Earth is Flat and Stationary

[trofimus]

Yeah OK, God made the big bang which made everything, and then several verses later where He says "made" and "fourth day" He actually means "Took out of His pocket on the 4th day"?

Sorry, not true. On the 4th day, He made the Sun. The text says so.

You must understand the original language behind your English translation.

Gen 1:1
"In the beginning (re’shît), God created (bara)..."

bara = to create out of nothing

Gen 1:16
"And God made (asah) two great lights..."

asah = making something from existing material, not ex nihilo creation

Also, the context of the verse is about placing those lights into firmanent, not about their creation in this "day".

 

[Zen]

You must understand the original language behind your English translation.

Gen 1:1
"In the beginning (re’shît), God created (bara)..."

bara = to create out of nothing

Gen 1:16
"And God made (asah) two great lights..."

asah = making something from existing material, not ex nihilo creation

Also, the context of the verse is about placing those lights into firmanent, not about their creation in this "day".

Good, at least you've admitted that He made them and put them there.

עָשָׂה "to make", "to produce", "to work", "to do"

בָּרָא "to create", "to shape", "to form"

 

[trofimus]

Good, at least you've admitted that He made them and put them there.

עָשָׂה "to make", "to produce", "to work", "to do"

בָּרָא "to create", "to shape", "to form"

Yes, He created the Universe from nothing (Big bang) in the verse 1.

In day 4 He placed them to firmanent, in our vocabulary - He made them visible in the sky.

He did not create sun, moon etc "ex nihilo" from nothing, but He made them from existing material in the Universe.

 

[Zen]

Yes, He created the Universe from nothing (Big bang) in the verse 1.

In day 4 He placed them to firmanent, in our vocabulary - He made them visible in the sky.

He did not create sun, moon etc "ex nihilo" from nothing, but He made them from existing material in the Universe.

You're the one that is confusing people by bending scripture and replacing words. Nice trick using latin and hebrew together. English is just fine, thank you.

The word Universe isn't in the bible, neither is big bang. Made is just fine with me.

Now that you can admit that light existed before the Sun and stars, we can move on.

 

[trofimus]

You're the one that is confusing people by bending scripture and replacing words. Nice trick using latin and hebrew together. English is just fine, thank you.

The word Universe isn't in the bible, neither is big bang. Made is just fine with me.

Now that you can admit that light existed before the Sun and stars, we can move on.

English is not just fine. English is OK for basic understanding of the Bible, but if you want to teach us about Genesis etc, you need to see the original language or else you are teaching us blindly. The English translation is not authoritative source for such meanings.

Light on the Earth is received from the sun and other stars.

Light in the Universe? Not so much, light can be produced by various ways.

 

[dcontroversal]

I'm a scientist, and I teach that God created the heavens and the earth (entire universe). I also teach the mechanics of God's universe. Including, the earth is spherical, the earth and planets orbit the sun, the moon orbits the earth, that man has landed on the moon, the mechanics of satellite orbits, and many other facts about God's wonderful creation.

I honestly do not personally know, nor have I met, a single Christian who would even consider the things that you, and a few others have tried to sell on this thread.

One question. What religious sect do you and the other supporting you belong to?

The flat earth society........ HAHAHAH

 

[Zen]

English is not just fine. English is OK for basic understanding of the Bible, but if you want to teach us about Genesis etc, you need to see the original language or else you are teaching us blindly. The English translation is not authoritative source for such meanings.

Light on the Earth is received from the sun and other stars.

Light in the Universe? Not so much, light can be produced by various ways.

"And God said, Let there be light"
"And God saw the light, that it was good"

Which language do I have to be able to speak, to "teach" you what this says? Hebrew?

"And God made two great lights"
"And the evening and the morning were the fourth day."

 

[trofimus]

"And God said, Let there be light"
"And God saw the light, that it was good"

Which language do I have to be able to speak, to "teach" you what this says? Hebrew?

"And God made two great lights"
"And the evening and the morning were the fourth day."

Yes, if you want to teach us something only you can see, you must prove it not by English, but by the original inspired text.

I showed you that the original inspired text contains some deeper meanings you do not see in your translation. Which is your problem, not mine.

If you think your English translation contradicts science, its also your problem only. Original meanings do not contradict it.

 

[Zen]

Yes, if you want to teach us something only you can see, you must prove it not by English, but by the original inspired text.

I showed you that the original inspired text contains some deeper meanings you do not see in your translation.

God's words always have a deeper meaning.

You're trying to bend God's Word to conform to the world. You don't want atheists to think you're stupid.

 

[trofimus]

God's words always have a deeper meaning.

You're trying to bend God's Word to conform to the world. You don't want atheists to think you're stupid.

Sure. And this deeper meaning is in very good agreement with mainstream science, even though you do not like this fact.

You are trying to bend God's Word to be against science. You want atheists to think you're stupid.

 

[Zen]

Sure. And this deeper meaning is in very good agreement with mainstream science, even though you do not like this fact.

You are trying to bend God's Word to be against science. You want atheists to think you're stupid.

No it's not, you're delusional. The big bang theory is garbage, anything that goes against scripture isn't true.

Unlike you I don't care what godless people think, I couldn't care less if they think I'm stupid. Just like 90% of the people here think I'm stupid. So what?

 

[trofimus]

No it's not, you're delusional. The big bang theory is garbage, anything that goes against scripture isn't true.

Unlike you I don't care what godless people think, I couldn't care less if they think I'm stupid. Just like 90% of the people here think I'm stupid. So what?

I showed you that the Big Bang theory is actually in agreement with Scripture.

You probably do not want it to be.

 

[Zen]

I showed you that the Big Bang theory is actually in agreement with Scripture.

You probably do not want it to be.

Either you don't understand what the big bang theory is, or you're just trying to win an argument and don't care about what's true.

The big bang is an atheist fairytale. Created by a Catholic.

If the furthest stars are 13 billion years away, how can the Earth be 6000 years old? If the Earth isn't 6000 years old, then the lineages in scripture aren't true. If they aren't true then the bible is useless fiction.

Why do you want to bend scripture? When Lord Jesus returns are you going to cover Him up with text books and apologize to godless people?

 

[UnderGrace]

It is plausible that the earth is stationary. I have read some interesting proofs for this, I agree it bears investigation.
However I agree that science just does not support that the earth is flat.

Wait... I'd rather have people explore every concept for themselves, even if they are wrong, then assume what one has been programmed... I mean...taught has been correct.
I rather are in the half way stage in that I believe the earth does not move but is still ball shaped, and all moves round the earth.

 

[UnderGrace]

I also agree that everything that is promoted in the world bears scrutiny always.

I fully support the OP in that he or she had the guts to bring this theory and those who've argued the points. Never assume what you have been taught is correct. Always gather all the information and look at what you see taking place for yourself, and then pray and make your decision!

 

[trofimus]

Either you don't understand what the big bang theory is, or you're just trying to win an argument and don't care about what's true.

The big bang is an atheist fairytale. Created by a Catholic.

If the furthest stars are 13 billion years away, how can the Earth be 6000 years old? If the Earth isn't 6000 years old, then the lineages in scripture aren't true. If they aren't true then the bible is useless fiction.

Why do you want to bend scripture? When Lord Jesus returns are you going to cover Him up with text books and apologize to godless people?

"An atheist fairytale created by a Catholic."

Nice. You are so consistent...

Genealogies in Scripture are not from the creation of the planet, but from the creation of Adam. And they are not complete, probably.

 

[Zen]

"An atheist fairytale created by a Catholic."

Nice. You are so consistent...

Genealogies in Scripture are not from the creation of the planet, but from the creation of Adam. And they are not complete, probably.

You're arguing like an atheist. You make the same arguments against scripture that Christopher Hitchens did.

'Oh so God makes everything and then steps back for 11billion years and then steps in'

You and he both think that scripture is flawed, incomplete and stupid. You think it's stupid to believe it. How are you any different?

"Genealogies in scripture are not from the creation of the planet"

1) Adam was created on the 6th (24 hour) day, making it part of the creation of the Earth in Genesis.
2) It's not a planet, it's Earth.
3) None of the pictures of a spherical Earth in this thread have been real.
4) The sabbath is a literal day of rest, of 24 hours, and is included in the 7 day creation. It wasn't a billion years.
5) Billions of year periods don't have "evening and morning".
6) Adam's genealogies extend right through to Jesus Christ in the N.T. giving a complete unbroken history.

 

[trofimus]

You're arguing like an atheist. You make the same arguments against scripture that Christopher Hitchens did.

'Oh so God makes everything and then steps back for 11billion years and then steps in'

You and he both think that scripture is flawed, incomplete and stupid. You think it's stupid to believe it. How are you any different?



1) Adam was created on the 6th (24 hour) day, making it part of the creation of the Earth in Genesis.
2) It's not a planet, it's Earth.
3) None of the pictures of a spherical Earth in this thread have been real.
4) The sabbath is a literal day of rest, of 24 hours, and is included in the 7 day creation. It wasn't a billion years.
5) Billions of year periods don't have "evening and morning".
6) Adam's genealogies extend right through to Jesus Christ in the N.T. giving a complete unbroken history.

"Atheist" is your evil word number one, you are using it when you are in trouble.

Sometimes together with the evil word number two - "Catholic"

 

[Zen]

"Atheist" is your evil word number one, you are using it when you are in trouble.

Sometimes together with the evil word number two - "Catholic"

I accept your forfeit. Have a great day.

 

[GaryA]

If you think your English translation contradicts science, its also your problem only. Original meanings do not contradict it.

It does not contradict science; "science" contradicts it.

Now, just think about that for a while. There is a deeper meaning...