“Hanging the earth upon nothing” (page 2)

peacefulpete

It's a beautiful expression of faith by someone who looked up and saw only stars. Nothing more nothing less.

1 Samuel 2:8 and Job 38:4, 6 are some more verses about the foundations and/or pillars of the Earth. https://www.bibleandscience.com/bible/books/genesis/genesis1_pillarsearth.htm says the following. 'In Ugaritic we have seen that there are two mountains, trgzz and trmg that bind the earth. Gibson says that these twin mountains were founded in the earth-encircling ocean, and held up the firmament, and also marked the entrance to the underworld (1978, 66). The mountains are said to bind the earth. This may indicate that the mountains surrounded, and supported the earth as well as confine the netherworld. The mountains were seen as the foundations of the earth, and the support pillars for the heavens. The Hebrews probably held a very similar view as the verses above indicate, as well as later Hebrew writings. So the phrase "pillars of heaven" and "pillars of earth" are referring to the same mountains. One emphasizes the height of the mountains holding up heaven, the other emphasizes the depth of the mountains that hold the earth firm.'

Job 38:17 (1898 ARV; 1901 ASV) says "gates of death" and "gates of the shadow of death"

Job 38:22 (1898 ARV; 1901 ASV) says "treasuries of the snow" and "treasuries of hail"

smiddy3

What about the sun standing still ? Josh.10:12-14

And the mind boggles to think what would happen if the Earth stood still

waton

And the mind boggles to think what would happen if the Earth stood still

s3, in Joshua's case, stop rotating and starting to spin again within hours.

"earthquakes in one place and another" ha ha.

In Job's case, stopped revolving, stopped being hung on energy aka "no thing", a straight dive into the sun, be gone in 65 days. average falling speed: ~100 000 km/h ( quoted from Wiki)

Disillusioned JW

I hope Sea Breeze reads this post.

Hey folks the https://www.bibleandscience.com website (called "Institute for Biblical & Scientific Studies") I quoted from (at a different page on the site) is a Christian site which promotes the idea that God created the universe and life, but it isn't the typical kind. Consider the following about it.

The https://www.bibleandscience.com/murray.htm web page says the following regarding its former President, Dr. Arlton C. Murray.

"Arlton Murray received a D. Sc. (Doctor of Science) in 1981 from the Sussex College of Technology in London.

... Arlton Murray started working for the Smithsonian Institute in Washington DC in 1934. He worked for 27 years as Paleo-Osteological preparatory and field collector, Division of Vertebrate Paleontology. Some of the fossils he helped prepare are still on display. On one expedition he went to Panama to help excavate a giant ground sloth, megatherium.

... He was Curator of the Museum of Earth and Life History in Lynchburg, Virginia for four years. During this time he helped excavate an allosaurus.

... Dr. Arlton Murray has met most of the leaders of the creation science movement. He was with Carl Baugh when he was looking for dinosaur and human prints in the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas. Dr. Murray secretly made a cast of one of the supposed human footprints and took it to an expert who said it was not a human print. For more information see The Paluxy Dinosaur/"Man Track" Controversy. After 75 years of traveling all over the USA and foreign countries to excavate fossils for the Smithsonian and other museums, he has not found one shred of credible evidence that man and dinosaur lived together as young-earth creationists claim. Dr. Murray is very concerned about the wild unsubstantiated claims of young-earth creationists."

The https://www.bibleandscience.com/meyers.htm says the following regarding the Institute's current President, Dr. Stephen C. Meyers. [Note: Dr. Stephen C. Meyers is a totally different person than the intelligent design proponent named Stephen C. Meyer.]

He received multiple theology degrees and he took "Special Courses in Egyptian Studies and Biblical Archaeology from University of Pennsylvania" and "Courses in Archaeology, Geology, Paleontology, and Astronomy from the Wagner Free Institute of Science."

He was a young earth creationist and he "was raised in a strict fundamentalist Baptist church" which thought "Billy Graham was an apostate". He also says the following regarding the very strict fundamentalist colleges he attended in the 1970s. 'Separation from the world was key especially in doctrine. In "secondary separation" one must not talk to someone who associates with someone else who is considered apostate which was most people and organizations unless GARB approved. The result, many pastors and people fight among themselves for who is the holiest, and then separate from them. Believing exactly the right doctrine was the most important thing. There is no room for tolerance. I was refused graduation because I did not believe exactly the same way they believed on every doctrine. I did learn enough Hebrew and Greek to point out their inconsistencies.'

Notice that his experience with a strict fundamentalist Baptist church and fundamentalist colleges is very similar to the experiences that JWs have (and which many exJWs had) with the Watchtower!

He says the following regarding paranoia within fundamentalist Christianity. "The end of the world always seems just around the corner. There are all sorts of government conspiracies, cover ups, and world take over scenarios leading to one world government, the beast, the Antichrist, the illuminati, and the infamous mark of the beast, 666. Some churches have tried to out smart the Antichrist by running up debts, building huge churches, and not planning to pay for them because the end is near, then loosing their property because Christ did not return. Harold Camping proclaimed the end of the world in 1994. Christians were willing to quit their jobs, sell their homes, and send Camping their money. More on Harold Camping."

Notice that many JWs have and some exJWs had the same mindset as those within within fundamentalist Christianity. Notice he said many within fundamentalist Christianity believe in many government conspiracies.

He goes on to say the following.

'I thought the Bible was filled with all kinds of scientific facts thousands of years ahead of its time for example, Isaiah 40:22 mentions the "circle of the earth." My thesis was to show if this was true. My conclusions were the opposite. The Bible is not a scientific book, it is a spiritual book. See Do the Bible and Science Agree?

How old is the Earth?

All my life I was taught that the earth was very young because the Bible said so, and "true" science confirmed it so. Henry Morris was my hero. I never heard evidence from the other side. When I began to study geology things just did not add up. How could the flood have created all the wide variations in the different layers of the earth? How could there be dinosaurs tracks, dinosaur eggs, nests, and young dinosaurs running around in the middle of the flood. Did not the flood destroy all life? How could all the dinosaurs fit on the ark? After careful study of both sides, the geologists had far better answers and evidence. See How Old is the Earth

When I was at the last International Creationist Conference (1998) I learned that Henry Morris' views on the flood were passé, while his son John pushed a new view of surge tectonics.'

Regarding his studies at Westminster Theological Seminary (which he abbreviates as "WTS", not to be confused with "Watchtower Society") he says the following.

'At WTS I knew that I wanted to do my thesis on the phrase “circle of the earth”, and “circle of the heavens.” I spent much time researching these phrases in ancient literature. The key question: Was the “circle of the earth” an amazing scientific statement in the Bible, or was it just a common phrase used in the ancient Near East?

I did not like the answer that my research came up with, but I had to be honest with myself. The phrase “circle of the earth” and other supposed scientific phrases were just common phrases used in the ancient Near East. In fact I had misunderstood their meanings. The ancient Hebrews would never have understood these phrases in scientific terms. I had poured my modern scientific ideas back into ancient Hebrew phrases. Today I see the young-earth creationists, and old-earth creationists pouring their modern ideas back into the scriptures just like I did.

The next key question was: How did the ancient Hebrews understand these phrases? I think a better translation would be the “vault or dome of the earth.” Since Isaiah 40:22 is poetry, the next parallel phrases help us to better understand chug or vault of the earth. It is said to be like a tent that is stretched out over the earth. The ancient Hebrews would not have understood this phrase as meaning a spherical earth. For a detailed study of this see Genesis 1.

All the supposed modern scientific statement in the Bible that I had studied turned out to be just common pre-scientific statements. Many of these phrases indicated a false scientific view of the universe. The Bible mentions the “pillars of the earth” and “pillars of the heavens.” The ancient Hebrews saw the mountains as pillars that held up the earth and sky.

... As I began to read scholarly works outside of fundamentalism, I proceeded to see that these scholarly works were much better, and more in depth than the shallow fundamentalist works. I discovered that the internal and external evidence for the fundamentalist view of the Bible was wrong. Not only was the Bible not a science book, it was not even a historically accurate history book.

Part 3 – The Bible: Young or old earth Creation?

With the foundation of the infallibility of the Bible destroyed, I could now start to accept some of the teachings of science. I was a young-earth creationist who was chopping at the bit to debate anyone who claimed otherwise. I had started young-earth creationist clubs at the UT of Chattanooga and in Philadelphia.

... As I studied the evidence, the young-earth arguments seemed to fall apart. Even Answers in Genesis points out many of these false arguments. See "Arguments we think creationists should NOT use" by Answers in Genesis. Unfortunately, many young-earth creationists still hold to these false arguments.

... I had now plunged from the pinnacle of fundamentalist young-earth creationist to the depths of an old-earth creationist. The arguments for an old earth were too overwhelming.'

Dr. Meyers says he considers the following to be true. "Many of the evidences young-earth creationists reject, are powerful evidences for God and creation. For example, the Big Bang is powerful evidence that there is indeed a beginning to creation, but young-earthers vehemently reject this. They have also rejected Einstein’s theories of relativity, plate tectonics, and radiometric dating." I don't believe the examples he states are powerful evidences for God and creation, but I can understand why he believes they are. At least he is now convinced of the scientific facts and scientific theories. He continues by saying the following.

' Part 4 – Bible and Evolution

I had fallen from young-earth creation to old earth creation, and now I was on the verge of descent into the murky realm of theistic evolution. One key book is “Finding Darwin’s God” written by Kenneth Miller.

I see two major lines of evidence: Geology and Genetics. The first main evidence for me was an old earth with progressively evolving fossils. Humans are not found with dinosaurs, and dinosaurs are not found with trilobites.

Secondly, Genetics seems to be unraveling the mysteries of our origin. We are about only 2% genetically different from chimpanzees. African and Asian elephants are far more genetically different. This is easily explained by evolution, but not creation.

... It seems to me that God used evolution to create life on earth. Did not God command the earth to bring forth or evolve forth life?

So now I have completely fallen to the bottom of the barrel, and I’m in danger of falling out of the barrel into atheism according to fundamentalists. But maybe, just maybe, I have stumbled across the liberating truth that has set me free from the bondage of fundamentalism.

—Dr. Stephen C. Meyers (2003)'

The https://www.bibleandscience.com/bible/books/genesis/geology.htm web page of the site says the following.

"There are many reasons why Noah's flood can not account for all the geology we have. ... According to the Bible all life was destroyed by the flood, yet there are many animal tracks, nests, ripple marks, and erosion between layers.

The flood does not account for the thousands of annual layers of varies, thousands of layers of ice, coral reef growth, evaporates, and many layers of coal deposits (Wonderly 1987). One of the greatest misunderstandings is that dinosaurs and humans lived together, and therefore Noah must have brought dinosaurs on the ark. There were no dinosaurs on the ark. Dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago."

Phizzy

That Site mentioned above by Dis.JW. is a bit more open minded and sensible than head-banging Bible Literalists are, but is a tad naive.

For example : " II Timothy 3:16 clearly states that the Bible is inspired by God" , of course it doesn't, there was no Bible when the writer (not Paul by the way) of those words wrote them. Certainly no New Testament Canon.

There were Jewish writings, collected together into a sort of Canon, but not considered fully established or as holy writ. Lots of what is now considered Apocryphal would have been in there too, the Book of Enoch etc etc.

As to the vision of what the Earth was by Hebrew writers there is no indication they considered it a Sphere, they would have used the word in Hebrew which we could translate as "Ball" had this been so, not the word used, which means shaped like a round food Plate.

waton

The verse says nothing about a ball, for all we know, the writer could have had in mind a garden of eden swing.

One , or a handful of verses in 30 000 to be correct is not a bad score to be uniquely insightful.

They certainly did not understand that the earth would actually fall up to the sun when they saw it in daytime.

Think of the swing to have go at 30 km a second average not to rise up. ( ~ 48 000 cubits per watch ) ha ha.

The Writer did not understand the difference between the gravity of the sun and the pull centered on the earth.

Fun fact: at times the planets actually orbit around nothing, when the planets pull the baricenter outside the suns surface.

Phizzy

Waton said " The verse says nothing about a ball, for all we know, the writer could have had in mind a garden of eden swing."

I didn't say the verse said that, I was trying to make the point that the verse used a Hebrew word that did not evoke a mental image of anything spheroid, which they had a perfectly serviceable word for, but instead used the other word, which gave a mental vision like a food plate. So this verse is far from insightful.

waton

Phizzy, sorry, I was referring to the text in the Opening Post, Job 26:7, "--hanging the Earth--", I see nothing circular in the expression "Earth", instead, the four corners are the main bible theme on that, right to Revelation after the 1000 year reign.

As I said, in the daytime, the Earth actually hangs from the Sun above, by the warping of spacetime.

The bible can be wrong, even when it seems to be right.

joe134cd

JWisim aside. The bible is unique in many aspects. It stands alone as different from other writings at the time. For example the code of Hammurabi, which is considered to precede that of the Torah, has lead critics to say that the Torah was merely a copy from the Babylonian empire. However, what sets it apart is that the code of Hammurabi dosnt touch on matters of science. For example, health and safety regulations, work place compensation, horticultural practices, which was unknown at the time. Are mentioned in the bible, and are still relevant today.

“Hanging the earth upon nothing”

Share this