BIBLE???

  • 109 Replies
  • 30228 Views
*

iWitness

  • 1173
  • +0/-0
  • If the earth is round then what is your problem?
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #30 on: March 20, 2015, 09:25:35 AM »
The Bible is very clear about the shape of the Heavens and Earth on the first page of the Bible, Genesis Chapter 1.

Quote
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Genesis 1:1-2

Quote
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
Genesis 1:6-8

Quote
And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the third day.
Genesis 1:9-13

Quote
And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Genesis 1:14-19

Disclaimer: I am confused. Everything I say is speculative and not admissible in a court of law; however, I am neither insane nor a threat to myself or others. I am simply curious about everything in life and enjoy talking about crazy shit. Oh, & btw I like turtles.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #31 on: March 20, 2015, 09:37:30 AM »
The Bible is very clear about the shape of the Heavens and Earth on the first page of the Bible, Genesis Chapter 1.

As "clear" as it is here...

Quote
Leviticus—  20:13  "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them".

—I didn't think so.  Hypocrite!    ::)

*

SpheresForLife

  • 57
  • +0/-0
  • Protestant Christian and proud Round Earther
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #32 on: March 20, 2015, 09:45:48 AM »

How is this an accurate depiction of Earth from the Bible? The waters above the firmament are clouds. Clouds are made out of water. And how would the firmament keep all the water up there. Firmament means the sky. Water would fall right through
The Constitution is the guide which I will never abandon
-George Washington

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • +0/-0
  • Round Earther
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #33 on: March 20, 2015, 09:53:58 AM »

How is this an accurate depiction of Earth from the Bible? The waters above the firmament are clouds. Clouds are made out of water. And how would the firmament keep all the water up there. Firmament means the sky. Water would fall right through

That model also doesn't explain time zones.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #34 on: March 20, 2015, 10:07:32 AM »
That model also doesn't explain time zones.

I've often wondered whether that depiction is intended to be viewed literally, or is more like a nonsensical cartoon, originally posted elsewhere as a joke.  I can't believe that any rational person would take it seriously—although the guy that repeatedly posts it reckons he has an invisible friend up in the sky LOL.

Maybe he is serious?    ::)

*

JimmyTheCrab

  • 10340
  • +0/-5
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #35 on: March 20, 2015, 10:18:00 AM »
Firstly: It clearly depicts that the earth is flat, even in a dream.
It is a dream - something the writers made clear, yet you dishonestly left out.

Quote
It reveals the worldview of the writers. As I said before we need to read what the authors believed
The authors believed it was a symbolic dream - it tells us nothing about what shape they thought the planet was.

Quote
we cannot pick and choose what we are going to read literally.
Of course we can, only a fool would do otherwise.

Quote
It is all literal.
What, all?

"Isaiah 64:8
Verse Concepts
But now, O LORD, You are our Father, We are the clay, and You our potter; And all of us are the work of Your hand.
"

So, the writers believed everyone was literally made of clay and God was literally a potter with a wheel constructing people?
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #36 on: March 20, 2015, 10:46:21 AM »

   •   Trees were created before man.    (Genesis 1:11-12, 26-27)
   •   Birds were created before man.    (Genesis 1:20-21, 26-27)
   •   Animals were created before man.    (Genesis 1:24-27)
   •   Man and woman were created together.    (Genesis 1:26-27)

My people used to believe, the first birds, animals and humans grew on a big tree. The whole story actually reads like an early attempt of a purely naturalistic explanation for the origin of things. Then the Church came and told us the Truth...

So in actuality, nobody knows whether or not the biblical stories are truthful, or simply fairy stories and myths?  The self-contradictions I've pointed out above support the latter viewpoint.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • +0/-0
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #37 on: March 20, 2015, 10:50:21 AM »
That model also doesn't explain time zones.

Time zones are a human construct.
Read the FAQS.

*

SpheresForLife

  • 57
  • +0/-0
  • Protestant Christian and proud Round Earther
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #38 on: March 20, 2015, 10:59:10 AM »
That model also doesn't explain time zones.

Time zones are a human construct.
The word "Time zone" is a human construct but the model does not explain how on one side of the planet, it's dark, and the other side is light.
The Constitution is the guide which I will never abandon
-George Washington

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • +0/-0
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #39 on: March 20, 2015, 11:01:29 AM »
That model also doesn't explain time zones.

Time zones are a human construct.
The word "Time zone" is a human construct but the model does not explain how on one side of the planet, it's dark, and the other side is light.

Have you personally verified this phenomenon yourself?
Read the FAQS.

*

SpheresForLife

  • 57
  • +0/-0
  • Protestant Christian and proud Round Earther
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #40 on: March 20, 2015, 11:09:02 AM »
That model also doesn't explain time zones.

Time zones are a human construct.
The word "Time zone" is a human construct but the model does not explain how on one side of the planet, it's dark, and the other side is light.

Have you personally verified this phenomenon yourself?
What do you mean? When it's 2:00 PM in Philadelphia, its 7:00 PM in Berlin. It's pretty bright out here and dark over there.
The Constitution is the guide which I will never abandon
-George Washington

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • +0/-0
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #41 on: March 20, 2015, 11:13:04 AM »
That model also doesn't explain time zones.

Time zones are a human construct.
The word "Time zone" is a human construct but the model does not explain how on one side of the planet, it's dark, and the other side is light.

Have you personally verified this phenomenon yourself?
What do you mean? When it's 2:00 PM in Philadelphia, its 7:00 PM in Berlin. It's pretty bright out here and dark over there.

So you've been in both places at the same time to verify this or...?
Read the FAQS.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #42 on: March 20, 2015, 11:17:11 AM »
So you've been in both places at the same time to verify this or...?

I've verified a scenario similar to this speaking with my parents in Melbourne  from New York.


*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • +0/-0
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #43 on: March 20, 2015, 11:17:46 AM »
So you've been in both places at the same time to verify this or...?

I've verified a scenario similar to this speaking with my parents in Melbourne  from New York.

How do you know heavy cloud coverage didn't cause this supposed darkness?
Read the FAQS.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #44 on: March 20, 2015, 11:25:23 AM »
So you've been in both places at the same time to verify this or...?

I've verified a scenario similar to this speaking with my parents in Melbourne  from New York.

How do you know heavy cloud coverage didn't cause this supposed darkness?

Because it was a bright sunny day in Melbourne, and a clear, freezing cold night in NY.  At any rate, have you ever seen the sun completely obscured by heavy clouds in the middle of the day?



?

brandnewb

  • 9
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #45 on: March 20, 2015, 11:26:33 AM »
Alright I was gone for a bit and there is now a lot for me to reply to.

Firstly; Several individuals have pointed out verses that they claim should not be taken literally. Most of these touch on subjects that have been discussed extensively elsewhere. They are not relevant to the discussion of a flat earth. I will address them only briefly because I do not want to distract from the main discussion again.

MAT 1:16 and LUK 3:23

Was Jacob literally Joseph's dad? Or was Heli literally Josephs dad?
Look Here: https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/genealogy/whats-in-a-fathers-name/

Is Jesus literally one with God or is God literally greater than Jesus?

This is a discussion of the Trinity, it is completely separate from the discussion of a flat Earth. Go google the Trinity if you want to look into this question. Or we can discuss it elsewhere in a thread not about the shape of the earth.

Anyway you get the point I wont talk about all of them, all these questions are addressed by authors many times, and the answers are not relevant to a flat earth.

You can just google them, in fact 'answers in genesis' has addressed many of the issues. Sadly they themselves have been miss-led by the lie of a round earth, and fail to admit how the bible actually describes the earth.

Time zones
 
Above iWitness depicts the true nature of the world, as described in genesis. The issue of timezones is not an actual issue. The modern flat earth models that allow for timezones can be incorporated with the vaulted ceiling of the heavens as depicted in the bible. This allows for timezones, and the celestial bodies in the heavens circling as described in Genesis.

But again the issue of timezones is somewhat separate from the argument of how the bible describes the earth. Although admittedly not as much as the theology objections.

AusGeoff

Leviticus 20:13  This is also a separate discussion, bringing harmony to the old and new testaments. Jesus' message to love others, and some of the things found in Leviticus. Again millions of trees have died to make the books written on this topic. And it is not relevant to a flat earth. You can look up the works of other authors on the topic.

The order of creation has also been written about extensively. And you can look up those writers commentary. Lets stay on flat earth.

JimmyTheCrab

How we describe things in dreams reflects how we view them to be. The author thought the earth was flat. And you still have not address the other two versus which have the same problem.

I will add some more:

After this, I saw four angels stationed at the four corners [gonia] of the earth holding back the four winds...(Revelation 7:1).”

Also a dream, but the bible talks about the four corners many more times. And this is a prediction of things to come.  The earth has corners, meaning it is not round. It may not be a square or rectangle either, but there are corners.

“[H]e brings up the mist from the ends of the earth, he opens rifts for the rain and brings the wind out of his storehouses (Jeremiah 51:16).

Ends, spheres don't have ends.

 Isaiah 11:12 
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. (KJV)

Job 38:13
13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV) 
Jeremiah 16:19
19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. (KJV) 
Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV) 
Now before you point out this:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers.  He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.  (From the NIV Bible, Isaiah 40:22)"

Let us point out that we already know the earth has ends. Therefore it must be an imperfect circle that has 'corners' or simply peninsulas that extend into the surrounding water. The above also helps support a solid object for the sky, which I will talk about in a moment.

To quote a author:

The Geographical Meaning of Earth Seas in Genesis 1:10
by Paul Seely:
"There is one verse in the OT, however, which has often been cited at least by laymen as a proof that the earth was understood to be a globe.  I refer to Isaiah 40:22 which speaks of God as the One sitting above the circle of the earth.   This verse does imply that the earth is circular, but there is nothing either in the underlying Hebrew word (hug) or in the context which necessarily implies anything more than the circularity of the flat earth-disc which the historical context and Genesis 1 have given us as the meaning of.  If Isaiah had intended to speak of the earth as a globe, he would probably have used the word he used in 22:18 (dur), meaning 'ball.' "

Water above the heavens are clouds:


Vault of heaven is most definitely a solid object. The above versus in genisis as quoted by iWitness describe it as a physical barrier to divide the waters above and below the heaven. Clouds are not above the heavens, they are in the sky.

Aside from that the bible describes the sky as having physical windows to let the water through many times;

Genesis 7:11, Genesis 8:2, Isaiah 24:18-19, Jeremiah 51:15-16, and Malachi 3:10  all describe the windows or floodgates of the heavens opening to allow the water to fall down to the earth.

But that aside the describes the sky as a solid obect very clearly. Job 37:18 “...can you join him in spreading out the skies, hard as a mirror of cast bronze?”

Quote
The Vault of Heaven Source: (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm)
The vault of heaven is a crucial concept. The word “firmament” appears in the King James version of the Old Testament 17 times, and in each case it is translated from the Hebrew word raqiya, which meant the visible vault of the sky. The word raqiya comes from riqqua, meaning “beaten out.” In ancient times, brass objects were either cast in the form required or beaten into shape on an anvil. A good craftsman could beat a lump of cast brass into a thin bowl. Thus, Elihu asks Job, “Can you beat out [raqa] the vault of the skies, as he does, hard as a mirror of cast metal (Job 37:18)?”

Elihu's question shows that the Hebrews considered the vault of heaven a solid, physical object. Such a large dome would be a tremendous feat of engineering. The Hebrews (and supposedly Yahweh Himself) considered it exactly that, and this point is hammered home by five scriptures:

Job 9:8, “...who by himself spread out the heavens [shamayim]...”

Psalm 19:1, “The heavens [shamayim] tell out the glory of God, the vault of heaven [raqiya] reveals his handiwork.”

Psalm 102:25, “...the heavens [shamayim] were thy handiwork.”

Isaiah 45:12, “I, with my own hands, stretched out the heavens [shamayim] and caused all their host to shine...”

Isaiah 48:13, “...with my right hand I formed the expanse of the sky [shamayim]...”
If these verses are about a mere illusion of a vault, they are surely much ado about nothing. Shamayim comes from shameh, a root meaning to be lofty. It literally means the sky. Other passages complete the picture of the sky as a lofty, physical dome. God “sits throned on the vaulted roof of earth [chuwg], whose inhabitants are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the skies [shamayim] like a curtain, he spreads them out like a tent to live in...[Isaiah 40:22].” Chuwg literally means “circle” or “encompassed.” By extension, it can mean roundness, as in a rounded dome or vault. Job 22:14 says God “walks to and fro on the vault of heaven [chuwg].” In both verses, the use of chuwg implies a physical object, on which one can sit and walk. Likewise, the context in both cases requires elevation. In Isaiah, the elevation causes the people below to look small as grasshoppers. In Job, God's eyes must penetrate the clouds to view the doings of humans below. Elevation is also implied by Job 22:12: “Surely God is at the zenith of the heavens [shamayim] and looks down on all the stars, high as they are.”

This picture of the cosmos is reinforced by Ezekiel's vision. The Hebrew word raqiya appears five times in Ezekiel, four times in Ezekiel 1:22-26 and once in Ezekiel 10:1. In each case the context requires a literal vault or dome. The vault appears above the “living creatures” and glitters “like a sheet of ice.” Above the vault is a throne of sapphire (or lapis lazuli). Seated on the throne is “a form in human likeness,” which is radiant and “like the appearance of the glory of the Lord.” In short, Ezekiel saw a vision of God sitting throned on the vault of heaven, as described in Isaiah 40:22.



The bible leaves no question, the earth is flat. And the sky is a physical object which covers it.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2015, 11:39:05 AM by brandnewb »

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #46 on: March 20, 2015, 11:42:31 AM »
AusGeoff

Leviticus 20:13  This is also a separate discussion, bringing harmony to the old and new testaments. Jesus' message to love others, and some of the things found in Leviticus.  And it is not relevant to a flat earth.

The order of creation has also been written about extensively. And you can look up those writers commentary. Lets stay on flat earth.

LOL... "let's stay on flat earth"?  A very neat—but totally unconvincing deflection there my friend.


Q1:  Do you personally read Leviticus from a literal standpoint, IE that all homosexuals should be killed?

Q2:  Or do you read it as some sort of obscure allegory?

Q3:  If you consider it is an allegory, can you please clarify what it means in contemporary terms?

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • +0/-0
  • Round Earther
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #47 on: March 20, 2015, 12:04:31 PM »
That model also doesn't explain time zones.

Time zones are a human construct.
The word "Time zone" is a human construct but the model does not explain how on one side of the planet, it's dark, and the other side is light.

Have you personally verified this phenomenon yourself?

Are you suggesting that time zones don't exist?
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

JimmyTheCrab

  • 10340
  • +0/-5
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #48 on: March 20, 2015, 12:14:02 PM »
That model also doesn't explain time zones.

Time zones are a human construct.
The word "Time zone" is a human construct but the model does not explain how on one side of the planet, it's dark, and the other side is light.

Have you personally verified this phenomenon yourself?
Are you denying it?
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

?

brandnewb

  • 9
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #49 on: March 20, 2015, 12:38:26 PM »

LOL... "let's stay on flat earth"?  A very neat—but totally unconvincing deflection there my friend.

Im sorry ausGeoff but you are derailing this thread.

Rule 8. Low-content Posting/Derailment
Do not make spammy, non-contributive or low-quality posts, or derail threads by deliberately dragging discussion away from the original topic.


The original topic of this thread is a flat earth, not homosexuality and Christianity.

However since you are clearly not going to let this go I will give you a few links explaining this.
You can take this literally, but it also has to be translated properly and taken within it's proper context. We can get into a big argument about this but that is not what this thread is about.

Other people have already argued this issue elsewhere. It is not a new problem, you are not dealing a deathblow to all of Christianity.

http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/leviticus.html

http://www.createdgay.com/lev

Now I am not saying that I necessarily agree with what is said in the links above. I am just giving you quick examples of discussions that can be read elsewhere. But it is not relevant here.

I'm just trying to prevent this thread getting derailed onto food or something again.


Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #50 on: March 20, 2015, 01:00:26 PM »
Geoff, the other question that has to be asked is, to whom do the Laws in Leviticus apply? The command about not lying with another man is in the Holiness Code. I have heard some Jewish scholars suggest that the forbidding of male homosexuality only applies to Jews. Now, that is a minority view, but nonetheless, it is a view. And notice that NOWHERE in the Hebrew Bible OR the NT does it say ANYTHING about women lying with women. Why not?

Furthermore, one has to figure out why these Laws were imposed. At the time, the nations around Israel were in the habit of castrating men. And then other men would use those non-men, if you will for sexual purposes. You'll notice that in the Holiness Code it also forbids castrating any male creature.

So, when you take all these Laws together, you come up with a collection. Taken as a group, these Laws were designed to put an end to the evil practices of Canaanite religion, essentially, as Canaanite beliefs more or less centered around fertility rituals that degenerated into sexual orgies, ultimately, with people basically fucking the priests and the priestesses, who acted as agents of the gods and goddesses.

Another practice that was ended was men shaving their beards. Why, because castrated men shaved to be more feminine. These non-men, eunuchs, were expected to play the part of the woman during sex. G-d forbade this to his People.

Did he forbid it to non-Jews? Most Jews would say that homosexuality was forbidden to all humans because it violates natural law. But some scholars have differed on the matter. I'm not sure what I think, and I don't spend too much time thinking about it, because I'm not a homosexual, and I don't have close friends that are. The few friends I have that are gay, well, that is their business. Its not my position to tell them how to live their moral lives. I've got enough concerns living my own, thank you.

I think another question arises also. Can you take just one Law from the Holiness Code and apply it, and ignore the rest? Is that fair? Can you have your cake and eat it too? I think many Orthodox Jews would say no. Its all or nothing. Its like taking half the Torah and not the other half. We would be as bad as we think the Christians are for worshiping a Jewish guy but not following the Torah that he himself followed! If we only applied bits and pieces of the Holiness Code, what would that say about us?









« Last Edit: March 20, 2015, 01:12:39 PM by Yaakov ben Avraham »

?

tappet

  • 2162
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #51 on: March 20, 2015, 01:35:30 PM »
You want an example of science telling you to eat this stuff, where the hell do you live?. Start with the fraud Ancel Keys then educate yourself from there.
Your science says that every saturated fat man has ever eaten since being on this earth is bad for his health and will kill him.
So science created an unsaturated, oxidising, toxic seed oil to save his life.
Gee thanks science.
So even with your evolution it just don't work. Really, 4.5 million years eating meat and saturated fat got you here.
Then 30 years ago science says that was all bad for our health, you need the good heart oil. Now your even going against your evolution. How could you evolve to thrive on unsaturated oil in such a short time?
Its all bullshit.
This is why I would not believe an ounce of shit any of you roundies say on here.
Your own chemistry proves unsaturated fats are toxic but you cannot grasp it.
That's right, not my chemistry, your chemistry!

Whose chemistry is it that's telling you that unsaturated fats are bad? At any rate, as I said, don't eat things if you think they're bad for you. Easy-peasy.

Since you mention Dr. Keys, do note that he lived to 100 years old; that's much longer than average, especially for men. If he took his own dietary advice, it must not have been that bad. But anyway - you need to realize that no matter what you do and don't eat, you're still going to die of something. I've already outlived Steve Jobs, of the rigorous Organic-Vegan-Fruitarian-No-processed-food-ever lifestyle, by several years[nb]Maybe not ingesting drugs like Jobs did has something to do with it... dunno.[/nb]. I'm not dead yet and you'd probably be appalled at my diet[nb]It includes *gasp* Not-Organically-Raised-And-Hormone-Free Red Meat and some processed food![/nb]. I don't smoke[nb]I'm not that stupid.[/nb][nb]Or play Russian Roulette.[/nb], always wear a seat belt when traveling in a car, and do get a reasonable amount of exercise; all these are known to help live a longer life.

But brandnewb does have a point. This has gotten off track. Back to the bickering about Bible verses.
Nah,
 I was not going off track. This thread was about the bible/God. Thus I pointed out the round earth God/science and watched all of the round/atheist preachers run in for a sermon. Sit back and watch round earth comments on here, its a religion.
As for food its just like round earth. You have been told what to eat, you do not even know what food is otherwise you would not have made those comments.

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2161
  • +0/-0
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #52 on: March 21, 2015, 05:50:41 PM »
Alright I was gone for a bit and there is now a lot for me to reply to.

Firstly; Several individuals have pointed out verses that they claim should not be taken literally. Most of these touch on subjects that have been discussed extensively elsewhere. They are not relevant to the discussion of a flat earth. I will address them only briefly because I do not want to distract from the main discussion again.

MAT 1:16 and LUK 3:23

Was Jacob literally Joseph's dad? Or was Heli literally Josephs dad?
Look Here: https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/genealogy/whats-in-a-fathers-name/

Is Jesus literally one with God or is God literally greater than Jesus?

This is a discussion of the Trinity, it is completely separate from the discussion of a flat Earth. Go google the Trinity if you want to look into this question. Or we can discuss it elsewhere in a thread not about the shape of the earth.

Anyway you get the point I wont talk about all of them, all these questions are addressed by authors many times, and the answers are not relevant to a flat earth.

You can just google them, in fact 'answers in genesis' has addressed many of the issues. Sadly they themselves have been miss-led by the lie of a round earth, and fail to admit how the bible actually describes the earth.

Time zones
 
Above iWitness depicts the true nature of the world, as described in genesis. The issue of timezones is not an actual issue. The modern flat earth models that allow for timezones can be incorporated with the vaulted ceiling of the heavens as depicted in the bible. This allows for timezones, and the celestial bodies in the heavens circling as described in Genesis.

But again the issue of timezones is somewhat separate from the argument of how the bible describes the earth. Although admittedly not as much as the theology objections.

AusGeoff

Leviticus 20:13  This is also a separate discussion, bringing harmony to the old and new testaments. Jesus' message to love others, and some of the things found in Leviticus. Again millions of trees have died to make the books written on this topic. And it is not relevant to a flat earth. You can look up the works of other authors on the topic.

The order of creation has also been written about extensively. And you can look up those writers commentary. Lets stay on flat earth.

JimmyTheCrab

How we describe things in dreams reflects how we view them to be. The author thought the earth was flat. And you still have not address the other two versus which have the same problem.

I will add some more:

After this, I saw four angels stationed at the four corners [gonia] of the earth holding back the four winds...(Revelation 7:1).”

Also a dream, but the bible talks about the four corners many more times. And this is a prediction of things to come.  The earth has corners, meaning it is not round. It may not be a square or rectangle either, but there are corners.

“[H]e brings up the mist from the ends of the earth, he opens rifts for the rain and brings the wind out of his storehouses (Jeremiah 51:16).

Ends, spheres don't have ends.

 Isaiah 11:12 
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. (KJV)

Job 38:13
13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV) 
Jeremiah 16:19
19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. (KJV) 
Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV) 
Now before you point out this:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers.  He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.  (From the NIV Bible, Isaiah 40:22)"

Let us point out that we already know the earth has ends. Therefore it must be an imperfect circle that has 'corners' or simply peninsulas that extend into the surrounding water. The above also helps support a solid object for the sky, which I will talk about in a moment.

To quote a author:

The Geographical Meaning of Earth Seas in Genesis 1:10
by Paul Seely:
"There is one verse in the OT, however, which has often been cited at least by laymen as a proof that the earth was understood to be a globe.  I refer to Isaiah 40:22 which speaks of God as the One sitting above the circle of the earth.   This verse does imply that the earth is circular, but there is nothing either in the underlying Hebrew word (hug) or in the context which necessarily implies anything more than the circularity of the flat earth-disc which the historical context and Genesis 1 have given us as the meaning of.  If Isaiah had intended to speak of the earth as a globe, he would probably have used the word he used in 22:18 (dur), meaning 'ball.' "

Water above the heavens are clouds:


Vault of heaven is most definitely a solid object. The above versus in genisis as quoted by iWitness describe it as a physical barrier to divide the waters above and below the heaven. Clouds are not above the heavens, they are in the sky.

Aside from that the bible describes the sky as having physical windows to let the water through many times;

Genesis 7:11, Genesis 8:2, Isaiah 24:18-19, Jeremiah 51:15-16, and Malachi 3:10  all describe the windows or floodgates of the heavens opening to allow the water to fall down to the earth.

But that aside the describes the sky as a solid obect very clearly. Job 37:18 “...can you join him in spreading out the skies, hard as a mirror of cast bronze?”

Quote
The Vault of Heaven Source: (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm)
The vault of heaven is a crucial concept. The word “firmament” appears in the King James version of the Old Testament 17 times, and in each case it is translated from the Hebrew word raqiya, which meant the visible vault of the sky. The word raqiya comes from riqqua, meaning “beaten out.” In ancient times, brass objects were either cast in the form required or beaten into shape on an anvil. A good craftsman could beat a lump of cast brass into a thin bowl. Thus, Elihu asks Job, “Can you beat out [raqa] the vault of the skies, as he does, hard as a mirror of cast metal (Job 37:18)?”

Elihu's question shows that the Hebrews considered the vault of heaven a solid, physical object. Such a large dome would be a tremendous feat of engineering. The Hebrews (and supposedly Yahweh Himself) considered it exactly that, and this point is hammered home by five scriptures:

Job 9:8, “...who by himself spread out the heavens [shamayim]...”

Psalm 19:1, “The heavens [shamayim] tell out the glory of God, the vault of heaven [raqiya] reveals his handiwork.”

Psalm 102:25, “...the heavens [shamayim] were thy handiwork.”

Isaiah 45:12, “I, with my own hands, stretched out the heavens [shamayim] and caused all their host to shine...”

Isaiah 48:13, “...with my right hand I formed the expanse of the sky [shamayim]...”
If these verses are about a mere illusion of a vault, they are surely much ado about nothing. Shamayim comes from shameh, a root meaning to be lofty. It literally means the sky. Other passages complete the picture of the sky as a lofty, physical dome. God “sits throned on the vaulted roof of earth [chuwg], whose inhabitants are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the skies [shamayim] like a curtain, he spreads them out like a tent to live in...[Isaiah 40:22].” Chuwg literally means “circle” or “encompassed.” By extension, it can mean roundness, as in a rounded dome or vault. Job 22:14 says God “walks to and fro on the vault of heaven [chuwg].” In both verses, the use of chuwg implies a physical object, on which one can sit and walk. Likewise, the context in both cases requires elevation. In Isaiah, the elevation causes the people below to look small as grasshoppers. In Job, God's eyes must penetrate the clouds to view the doings of humans below. Elevation is also implied by Job 22:12: “Surely God is at the zenith of the heavens [shamayim] and looks down on all the stars, high as they are.”

This picture of the cosmos is reinforced by Ezekiel's vision. The Hebrew word raqiya appears five times in Ezekiel, four times in Ezekiel 1:22-26 and once in Ezekiel 10:1. In each case the context requires a literal vault or dome. The vault appears above the “living creatures” and glitters “like a sheet of ice.” Above the vault is a throne of sapphire (or lapis lazuli). Seated on the throne is “a form in human likeness,” which is radiant and “like the appearance of the glory of the Lord.” In short, Ezekiel saw a vision of God sitting throned on the vault of heaven, as described in Isaiah 40:22.



The bible leaves no question, the earth is flat. And the sky is a physical object which covers it.

Dont run away once you answered one  you think works and ignore the ones you can't answer.

Just answer the Solomons horses.

You can't say it can be taken literally if it says he has 40,000 and 4,000 at the same time.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #53 on: March 21, 2015, 05:54:12 PM »
LOL... "let's stay on flat earth"?  A very neat—but totally unconvincing deflection there my friend.

I'm sorry ausGeoff but you are derailing this thread.

And yet another neat—but more than obvious deflection in order to avoid addressing my questions LOL.

Quote
The original topic of this thread is a flat earth, not homosexuality and Christianity.


Nope.  The original topic of this thread is BIBLE.  And the OP says:  "Anyway I am a flat earther and a dedicated christian and I believe everything the bible says is true because it is like no evolution etc. I believe in the flat earth because it makes sense in many ways but also because the bible says so...".

He goes on to question the veracity of biblical texts, and by implication the definitions of the earth from the bible's point of view.  I'm simply pointing out that the bible contains many errors of fact and misinterpretations of the real world, and would have us believing science that was valid at that time 2,500 years ago.

As you've now evaded addressing the truth of several issues, including killing homosexuals,  I'm merely trying to ascertain whether or not you treat every claim in your bible as absolutely true.  In other words, if many of its ethical claims are demonstrably erroneous in the 21st century, then how many of its pseudo-scientific claims (such as a flat earth) are also woefully out of date?


So... do you agree that ethically this is true?

Leviticus—  20:13  "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them".

Yes or no?  Simple question.  Please don't avoid it again.    ::)

?

brandnewb

  • 9
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #54 on: March 21, 2015, 08:21:39 PM »
@ ausGeoff and Lemmiwinks

You clearly did not take the time to look at either of the links I sent you. Or even to read the text of the hyper-links. I think a website called 'createdgay' would not be preaching that we should kill gays.
 So I will just give you the links again, and ignore you just like you are ignoring my answers.


http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/leviticus.html

http://www.createdgay.com/lev


As to the horses, I am sure you think you are very clever. But people have been studying the bible for a long time. You are not going to be able to find some apparent contradiction that has not already already been addressed in great detail elsewhere.

http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/40000-or-4000-in-1-kings-426

http://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_kings/4-26.htm

 http://youthapologeticstraining.com/how-many-stalls-for-horses-and-chariots-did-solomon-have-bible-contradictions-05-episode-317/

Your hatred for religion is evident, you have not even taken the time to look into the readily available answers to your questions. It is easier to read articles that agree with you, then ignor what the other side says in response to your objections.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #55 on: March 21, 2015, 09:00:13 PM »
Your hatred for religion is evident, you have not even taken the time to look into the readily available answers to your questions. It is easier to read articles that agree with you, then ignore what the other side says in response to your objections.

LOL... nope.  I certainly don't "hate" religion.  I laugh at it.  ;D


—And Leviticus abounds with much more murder and mayhem than just killing homosexuals...

20:9 For ever one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.

20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

20:11 And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

20:12 And if a man lie with his daughter in law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood shall be upon them.

20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

20:14 And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you.

20:15 And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast.

20:16 And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

20:17 And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath uncovered his sister's nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity.

20:18 And if a man shall lie with a woman having her sickness [menstruating], and shall uncover her nakedness; he hath discovered her fountain, and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood: and both of them shall be cut off from among their people.

—I could quote a hundred more such inhumane examples of the foulness of the bible and its murderous stipulations.

And religious zealots such as yourself expect us skeptical atheists to even consider its claims that the earth is flat?  You're seriously wasting your time (and ours) bringing your holy book to a debate about matters scientific.

    ::)

?

brandnewb

  • 9
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #56 on: March 21, 2015, 09:40:35 PM »
And religious zealots such as yourself expect us skeptical atheists to even consider its claims that the earth is flat?  You're seriously wasting your time (and ours) bringing your holy book to a debate about matters scientific.

Oh its really too much, I gotta stop. Once you accused me of wasting my time I laughed. You are right I am wasting my time. I don't believe any of this.  The thing that made me laugh is that you are the one who is really wasting their time. Why do you guys come on here and argue with these people? I am quite confident that they are all trolls. And the few who are not trolls and actually believe will never be convinced.

And just look through OPs post history. This is his website: http://libertyjfreedom.wix.com/theearthisflat

He is a complete troll.

But lets be serious for a moment. The bible \is\ full of contradictions, and it is foolish to take it literally. But you need to realize that Christians have been studying it for centuries. They are going to have answers to any contradictions you point out. It only took me a couple minutes to find websites that talked about the things people here asked about.

And for all the verses you just quoted, I'm sure if I spent the time I could find someone trying to explain them away too. And I am sure they are convincing enough that millions of Christians believe it.

More importantly you are coming across as just as much of a fanatic as a fundamentalist christian. You are admittedly more accurately informed then most Christians. But that is not the point, there are many reasonable Christians who I am sure are better informed then you and I.

You may be skeptical of the fact that educated people can also be Christians; so here is a list of some of the most prominent;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_thinkers_in_science#2001.E2.80.93today_.2821st_century.29

The point is that yes there are Christians who are laughable in their beliefs. But there are also atheists who could be accused of the same. (Global warming or Vaccine deniers for instance.) There are also Christians and atheists who are reasonable, intelligent educated people.

LOL... nope.  I certainly don't "hate" religion.  I laugh at it.

I do not laugh at Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Atheism, Agnosticism or any other belief system. They all contain individuals who are intelligent and well educated.


Edit: I also thought I should point out, that I did fulfill the purpose of the Q&A sub-forum in trying to show that the bible indeed says the earth is flat.  (I do not believe the earth is flat, I do believe the bible says it is flat)



« Last Edit: March 21, 2015, 09:55:22 PM by brandnewb »

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #57 on: March 21, 2015, 09:58:15 PM »
I do not laugh at Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Atheism, Agnosticism or any other belief system. They all contain individuals who are intelligent and well educated.

I have to correct your error.

Atheism is not a "belief system".  [1580s, from French athéisme (16C), from Greek atheos "without god"]

?

brandnewb

  • 9
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #58 on: March 21, 2015, 10:08:35 PM »
I do not laugh at Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Atheism, Agnosticism or any other belief system. They all contain individuals who are intelligent and well educated.

I have to correct your error.

Atheism is not a "belief system".  [1580s, from French athéisme (16C), from Greek atheos "without god"]

While you are correct, I could argue it is only a matter of Semantics. Agnosticism is also arguably not a belief system.  "agnostic", according to the philosopher William L. Rowe, is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of God. (yes I stole that right from wiki) Belief that there is no god could be considered a 'system' depending on how you want to define things. At least certainly more so then agnosticism.

But again it is all semantics, and I am sure you can find someone somewhere who cares enough to argue the point with you. I don't care.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2015, 10:10:44 PM by brandnewb »

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: BIBLE???
« Reply #59 on: March 21, 2015, 11:41:15 PM »
Belief that there is no god could be considered a 'system' depending on how you want to define things.

Obviously a ludicrous claim.  That somebody doesn't believe in the existence of leprechauns doesn't mean they have a belief in or an adherence to any "system".  (A system is defined by my dictionary—not me—as a set of entities, real or abstract, comprising a whole.)

BTW, I don't have a belief that gods don't exist—I know for a fact they don't.