Bible Vs Scientism

[Magenta]

"I have come that you may have LIFE" = "these words I speak they are Spirit and they are Life" - Gospel of John

John 6:63

 

[Dino246]

This isn't a flat earth thread, Magenta. It's a "Bible Vs Scientism" thread. And according to Scientism, the earth moves in relation to the sun. In the Bible, it is the sun that moves in relation to the earth. Which one of those is the truth?

Comparing the Bible to Scientism is no more valid than comparing Science to Creationism; it's a strawman argument.

 

[MichaelBoll]

In the heavens God has pitched a tent for the sun.

So God has not pitched a tent for the sun?

Isaiah 40:22... It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in.

No, God has not pitched a literal tent for the sun. Metaphorically, yes, God has spread out the heaven as if it were a tent in which we dwell.

 

[MichaelBoll]

Are you not a flat earth proponent?

I don't know of any such thing as a spherical tent, do you? I am familiar with nomadic tents of Isaiah's day, that were like a dome covering a flat circle of land. What do you think Isaiah and David had in mind when they compared God's heaven to a tent?

 

[Magenta]

Isaiah 40:22... It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in.

No, God has not pitched a literal tent for the sun. Metaphorically, yes, God has spread out the heaven as if it were a tent in which we dwell.

It seems you interpret those types of verses differently than some others might.

 

[Magenta]

I don't know of any such thing as a spherical tent, do you?

Spherical tent

 

[MichaelBoll]

Do you mean any of these verses?

All of those verses would convey the idea of the sun moving in relation to the earth, yes. The Hebrew verses (what Jesus called "scripture") don't actually say "rise" and "set". They say "come in" and "go out" - which is more accurate. The NT verses do say "rise" and "set", which is what the sun definitely appears to do. Of course it's not literally what the sun does - whether the earth is flat or a spinning ball.

 

[Magenta]

All of those verses would convey the idea of the sun moving in relation to the earth, yes. The Hebrew verses (what Jesus called "scripture") don't actually say "rise" and "set". They say "come in" and "go out" - which is more accurate. The NT verses do say "rise" and "set", which is what the sun definitely appears to do. Of course it's not literally what the sun does - whether the earth is flat or a spinning ball.

Coming in and going out of its tent...

 

[MichaelBoll]

I have no idea what method God would have used if he had told us how many earth years old the earth is.

I suppose God could have said, "The earth is X years old" at some point, but then we'd be in the same predicament as we are now - trying to ascertain from ancient genealogies exactly when He said those words, and how many years have actually transpired since then. In reality, if we take the Bible at face value, we already have the info we need to make a valid estimate - give or take a thousand years. But not give or take 4.5 billion years. 😉

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

This isn't a flat earth thread, Magenta. It's a "Bible Vs Scientism" thread. And according to Scientism, the earth moves in relation to the sun. In the Bible, it is the sun that moves in relation to the earth. Which one of those is the truth?

And the Bible doesn't say the sun literally resides in a tent. It does say in more than one place that the manner in which God spread out the heaven over the earth is reminiscent of Him spreading a tent out over the earth. Do you believe that Biblical teaching?

Science and the bible are not against one another, rather, they are COMPLEMENTARY. What science fails to explain, the bible does; what is hard to grasp in the bible, it's demonstrated through science. Real science is not a censensus among a bunch of experts, it's a testimony of God's divine providence.

 

[MichaelBoll]

It seems you interpret those types of verses differently than some others might.

As opposed to what? I see your photo of the hanging tent. That is cool and now I want one. But you suppose that's what Isaiah and David had in mind? How do YOU interpret the Biblical descriptions, "spreads out the heaven like a tent" and "pitched a tent in the heaven for the sun"?

 

[MichaelBoll]

Coming in and going out of its tent...

No, the tent is the entire heaven. David says the sun rushes out of its chamber. Enoch describes it similarly, except it comes out from and enters into many different gates.

 

[MichaelBoll]

Comparing the Bible to Scientism is no more valid than comparing Science to Creationism; it's a strawman argument.

Please point out the strawman I've created. I'm actually contrasting what the Bible teaches with what Scientism teaches, ie: God created the earth during a six day period vs big bang/expansion/accretion/earth during 10 billion year period.

 

[Dino246]

Please point out the strawman I've created. I'm actually contrasting what the Bible teaches with what Scientism teaches, ie: God created the earth during a six day period vs big bang/expansion/accretion/earth during 10 billion year period.

The problem is that you're using the term "scientism" in reference to all science, both valid and falsely so-called.

 

[MichaelBoll]

Science and the bible are not against one another, rather, they are COMPLEMENTARY. What science fails to explain, the bible does; what is hard to grasp in the bible, it's demonstrated through science. Real science is not a censensus among a bunch of experts, it's a testimony of God's divine providence.

In the OP, I explained that science and the Bible are not at odds... but Scientism (blind faith belief in flawed people's interpretations of raw data, ie: what you called "consensus among experts") and the Bible are very contradictory. For example, the Bible says God created heaven, earth, sea, and all that is in them during a six day period. Scientific data doesn't contradict this account - but Scientism certainly does. Scientism claims that from no earth to earth with humans took 4 billion years - not six days.

Which claim is the truth?

 

[MichaelBoll]

The problem is that you're using the term "scientism" in reference to all science, both valid and falsely so-called.

Read the OP again. You are mistaken, as I explicitly explained the difference between the two, and haven't conflated the two terms throughout this entire discussion.

Science is an investigation and gathering of raw observational data. Scientism is a faith-based belief in certain CONCLUSIONS drawn from that data by certain flawed human beings.

 

[Dino246]

All of those verses would convey the idea of the sun moving in relation to the earth, yes. The Hebrew verses (what Jesus called "scripture") don't actually say "rise" and "set". They say "come in" and "go out" - which is more accurate. The NT verses do say "rise" and "set", which is what the sun definitely appears to do. Of course it's not literally what the sun does - whether the earth is flat or a spinning ball.

Do the phrases "come in" and "go out" somehow preclude the sun's disappearance over the horizon as the Earth spins on its axis, when viewed from the surface of the Earth?

No.

I suggest that if you want a serious discussion about creation vs evolution, you're going to have to leave the flat earth issue completely out of it.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

In the OP, I explained that science and the Bible are not at odds... but Scientism (blind faith belief in flawed people's interpretations of raw data, ie: what you called "consensus among experts") and the Bible are very contradictory. For example, the Bible says God created heaven, earth, sea, and all that is in them during a six day period. Scientific data doesn't contradict this account - but Scientism certainly does. Scientism claims that from no earth to earth with humans took 4 billion years - not six days.

Which claim is the truth?

Yeah, scienTISM is definitely a cult. It's essentially Nicolaitanism - "Nico" + "Laity" = Conquering the Commoners. In political terms, it's technocracy.

 

[Dino246]

Read the OP again. You are mistaken, as I explicitly explained the difference between the two, and haven't conflated the two terms throughout this entire discussion.

Science is an investigation and gathering of raw observational data. Scientism is a faith-based belief in certain CONCLUSIONS drawn from that data by certain flawed human beings.

Following up to my previous post, the flat earth hypothesis fits in the latter category.

 

[Magenta]

No, the tent is the entire heaven. David says the sun rushes out of its chamber. Enoch describes it similarly, except it comes out from and enters into many different gates.

A tent is a chamber. Are you refusing to take Scripture literally? @Eli1 might be interested to know that