Bible Vs Scientism

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.

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?

Yes. But that circuit does not prove the earth is flat

Do you believe the sun resides in a tent?

ah. a 1st Enoch dude.

that explains a lot.

One important clue is that God "spoke" everything into being, the closest analogy to that is launching a virtual world in a software program, known as "simulation theory". In that way, God could've "created" the universe by flipping a switch in one second, He did it in six days plus one day of rest to establish a pattern. Scientism tells you that it took millions upon millions of years to form, but from God's prospective, or even just a satellite's perpective, that's just a tiny crack. A few years ago, there was a massive sinkhole in New Zealand that ripped the ground apart, and guess what? It happened OVERNIGHT. The earth just cracked open. Take that as a micro Grand Canyon.

Do you know how the Grand Canyon was formed - scientifically speaking?

Was it millions of years of erosion?

As I said, that's just a crack.

The Bible teaches us that God created the heaven, the earth, the sea, and everything in them in six days - and then rested on the seventh. This occurred a little over 6000 years ago. I believe this, because God's written word is my ultimate authority.

Science is a process... an investigation and collection of raw data. Science doesn't actually "say" anything - as the common idiom "science says" indicates. Science is only the collection of the data itself. Then flawed human beings interpret that data in many different ways. Those interpretations are not science itself, but conclusions based on the data which was collected via the scientific process. Those conclusions come complete with personal biases, and much conjecture and speculation.

Scientism is a blind belief in those INTERPRETATIONS/CONCLUSIONS.

For example, we know through science that there are lights in the sky that appear to move over the earth in repeated patterns. It is not science itself, but the interpretations/conclusions/speculations of flawed men which tell us that those lights are giant fireballs in a vast vacuum, that they are moving away from us, and that this movement means that they were at one time all squished together into a hot, dense ball of energy. And Scientism is the faith-based belief IN those interpretations.

So the cult of Scientism (not science itself) claims that our world began as an explosion/expansion of a singularity about 14 billion years ago. The Bible teaches that our world began as a six day creative action taken by God... about 6000 years ago.

Which of those is the truth?

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.

I'm with yah Brother - now take a crack at my question.

It is in love with no added judgement for i do not claim to know exactly myself.
There is a scientific event that happenned a while back whereby some observable scientific evidence pointed to a possible clear factual analysis.
No guarantees of course.

Do you know how the Grand Canyon was formed - scientifically speaking?

Was it millions of years of erosion?

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

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

I personally believe that God's word is inspired and that what we read is mostly literal. It is possible to reconcile an apparently old earth with the Genesis account. It's known as the pre-Adamic creation theory.

When you read "millions" or "billions" of years, that's an incomprehensible, astronomical number. You read and hear these numbers over and over again, you're just inundated, 'cause this number is so large that you couldn't even play a time lapse video in your mind to get a handle on this process. As a psychological effect, you subconsciously take that as eternity, which means the creation subtly becomes the creator of itself, and that's the real goal that this evolutionary view aims to accomplish. It doesn't matter exactly how many years, what matters is the MAGNITUDE of that number. It's a mind game.

I merely pointed out the correct Hebrew terminology, and noted that it is interesting that "come in" and "go out" is how sunrise and sunset are described in the OT, especially when combined with David saying the sun rushes out of its chamber, and Enoch saying the sun comes into and goes out of various gates.


This isn't a flat earth thread or a "creation vs evolution" thread. It is a Bible vs Scientism thread. I am only responding the best I can to things other people have said/asked.

So let's you and I start having this "serious" discussion right now, shall we? You already said that you agree with the Bible that the creation of earth all the way to man on earth happened in six days, right? Does that agree with Scientism's 4.3 billion year time span? Nope. So it seems you and I are in agreement that Lyell's deep time is bunk. Is that correct?

The Bible also says that the sun moves in relation to the earth, while Scientism says the earth moves in relation to the sun. Do you also agree with the Bible on this point of contention?

The Bible is clear that the earth is flat and stationary with a domed vault over it like a tent, in which the sun, moon, and stars run their God-appointed circuits over the face of the earth.

The Bible says one, and Scientism says the other.

No. The Grand Canyon consists of sedimentary layers. Supposedly, they were formed by successive floods over millions of years. The problem with that is that there is no sign of vegetation between the layers, indicating that they were formed at the same time. One theory (which I believe) is that the layers were formed because of Noah's flood. Stirred up sediment will form layers when the disturbing influence stops. As an aside, there are marine fossils on the canyon's top layers.

The Grand Canyon was formed as the water drained into the massive deep areas formed as the earth's crust collapsed under the pressure of the surface water. You can see a similar effect in dirt after a storm. Run off cuts a path through the soft earth.

I've visited the Grand Canyon. I don't know how anyone can doubt that God is real after seeing it.

But I assert that it is NOT possible to reconcile the Biblical earth with Scientism's old earth. Give me the basic gist of the reconciliation you are talking about if you don't mind.

Agreed. Mostly literal - especially the historic accounts. But I assert that it is NOT possible to reconcile the Biblical earth with Scientism's old earth. Give me the basic gist of the reconciliation you are talking about if you don't mind. Thanks