Questions about the Earth

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
servant
Apprentice
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:30 am

Questions about the Earth

Post #1

Post by servant »

Did science or the bible first note that the earth hangs on nothing?

Did science or the bible first note that the earth was a circle and not flat?

User avatar
Still small
Apprentice
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:31 am
Location: Great South Land
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #161

Post by Still small »

Clownboat wrote: Circles are flat.
The earth is an oblate spheroid.
Sorry...

Just another reason to look to science books for science and not unknown desert nomads without written language orally telling traditions for centuries. That will lead circle to be spheres as we see here.

A sphere also looks like circle, in fact, it looks like a circle from all directions. Therefore, the use of the term ‘circle’ does not necessarily imply a 2-D shape. The word in Isaiah 40:22 translated as ‘circle’ is khûg (חוּג) which in many modern Hebrew dictionaries means ‘sphere’ or ‘globe’. In some, it is the generic term for ‘roundness’. The same word khûg (חוּג) is used in Job 22:14 (ESV) “Thick clouds veil him, so that he does not see, and he walks on the vault of heaven.�, and is translated as ‘vault’ which one might naturally assume is a 3-D image. Common usage makes it clear that ‘circle’, khûg (חוּג), can refer to either a two or three dimensional geometry. Hence, it cannot be argued that Isaiah 40:22 clearly teaches the earth to be a disc. And though you use the specific term ‘oblate spheroid’, the Earth is, in a general sense, still referred to as ‘round’.

Have a good day!
Still small

User avatar
Clownboat
Savant
Posts: 9342
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
Has thanked: 883 times
Been thanked: 1242 times

Post #162

Post by Clownboat »

Still small wrote:
Clownboat wrote: Circles are flat.
The earth is an oblate spheroid.
Sorry...

Just another reason to look to science books for science and not unknown desert nomads without written language orally telling traditions for centuries. That will lead circle to be spheres as we see here.

A sphere also looks like circle, in fact, it looks like a circle from all directions. Therefore, the use of the term ‘circle’ does not necessarily imply a 2-D shape. The word in Isaiah 40:22 translated as ‘circle’ is khûg (חוּג) which in many modern Hebrew dictionaries means ‘sphere’ or ‘globe’. In some, it is the generic term for ‘roundness’. The same word khûg (חוּג) is used in Job 22:14 (ESV) “Thick clouds veil him, so that he does not see, and he walks on the vault of heaven.�, and is translated as ‘vault’ which one might naturally assume is a 3-D image. Common usage makes it clear that ‘circle’, khûg (חוּג), can refer to either a two or three dimensional geometry. Hence, it cannot be argued that Isaiah 40:22 clearly teaches the earth to be a disc. And though you use the specific term ‘oblate spheroid’, the Earth is, in a general sense, still referred to as ‘round’.

Have a good day!
Still small
A circle is a closed curved shape that is flat. That is, it exists in two dimensions or on a plane. In a circle, all points on the circle are equally far from the center of the circle.
http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/project ... erent.html

Circles are still flat and the earth is still an oblate spheroid.
I don't claim to know what ancient writers meant, but I do claim to know what a circle is.

Thank you for identifying why it is not logical for a god to create a message for everyone (in this case the Bible), but then require pastor, priests, theologians, random internet posters to interpret and explain said book.

In the Bible, a circle can mean sphere and a young women can mean virgin.
I wonder what resurrection can mean?
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.

I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU

It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco

If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb

User avatar
Still small
Apprentice
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:31 am
Location: Great South Land
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #163

Post by Still small »

Clownboat wrote: A circle is a closed curved shape that is flat. That is, it exists in two dimensions or on a plane. In a circle, all points on the circle are equally far from the center of the circle.
http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/project ... erent.html

Circles are still flat and the earth is still an oblate spheroid.
I don't claim to know what ancient writers meant, but I do claim to know what a circle is.

Thank you for identifying why it is not logical for a god to create a message for everyone (in this case the Bible), but then require pastor, priests, theologians, random internet posters to interpret and explain said book.

In the Bible, a circle can mean sphere and a young women can mean virgin.
I wonder what resurrection can mean? (Emphasis added)
Your confusion, whether by accident or deliberate, is simply due to your failure to follow the simple rule of “when in doubt, refer to the original�. As Isaiah 40:22 was written in Hebrew, it is the Hebrew word to which we should refer. Yes, you may know what the term ‘circle’ in English means but it appears that you wish to obfuscate by ignoring the original Hebrew term khûg (חוּג) which, as explained earlier, in many modern Hebrew dictionaries means ‘sphere’ or ‘globe’ or the generic term for ‘roundness’.

It has now been explained to you (twice) so your continued misunderstanding would be viewed as being deliberate.

As to the term ‘young women’, to which particular Bible verse are you referring? If you can be more specific, I shall endeavour to resolve your misunderstanding.

As for the Greek term translated as ‘resurrection’, in the New Testament, 39 times the Greek word used is ’anastasis’ (ἀνάστασις) meaning ‘a standing up again’, that is, (literally) a resurrection from death - raised to life again, resurrection, rise from the dead, that should rise, rising again. For example - Acts 2:31  “He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.�

Once, in the New Testament, in Matthew 27:53  “And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.�, the Greek word used is ’egersis’ (ἔγε�σις) meaning ‘a resurgence (from death)’.

Also, once in the New Testament, in Philippians 3:11  “If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.�, the Greek word used is ’exanastasis’ (�ξανάστασις) meaning ‘a rising from death’.

Hopefully, this has cleared up any confusion you may have had and now you, too, can explain to others that may wish to obfuscate such terms.

Have a good day!
Still small

User avatar
Clownboat
Savant
Posts: 9342
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
Has thanked: 883 times
Been thanked: 1242 times

Post #164

Post by Clownboat »

Still small wrote:
Clownboat wrote: A circle is a closed curved shape that is flat. That is, it exists in two dimensions or on a plane. In a circle, all points on the circle are equally far from the center of the circle.
http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/project ... erent.html

Circles are still flat and the earth is still an oblate spheroid.
I don't claim to know what ancient writers meant, but I do claim to know what a circle is.

Thank you for identifying why it is not logical for a god to create a message for everyone (in this case the Bible), but then require pastor, priests, theologians, random internet posters to interpret and explain said book.

In the Bible, a circle can mean sphere and a young women can mean virgin.
I wonder what resurrection can mean? (Emphasis added)
Your confusion, whether by accident or deliberate, is simply due to your failure to follow the simple rule of “when in doubt, refer to the original�. As Isaiah 40:22 was written in Hebrew, it is the Hebrew word to which we should refer. Yes, you may know what the term ‘circle’ in English means but it appears that you wish to obfuscate by ignoring the original Hebrew term khûg (חוּג) which, as explained earlier, in many modern Hebrew dictionaries means ‘sphere’ or ‘globe’ or the generic term for ‘roundness’.

It has now been explained to you (twice) so your continued misunderstanding would be viewed as being deliberate.

As to the term ‘young women’, to which particular Bible verse are you referring? If you can be more specific, I shall endeavour to resolve your misunderstanding.

As for the Greek term translated as ‘resurrection’, in the New Testament, 39 times the Greek word used is ’anastasis’ (ἀνάστασις) meaning ‘a standing up again’, that is, (literally) a resurrection from death - raised to life again, resurrection, rise from the dead, that should rise, rising again. For example - Acts 2:31  “He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.�

Once, in the New Testament, in Matthew 27:53  “And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.�, the Greek word used is ’egersis’ (ἔγε�σις) meaning ‘a resurgence (from death)’.

Also, once in the New Testament, in Philippians 3:11  “If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.�, the Greek word used is ’exanastasis’ (�ξανάστασις) meaning ‘a rising from death’.

Hopefully, this has cleared up any confusion you may have had and now you, too, can explain to others that may wish to obfuscate such terms.

Have a good day!
Still small
Circles are still flat and the earth is still an oblate spheroid.
I don't claim to know what ancient writers meant, but I do claim to know what a circle is.

The phrase of Isaiah 40:22, "the circle of the earth" is very controversial. There are five main views of this phrase. The first interpretation says that the word "circle" means "sphere" indicating that the earth is a sphere. This view seems most unlikely since we have all ready seen that the Hebrew word gh means "circle," and it seems very remote that it means "sphere" because of the context, and there is a better Hebrew word for "sphere," rwd. In Isaiah 22:18 the word rwd is translated "ball." If the LXX translators understood gh as "sphere," they would have used the Greek word sfairoeides. Plugging the meaning of "sphere" into every passage that gh occurs will result in awkward interpretations.

The second interpretation is that the earth is a round flat disk. Although the ancient world thought the earth was round and flat, this phrase seems to refer to the shape the vaulted heavens above the earth from which the inhabitants look like grasshoppers.

The third view, which is set forth by Seybold, is that "circle" refers to the ring of the ocean that surrounds the earth. This is mainly based on the supposed meaning of the word guros used in the LXX for gwj.

The fourth interpretation is that "circle" refers to the vault like sky over the earth. This seems to be partly right as well as the next view where "circle" refers to the horizon. It may be best to combine theses two views so that "circle" refers to the circle of the horizon that arches up over the earth. From the top of this dome God looks down to see the inhabitants on earth as small as grasshoppers. In the later part of this same verse (Isa.40:22) the heavens are described like a curtain and a tent. There seems to be a descriptive parallelism of the heavens in this poetic verse.

Stadelmann (1970, 42) states that gwj refers to the horizon which was the boundary between earth and heaven, and indicates how the heavenly dome was linked with the earth. In Job 26:10 gwj is the boundary between light and darkness. It is the circular line that separates the light of heaven from the darkness under the ocean and earth. In the ancient world the horizon prevented the earth from being flooded by primeval waters by holding the sky and the earth firmly together (Ibid, 43). In Job 22:14 it seems that the gwj is more than the horizon, and includes the vault of heaven as well. This seems to be the case in Isaiah 40:22 as well. Therefore, gwj is the part for the whole of heaven in certain passages in Job and Isaiah. This would be called "Synecdoche of the Part" by Bullinger (1968, 640, see also 892).

In Isaiah 66:1 it says, "Thus saith the LORD, the heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool." The imagery of Isaiah 66 and 40 shows clearly that gwj means the vaulted heavens.
https://www.bibleandscience.com/bible/b ... eearth.htm

Do you claim to know what they actully meant? Is the confusion above imaginary?
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.

I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU

It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco

If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb

User avatar
Still small
Apprentice
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:31 am
Location: Great South Land
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #165

Post by Still small »

Clownboat wrote: Circles are still flat and the earth is still an oblate spheroid.
I don't claim to know what ancient writers meant, but I do claim to know what a circle is.

The phrase of Isaiah 40:22, "the circle of the earth" is very controversial. There are five main views of this phrase. The first interpretation says that the word "circle" means "sphere" indicating that the earth is a sphere. This view seems most unlikely since we have all ready seen that the Hebrew word gh means "circle,". . .


Where have we seen that the Hebrew word means “circle�? Certainly not in that article. As I have shown before, the actual Hebrew term is khûg (חוּג) (not gh) which in many modern Hebrew dictionaries means ‘sphere’ or ‘globe’ and in some, it is the generic term for ‘roundness’. And as also mentioned before, what shape does a sphere look like from any and all directions?
It appears that you are trying to force your own interpretation upon a term that may have more than one, just to suit your own argument. That is a clear sign of bias known as ‘eisegesis’. Whereas any interpretation of the meaning of a translated or foreign text should be by ‘exegesis’

Have a good day!
Still small

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 9855
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 189 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Post #166

Post by Bust Nak »

While people argue the translation, I would just point out that the Bible's language is consistent with ancient Mesopotamian thought on the nature of the Earth: A disk, sitting on pillars in an ocean of water, surrounded by a solid domed firmament.

What are the likely explanation of the choice of words in the Bible? Ancient Israelites shared the same idea of cosmology with their neighbours, random coincidence, or they used the same kind of descriptions to go with the flow while holding a more advanced idea of the cosmos? Perhaps something I haven't thought of?

benchwarmer
Guru
Posts: 2285
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
Has thanked: 1959 times
Been thanked: 739 times

Post #167

Post by benchwarmer »

[Replying to post 166 by Bust Nak]

I agree with BN here. There is not one clear reference to the Earth being a sphere in the entire Bible. I don't even think the word 'sphere' is anywhere to be found in regards to anything. There are, however, many references which hint at people believing the Earth to be flat. Given that, any mention of circle in the Bible is likely talking about a 2D circle.

User avatar
Clownboat
Savant
Posts: 9342
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
Has thanked: 883 times
Been thanked: 1242 times

Post #168

Post by Clownboat »

Still small wrote:
Clownboat wrote: Circles are still flat and the earth is still an oblate spheroid.
I don't claim to know what ancient writers meant, but I do claim to know what a circle is.

The phrase of Isaiah 40:22, "the circle of the earth" is very controversial. There are five main views of this phrase. The first interpretation says that the word "circle" means "sphere" indicating that the earth is a sphere. This view seems most unlikely since we have all ready seen that the Hebrew word gh means "circle,". . .


Where have we seen that the Hebrew word means “circle�? Certainly not in that article. As I have shown before, the actual Hebrew term is khûg (חוּג) (not gh) which in many modern Hebrew dictionaries means ‘sphere’ or ‘globe’ and in some, it is the generic term for ‘roundness’. And as also mentioned before, what shape does a sphere look like from any and all directions?
It appears that you are trying to force your own interpretation upon a term that may have more than one, just to suit your own argument. That is a clear sign of bias known as ‘eisegesis’. Whereas any interpretation of the meaning of a translated or foreign text should be by ‘exegesis’

Have a good day!
Still small


To the bold (once again, just a copy/paste is all that is needed):
"I don't claim to know what ancient writers meant..."

You are the only one here that appears to be pretending to be certain.
Be well.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.

I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU

It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco

If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb

User avatar
Still small
Apprentice
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:31 am
Location: Great South Land
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #169

Post by Still small »

Bust Nak wrote: While people argue the translation, I would just point out that the Bible's language is consistent with ancient Mesopotamian thought on the nature of the Earth: A disk, sitting on pillars in an ocean of water, surrounded by a solid domed firmament.

What are the likely explanation of the choice of words in the Bible? Ancient Israelites shared the same idea of cosmology with their neighbours, random coincidence, or they used the same kind of descriptions to go with the flow while holding a more advanced idea of the cosmos? Perhaps something I haven't thought of? (Emphasis added)
Job said to his companion in Job 26:7  “He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.� That doesn’t sound the same to me. Your understanding of the Mesopotamian cosmology has the Earth sitting on or supported by something (underneath). Job’s understanding is that the Earth is suspended or hangs “upon nothing�. Which is the closer description of the actual cosmology?

Have a good day!
Still small

Revelations won
Sage
Posts: 830
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 10:13 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 27 times

Post #170

Post by Revelations won »

I find it a little amusing to observe the various ideas elating to the earth. I suspect our current science is very lacking in clear answers on how this earth is governed in it's axis and rotational speed and orbit.

Does anyone have a precise calculation of how this is controlled?

If this were controlled by gravitational force, then what are the clear calculations which govern the earth's orbit?

Which is the governing body which controls this and all other planets?

How large is our universe?

What controls all of these countless planets so we do not have a planetary demolition derby which would result in total chaos?

This earth is such a finite spec in this whole cosmos. Having said that is it not just as reasonable to consider that there may be millions of other populated earths like the one on which we live?

Post Reply