emotional

Oh, you mean the quasi-deistic starter-God of Theistic Evolution? I've always thought of theistic evolution as being like constitutional monarchy: just as the monarch can't do but what Parliament decrees, so too the God of Theistic Evolution can't create but what natural selection decrees. Not one I could pray to, I think...

In any case: there is absolutely no need for that theory! Naturalistic explanations are sufficient, and work better than the supernaturalist conjectures, and answer even theological questions much better (the problem of Good/Evil, Blind Fate, Predatory Nature and all that). But I digress, this doesn't belong to this forum. All I can say is that the "modern" God of Theistic Evolution is an evolutionary vestigial dropout of the old Biblical God. Gods too have to evolve in order to survive...

Vorkosigan

Hi Photo! There's some scholarship that indicates that Columbus 'underestimate' was purposeful and he knew exactly where he was going. In 1477 or so he visited Iceland and undoubtedly came into contact with the local sagas about Vinland. He carried trade goods more appropo for trading with local tribes rather than advanced civilizations. Portugal appears to have reached Brazil as early as 1444, and Columbus may have known (in order to return from Africa, you had to swing out far to the east into the S. Atlantic, and then sail back, easy to get blown all the way to S America). If I can think of more I'll post.

Michael

NOGO

It was Eratosthene who first computed the earth's circumference. See for example
<a href="http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1457.htm" target="_blank">http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1457.htm</a>
What we must remember is that however ingenious these discoveries were most people and indeed society as a whole, still believed that the earth was flat. Copernicus (died 1543) who proposed the solar system as we see it today had no proof of his theory. His solar system best explained the various observation to date. The debate that followed this theory can best be compared to the evolution debate which is still raging today.

smugg

My favorite:

"Behold, the LORD maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof." Isaiah 24:1

Seems pretty obvious ol' Isaiah was convinced of a scutiform earth.

NOGO

This is good but some people will argue that this does not refer to the phisical earth. See the very next verse which speaks of priests being like people and lenders being as borrowers etc.
Upside down indeed. Must be carefull of alternate legitimate interpretations.

smugg

Ah, well, if the request was for evidence which no Biblical literalist would dare deny, I'm afraid I've never seen any.

NOGO

True enough. I was not being confrontational here. I argued enough with believer that I know that when cornered they come up with the most imaginitive answers.


[ January 25, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]

[ January 25, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]</p>

davidH

ok, lets get something sorted out here.
The Jews did believe that the earth was flat.
That is evidient from some of the verses in the Bible - though not all that you have quoted.
The Jews believed the earth was flat as did everyone else - they believe on the basis of evidience. No one had tried to sail around the world, as far as their eyes could tell the earth was flat.
Sure even the people who began suggesting the world was round were ridiculed.
They had no images from space etc. So they were acting on what their senses told them, and so hardly surprising that when writing the Bible this comes out.
However how does this refute the validity of the Bible and prove it to be false?

To the person who wrote about the stars - use your brain and think logically please.

Just put yourself in his position and imagine that you had just seen this vision of metorites entering the earth's atmosphere.
You have no knowledge of lumps of rock. You do have a name for the bright specks in the night sky (stars). When writing down what you saw tell me truthfully how you would describe what you saw.

The only logical thing is to describe it as stars because as far as you know apart from the moon the stars are all that's up there.

Nogo - I would be interested to see what version you are quoting the Bible verses from. Have you studied the hebrew or greek to see what meaning the verses have?

you gave this verse;

"Ezekiel 1:22-26
And the likeness of the firmament upon the heads of the living creature was as the colour of the terrible crystal, stretched forth over their heads above. And under the firmament were their wings straight, the one toward the other:
every one had two, which covered on this side, and every one had two, which covered on that
side, their bodies. And when they went, I heard the noise of their wings, like the noise of great waters, as the voice of the Almighty, the voice of speech, as the noise of an host: when they stood, they let down their wings. And there was a voice from the firmament that was over their heads, when they stood, and had let down their wings. And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it."

"The firmament or heaven separates water above from waters below. The waters below are obviously the oceans and lakes etc. but what are the waters above?
Note that firmament and heaven are the same. "And God called the firmament Heaven"


You have interpreted this verse to mean the atmosphere or whatever. Get a Bible and read it and see if you think it applies to our atmoshere or even our heavens.

You see you have to take verses in context.
Read the following verses when Ezekiel started seeing this vision.

Ezekiel 1 v 4

"I looked, I saw a windstorm coming out of the north - an immense cloud with flashing lightning and surrounded by brilliant light. The centre of the fire looked like glowing metal and in the fire was what looked like four living creatures.In appearance their form was like that of a man."

You see? How could what Ezekiel was describing have applied to the earth and the heavens? He was describing what he saw in the centre of the fire in an immense cloud. Since the creatures where in this fire how could the firament have implied the heavens etc? It wasn't even refering to the heavens.

Please be careful when quoting verses - get a Bible and look at the context it's in, read the verses around it because it could give a completely different meaning to the words.

I'll reply again to what you said Nogo because I haven't time now.
Yo, Nogo, you have a Bible handy if I give Bible references just so you can read the context to make sure what I am saying is right? If not I'll go into detail on the context too.

hezekiah jones

That only makes it worse. Better to read the entire Bible in the context of all the other books in the world.

NOGO

This is nonsense. You want us to believe that all that the Bible says is what people saw with their eyes. This is wrong.

There is more to it than what their sense told them. There is an implied universe which is very different than the one we know of today. Take for example

NASB Ecclesiastes 1:5 Also, the sun rises and the sun sets; And hastening to its place it rises there again.

The first part is what people see. The second part is what they could not see and is therefore belief. This belief implies a very different world than what we know today.

Another example.
NASB Isaiah 40:22
It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

Can they see the Heavens remsembling a tent?

So it is wrong to says that they just reported what they perceived with their senses.
There are many more examples but these two are sufficient to show how wrong the statement can be.

You are saying that stars and meteorites were the same in the minds of the writers of the Bible. So when the Bible says that stars fall to earth we should read meteorites fall to earth. Well let's see if that fits.

NASB Matthew 24:29
But immediately after the tribulation of those days THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND THE METEORITES WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

What is wrong with this picture?
The sun will be darkened - Unusal event.
The moon wll not give it's light - Unusual event
Meteorites will fall from the sky - is this worthy of mention at the end of the world.
Meteorites falling to earth is a mundane event which happens regularly and in greater frequency around the month of August every year.

NASB Rev 6:12-13
I looked when He broke the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth made of hair, and the whole moon became like blood; and the meteorites of the sky fell to the earth, as a fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by a great wind.

Same as above.
But also do meteorites fall as figs from a tree?
No they don't.
What the author has in mind here is that ALL the stars fall to earth. Directly to earth like figs fall directly to earth from a tree.
Once the sky is empty it departs like a scroll

NASB 6:14
The sky was split apart like a scroll when it is rolled up

Rolled up means that the sky is a surface.
The stars are little lights appended to it.
In genesis God put the stars in the expanse or firmament which God called heaven. And heaven resembles a tent Isaiah 40:22.

Even if meteorites is intended then the context would show that Bible writers believed that the stars of heaven became unhooked from the firmament (or exapnse = heaven) (as figs from a tree) and fell as meteorites.

Very often the Bibles speaks of stars of heaven.
If heaven is like a tent (Isaiah 40:22) then what does that tell you about the what they believed the stars to be.

NASB says "stars of the sky". This is what people's senses showed them that the stars were in the sky. Is it so hard to believe that these same people also thought that these stars could fall to earth in unusual circumstances like the end of the world?

I was quoting mostly from the KJV but any version will do. In this matter they all say the same thing.


I can only hope that you do follow your own advice.


I am not sure if you are saying that all of this was happening inside the cloud but that is clearly not the case.
Notice verse 1 which says that the heavens opened and verse 26 which says that Ezekiel saw the throne of God ABOVE the expanse.

"Expanse" NASB or "firmament" KJV is the same word used in Genesis 1:6-8
God called this thing Heaven Gen 1:8

It cannot be the atmosphere for these reasons (see my previous posts for references)

1 God places the sun, moon and stars within the expanse
2. The water above the expanse is used to water the earth
3 The Heavens or skies is a surface that looks like a tent.

Isaiah 40:22
It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

Remember that God call the expanse heaven. Therefore it resembles a tent.
A tent or curtain is a surface. That is the way Ezekiel also describes it as a surface above the heads of the Cherubin and above the surface is the throne of God. This is also the surface which scrolls away in Revelation 6:14

NASB Isaiah 51:13
and have forgotten the LORD, your Maker, who stretched out the heavens and laid the foundations of the earth,

NASB Zechariah 12:1
Thus says the LORD, who stretched out the heavens and founded the earth and formed the spirit of man within him:

NASB Job 37:18
18 Can you, with Him, spread out the skies, Strong as a molten mirror?

Again the idea of spreading or stetching the skies or heavens.
Now why a molten mirror. In those days they used metals to make mirrors. The metal was molten to make a strong smooth flat surface which was used as a mirror.

Clearly this has nothig to do with what we call Heaven today.

[ January 28, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]

[ January 28, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]

[ January 28, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]

[ January 28, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]</p>