1 Like
This is nonsense. There was no earth 13.8 billion years ago. The material of the earth did not even exist at this time. It came from supernovae and neutron star collisions over billions of years before the earth or the sun even existed.
1 Like
In my experience in a previous life as a schoolie, a student asking nuisance questions got sanctioned for time wasting and disrupting the learning of others…so theres that if you want to play games…and your words do speak for themselves as ive already explained.
I claimed it was “minorities” who held the the view. It seems to me that you didnt read that part in the evidence i presented?
From your response there, it appears you didnt even read any of the evidence.
So let me get this straight,
You are citing that a YEC who goes against the mainstream belief system is doing so for convenience?
What convenience would that be given it is your view that demonstrably twists and even attempts to discredit bible texts that are an inconvenience to your view.
For example i believe Moses really existed and the biblical description of the Exodus, 40 years in the wilderness of Sinai, and Joshua’s leadership of the conquest of Canaan are real events…i believe all that because the historical narrative is written that way and is consistent with the preceedeing and subsequent bible narratives as well as its theological lessons…your answer to that dilemma would appear to be…“we are under the new covenant” or “genre”. My response to that would be, where do you obtain credibility to any belief when there is no historical support as both of thr defenses you lean on are based on mythical fairytale because it has no historical narrative.
So I assume you are familiar with the Socratic method.
1 Like
All matter in the universe was made from nothing, in the beginning. Law of conservation of mass. So, in a sense the material (the Deep) that would eventually be formed into the earth did exist. It was without form and void (tohu and bohu).
You didn’t present any evidence. It was not “minorities” that held to a flat earth, it was almost universal.
I am stating that as a fact. YEC begins with the assumption that the Holy Spirit was required to force ancient writers to use literary forms that would not even exist for another two to three thousand years, and ignores anything to the contrary. It picks and chooses what to call metaphorical and what to call literal, totally ignoring that the text is ancient literature with its own standards.
That’s the assumption you start with. You have never actually stopped to examine the actual text to find out if it was intended to be read the way you read it.
If you don’t know the actual genre of a piece of writing, you cannot know what it means.
You’ve slipped back into your pigeon-holing – the above dos not address anything I’ve said.
1 Like
The Bible does not teach that the earth is flat. But it does use flat-earth imagery. As far as we can tell, if they thought about the shape of the earth at all, the ancient Hebrews thought of the earth as flat. Classical Greek thinkers are the first known individuals to have put together enough data from a large enough geographic range to recognize that the earth is round. The more educated New Testament writers may have been aware of this, though we have no data on how much such information trickled down to the general public until quite modern times. Revelation still refers to the corners of the earth. Of course, one hopes that most people can figure out that Revelation is symbolic, but such hope is sometimes disappointed, like the stupid “errors in the Bible” website claiming that “In His hand were seven stars” is an astronomical impossibility. But if one insists that the Bible is speaking scientifically, then the earth is flat with the sky being a solid dome over it. There exist geocentric young-earthers; I do not know specifically how much young-earth and flat-earth advocates overlap these days. The point, however, is that both make the same error of insisting on selected parts of the Bible as teaching science while failing to carefully apply the commands for truthfulness and consistency to examination of their own claims.
2 Likes
There is this interesting book which is about how the Bible was interpreted in the early days, for a few centuries starting about 200 BCE. The society in which the Bible was composed did not read it as what we would call “literalism”.
The Bible As It Was
by James L. Kugel
Belknap Press of Harvard U. Press, 1997
liar…you know full well i have presented a wealth of evidence…its just that you choose to ignore it by digging a hole in the sand, placing your head in that hole and pretending there is none given to you.
If you are going to keep making that statement, my future response will be exactly as above. So if you dont want to be called a liar, dont make statements that can be proven, by the witness of the posts i have made on these forums, to be a flat out lie.
It is a lousy academic who cites themselves as a reference for evidence for their worldview. You cite yourself so often on these forums (an example is the claim “flat earthism was universal” which is absolutely false), it surely must be obvious to you how problematic that is. Its a wonder you havent written your own bible.
You claim “flat earthism was biblical”…i reject that claim because, one of your own arguments on these forums is that God wouldnt lie to us in the fossil record. If God doesnt lie in the fossil record, how then could he lie in visions containing the earth He gave in the bible?
Isaiah 67
Daniel 4
Revelation 21
We could also add in any heavenly visions to the above list…because logically, if the earth is flat, then so is heaven! I wonder how many Christians who are flat earthists you have interviewed who have been asked and affirmed that heaven is flat? Do we have any evidences of that belief in the bible St Roymond?