Prove or Disprove Flat Earth Theology

[gnostic]

You aren't re


Have you ever looked up words like "carpet" or "bed" in a dictionary?

You do realize these are not the same words in which they were originally written and are English? You do realize EVERY definition of EVERY word in EVERY language is used by DEFINITION. While you're busy looking up these words check on "definition" too. Look up the words in the definition of "definition". Look those up too until you understand my damn point.

You butt in argument without understanding the context of the argument, cladking.

The topic is about “flat earth”, where scriptures like the Bible and the Qur’an, give picture of flat earth, and not sphere-like planet (oblate spheroid).

Since I was replying to paarsurrey, who believed in the Qur’an, so I gave him verse (20:53) with different translations, which say the Earth was spread out like a “carpet” or “bed”, which is repeated a number of times.

The bed and carpet are merely similes, but it does draw of images of the Earth being “flat” not with roundness of a sphere.

Neither bed, nor carpet, are shaped like a sphere, cladking.

I was also pointing out that the word “round” could apply to any shape with curves that necessarily mean “sphere”, for instances cone, cylinder/disk, circle, oval, arc, rectangle with 4 rounded corners, or box with 8 rounded corners.

I don’t deny a sphere is round, but so is the disk or cylinder, which what some ancient cultures believed the shape of the Earth, like the Egyptians, Babylonians, Israelites, Greeks (before Aristotle), and apparently Arabs in Muhammad’s time.

Do you understand my points as to why I quoted from the Qur’an?

Paarsurrey believed in the Qur’an, so I used the Qur’an to demonstrate Muhammad believed in flat earth, like that of disk in shape, not a sphere.

So what’s your damn problem?

 

[cladking]

What?

I started to write a response and decided it would do no good. Didn't notice the site saved it.

You could look up the word "definition" too. You might just be surprised. Use a real dictionary from back when English was like a language. Use an unabridged dictionary and look up the words in the definitions too. You might just be surprised at anyone's definition.

 

[cladking]

Neither bed, nor carpet, are shaped like a sphere, cladking.

Really! A bed of limestone (or rail beds) is a section of a sphere. We could put the idea of a spherical earth to bed if we just changed our definitions. All the beds on the planet (and ocean beds) form a sphere.

You're just playing word games not only with the Koran but with you belief the the world isn't flat.

So what’s your damn problem?

I think you're wrong. I think there is truth in the Koran but most people choose not to see it. I think there's truth in science but it's not what most people believe.

You might be right that this isn't the best thread to make my argument. Which is ironic since I believe in a flat earth and that religions are misunderstood.

 

[gnostic]

Really! A bed of limestone (or rail beds) is a section of a sphere. We could put the idea of a spherical earth to bed if we just changed our definitions. All the beds on the planet (and ocean beds) form a sphere.

You're just playing word games not only with the Koran but with you belief the the world isn't flat.


I think you're wrong. I think there is truth in the Koran but most people choose not to see it. I think there's truth in science but it's not what most people believe.

You might be right that this isn't the best thread to make my argument. Which is ironic since I believe in a flat earth and that religions are misunderstood.

You know very well that the Qur’an isn’t talking about bed of any “rock”. Some passages mentioned “bed”, while others mentioned “carpet”, but not once did it ever mention any rocks in those passages, not even in the original Arabic.

And you are forgetting that “bed” isn’t the only word used; “carpet” appeared to “spread”.

I don’t even know why I am even arguing with you in any case, since Muhammad’s Arabic post-dated your silly conspiracy theory about Ancient Language.

 

[Ouroboros]

You just butcher language.

I'm a "conspiracy nut" and a "sphere" isn't "round".

Hmmm.... nuts usually are hexagonal... Maybe the world is too?

 

[cladking]

You know very well that the Qur’an isn’t talking about bed of any “rock”. Some passages mentioned “bed”, while others mentioned “carpet”, but not once did it ever mention any rocks in those passages, not even in the original Arabic.

And you are forgetting that “bed” isn’t the only word used; “carpet” appeared to “spread”.

I don’t even know why I am even arguing with you in any case, since Muhammad’s Arabic post-dated your silly conspiracy theory about Ancient Language.

...And spreading carpets of trees are sometimes called "forests".

 

[cladking]

Hmmm.... nuts usually are hexagonal... Maybe the world is too?

I'd sooner make this argument than trying to prove all the ancient books are founded on superstition and ignorance.

 

[paarsurrey]

I started to write a response and decided it would do no good. Didn't notice the site saved it.

You could look up the word "definition" too. You might just be surprised. Use a real dictionary from back when English was like a language. Use an unabridged dictionary and look up the words in the definitions too. You might just be surprised at anyone's definition.

definitional (adj.)
"of or pertaining to definition," 1817; see definition + -al (1).

Related entries & more
Advertisement
definition (n.)
late 14c., diffinicioun, definicion, "decision, setting of boundaries, determination and stating of the limits and distinctive nature of a thing," also "limitations," also "a statement of the meaning of a word or phrase," from Old French definicion, from Latin definitionem (nominative definitio) "a bounding, a boundary; a limiting, prescribing; a definition, explanation," the last sense most often in Cicero, noun of action from past-participle stem of definire "to limit, determine, explain," from de "completely" (see de-) + finire "to bound, limit," from finis "boundary, end" (see finish (v.)). In logic, meaning "act of stating what something means" is from 1640s. Meaning "degree of distinctness of the details in a picture" is from 1889.

definition | Search Online Etymology Dictionary
Is that one means.

or
bed
/bed/
noun

1. 1.
   a piece of furniture for sleep or rest, typically a framework with a mattress and coverings.
   "a large double bed"
   
   Similar:couch,berth,billet,the sack,the hay,one's pit,kip
2. 2.
   the bottom of the sea or a lake or river.
   "the gravelly bed of the stream"
   Similar: bottom,floor
   the floor" data-hw="floor" data-lb="" data-tae="false" data-te="false" data-tl="en-US" data-url="/search?q=define+floor&forcedict=floor&dictcorpus=en-US">
   ground,depths,
3. lay the groundwork for a colony on the moon" data-hw="groundwork" data-lb="" data-tae="false" data-te="false" data-tl="en-US" data-url="/search?q=define+groundwork&forcedict=groundwork&dictcorpus=en-US">
4. verb

1. settle down to sleep or rest for the night in an improvised place.
   "he usually bedded down on newspapers in the church porch"
   
   Similar:go to bed,retire
   retired from the navy in 1966" data-hw="retire" data-lb="" data-tae="false" data-te="false" data-tl="en-US" data-url="/search?q=define+retire&forcedict=retire&dictcorpus=en-US">
   call it a day,go to sleep,get some sleep,sleep,nap
   ,have/take a nap,catnap,doze,have a doze,hit the sack,hit the hay,
   turn in,snooze,snatch forty winks,get some shut-eye,kip,
   have a kip,get some kip,hit the pit,catch some Zs,slumber
2. 2.
   transfer (a plant) from a pot or seed tray to a garden plot.
   "I bedded out these houseplants"

https://www.google.com/

Regards

 

[ChristineM]

I started to write a response and decided it would do no good. Didn't notice the site saved it.

You could look up the word "definition" too. You might just be surprised. Use a real dictionary from back when English was like a language. Use an unabridged dictionary and look up the words in the definitions too. You might just be surprised at anyone's definition.

Ok...

Definition : a statement of the exact meaning of a word, especially in a dictionary

Thanks for that, i did not realise you were so open to disproving yourself

BTW, i use the Oxford English Dictionary, not the made up to massage egos dictionary

 

[cladking]

Ok...

Definition : a statement of the exact meaning of a word, especially in a dictionary

Thanks for that, i did not realise you were so open to disproving yourself

BTW, i use the Oxford English Dictionary, not the made up to massage egos dictionary

Good! But you won't have any fun until you look up "exact" and "meaning". You don't get to pick and choose which meaning or dictionary you use. The speaker picks and chooses and the listener isn't even aware this job was done for him. Instead the listener just parses the words in his own unique way as you did with my last post. We parse words as we hear or read them or they would make no sense at all. And then most of us try not to parse them correctly when we don't agree with the author. We never really understand the author and when we do we often argue his words rather than what he's saying (his meaning).

This idea that we each take our own meaning is the idea here but you'll prefer to argue words. This is what I call a "semantical argument". There is no substance to the argument and no possible means to come to a meeting of the minds.

There's no such thing as "exact meaning" in any modern utterance. There's not really such a thing in any modern word. Few words have a single definition and even those which do have definitions composed of... ...you guessed it... ...more words.

 

[ChristineM]

Good! But you won't have any fun until you look up "exact" and "meaning". You don't get to pick and choose which meaning or dictionary you use. The speaker picks and chooses and the listener isn't even aware this job was done for him. Instead the listener just parses the words in his own unique way as you did with my last post. We parse words as we hear or read them or they would make no sense at all. And then most of us try not to parse them correctly when we don't agree with the author. We never really understand the author and when we do we often argue his words rather than what he's saying (his meaning).

This idea that we each take our own meaning is the idea here but you'll prefer to argue words. This is what I call a "semantical argument". There is no substance to the argument and no possible means to come to a meeting of the minds.

There's no such thing as "exact meaning" in any modern utterance. There's not really such a thing in any modern word. Few words have a single definition and even those which do have definitions composed of... ...you guessed it... ...more words.

This is not about fun but about reality

Exact : not approximated in any way; precise.

Meaning : not approximated in any way; precise.

Seems basic to me that it means not guessed at, not made up

 

[paarsurrey]

This is not about fun but about reality

Exact : not approximated in any way; precise.

Meaning : not approximated in any way; precise.

Seems basic to me that it means not guessed at, not made up

One means:
Reality is exact, precise , not approximated in any way, it is not guessed at. Right, please?
If yes, please give examples.

Regards

 

[ChristineM]

One means:
Reality is exact, precise , not approximated in any way, it is not guessed at. Right, please?
If yes, please give examples.

Regards

The definitions are clear.

Example 1+1=2

 

[paarsurrey]

The definitions are clear.

Example 1+1=2

These are symbols, not a natural word of any language , please.

Regards

 

[ChristineM]

These are symbols, not a natural word of any language , please.

Regards

Don't start that bull again, you want words

One plus one equals two

 

[paarsurrey]

Don't start that bull again, you want words

One plus one equals two

"One plus one equals two"

Which lexicon/dictionary mentions this equation, please?
Which online etymology dictionary mentions it, please?

Regards

 

[ChristineM]

"One plus one equals two"

Which lexicon/dictionary mentions this equation, please?
Which online etymology dictionary mentions it, please?

Regards

Why do you keep changing the goalposts to massage your ego when an answer is given that you dont like. You asked a question, i answered it, end of story

 

[cladking]

Why do you keep changing the goalposts to massage your ego when an answer is given that you dont like. You asked a question, i answered it, end of story

Words are symbols and you just don't get it.

One plus one equals two is a symbol for the belief you can turn reality into symbols to be manipulated logically. You can't add Moscow plus moon and get to places anymore than you can add won plus a Korean Won and get too much. Indeed, there are no two identical things in existence which is why I say reality itself is binary and we use analog thought to reduce it to that which we can study. Not only can you not define a word precisely but they simply aren't even real. Then you want to impose your certainty and means of understanding reality on people who lived hundreds or thousands of years ago. You want to impose your definitions on a language that was used before English was even invented.

You think you have the answers because you have a system for coming to understand and this system has been around long enough to actually be useful. But this does not "prove" the world is "round", it is merely a convenient shorthand way of defining the shape of an object in our specific classification scheme. ANYTHING can be parsed to sound like nonsense. But by the same token almost ANYTHING can be parsed to make perfect sense. Try commenting on the sense not the nonsense. Ignore the words and look at the message because everybody has something to say.

 

[ChristineM]

Words are symbols and you just don't get it.

One plus one equals two is a symbol for the belief you can turn reality into symbols to be manipulated logically. You can't add Moscow plus moon and get to places anymore than you can add won plus a Korean Won and get too much. Indeed, there are no two identical things in existence which is why I say reality itself is binary and we use analog thought to reduce it to that which we can study. Not only can you not define a word precisely but they simply aren't even real. Then you want to impose your certainty and means of understanding reality on people who lived hundreds or thousands of years ago. You want to impose your definitions on a language that was used before English was even invented.

You think you have the answers because you have a system for coming to understand and this system has been around long enough to actually be useful. But this does not "prove" the world is "round", it is merely a convenient shorthand way of defining the shape of an object in our specific classification scheme. ANYTHING can be parsed to sound like nonsense. But by the same token almost ANYTHING can be parsed to make perfect sense. Try commenting on the sense not the nonsense. Ignore the words and look at the message because everybody has something to say.

You say i don't get it because i dont agree with you that you can twist the meaning of words do suite your sensibilities. Methinks you project muchly.

Yes words are symbols, symbols of their definitions

 

[ChristineM]

One means:
Reality is exact, precise , not approximated in any way, it is not guessed at. Right, please?
If yes, please give examples.

Regards

Mathematics are precise, i gave you an example, just because you dont like it does not make it any less relevant