^^^
Nonsense. Just because people are not saying anything does not mean we're defeated. Rather, we're allowing you to glory in your ignorance.

And you totally ignored my post and the link seeing you could not refute it.

Welldone, and carry on!
More grease to your elbow!

Joshthefirst: ^^^
Nonsense. Just because people are not saying anything does not mean we're defeated. Rather, we're allowing you to glory in your ignorance.

And you totally ignored my post and the link seeing you could not refute it.

Welldone, and carry on!
More grease to your elbow!

Baba, you are still here. . .

Joshthefirst: ^^^
Nonsense. Just because people are not saying anything does not mean we're defeated. Rather, we're allowing you to glory in your ignorance.

Stop lying. You had no answers for the arguments, they were too much for you. You won't have to wait for too long however, deepsight will soon be here

Joshthefirst: And you totally ignored my post and the link seeing you could not refute it.

Welldone, and carry on!
More grease to your elbow!

And this is your second lie on the same post.

Even though we didn't specifically mention your post, I and mazaje had sufficiently debunked the claim.

If you have problems with the answers, point it out so we can start from there.

Logicboy03:
They couldnt guess or assume that all planetary bodies were like that? When that is all they can see about planetary bodies- hung in space?
Wow, you have become so dishonest

mazaje:
That is because you haven't read much about it. . .Aristarchus of Samos c.310 – c.230 BC. He presented the first known model that placed the Sun at the center of the known universe with the Earth revolving around it (see Solar system). He was influenced by Philolaus of Croton, but he identified the "central fire" with the Sun, and put the other planets in their correct order of distance around the Sun.[1] His astronomical ideas were often rejected in favor of the geocentric theories of Aristotle and Ptolemy. (Wikipedia). . .
Anaximander (c. 610 – c. 546 BC) was the first recorded person to suggest the Earth is a sphere. Erastothenes basically worked out the circumference. It was proven 1800 years later by Magellan's voyage. . . .
Some of these guys new these things b4 they were every written down in the pages of the bible. . .That doesnt mean they got their knowledge from supernatural sources. . .Some of the ideas in some parts of the world were foolish but some were also on point. . .After all the same bible if it is to be taken literally falsely states that the earth was created before the sun. . .

rationalmind:
Thanks for bringing out the point better. That was the same thing I pointed to him.
Even if we admit the general consensus was that earth was on something, it will be wrong to say not one person was right about the "nothing" and it will be equally wrong to say the bible writers were not exposed to that person or that line of thought.

mazaje:
Very true, they mingled with others, to claim they alone knew it is just false. . .For example Democritus (c. 460 – c. 370 BC) held that the earth was round, and stated that originally the universe was comprised of nothing but tiny atoms churning in chaos, until they collided together to form larger units—including the earth and everything on it. He surmised that there are many worlds, some growing, some decaying; some with no sun or moon, some with several. He held that every world has a beginning and an end, and that a world could be destroyed by collision with another world. (Wikipedia) . . Some of these guys even at that time knew things that were just extra ordinary. . .People worshipped some of them because of their knowledge and discoveries, movements were formed after them e,g Pythagoras. . .The writers of the bible knew very little about the earth and the universe compared to the ancient greek philosophers. . .That doesn't mean that the ancient greeks were inspired by their pantheon of greek gods. . .

I accept.

None of this however, explains that reference in the book of Job as "knowledge available to stone age men" - the truth is quite simply that no such proposition was current in such days at such places. Where other astronomical and cosmological propositions existed such as you mentioned, they were very rare indeed: and were certainly not accepted in conventional thinking of the time which was, not only very superstitious, but also very deluded on the matter of the earth. The writer of Job would have to be in a special class to accept and make that allusion, especially as you noted (mazaje) that such men were extremely rare and even worshiped (even long after Job's time).

It has never been my argument on this board that the bible is the inspired word of God - indeed I have argued the reverse excessively. I have been a thorough basher of many things therein, even. So don't mistake me - I am not arguing for necessary Divine Revelation. However I do state that there are many gems of wisdom and truth in the bible. Intuitions deep, profound and ahead of their time. And many rare insights, especially for it's time. Such as Job's.

Whether you like it or not, the Book of Job makes a very rare and unlikely reference to the Earth -

- As hanging on nothing

- As being a sphere [Edit: I believe this reference is in Isaiah, with the word "circle"]

Both of these ideas did not gain currency until many many centuries later.

Both of these references were NOT current conventional thinking at the time. As such, the writer of the book of Job would have been much better than the average "stone age man"!

^^

Roger that. . .

Pope Xander VII:


The point i tired to get across with my analogy was that a god like Yahweh, who spent a large majority of his time in the old testament meddling in the most insignificant of human
affairs can't be the god of this infinite universe(i say this not in certainty).We only hear about Yahweh's conquests in the middle-east( around the Gaza area to be exact). Ask yourself, did other parts of the earth not exist? Oduduwa is to the Yorubas, as Yahweh is to the Jews.

You can't call black holes and stars insignificant! Dinosaurs were wiped off the earth by a Comet! A comet hitting the earth will wipe off life as we currently know it. Humans exist today because the extinction of previous organisms allowed a new wave of organisms to come forth(natural selection ). The future of the earth depends heavily on the astronomical bodies around us.

I buy into that.

Deep Sight:







I accept.

None of this however, explains that reference in the book of Job as "knowledge available to stone age men" - the truth is quite simply that no such proposition was current in such days at such places. Where other astronomical and cosmological propositions existed such as you mentioned, they were very rare indeed: and were certainly not accepted in conventional thinking of the time which was, not only very superstitious, but also very deluded on the matter of the earth. The writer of Job would have to be in a special class to accept and make that allusion, especially as you noted (mazaje) that such men were extremely rare and even worshiped (even long after Job's time).

It has never been my argument on this board that the bible is the inspired word of God - indeed I have argued the reverse excessively. I have been a thorough basher of many things therein, even. So don't mistake me - I am not arguing for necessary Divine Revelation. However I do state that there are many gems of wisdom and truth in the bible. Intuitions deep, profound and ahead of their time. And many rare insights, especially for it's time. Such as Job's.

Whether you like it or not, the Book of Job makes a very rare and unlikely reference to the Earth -

- As hanging on nothing

- As being a sphere

Both of these ideas did not gain currency until many many centuries later.

Both of these references were NOT current conventional thinking at the time. As such, the writer of the book of Job would have been much better than the average "stone age man"!

@ bold....why do you lie like an apologist?

1) The bible describes the earth a circle not a sphere

2) Even the first caveman saw the moon and sun suspended on nothing. How can you claim without evidence that the earth being hung on nothing was not a common view held by the men of the time?

3) Space is not nothing and as such, the view that the earth is suspended on nothing is still damn ignorant.

Deep Sight:


Both of these references were NOT current conventional thinking at the time. As such, the writer of the book of Job would have been much better than the average "stone age man"!

Good. I like the bolded.

In other words, while the writer of the book of Job would have been much better than the average stone age man, what he wrote is not outside what a stone age man could have written.

That was my original argument.

Logicboy03:

@ bold....why do you lie like an apologist?

1) The bible describes the earth a circle not a sphere

2) Even the first caveman saw the moon and sun suspended on nothing. How can you claim without evidence that the earth being hung on nothing was not a common view held by the men of the time?

3) Space is not nothing and as such, the view that the earth is suspended on nothing is still damn ignorant.

Since you say space isn't nothing; what material is space composed of then ?

Logicboy03:

@ bold....why do you lie like an apologist?

Why are you a desperate red eyed cultist? What is your obsession with lies?

1) The bible describes the earth a circle not a sphere

There is a huge debate among historical linguists and translators - many say that the word translated circle refers to s sphere.

2) Even the first caveman saw the moon and sun suspended on nothing. How can you claim without evidence that the earth being hung on nothing was not a common view held by the men of the time?

The fact is that whereas you can easily reach that conclusion today after centuries of science, that was not the view held by the ancient world. They had no idea that the Sun and Moon were bodies similar to the earth in shape and form. Absolutely no idea. That is why for ages sailors were afraid of sailing too far and "falling off the edge of the earth!" And many other such.

3) Space is not nothing and as such, the view that the earth is suspended on nothing is still damn ignorant.

Of course space is not nothing, but it is a perfect description all the same, for a person of that time to say that the earth is hanging on nothing - whereas contemporary ideas imagined all sorts of animals and foundational supports holding up the earth.





PS: Please don't draw me too far into this discussion. I am no Bible apologist. The bible is not my creed. Rationalmind made a statement about how every statement in the bible can be accounted for by stone age thinking. I just thought to point out to him that there are statements in the bible that are beyond stone age thinking.

Other than that, please don't harass me on top bible issue. Thank you.

mazaje: ^^

Roger that. . .

One more thing to note. You had to throw a very large and open field of time around most of the people you mentioned - in some cases up to seven centuries possible variation as to the time they lived and in at least one case up to ten centuries possible variation!

Contrast this with the fact that scholars date the book of Job to 4 - 6th century BCE - which means that the events and statements therein (if they occurred) would have been much older. Indeed some argue that the events occurred many many centuries before that on account of these facts -

1. Job lived 140 years after his calamities (42:16). This corresponds with the lifespans of the patriarchs. For example, Abraham lived 175 years.

2. Job's wealth was reckoned in livestock (1:3; 42:12) which was also true of Abraham (Gen. 12:16) and Jacob (Gen. 30:43).

3. The Sabeans and Chaldeans (Job 1:15, 17) were nomads in Abraham's time, but in later years were not.

4. The Hebrew word (qsitah) translated "piece of silver" (42:11) is used elsewhere only twice (Gen. 33:19, Josh. 24:32). Both times are in reference to Jacob.

5. Job's daughters were heirs of his estate along with their brothers (Job. 42:15). This was not possible later under the Mosaic Law if a daughter's brothers were still living (Num. 27: 8 )

6. Literary works similar in some ways to the Book of Job were written in Egypt and Mesopotamia around the time of the patriarchs.

7. The Book of Job includes no references to the Mosaic institutions (priesthood, laws, tabernacle, special religious days and feasts).

8. The name (sadday) is used of God 31 times in Job (compared with 17 times elsewhere in the Old Testament) and was a name familiar to the patriarchs.

9. Several personal and place names in the book were also associated with the patriarchal period. Examples include (a) Sheba - a grandson of Abraham, (b) Tema - another grandson of Abraham, (c) Eliphaz - a son of Esau, (d) Uz - a nephew of Abraham.

10. Job was a common West Semitic name in the second millennium B.C. Job was also a name of a 19th-century-B.C. prince in the Egyptian Execration texts.

So you should bear that in mind when comparing the statements made therein to statements made much much later by very distinguished minds who you admit were very rare for their time!

@ rationalmind, take note.

^ ^ ^ noted.

Still doesn't however show it couldn't had been written by stone age men. It only demonstrates that, stone age men can atimes show rare intelligence and profound wisdom far beyond their contemporaries. Such was the case of Job.

rationalmind: ^ ^ ^ noted.

Still doesn't however show it couldn't had been written by stone age men. It only demonstrates that, stone age men can atimes show rare intelligence and profound wisdom far beyond their contemporaries. Such was the case of Job.

you're not as smart as the "stone-age men" actually. Infact, you might be a fool in comparison. Man has just learned to build on his knowledge and come together to improve his environment.
Only a foolish person would fail to recognize this. The model dimensions of noah's ark written by "stone-age men" is extremely sea-worthy and without fault. Stone-age men indeed. Sometimes I marvel at your naivete.

The scale of the ark is huge yet remarkably realistic when compared to the largest wooden ships in history. The proportions are even more amazing—they are just like a modern cargo ship. In fact, a 1993 Korean study was unable to find fault with the specifications.
All this makes nonsense of the claim that Genesis was written only a few centuries before Christ, as a mere retelling of earlier Babylonian flood legends such as the Epic of Gilgamesh. The Epic of Gilgamesh story describes a cube-shaped ark, which would have given a dangerously rough ride. This is neither accurate nor scientific. Noah’s ark is the original, while the Gilgamesh Epic is a later distortion.
...

Noah’s ark was the focus of a major 1993 scientific study headed by Dr. Seon Hong at the world-class ship research center KRISO, based in Daejeon, South Korea. Dr. Hong’s team compared 12 hulls of different proportions to discover which design was most practical. No hull shape was found to significantly outperform the 4,300-year-old biblical design. In fact, the ark’s careful balance is easily lost if the proportions are modified, rendering the vessel either unstable, prone to fracture, or dangerously uncomfortable.
The research team found that the proportions of Noah’s ark carefully balanced the conflicting demands of stability (resistance to capsizing), comfort (seakeeping), and strength. In fact, the ark has the same proportions as a modern cargo ship.

Figure 4. The proportions of the ark were found to carefully balance the conflicting demands of stability, comfort, and strength.
The study also confirmed that the ark could handle waves as high as 100 feet (30 m).

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab3/what-did-noahs-ark-look-like


Cave men indeed. I wonder how you'll blindly twist and shamelessly deny this one now, and many more. When would you learn to abandon the foolishness and myopic thinking that comes with blindly denying truth and the special nature of the bible and look at things objectively instead of holding on to the myopic vision and thinking of your acclaimed ancestors?


The bible was written by stone age men I hear.

Incase you don't know, much knowledge has been lost. Our supposed dumb ancients could mould brass and fashion iron and other such things. The romans were the first to use reinforced concrete. Look at a mountain adorned with a garden and water pumped from the ocean to water it(the hanging towers). Why would you continue in this kind of foolish thinking?

The only reason there is technological and scientific advancement in the world today is because of exchange and build-up of knowledge and research.

Stop holding on to false and empty claims. You are not decieving anyone, only publicly embarrasing yourself.

^ ^ ^ ^But wait, are you really genuinely foolish?

This has gotten to be the worst post I have ever read on nairaland. I think there should be an opposite thread to the one on greatest posts where stewpid posts are put.

This idiot has been shown countless times stone age men can atimes naturallygenerate some kind of astute reasoning that are beyond their peers.

He foolishly quoted another boring, stupid and thoughtless epistle about noahs ark.

The pyramid of egypt remains a wonder amongst scholars on how such near perfect and mighty structure was built in the 3rd century or thereabout.

Yet, no one attributes the structure to any divine influence. What the hell makes noahs ark different? What makes it different from all the other wonders of the ancient world who no one attributes divinity to?

How stewpid does one have to get to realise this simple and obvious fact that even though there might be remarkable events in the bible, it still doesn't go outside of what stone age men could do or say?

If not that I know better, I would start doubting if at all you have a brain.

rationalmind: ^ ^ ^ ^But wait, are you really genuinely foolish?

This has gotten to be the worst post I have ever read on nairaland. I think there should be an opposite thread to the one on greatest posts where stewpid posts are put.

This idiot has been shown countless times stone age men can atimes naturallygenerate some kind of astute reasoning that are beyond their peers.

He foolishly quoted another boring, stupid and thoughtless epistle about noahs ark.

The pyramid of egypt remains a wonder amongst scholars on how such near perfect and mighty structure was built in the 3rd century or thereabout.

Yet, no one attributes the structure to any divine influence. What the hell makes noahs ark different? What makes it different from all the other wonders of the ancient world who no one attributes divinity to?

How stewpid does one have to get to realise this simple and obvious fact that even though there might be remarkable events in the bible, it still doesn't go outside of what stone age men could do or say?

If not that I know better, I would start doubting if at all you have a brain.

actually, you are the foolish one. Claiming that generally "stone-age men" were stupid. I have showed you proof that they were as smart as we were and it is our exchange of knowledge that makes us better, from the writings of same men and others and you come and start speaking of divine influence. Please where in my post did I show divine influence?


Sorry, but the wind has blown away your feathers and exposed your ass once again.

I should have just ignored you instead of making you embarass yourself like this. I apologize.

Joshthefirst: actually, you are the foolish one. Claiming that generally "stone-age men" were stupid. I have showed you proof that they were as smart as we were and it is our exchange of knowledge that makes us better, from the writings of same men and others and you come and start speaking of divine influence. Please where in my post did I show divine influence?


Sorry, but the wind has blown away your feathers and exposed your ass once again.

I should have just ignored you instead of making you embarass yourself like this. I apologize.

Chai, see Josh lying for Jesus . Point to me where I said stone age men were stupi.d?

Failure to do so, you have been confirmed a liar for the second time in as many days.

All I've been saying so far is that, some of them demostrate intelligence far above their peers. How does that translate to, the others are stewpid.

Chai, JOSH THE LIAR. I hail you.

Again, he lies he didn't show the divinity. Here is what he said immediately after the quote about the ark.

Joshthefirst: When would you learn to abandon
the foolishness and myopic thinking that
comes with blindly denying truth and the
special nature of the bible

What does the special nature of the bible (a divine book) with respect to noahs ark translate to if not divinity?

See as you shamelessly lie around. Like I said, yahweh will be very ashamed of you. You are a disgrace

And please remember to show where I referred to stone age men as stewpid. You pathetic and shameless liar.

Doing some light reading, I see that it is even suggested by researchers that the book of Job chronicled events over centuries before 1000 BCE.

http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/docs/39_job.pdf

Elihu was the youngest of those who were alive at the time and his ancestral line back to
Jacob is the longest. Elihu’s ancestor Hezron was alive before Israel went to Egypt (Genesis 46:12)
but there is no mention of Hezron’s son Ram in the list of those who went to Egypt with Israel so,
at a minimum, Ram was born in 1385 - 65 = 1320 BC. At a minimum, the age of Ram at the birth
of Barachel was 15 years. Likewise, a minimum age for Barachel at the birth of Elihu would be
15 years. Elihu himself, at a minimum, would have had to have been about 10 years old when the
events of Job took place. 1320 - 15 - 15 - 10 = 1280 BC. So, the minimum age for Eliphaz when the
events of the book of Job took place would be 1365 - 1280 = 85 years. Because Job/Jobab was two
generations from Eliphaz, he would have been at least 30 years younger than Eliphaz. Because Job
lived another 70 years after the events of the book of Job took place (Job 42:16), he was probably
in his mid-thirties to early fourties at the most. Supposing that Eliphaz was 85 to 95 years old when
the events of the book of Job took place, the book of Job would be chronicling events that took
place between 1280 and 1270 BC – about 100 years before the Exodus.

As explained in the below excerpt, it is also evident from the text of the book of Job itself that
it is older than any other book of the Bible.

Excerpted from ancient-hebrew.org: Biblical Hebrew E-Magazine – Issue #019:

Q: What is the Oldest book of the Bible?

A: The books of the Bible are not arranged in a chronological order. The books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers and Deuteronomy are, by tradition, believed to be written by Moses and are usually believed to be
the oldest books of the Bible. But this is not the case. The book of Job is the oldest book, some even believing
it was originally written before the flood. The most compelling evidence for the antiquity of the book of Job
is its use of Hebrew words. In many cases the more ancient, concrete meaning of a word is found in the
book of Job. As an example the Hebrew word “pachad” is used to mean fear or awe an abstract concept but is
used in its concrete form only in Job 4:14 – “dread came upon me, and trembling, which made all my bones shake”.

rationalmind: ^ ^ ^ noted.
Still doesn't however show it couldn't had been written by stone age men. It only demonstrates that, [size=18pt]stone age men can atimes show rare intelligence and profound wisdom far beyond their contemporaries.[/size] Such was the case of Job.

This is the post I quoted and replied in context and yet you still find dishonest means to deny what has been spoken. Shame on you.

Enough said.

Joshthefirst: This is the post I quoted and replied in context and yet you still find dishonest means to deny what has been spoken. Shame on you.

Enough said.

You have been confirmed a liar . Let me see you talk about honesty on this forum.

How does the bold in whatever context say that the others were stewpid?

Open a thread and apologise to me for lying, and also remember to ask God for forgiveness.

Joshtheliar

rationalmind:

You have been confirmed a liar . Let me see you talk about honesty on this forum.

How does the bold in whatever context say that the others were stewpid?

Open a thread and apologise to me for lying, and also remember to ask God for forgiveness.

Joshtheliar

don't worry, I presume other people can read and understand.

Joshthefirst: don't worry, I presume other people can read and understand.

No, everyone will see how bad you are at lying and extremely bad at covering it up.

I will put links to this thread at every slight opportunity so even your christian brothers can see you for the liar that you are.

Deep Sight:

Really?

Can you tell me know "stone age" men could have known this -

Job 26:7 - "He spreads out the Northern Skies over empty space, He suspends the Earth over nothing."

In answering, do some light research on what most ancients thought the "foundations" of the earth were rooted in.

Many ancient civilization knew the earth was suspended on nothing.
Many also knew the ultimate importance of the Sun
Many also knew about the light spark that driggered creation.
Many explained creation in details
The Bible creation story is not complete and totally correct. No source can claim that not even modern science

All I can say is the Bible is highly corrupted the original story was told by ancient Canaanites. They attributed many Gods with the creation but the prominent agent was El Elyon. I was had a book about Baal Haddad- a canaanite God who formed humans

rationalmind: ^ ^ ^ ^But wait, are you really genuinely foolish?

This has gotten to be the worst post I have ever read on nairaland. I think there should be an opposite thread to the one on greatest posts where stewpid posts are put.

This idiot has been shown countless times stone age men can atimes naturallygenerate some kind of astute reasoning that are beyond their peers.

He foolishly quoted another boring, stupid and thoughtless epistle about noahs ark.

The pyramid of egypt remains a wonder amongst scholars on how such near perfect and mighty structure was built in the 3rd century or thereabout.

Yet, no one attributes the structure to any divine influence. What the hell makes noahs ark different? What makes it different from all the other wonders of the ancient world who no one attributes divinity to?

How stewpid does one have to get to realise this simple and obvious fact that even though there might be remarkable events in the bible, it still doesn't go outside of what stone age men could do or say?

If not that I know better, I would start doubting if at all you have a brain.

Brother pls stop allowing Joshthefirst to be peddling lies. . .The Noah's flood story remains a myth. . .It never happened, there is no scientific evidence for it and there is also no historical evidence for it. . .There is no evidence to show that the planet was destroyed completely by a flood about 6000 years ago. . .The pyramids of Giza which you alluded to where actually built around that time. . .People were living and writing their histories in places like China, Egypt, India and the Americas about 6000 years ago with out any interuption so the Noah's flood is just a plaigiarized myth from the epic of gilgamesh, that is where the Jews plaigiaried the story from. . .Christians now adays are claiming that it was a local flood because it is embarassing to claim that the entire planet was wiped out 6000 years ago leaving a drunkard and his family behind. . .

Uyi Iredia:

Since you say space isn't nothing; what material is space composed of then ?

Outer space, or simply space, is the void that exists between celestial bodies, including the Earth.[1] It is not completely empty, but consists of a hard vacuum containing a low density of particles: predominantly a plasma of hydrogen and helium, as well as electromagnetic radiation, magnetic fields, neutrinos, dust and cosmic rays.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_space

mazaje:

Brother pls stop allowing Joshthefirst to be peddling lies. . .The Noah's flood story remains a myth. . .It never happened, there is no scientific evidence for it and there is also no historical evidence for it. . .There is no evidence to show that the planet was destroyed completely by a flood about 6000 years ago. . .The pyramids of Giza which you alluded to where actually built around that time. . .People were living and writing their histories in places like China, Egypt, India and the Americas about 6000 years ago with out any interuption so the Noah's flood is just a plaigiarized myth from the epic of gilgamesh, that is where the Jews plaigiaried the story from. . .Christians now adays are claiming that it was a local flood because it is embarassing to claim that the entire planet was wiped out 6000 years ago leaving a drunkard and his family behind. . .

forget about the flood then, and look at the very articulate dimensions of an ark written by a "stone-age man"

Joshthefirst: forget about the flood then, and look at the very articulate dimensions of an ark written by a "stone-age man"

Brother learn to read before shooting blanks. . .I never used the word stone age man in this thread, you can re-read all of my posts here on the thread. . .

mazaje:

Brother pls stop allowing Joshthefirst to be peddling lies. . .The Noah's flood story remains a myth. . .It never happened, there is no scientific evidence for it and there is also no historical evidence for it. . .There is no evidence to show that the planet was destroyed completely by a flood about 6000 years ago. . .The pyramids of Giza which you alluded to where actually built around that time. . .People were living and writing their histories in places like China, Egypt, India and the Americas about 6000 years ago with out any interuption so the Noah's flood is just a plaigiarized myth from the epic of gilgamesh, that is where the Jews plaigiaried the story from. . .Christians now adays are claiming that it was a local flood because it is embarassing to claim that the entire planet was wiped out 6000 years ago leaving a drunkard and his family behind. . .

Thanks for this, I'm sure it will be helpful during future debates.

I guess that's why some of them are shifting grounds already saying its allegory.

Edit: And good you noticed how the guy shamelessly lies. Sad its coming from a christian.

Deep Sight:



Why are you a desperate red eyed cultist? What is your obsession with lies?



There is a huge debate among historical linguists and translators - many say that the word translated circle refers to s sphere.



The fact is that whereas you can easily reach that conclusion today after centuries of science, that was not the view held by the ancient world. They had no idea that the Sun and Moon were bodies similar to the earth in shape and form. Absolutely no idea. That is why for ages sailors were afraid of sailing too far and "falling off the edge of the earth!" And many other such.



Of course space is not nothing, but it is a perfect description all the same, for a person of that time to say that the earth is hanging on nothing - whereas contemporary ideas imagined all sorts of animals and foundational supports holding up the earth.





PS: Please don't draw me too far into this discussion. I am no Bible apologist. The bible is not my creed. Rationalmind made a statement about how every statement in the bible can be accounted for by stone age thinking. I just thought to point out to him that there are statements in the bible that are beyond stone age thinking.

Other than that, please don't harass me on top bible issue. Thank you.

First of all, it is only of recent that apologists claim that the translation is ‘sphere’......all bibles printed before the advent of modern science translated it as a disc orcircle. So this isan apologist’s anachronistic way of reading the bible


Secondly, shapeof planets is irrelevant to the discussion of being suspended over nothing. Any caveman would assume that the earth was suspended over nothingby simple deduction or even intuition at the the time. The sun and moon are on nothing,so why would the earth be on something? Stop lying

mazaje:

Brother learn to read before shooting blanks. . .I never used the word stone age man in this thread, you can re-read all of my posts here on the thread. . .

okay, but what does the scientifically proven very specific dimensions of an ark capable of withstanding waves of 100ft telll you?

Joshthefirst: okay, but what does the scientifically proven very specific dimensions of an ark capable of withstanding waves of 100ft telll you?

It tells me that they people living at that time were capable of acheiving great feats assuming the story was true. . .The pyramid of giza has always been among the 7 wonders of the world, It is the oldest of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, and the only one to remain largely intact, it is thousands of years old. . .Mordern scientist still marvel on how it was constructed. . .

mazaje:

It tells me that they people living at that time were capable of acheiving great feats assuming the story was true. . .The pyramid of giza has always been among the 7 wonders of the world, It is the oldest of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, and the only one to remain largely intact, it is thousands of years old. . .Mordern scientist still marvel on how it was constructed. . .

yeah. Men have always been thinkers. Innovators. Happy new year in advance sir. Keep being an innovator, keep thinking.