Not even Christians believe the *edit* of creation

[shunyadragon]

Ah. Thank you so much for the clarification.

Who are these christians the OP is talking about? I'm curious.

See post #133 and 139. The beliefs of Christians is unfortunately tragically variable without the guidance of science.

 

[firedragon]

Not sure. The range of beliefs of people who call themselves Christian is very broad, as I see it.

Alles Gut.

 

[shunyadragon]

What is a Christian?

One who believes in one of the many diverse variations and contradictory beliefs for Jesus Christ and/or God

 

[shunyadragon]

Alles Gut.

Huh?!?!?!

 

[Absolutely Frank]

One who believes in the many diverse variations and contradictory beliefs for Jesus Christ and/or God

Ah, I see, a classic case of misunderstanding dressed up as wit and failing. Let's be more precise. It's obvious you no next to nothing about Jesus Christ and what he taught.

 

[shunyadragon]

Ah, I see, a classic case of misunderstanding dressed up as wit and failing. Let's be more precise. It's obvious you no next to nothing about Jesus Christ and what he taught.

Your a green newbe. My history of posting on RF Demonstrates I know full well the diversity of the beliefs of Christians and what they claim Jesus Christ taught,

Which one is your version of the One and only One True belief?

 

[Absolutely Frank]

Your a green newbe. My history of posting on RF Demonstrates I know full well the diversity of the beliefs of Christians and what they claim Jesus Christ taught,

Ah, I see you’ve trotted out the old ‘I’ve been around the block’ defense. Yet, merely having a history of posts does not automatically confer clarity or accuracy. Classic Dunning-Kruger. For all you know all your posts about Christianity and your supposed "expert" opinion could be nothing more than horse poo-poo.

 

[shunyadragon]

Ah, I see you’ve trotted out the old ‘I’ve been around the block’ defense. Yet, merely having a history of posts does not automatically confer clarity or accuracy. Classic Dunning-Kruger. For all you know all your posts about Christianity and your supposed "expert" opinion could be nothing more than horse poo-poo.

An acrid pejorative post does not address a coherent position or meaningful questions, Just, rant, rant and more rant.

Which one is your version of the One and only One True belief?

The beliefs range from a humanist Jesus as in some Unitarians to hard core extreme fundis that believe in geocentric universe.

 

[DavidSMoore]

What is a Christian?

Are you possibly wondering why I titled my original posting "Not even Christians believe the story of the creation"? If so, I think it's pretty clear from the past 3+ months of discussion that no one-- Christian or otherwise-- is defending any of the following:

• The universe was fashioned from the pre-existing material substances of the chaos and the waters.
• The universe is filled with water.
• The Earth's atmosphere is dome shaped.
• The Earth itself is a flat disc.
• The Sun, the Moon, and the stars are all contained within the Earth's atmosphere.

Most of the objections raised have been to the effect that the Bible's creation story doesn't say any of the above. But it does.

BTW I originally had a different title that used a phrase which the site moderators did not accept and which they replaced with "*edit*".

 

[GoodAttention]

The only three dimensional geometric shape that would fit beneath a dome shaped atmosphere is a flat disc. So the author of the Biblical story of creation must have believed that the Earth is a flat disc. Simple. Does the Bible explicitly state "The Earth is a flat disc"? No, it doesn't. But so what? The plain reading of the text shows that the author of the story of the creation must have believed that.

You do understand the difference between an author and a translator don’t you?

 

[GoodAttention]

I clarified the belief of the ancients as flat or rounded disc with a heavenly dome above. sitting on pillars, Again, again, and again read Genesis and other references provided depicting the flat or curve plat with domed heavens.. In all the pictures made by the ancients based on the scriptures showed either a flat disc or a rounded disc as the geocentric fixed center of the universe sitting on pillars. They read the scriptures and described graphically what they believed.

No problem the Genesis account of Creation is 100% fiction, and was understood as described by Christians as a flat or rounded disc domed heavens fixed in space at the center of the universe.

The Roman philosopher Lucretius was the first to propose a modern cosmology. It was the Greeks that began to conclude that the earth was a sphere until the Greek view began to dominate after the 5th century.

It is not only the Genesis account, but many references throughout the OT that support a flat or domed earth supported by pillars fixed at the center of the universe.



The view of a fixed geocentric earth remained the dominate view until. the15th and 16th century. The Bible provided no guidance for more modern cosmology. The authors or compilers of the Pentateuch, OT, and gospels and the Church Fathers believed in a literal Pentateuch and Torah. For most of the early believers in Christianity these views were by far dominant, because they believed in a literal scripture.

Some of the Biblical references:

Daniel 4:10-11: “These are the visions I saw while lying in bed: I looked, and there before me stood a tree in the middle of the land. Its height was enormous. The tree grew large and strong and its top touched the sky; it was visible to the ends of the earth.”

Earth fixed in space on pillars

1 Chronicles 16:30: "He has fixed the earth firm, immovable." [1]

Psalm 93:1: "Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ..." [2]

Psalm 96:10: "He has fixed the earth firm, immovable ..." [3]

Psalm 104:5: "Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken." [4] [1]

1 Chronicles 16:30: Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.[5]

Psalms 75:3 When the earth and all its people quake, it is I who hold its pillars firm.

I Samuel 2:8 He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, And lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, To set them among princes, And to make them inherit the throne of glory: For the pillars of the earth are the LORD's, And he hath set the world upon them.

Job 9:6 He shakes the earth from its place and makes its pillars tremble.

Many verses describe the earth has having four corners as depicted in an ancient maps.

Some today actually still argue for a planar earth as a fixed geocentric universe based on the Bible: Plane Geodesy

The on light for heliocentric view at the times of Jesus Christ was the Roman philosopher Lucretius who described the universe from a modern perspective.

So what you are saying is, Christian beliefs about the Earth were wrong because they interpreted a translated version of Genesis literally?

 

[GoodAttention]

You imagine?!?!!? How is this in touch with reality. The question of the differences in translation and contemporary interpretations is not remotely the issue, because it is the habit today to interpret ancient scripture to fit what they are comfortable with.

The problem of the fact that the Bible presents a literal ancient cosmology believed at the time without science has ramifications of what believers are willing to believe today, which is very tragic and bizarre. For example:

Geocentric model - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Polls​

According to a report released in 2014 by the National Science Foundation, 26% of Americans surveyed believe that the Sun revolves around the Earth.[44] Morris Berman quotes a 2006 survey that show currently some 20% of the U.S. population believe that the Sun goes around the Earth (geocentricism) rather than the Earth goes around the Sun (heliocentricism), while a further 9% claimed not to know.[45] Polls conducted by Gallup in the 1990s found that 16% of Germans, 18% of Americans and 19% of Britons hold that the Sun revolves around the Earth.[46] A study conducted in 2005 by Jon D. Miller of Northwestern University, an expert in the public understanding of science and technology,[47] found that about 20%, or one in five, of American adults believe that the Sun orbits the Earth.[48] According to 2011 VTSIOM poll, 32% of Russians believe that the Sun orbits the Earth.[

That sounds more like a chronic underinvestment in a public education system coupled with a foundation of freedom of religion being an inalienable right of choice.

 

[YoursTrue]

The only three dimensional geometric shape that would fit beneath a dome shaped atmosphere is a flat disc. So the author of the Biblical story of creation must have believed that the Earth is a flat disc. Simple. Does the Bible explicitly state "The Earth is a flat disc"? No, it doesn't. But so what? The plain reading of the text shows that the author of the story of the creation must have believed that.

The use of the term dome doesn't have to be as you are interpreting it. Take care.

 

[shunyadragon]

So what you are saying is, Christian beliefs about the Earth were wrong because they interpreted a translated version of Genesis literally?

I never said any such thing,

I will say the Biblical accounts of history in the Pentateuch are wrong, because, first they lacked the science, second, they are based on mythology, and created history without provenance after 600 BCE, Also, the Pentateuch lacks provenance of authorship and absolutely no writings before 600 BCE

Interpretation is not the issue. There as many interpretations as the many different churches try and make it fit what they believe. The authors and compilers and the Church Fathers believed the text was historically literally true.

 

[shunyadragon]

That sounds more like a chronic underinvestment in a public education system

No what people take priority over what is taught in the classroom with what is taught in the church. You know, "The Bible told me so."

coupled with a foundation of freedom of religion being an inalienable right of choice.

This not only sounds, like, but is a failure to and inability to respond to the post coherently.

Confusing at best, and we do have the freedom to believe and choose whatever we want in terms of religion.

 

[GoodAttention]

I never said any such thing,

I will say the Biblical accounts of history in the Pentateuch are wrong, because, first they lacked the science, second, they are based on mythology, and created history without provenance after 600 BCE, Also, the Pentateuch lacks provenance of authorship and absolutely no writings before 600 BCE

You mean the literal accounts are wrong correct?

Interpretation is not the issue. There as many interpretations as the many different churches try and make it fit what they believe.

Ok.

The authors and compilers

Of the gospels? Can you be specific please so I can understand what exactly you are saying.

and the Church Fathers believed the text was historically literally true.

So the Church Fathers never considered a non-literal reading?

 

[GoodAttention]

No what people take priority over what is taught in the classroom with what is taught in the church. You know, "The Bible told me so."

This not only sounds, like, but is a failure to and inability to respond to the post coherently.

Confusing at best, and we do have the freedom to believe and choose whatever we want in terms of religion.

Prime example of why you shouldn’t dissect a statement, particularly when the first point is literally coupled with the second point.

 

[shunyadragon]

You mean the literal accounts are wrong correct?

The authors, compilers, and the Church Fathers believed the historical accounts of the Pentateuch were literally true including Genesis Creation. They were of course wrong because they lacked the science to make that determination.

Of the gospels? Can you be specific please so I can understand what exactly you are saying.

The authors of the gospels and letters refer to the Genesis Creation, and the history described in the Pentateuch, and ancient cosmology as literally true, They of course also used allegorical and symbolic use of scripture. They believed what everybody else believed at the time, except of course the Roman philosopher Lucretius that proposed a more modern cosmology of our universe.

The geocentric view of the universe was the dominant belief in Christianity, Judaism and Islam based on scripture up until the 15th and 16th centuries based on scripture, All the maps and diagrams that were made from the BCE up until the 15th-16th century described a geocentric universe based on scripture,

So the Church Fathers never considered a non-literal reading?

As far as the history of Creation involving Adam and Eve and the Fall from a perfect world, and the history described in the Pentateuch such as Noah's Flood and Exodus the Church Fathers considered it literal history. Yes, they also believed in allegorical and symbolic interpretations of the text.

 

[shunyadragon]

Prime example of why you shouldn’t dissect a statement, particularly when the first point is literally coupled with the second point.

Failure to respond. . . It is not the fault of academic education when from grammar school to the universities the scientific cosmology, history of our earth, solar system and life including the sciences of evolution are taught.

No what people take priority over what is taught in the classroom with what is taught in the church. You know, "The Bible told me so."

 

[GoodAttention]

The authors, compilers, and the Church Fathers believed the historical accounts of the Pentateuch were literally true including Genesis Creation. They were of course wrong because they lacked the science to make that determination.

I can understand the Christian church fathers reading Genesis creation literally, but what do you understand of Rabbinic Judaism and the Oral Torah?