Hey, listen, all I ever try to do is help people and I feel that I am doing a pretty good jod of it where I live. I was only trying to reach someone who would listen but it seems all I have found is an arguement on spelling or any loop-hole that has already been completely exhausted throughout time time of man and it has convinced me that the only way to reach people is to show them the way, which is impossible in this forum ( seeing as we only have words ). So good luck to you all and I hope that it turns out well for you in the end. God bless you richly !
Let the goading begin ....
Originally posted by oilman Hey, listen, all I ever try to do is help people and I feel that I am doing a pretty good jod of it where I live. I was only trying to reach someone who would listen but it seems all I have found is an arguement on spelling or any loop-hole that has already been completely exhausted throughout time time of man and it has convinced me that the only way to reac ...[text shortened]... e that it turns out well for you in the end. God bless you richly !
Let the goading begin ....
The more you continue to spell, the less I'm inclined to believe that you are working on a PhD of any credibility.
It is the usual excuse from christians. If we ever point out in the bible contridictions or anything that does not make sense, we "do not understand and only believers can grasp their concepts".
Of course that god manipulated the heavens into fooling scientists into believing that the universe is millions of years old. He did this to "test our faith".
I refer once again to an enlightening site that was pointed out before:
Originally posted by lausey It is the usual excuse from christians. If we ever point out in the bible contridictions or anything that does not make sense, we "do not understand and only believers can grasp their concepts".
Of course that god manipulated the heavens into fooling scientists into believing that the universe is millions of years old. He did this to "test our faith".
...[text shortened]... again to an enlightening site that was pointed out before:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/
You know what cracks me up? Just over 500 years ago the majority of the civilized world was convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Earth was flat.
So okay. We are expected to believe that a book which has its origins from the 4th century from various authors (who were of course beyond reproach), who wrote this in a time without the benefit of any type of technology or rational explanation for occurrences of nature, which was then translated by English scholars who worked for the Monarchy (who were of course also beyond any kind of reproach or manipulation of the masses) is the undisputed word of God?
Originally posted by Joe Fist You know what cracks me up? Just over 500 years ago the majority of the civilized world was convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Earth was flat.
So okay. We are expected to believe that a book which has its origins from the 4th century from various authors (who were of course beyond reproach), who wrote this in a time without the benefit of an ...[text shortened]... ation of the masses) is the undisputed word of God?
Nah I guess I am just crazy then 😲😲😲😲
You know what cracks me up? Just over 500 years ago the majority of the civilized world was convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Earth was flat.
Rubbish. At least get your facts right:
People from early antiquity generally believed the world was flat, but by the time of Pliny the Elder (1st century) its spherical shape was generally acknowledged. At that time Ptolemy derived his maps from a curved globe and developed the system of latitude and longitude (see clime). His writings remained the basis of European astronomy throughout the Middle Ages.†
Originally posted by lucifershammer [b]You know what cracks me up? Just over 500 years ago the majority of the civilized world was convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Earth was flat.
Rubbish. At least get your facts right:
People from early antiquity generally believed the world was flat, but by the time of Pliny the Elder (1st century) its spherical shape was ge ...[text shortened]... ean astronomy throughout the Middle Ages.†
---
† http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_earth[/b]
Rubbish? Please. I don't recall anyone having a "Ptolemy" day for his voyage around the world.
I said the "majority of the civilized world" and I know the "geek squad" like yourself have found evidence to the contrary. I said it was the "common belief" so unless you plan to tear out the "Christopher Columbus" section of all history books why don't you address the true point of my comment instead of just the fringes.
Originally posted by Joe Fist Rubbish? Please. I don't recall anyone having a "Ptolemy" day for his voyage around the world.
I said the "majority of the civilized world" and I know the "geek squad" like yourself have found evidence to the contrary. I said it was the "common belief" so unless you plan to tear out the "Christopher Columbus" section of all history books why don't you address the true point of my comment instead of just the fringes.
Where did you go to school??
Columbus did not go around (i.e. circumnavigate) the world - he wasn't even trying to. He knew the earth was spherical, he just thought it was much smaller than it really was and that he could reach India faster by sailing west.
As for the "majority of the civilized world" business:
The widespread notion that Columbus encountered opposition based on the idea that the earth was flat is a literary myth created by Washington Irving. Educated people in Columbus's time agreed that the earth was round; anyone familiar with seafaring certainly knew it, since the roundness of the earth forms the basis of celestial navigation. The main debate was over whether a ship could circumnavigate the planet without running out of food or getting stuck in windless regions.†
Oh, and Europe was not the only "civilized" part of the world at the time.
Originally posted by lucifershammer Rubbish. At least get your facts right:
lol. From your same Wiki article, LH:
Originally posted by Augustine "Those who affirm [a belief in antipodes] do not claim to possess any actual information; they merely conjecture that, since the Earth is suspended within the concavity of the heavens, and there is as much room on the one side of it as on the other, therefore the part which is beneath cannot be void of human inhabitants. They fail to notice that, even should it be believed or demonstrated that the world is round or spherical in form, it does not follow that the part of the Earth opposite to us is not completely covered with water, or that any conjectured dry land there should be inhabited by men. For Scripture, which confirms the truth of its historical statements by the accomplishment of its prophecies, teaches not falsehood; and it is too absurd to say that some men might have set sail from this side and, traversing the immense expanse of ocean, have propagated there a race of human beings descended from that one first man." (De Civitate Dei, 16.9)
So, it seems your church still had a problem with the round earth several centuries after the first postulation of its' spherical qualities. Are you saying the church was happy with Copernicus?
Originally posted by Joe Fist Actually I just had an epiphany from what you just wrote. You just proved my point through your rabid search to prove how uninformed I am.
Okay so I am totally clueless in your eyes about Columbus and his voyage to America and everybody knew the real deal by the time of "Pliny the Elder" (whoever the f**k that was), right?
But nonetheless I, like b ...[text shortened]... of course must have been accurately translated because after all I didn't know who Ptolemy was?
But nonetheless I, like billions of people, were sold the "lie" of Columbus throughout our primary education
Have you never heard of Magellan?
No, seriously - where did you do your schooling? Where I come from, virtually every student has studied the Ptolemaic model in school (it's a completely different matter that most will forget).
So again there is absolutely no possiblity that the Bible's original authors and translators did not screw this up or manipulate it for their own benefit.
So of course the only "lie" I am suffering is my refusal to believe in this ancient text that of course must have been accurately translated because after all I didn't know who Ptolemy was?
I have no idea what point you're trying to make.
Are you trying to say, "People back in the 4th century were idiots who believed the Earth was flat and conceived of God and the Bible as explanations for natural phenomena"?
People in the so-called "Dark Ages" were smarter than your education has led you to believe.
Originally posted by David C lol. From your same Wiki article, LH:
[quote]Originally posted by Augustine "Those who affirm [a belief in antipodes] do not claim to possess any actual information; they merely conjecture that, since the Earth is suspended within the concavity of the heavens, and there is as much room on the one side of it as on the other, therefore the part whi ...[text shortened]... t postulation of its' spherical qualities. Are you saying the church was happy with Copernicus?
Jeez. Did you read the next sentence in the article?
Augustine denied the antipodes, not the round Earth.
Also, Copernicus had nothing to do with a spherical earth - his theory was entirely about geocentrism vs. heliocentrism.
During the 19th century, the Romantic conception of a European "Dark Age" gave much more prominence to the Flat Earth model than it ever possessed historically. The widely circulated woodcut of a man poking his head through the firmament of a flat earth to view the mechanics of the spheres, executed in the style of the 16th century cannot be traced to an earlier source than Camille Flammarion's L'Atmosphere: Météorologie Populaire (Paris, 1888, p. 163) [2]. The woodcut illustrates the statement in the text that a medieval missionary claimed that "he reached the horizon where the earth and the heavens met", an anecdote that may be traced back to Voltaire, but not to any known medieval source. In its original form, the woodcut included a decorative border that places it in the 19th century; in later publications, some claiming that the woodcut did, in fact, date to the 16th century, the border was removed. Flammarion according to anecdotal evidence had commissioned the woodcut himself. In any case, no source of the image earlier than Flammarion's book is known.
Russell, a professor of history at Santa Barbara who has written widely on mediaeval religion, heresy and witchcraft, explored the issue in Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus and Modern Historians. Russell claims that the Flat Earth theory is a myth used to impugn pre-modern civilisation, especially that of the Middle Ages in Europe. Today essentially all professional mediaevalists agree with Russell that the "mediaeval flat earth" is a nineteenth-century fabrication, and that the few verifiable "flat earthers" were the exception. (from the Wiki article on Flat earth)
Originally posted by lucifershammer Jeez. Did you read the next sentence in the article?
Augustine denied the antipodes, not the round Earth.
Also, Copernicus had nothing to do with a spherical earth - his theory was entirely about geocentrism vs. heliocentrism.
During the 19th century, the Romantic conception of a European "Dark Age" gave much more prominence to th ...[text shortened]... e few verifiable "flat earthers" were the exception. (from the Wiki article on Flat earth)
Originally posted by lucifershammer Jeez. Did you read the next sentence in the article?
Augustine denied the antipodes, not the round Earth.
Jeez? OK. uh-huh.
They fail to notice that, even should it be believed or demonstrated that the world is round or spherical in form, it does not follow that the part of the Earth opposite to us is not completely covered with water, or that any conjectured dry land there should be inhabited by men
So, Augustine knew of the theory of a spherical earth, but dismissed the notion. Yes?
Also, Copernicus had nothing to do with a spherical earth - his theory was entirely about geocentrism vs. heliocentrism.
Refresh my memory...who was the mathemetician the RCC wanted excommunicated and/or burned at the stake for heresy?
You must be born again
14 Sep '05 06:131 edit
Back to Top