Beliefs

I'm not laughing at God's words, just yours. It's on you to prove that the earth doesn't revolve around the sun, since you've made the ridiculous claim.

 

It's actually you laughing at God here, since youre' trying to add to scripture. The Hebrew word translated "circle" is "chuwg", which is a flat disc. It doesn't refer to a schere. By translating it as "sphere" you are guilty of adding to scripture.

I don't think you realize you ignorant that statement makes you sound.

 

I agree, obviously, that Satan is the great deceiver, but let's not forget that we have a responsibility for our own thoughts as well. It is easy for one to say "The Devil made me do it" but it is usually more accurate to say "I listened to the Devil, opened the door, spoke to him for awhile, thought about it and decided to agree to what he offered."

Yes someone can choose not to believe that God exists just as they can choose to listen to the devil or not. Either way our faith should remain in the Lord and our mission is still to tell those who do not believe the truth of Jesus Christ.

 

Then why do you not believe in a flat disc-shaped earth, since scripture describes it? Here, you use eisegesis to posit "sphere" where scripture describes a flat disc. And then you go on to berate others for doign exactly what you just did.

 

Dr. Robert Bakker apparently believed in Creation, though over a long time span. I am a young earth/universe person myself. I find Bakker's remarks regarding evolutionist Richard Dawkins particularly interesting.

The following excerpt is from an interview with Bakker recorded at:

http://scienceblogs.com/laelaps/2008/04/paleontological_profiles_rober.php

[Bakker] We dino-scientists have a great responsibility: our subject matter attracts kids better than any other, except rocket-science. What's the greatest enemy of science education in the U.S.?

Militant Creationism?

No way. It's the loud, strident, elitist anti-creationists. The likes of Richard Dawkins and his colleagues.

These shrill uber-Darwinists come across as insultingly dismissive of any and all religious traditions. If you're not an atheist, then you must be illiterate or stupid and, possibly, a danger to yourself and others.

As many commentators have noted, in televised debates, these Darwinists seem devoid of joy or humor, except a haughty delight in looking down their noses. Dawkinsian screeds are sermons to the choir; the message pleases only those already convinced. Dawkins wins no converts from the majority of U.S. parents who still honor a Biblical tradition. Hitchcock is a far better model. He had his battles with skepticism. He did worry that the discovery of Deep Time would upset the good people of his congregation. But Hitchcock could view three thousand years of scriptural tradition and see much of value - and much concordance with Jurassic geology.

Read his "Religion of Geology". It's a lovely contemplation of how Old Testament and New deal with the beauty in Nature. And the horror. Why is there pain and death among deer and lions? Why is there pain among humans? These questions are of little interest for the Dawkinsians, but trouble most Americans. Hitchcock found no easy answers. But he saw a Plan nevertheless. Millions of years of geological time, with waves after waves of predator and prey, punctuated by extinctions, were recorded in the sedimentary annals.

Careful study of fossil history gave Hitchcock a sense of awe - and privilege. He was a human being during the scientific revolution, fortunate to live at a time when society was awakening to the possibilities of understanding past ecosystems. Petrified jaws and teeth did prove that Nature was always regulated by attack and defense, pain and death. But the net result was extraordinary beauty that could be made intelligible by the human mind.

Apparently Bakker is not a believer in evolution crabtownboy. He just believes that GOD was a slowpoke! Anyhow I was pleased to read his remarks about Dawkins.

 

Just where does Scripture describe a flat disc-shaped earth? I would be interested in reading that. None of the several translations I have seem to include that passage.

 

I see, the Bible was written in English initially

You are showing your belief to be more wackier by the day (your beliefs, not the Bible...I thought I was add that disclaimer since you claim both are one in the same.)

 

A circle is not automatically three dimensional.

 

Like I said...wackier by the day...

 

Where did I say a circle was 3 dimensional? Help me out here! Please!

 

Hi Carico, Johnv is correct.

This Hebrew word "chuwg" pronounced koog translated by circle in the KJV does NOT mean a "sphere" but an expanse of 360 degrees as a man on the pinacle of a mountain turning in a 360 circle to view the earth. This is the meaning of this word, NOT a sphere.

In addition, it is important to read the context of this passage.

In the context of Isaiah 40, God (through Isaiah) is speaking to "my people", "Jerusalem" (Is 40:1), and Mt Zion (Is 40:9):

9 O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain;

The circle of the earth (HaEretz - the Land) is the view of the renewed expanse of the earth from atop Mt Zion where Jesus shall dwell when he comes to rule and reign over Israel, Judah and the nations (goyim).

Isaiah 40

9 O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain; O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God!
10 Behold, the Lord GOD will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him.​

Isaiah 24:23 Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the LORD of hosts shall reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, and before his ancients gloriously.​

However, I agree with you concerning creation as being done in 6 days as opposed to millions, billions ??? of years. That we were brought forth out of the "dust of the earth" not the sea and made in the image and likeness of God.​

Where I disagree with you is your pronouncement that anyone who disagrees with your beliefs (yes, scriptural) is a "wolf in sheep's clothing". ​

Now that may be true that there are those who are such wolves.
But to hold a view in ignorance or out of having been deceived does not condemn a person or preclude them from salvation.​

To believe the gospel which is to believe by faith that Jesus Christ was crucified, died, buried and resurrected for the forgiveness of sin and the gift of eternal life is what is essential.​

There is great deal of study which comes later and thankfully God is patient with us.​

Ephesians 4
14 That we henceforth be no more children,tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:​

The very existence of the apostolic epistles prove that many of God's children did hold erroneous views but nonetheless were still God's children.​

This situation cotinues to this day as more are saved.​

I may be wrong (and I hope I am) but your words concerning those who debate you on this board do not sound like remedial words but judgmental (for which there is a time).​

Galatians 6:1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.​

I say I hope I am wrong because God has this way of measuring us with a similar yardstick by which we measure others. We always come up short.
I know by both the Scripture (primarily) and experience.​

HankD​

 

HankD

The Scripture in question, Isaiah 40:22 states:

It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

You write:

The passage also states that the inhabitants are grasshoppers. Now if you are going to take the statement It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, literally then should we not take the statement and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; literally. The Hebrew word "chagab" means locust, grasshopper. So am I to assume we are grasshoppers. That way if we fall of the edge of the earth perhaps the grasshoppers limited ability to fly will save him. Locusts may do even better. If only that Greek guy, Icarus, had known then he could have used his grasshopper wings and perhaps landed safely after the sun melted the wax on his hand made wings. A real tragedy.

Would it not be much better if we read the passage metaphorically and avoid the nonsense that the Bible teaches a flat earth..

In attempting to establish the validity Scripture I have heard preachers say that science has actually established that the earth has four bulges to represent the four corners in the following Scripture:

Revelation 7:1. And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.

Isaiah 11:12. 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.

 

Please show where Hank ever said that monkeys turn into people. Another lie.

 

Carico, I'm on your side. Just a little more gentle and understanding of those who are yet learning.

But, correct you are, the Scripture uses the word circle and I agree as I explained it. Mt Zion is coming Carico and our great God and Savior will dwell there along with you and I and from that vantage point we will view the expanse of "the Land" and all the Gentile nations flowing into it.

I do understand and agree with you 100% except while webdog may be wrong I don't believe he is trying to prove the Bible wrong.

Also, In our daily lives, I think we all talk about things of which God could care less (perhaps this very conversation) and are a colossal waste of our time (which is really His). Thankfully He understands and loves us nonetheless.

But again you are absolutely correct there is only one thing in this life which matters and only one whose approval we should seek.:

Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.​

It won't be necessary as I have never told one of my 11 children that they were descendants of monkeys (though on many occassions their behavior seemed otherwise). To the contrary, we carefully instructed them in the tenants of a young earth 6 day creation.

You have good message, but FWIW and IMO your delivery needs some compassion.

HankD