Celsus

Hi Sci_Fidelity,

That verse is refering to Nebuchadrezzar's dream, and the most that can be made of it is that the author believes that Nebuchadrezzar believes that the earth is flat. But even this is doubtful--it looks exactly like a figurative sentence, and there's no reason to think otherwise.

Joel

Sci_Fidelity

Ah yes, I remember that now. But it doesn't negate the other passages...

braces_for_impact

So let me get this straight. The new apologetic is:

1. The bible is not inerrant on scientific matters, because the writers of the bible never sought to address science as a topic in the book.


2. The bible is nevertheless, inerrant on theology issues.

Am I getting this straight?

Sci_Fidelity

Correct. Until, of course, you run across something patently absurd, then it is "allegorical." :banghead:

CJD

Braces wrote, "The new apologetic is . . . [so forth and so on, but summed it up nicely in an oversimplistic kind of way]." One minor quibble, really. There is nothing "new" about it. The notion that theology and science are complimentary—rather than in harmony or in contradiction with each other—is very old indeed. So old in fact that the writers/editors of Scripture just assumed it.

By the way, sci fi, is allegory not an appropiate teaching method? Would you prefer that, for example, certain parables (or maybe the story of Jonah?) be prefaced with the following: "The reader should note that the following is purely allegorical, for the sake of teaching, and no attempts should be made to harmonize this story with modern science. Those not schooled in the various literary genres of the ancient Near East should seek the proper guidance before attempting any interpretation. Thank you for your patience."

CJD

Sci_Fidelity

Posted by CJD:


The point is, how do you tell the difference? You have fundamentalists maintaining the "parables" are literally true!!

And what would be preferable, since a supreme being is purported to be behind the words, is a clear and concise text, not one full of parables, absurdities, atrocities and contradictions. One could expect no less from the creator of the universe.

Instead, what we have is an obvious fraud; a collection of ancient stories assembled by primitive, patriarchal and superstitious men desperate to control their populations and explain their surroundings. It could not be more clear. :

Jack the Bodiless

The distinction between "scientific" knowledge and "other" knowledge is a recent invention. In Biblical times, the only distinction that mattered was between "stuff taught as truth" and "stuff taught as myth" (and even that was a hazy distinction).

The Bible is the "Word of God". With the exception of the parables and some of the more poetic psalms and so forth, it is stuff taught as truth: God exists, Jesus died on the Cross, the Earth is flat.

CJD, you seem to be attempting an "argument from authority": folks from long ago saw that the Bible contained falsehoods, they decided these were "allegories", therefore they are.

An old apologetic excuse is still an apologetic excuse.

Sci_Fidelity

Magus is exhibiting a rather irritating habit of abandoning threads when the questions get too tough.

burning

What about the Bible being the Divinely-Inspired Word of God? I mean, as I understand tradition says each and every word in the Bible is supposedly the Breath of God Himself - so obviously each word CANNOT have originated from imagination, literary device (allegory, etc.), or creating a "Jewish national history", etc.

So if the Bible says the Earth is flat (as the folks who excommunicated Galileo obviously believed) or it says the world was literally created in six days, whereas everything in astronomy and geology makes the above incredible...what happens to Divine Inspiration? If Genesis' Creation story has originals in older Canaanite, Mesopo-whatever or Egyptian cosmology (the firmament, El the father of Baal=El the enemy of Baal, Dilmun=Eden, Adapa+Enki+Enkidu=Adam, Nin-ti+Enkidu's Harlot=Eve, Ningishzida=Serpent, etc.)...what does this say about Divine Inspiration, the dogma?

I mean, sure, Innerancy is not necessarily falsified 'coz of human errors in translation, etc., but Divine Inspiration - D-I-V-I-N-E - you'd think is beyond reach of political/religious or any other agenda - or influence: If archaelology lets us see that the OT prophets, on a divinely-revealed mission, were only capable of appealing to the familiar...then what was Inspired, and what was Divine?

net2002

Tim S.:

Job 9:6
Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.

NIV
Job 9
6 He shakes the earth from its place
and makes its pillars tremble.

Funny how the same writer refers to the earth as being supported by pillars.
So much for hanging it on nothing!

Psalm 75:3
When the earth and all its people quake, it is I who hold its pillars firm.

Well, two verses against one! Yeah, gotta be just a figure of speech. But
then.... how can we be sure that Job 26:7 is NOT a figure of speech????
hehehehehe

Job 38:13

13That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be
shaken out of it?

How can you grab the ends of a sphere? Only a flat disc or square could be
grabbed and shaken in this way.


Job 37:3

3 He unleashes his lightning beneath the whole heaven
and sends it to the ends of the earth.

Can lightning travel around the Earth? No. They obviously believed that
theirs was a small, flat earth.

Job 38:4

4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?

If the author of Job believed the earth was spherical, the above question
really would have been better worded, "Who stretched a measuring line around
it?", don't you think?

6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone-


Job 28:24

24For he looketh to the ends of the earth, and seeth under the whole heaven;

Job 37:3

3He directeth it under the whole heaven, and his lightning unto the ends of
the earth.

Psalms 135:7

7He causeth the vapours to ascend from the ends of the earth; he maketh
lightnings for the rain; he bringeth the wind out of his treasuries.

Hehehehe Maketh lightning for the rain? Vapours ascending from the ends
of the earth?

Jeremiah 25:31

31A noise shall come even to the ends of the earth; for the LORD hath a
controversy with the nations, he will plead with all flesh; he will give
them that are wicked to the sword, saith the LORD.

Acts 13:47

47For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light
of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the
earth.

Matthew 4:8, "The devil took him (Jesus) to a very high mountain and
displayed before him all the kingdoms of the world in their
magnificence...." The only plausible reason for the "very high mountain" was
that the altitude would make it possible to see to the ends of the earth.
Only on a flat earth would this be remotely possible, so the New Testament
writers were as ignorant as the Old.

I'll place my money on the countless verses (many I didn't post) that
support a flat earth cosmology rather than 2 verses from Job and Isaiah.

Tip: Let the evidence form your belief, not your belief malform the
evidence.

Snipped extremely biased, excessive text.