This is talking about science and the Bible too:
Some passages speak of the sun, moon, and stars moving across the firmament. Not the earth. What is this about the seasons moving?
But the Bible does, in multiple places, teach that the earth is fixed and doesn’t move. Take a look at 1 Chronicles 16:30 –
Worship the Lord in the splendor of his holiness.
Tremble before him, all the earth!
The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved.
There are a bunch of other places as well.
Sure, I’m happy to continue the discussion.
Just so I know how to respond…I need to ask, are you Christian? I only ask because from these posts regarding the earth being “fixed” it seems you are attempting to show/prove that the Bible has a teaching on the earth that is contrary to what we observe and by doing so may be trying to question the truth and authority of God’s word. So I would expect those arguments from a non-believer versus one who believes the Bible and receives it as truth which is why I ask the question respectfully and without judgement.
If you’re a believer, then I’ll just encourage you to study and trust that God’s Word is absolutely true and without error and the Christ that you’ve placed you faith in for salvation will lead you into deeper understanding and faith as you walk with Him. If we have believed in our Lord and Savior Jesus as revealed in the Word of God…the Bible…surely we can believe in all that God has revealed in His word. And we can absolutely then look into the verses that speak of the earth being “fixed” and understand and interpret those properly seeing that they do not teach a belief in an “immovable” earth in time and space that violates or contradicts what we can observe and know through scientific discovery.
If you’re a non-believer, then it would be my desire to present the Gospel to you because you are in need of salvation from the condemnation that hangs over you and will plunge you into eternal judgement should you die without Christ. Discussing whether the Bible teaches the earth is “fixed” is not going to be fruitful in this case as there’s a greater need for salvation and belief.
It would be stupid to make Tom defend the beliefs of Christians he doesn’t agree with, don’t be difficult.
I just responded to Dale and would offer that to you as well to see how we might continue this conversation.
But I would like to respond here and before addressing 1 Chronicles 16:30, I would like to ask how we interpret these verses:
John 2:18-19 - The Jews then said to Him, “What sign do You show us as your authority for doing these things? Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
So one interpretation we can make from this is that Jesus was going to physically destroy the temple and rebuild it physically in three days. This would be the “wooden literalism” approach and as we read in John 2:20, that’s exactly what the the listeners responded with and most incorrectly and blindly. John 2:21-22 give us the interpretation and it is beautiful as it resulted in belief of some of the listeners.
So that is exactly what is being done to verses like 1 Chronicles 16:30. It is incorrectly being interpreted to say “firm” or “cannot be moved” means “the earth is fixed and immovable in time and space”. You, me and anyone reading this live on this earth and we can say as common sense that we are on solid ground…its firm and not moving. Anyone trying to use this to disbelieve or discredit the Biblical record is seeking something that isn’t there.
So I would encourage you to abandon any more of these thoughts that the Bible somehow teaches a belief in the earthly creation that contradicts what we observe in science.
You haven’t been around here much, obviously, or you certainly would not be asking such questions. Nor have you apparently taken note of the tag appended to my name by my ID photo. And then there is this very thread… please read this again above, including the nephrectomy link – it’s a post you even replied to. (You might check out this topic as well.)
? I wasn’t – I was referring to verses in the Bible that indicate that the earth is immobile, not others’ beliefs.
Well then, you obviously are unwilling to accept what the Bible plainly says. You have been led astray by secular science and want to spread false teachings here.
I mean no disrespect in my questions and don’t want to be viewed as a troublemaker here.
I first came to Biologos because it was referred to me and I read in the about us statement that one of the core values was “Christ-centered Faith — We embrace the historical Christian faith, upholding the authority and inspiration of the Bible.”
My desire has been only to highlight that authority and inspiration of the Bible.
I’ll leave it at that. Thanks, Tom
You have not succeeded and you have contradicted yourself.
With all due respect, I will disagree with you. I’ll let me previous response speak for itself. Take care
My biggest problem with YECism:
I’ll read thru that blog…thanks
? I didn’t cite any blogs.
In your post is had a link to “Did bones actually become fossilized in the sediments of “ancient” epeiric (inland) seas on continents?” which is what I referred to as the blog and also included the quote from Augustine.
Ah. That is just another forum topic, not actually a ‘blog’. And that one gets rather long and might not be worth your time to slog all the way through it. (I would rather you look at the objective evidence one, at least the early part of it since it’s not short either ; - )
Thanks…I’ll read thru that one in the coming days.
Further to your *s Tom, they are perfectly orthodox based on the Reformed, Western, literal, ‘plain reading’, historical-grammatical hermeneutic. Somehow the Eastern mindset, i.e. Orthodox, regards the very same texts, used in their hymnody, as allegorical and goes to enormous lengths to deconstruct and reconstruct their meaning based on that Westernly heterodox assumption. Their reconstruction is not damnationist.
A perfect false dichotomy. Rome sits near the pivot with purgatory. A minority in the Reformed West are so horrified with PSA that they incorporate the Orthodox allegorical approach.
But orthodox Reformed, literal minded, plain reading PSA must have YEC with original sin.
None of which relates to God as He is, to transcendence as it is. To the actual meaning of the incarnation-resurrection.
Why would anyone since the Enlightenment want or need to believe in God the cosmic child abuser, child sacrificer?
There are several fairly orthodox and Reformed here that do not demand YEC with original sin. And we relate to God as he is and as he relates to us. That could not happen without the actual meaning of the incarnation-resurrection. Take the incarnational George Müller for example. Maybe some others need more skeptical theism.
It was a gotcha thing. “Look here’s Christians who say they believe the Bible and think kooky stuff. What do you say to that?” He doesn’t have to say anything to that because people believe all kinds of nonsense and use the Bible to justify it. Who cares? The only thing he needs to “answer” for are his own beliefs.
You’re fine, Tom.
The BioLogos organization has a statement of beliefs and all the staff and moderators here subscribe to them. The things that are published on the website have gone through an editorial process and either reflect the position of the organization or ideas they would like to be conversant with. However, this is a discussion forum open to the public, posts are not moderated before they are posted, and anyone with internet access is welcome to throw their two cents in. Some of the participants are not Christian, and those who are represent a very wide swath of belief from many different Christian traditions besides American Evangelical. And some people lack social skills at times. Although many people here will agree with you that the Bible is inspired and authoritative, they may have very different ways of interpreting various passages and applying the truth of the Bible in practice.