to make is obsolete? This means that anything mentioned in the bible that has changed would be of small importance. Perhaps this could apply even further to say that anything that could change is irrelevant to the bible. We could take this a step further by saying that anything in the material world can change and therefore is irrelevant to the bible. Perhaps the bible is purely meant to be a spiritual guide and have no impact on our view of the physical world.

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 09:56:24 PM

Quote from: Raist on December 20, 2009, 09:23:14 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I've done some reading and apparently there is a case to be made from the bible that the earth is flat.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

As well as a strong case that the earth is round:

http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html#A5

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path. To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct. However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth? 

How about this, stop caring what people over 2000 years ago thought about the shape of the Earth. That literally has nothing to do with christianity, and its people like you that are everything that is wrong with religion. Instead of caring about the insignificant portions of the bible perhaps you should be paying attention to the important parts.

It has nothing to do with caring about what people over 2000 years ago thought, only a question of what the bible says. But I will grant this point: the bible does not seem to say anything about the shape of what the earth might be 2000 years later. God intervenes in the universe on a daily basis. The laws of physics might apply at sometimes and not at others. Or the laws of physics might change over time. Many theoretical physicists are starting to question whether universal constants may have changed over time. All physics can do is attempt to explain --as best it can -- the state of the universe as it exists today. But they are clearly wrong on many facts such as the crazy idea that the earth orbits the sun and not the other way around. Unless God has changed that recently. Perhaps there is a good reason for God changing the nature of the universe over time. As human society has advanced there now be good reason why there are so many more celestial objects. But I don't believe God would make any changes in the universe such as to render the Holy Gospal obsolete.

So when he wouldn't change anything in the bible to make is obsolete? This means that anything mentioned in the bible that has changed would be of small importance. Perhaps this could apply even further to say that anything that could change is irrelevant to the bible. We could take this a step further by saying that anything in the material world can change and therefore is irrelevant to the bible. Perhaps the bible is purely meant to be a spiritual guide and have no impact on our view of the physical world.

I agree. And I agree that the purpose of the bible is to be a spiritual guide. But lets look at the world today, shall we? Gays are getting married. Women are treated as equals. These are fundamental values that should not have changed over time. But these values have changed in the liberal Christian community because now nearly everything in the bible is treated as mere metaphor or as a representation of cultural values that shouldn't exist today. If this were true the bible would be irrelevant -- and that is indeed how many people now see it. The REASON it is important to take the bible at least fairly literally, is because otherwise everything starts to run off the page. 

Perhaps our view of the physical world is relevant to religion and perhaps it is not. I do not know the answer to this. As has been said, I do not know the mind of God -- but I am trying my best to understand it as well as a mortal can. Maybe God has a very good reason for the earth to be the center of the universe. Maybe it is important for understanding that humans are God's most cherished creatures. If we start believing there might be aliens out there, then we might start to question if humans really are God's most cherished creatures. It is very, very hard for us to determine which parts of the bible are necessarily more important than the others, due to the fact we don't know what God had in mind. The best approach, therefore, is to take all of it literally, just to be safe.

Dino, are you a sexist?

Also, where to begin. All these fundamental values have and should absolutely no relevance to religion. The dumbest Christian will tell you that religion is based on faith, nothing else. For one to say otherwise is just ridiculous.

Next, with being a biblical literalist there comes many problems, such as noahs ark, the genetics of Adam and eve, the multiple contradictions, creation, ect. When we talk about metaphors, you should refer yourself to the actual thoughts on what the people who actually wrote the bible had in mind (as the bible was "god inspired", not actually written by him) so that would be your best bet.

Quote from: Raist on December 20, 2009, 09:59:16 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 09:56:24 PM

Quote from: Raist on December 20, 2009, 09:23:14 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I've done some reading and apparently there is a case to be made from the bible that the earth is flat.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

As well as a strong case that the earth is round:

http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html#A5

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path. To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct. However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth?  

How about this, stop caring what people over 2000 years ago thought about the shape of the Earth. That literally has nothing to do with christianity, and its people like you that are everything that is wrong with religion. Instead of caring about the insignificant portions of the bible perhaps you should be paying attention to the important parts.

It has nothing to do with caring about what people over 2000 years ago thought, only a question of what the bible says. But I will grant this point: the bible does not seem to say anything about the shape of what the earth might be 2000 years later. God intervenes in the universe on a daily basis. The laws of physics might apply at sometimes and not at others. Or the laws of physics might change over time. Many theoretical physicists are starting to question whether universal constants may have changed over time. All physics can do is attempt to explain --as best it can -- the state of the universe as it exists today. But they are clearly wrong on many facts such as the crazy idea that the earth orbits the sun and not the other way around. Unless God has changed that recently. Perhaps there is a good reason for God changing the nature of the universe over time. As human society has advanced there now be good reason why there are so many more celestial objects. But I don't believe God would make any changes in the universe such as to render the Holy Gospal obsolete.

So when he wouldn't change anything in the bible to make is obsolete? This means that anything mentioned in the bible that has changed would be of small importance. Perhaps this could apply even further to say that anything that could change is irrelevant to the bible. We could take this a step further by saying that anything in the material world can change and therefore is irrelevant to the bible. Perhaps the bible is purely meant to be a spiritual guide and have no impact on our view of the physical world.

I agree. And I agree that the purpose of the bible is to be a spiritual guide. But lets look at the world today, shall we? Gays are getting married. Women are treated as equals. These are fundamental values that should not have changed over time. But these values have changed in the liberal Christian community because now nearly everything in the bible is treated as mere metaphor or as a representation of cultural values that shouldn't exist today. If this were true the bible would be irrelevant -- and that is indeed how many people now see it. The REASON it is important to take the bible at least fairly literally, is because otherwise everything starts to run off the page.  

Perhaps our view of the physical world is relevant to religion and perhaps it is not. I do not know the answer to this. As has been said, I do not know the mind of God -- but I am trying my best to understand it as well as a mortal can. Maybe God has a very good reason for the earth to be the center of the universe. Maybe it is important for understanding that humans are God's most cherished creatures. If we start believing there might be aliens out there, then we might start to question if humans really are God's most cherished creatures. It is very, very hard for us to determine which parts of the bible are necessarily more important than the others, due to the fact we don't know what God had in mind. The best approach, therefore, is to take all of it literally, just to be safe.

Troll harder, not better; you're too obvious. We've seen enough biblical literalists on FES to know you're not one of them.

http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2007/10/10/what-happens-when-an-agnostic-follows-the-bible-literally-for-one-year/

Interesting interview waith a fellow who lived the Bible literally for a year.

Quote from: Raist on December 20, 2009, 09:59:16 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 09:56:24 PM

Quote from: Raist on December 20, 2009, 09:23:14 PM

Quote from: Dino on December 20, 2009, 06:19:04 PM

I've done some reading and apparently there is a case to be made from the bible that the earth is flat.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

As well as a strong case that the earth is round:

http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html#A5

I am the leader of a small 2nd True Christian Church so I don't take this matter lightly. We have recently broken away from the 1st True Christian Church over a matter of biblical interpretation regarding natural animal sexual behavior, which lead me to believe they were not heading down the true path. To make a long story short I am now in the position of leading vs merely following and thus my responsibilities of biblical interpretation have increased. A true believer accepts that the bible is the word of God and believes God does not deceive, therefore only a literal interpretation of the bible is correct. However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth? 

How about this, stop caring what people over 2000 years ago thought about the shape of the Earth. That literally has nothing to do with christianity, and its people like you that are everything that is wrong with religion. Instead of caring about the insignificant portions of the bible perhaps you should be paying attention to the important parts.

It has nothing to do with caring about what people over 2000 years ago thought, only a question of what the bible says. But I will grant this point: the bible does not seem to say anything about the shape of what the earth might be 2000 years later. God intervenes in the universe on a daily basis. The laws of physics might apply at sometimes and not at others. Or the laws of physics might change over time. Many theoretical physicists are starting to question whether universal constants may have changed over time. All physics can do is attempt to explain --as best it can -- the state of the universe as it exists today. But they are clearly wrong on many facts such as the crazy idea that the earth orbits the sun and not the other way around. Unless God has changed that recently. Perhaps there is a good reason for God changing the nature of the universe over time. As human society has advanced there now be good reason why there are so many more celestial objects. But I don't believe God would make any changes in the universe such as to render the Holy Gospal obsolete.

So when he wouldn't change anything in the bible to make is obsolete? This means that anything mentioned in the bible that has changed would be of small importance. Perhaps this could apply even further to say that anything that could change is irrelevant to the bible. We could take this a step further by saying that anything in the material world can change and therefore is irrelevant to the bible. Perhaps the bible is purely meant to be a spiritual guide and have no impact on our view of the physical world.

I agree. And I agree that the purpose of the bible is to be a spiritual guide. But lets look at the world today, shall we? Gays are getting married. Women are treated as equals. These are fundamental values that should not have changed over time. But these values have changed in the liberal Christian community because now nearly everything in the bible is treated as mere metaphor or as a representation of cultural values that shouldn't exist today. If this were true the bible would be irrelevant -- and that is indeed how many people now see it. The REASON it is important to take the bible at least fairly literally, is because otherwise everything starts to run off the page. 

Perhaps our view of the physical world is relevant to religion and perhaps it is not. I do not know the answer to this. As has been said, I do not know the mind of God -- but I am trying my best to understand it as well as a mortal can. Maybe God has a very good reason for the earth to be the center of the universe. Maybe it is important for understanding that humans are God's most cherished creatures. If we start believing there might be aliens out there, then we might start to question if humans really are God's most cherished creatures. It is very, very hard for us to determine which parts of the bible are necessarily more important than the others, due to the fact we don't know what God had in mind. The best approach, therefore, is to take all of it literally, just to be safe.

You have to also take into account the way the Bible may have been twisted and misinterpreted throughout history. For instance, you broke away from your Christian sect due to the greed displayed by its leaders. It is only safe to assume that whatever "truth" presented by the Bible has been lost and perverted by these kinds of people for a few thousand years.

I prescribe to the Buddhist mindset, "You cannot know the unknowable."

Some bibles use the word sphere, but most use the word circle - which could lead one to believe it is a round flat disc as opposed to a globe.  

I.) Here are the scriptures on circle:

• Isaiah 40:22 - circle of the earth
• Proverbs 8:27 - circle
• Job 26:10 - circle

II.) However, the roundness is further described as a sphere  - based on a terrarium effect.   Remember terrariums were popular in the early mid 70's - my mother had one.  It is dome shaped, and is usually closed at the top, and after watering just once - it would last a long time in between watering, because condensation would build up around the top with tiny beads of water collected on the glass or plastic, and then run back down to water the plant in the terrarium. (see scripture below)

Bible says there was a river issuing out of Eden into 4 branches to water the garden during the days of Adam, but prior to Adam when there was no one living " ..... a mist came up from the ground since it had not rained yet."  (Genesis 2:5 & 6)  Not to confuse with Ge Chapter 1, for chapter 2 is re-emphasizing chapter 1 but with more details.

III.) Some say yeah but ... the bible also speaks about the extremity of the earth (Psalms 46:9); and the ends of the earth (Ps 22:27); which could denote for some that it is a flat disc.  However there is evidence against this too, for the bible says the four extremities of the earth (Is 11:12); and the four corners of the earth (Rev 7:1), which could denote for some that the earth is square.  You cannot take this as the Hebrews (Jews) understood the earth to be square, for in fact the number four is often used to denote that which is fully rounded out, just as we have four directions.  In fact the Hebrews divided the earth into four quarters or regions corresponding to the four points of the compass.  I can show these scriptures too if you like.  However, one would also need to know something about the history of Hebrew people, and the history of Hebrew linguistics to fully get the gist of it - (well for the skeptics anyhow).  However the evidence is NOT just biblical, even some astronomers and cosmologists way prior to Galileo's day knew the earth was round, as well as some cartographers.  Astronomers/ cosmographers -YES did exist long ago as far back as approximately 310 B.C., and cartographers existed as far back as approx. 610 B.C.  Not all of them believed the earth was round, but many did. [/list]

But what if you aren't christian? Kinda throws a wrench in your argument. Also bible was not written by god. What if it was written by satan? Would explain a lot of stuff. Just throwing some stuff out there.

I am pretty convinced that this website is a joke and my main purpose here is to scorn not to listen, but I do have a question for those who really, really, really claim to believe in a FE: do any of your theories tie in clearly with biblical teaching about the earth? 

and then

However, it is true that there are many passages in the bible which SEEM to contradict one another, making literal interpretation a sometimes easy, sometimes difficult, job. The reason God says things which SEEM to contradict is because God wants us to work hard at seeing the truth every day of our lives. If the bible were "easy to get", then the truth would be much less like a woman and more like a man, and humans would not have to struggle so hard to dig deeply into matters of great importance.

Does everybody else here see the bigotry and hypocrisy in this? Your reason as to why the bible contradicts itself is easily as pathetic and "scornful" as 99.99% of the FE arguments so how about you check yourself before you wreck yourself eh?

Lets see some contradictions! Hmmmm
Here is an entire list http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html


I'll read off a few.

What comes first? The human or the beast?

Genesis 1:25-27
(Humans were created after the other animals.)

    And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image.... So God created man in his own image.

Genesis 2:18-19
(Humans were created before the other animals.)

    And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

When did Jesus ascend into heaven?

On the day of his resurrection.

Luke 24:1-51
    Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them. And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.
    ...
    And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. ...
    And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus....
    ...
    And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together....
    ...
    And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
    ...
    And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.

Mark 16:9-19
    Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
    ...
    After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.
    ...
    Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
    ...
    So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

At least eight days after his resurrection.
[/size]

John 20:26
    And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.

Many days after his resurrection.

Acts 13:31
    And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.

Forty days after his resurrection.

Acts 1:2-3, 9
    Until the day in which he was taken up ... he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
    ...
    And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

Care to explain Minister Dino?

Lets see some contradictions! Hmmmm
Here is an entire list http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html


I'll read off a few.

What comes first? The human or the beast?

Quote

Genesis 1:25-27
(Humans were created after the other animals.)

    And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image.... So God created man in his own image.

Quote

Genesis 2:18-19
(Humans were created before the other animals.)

    And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

When did Jesus ascend into heaven?

On the day of his resurrection.

Quote

Luke 24:1-51
    Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them. And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.
    ...
    And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. ...
    And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus....
    ...
    And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together....
    ...
    And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
    ...
    And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.

Mark 16:9-19
    Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
    ...
    After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.
    ...
    Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
    ...
    So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

At least eight days after his resurrection.
[/size]

Quote

John 20:26
    And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.

Many days after his resurrection.

Quote

Acts 13:31
    And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.

Quote

Forty days after his resurrection.

Acts 1:2-3, 9
    Until the day in which he was taken up ... he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
    ...
    And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

Care to explain Minister Dino?

First, the beasts of the earth are different beasts than the beasts of the field and fowl of the air.

Second, regarding the accounts of the resurrection: some of those disciples were idiots.

The earth is flat, that much is sure. You've got cancer? Well fuck dude, there ain't no cure.

Lets see some contradictions! Hmmmm
Here is an entire list http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html


I'll read off a few.

Second, regarding the accounts of the resurrection: some of those disciples were idiots.

TO both of you: 
#1) Genesis Chapter 2 is just a more indepth discussion of Genesis Chapter 1.

#2) When one writes a book, a paper, a thesis or gives a speech - there is a intro, a body, and a conclusion.  You tell people what you are going to tell them, then tell them, then sum up in your conclusion what you aleady told them.  (This goes with point #1) - I would suggest a writing or speech class to understand how Genesis Chapter 1 and 2 are laid out - they make perfect sense - just not to you, perhaps.

#3)Resurrection and ascension are 2 different things.  He rose from the dead, after parts of 3 days had passed, but walked the earth 40 days and then ascended into heaven, where he was seated at the right hand of the Father.  Further explanation:  because humans cannot see the spirit world, they thought they were seeing an apparition, but Jesus said, see me, touch me - see my hands and my feet.  He appeared to them in materialized bodies, but not always the same body of flesh, to reinforce that He had indeed risen from the dead and really was the only begotten son.  Although he appeared in a materialized body and they could feel him, see him, eat with him, and walk with him, he was a spirit that would materialize itself in the human flesh to those he wanted to appear to, but did not materialize himself to those he did not want to.  So I guess technically you could say he was a spirit as soon as he resurrected but, - - -  did not go his way to the father until after the 40 days had passed.  In fact in the OT, even angels could go back and forth between the two realms, so this is not a new concept, nor is it inconsistent. 
 
#4) The comment about apostles beings idiots - not all apostles wrote books of the bible, for some were written by prophets, and apostles did not contribute books to the bible until Jesus' day - which is in the New Testament - like the gospels (that you mentioned).  Even so, all the books were written under divine inspiration from God - and God is NOT an idiot. 

#5) People of the time were actually literate AND NOT illiterate, as most people think.