The Bible Erroneously Says the Earth is Flat

[1213]

Which version are you using? The English of the KJV is not the same as the English of today.

EDIT: Here is a more modern translation:

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 6 - English Standard Version

I think KJV is usually more accurate. But I think that ok also, it tells also that “blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land”.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think KJV is usually more accurate. But I think that ok also, it tells also that “blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land”.

Why would you think that? Once again the language has changed so your interpretation of it will almost certainly be wrong at times. Modern translations go back to even older sources than the KJV, they tend to be closer to the original and have the benefit of being translated into the language that you speak.

Some prefer the KJV because it is easier to abuse. I hope that is not your excuse.

 

[Audie]

Why would you think that? Once again the language has changed so your interpretation of it will almost certainly be wrong at times. Modern translations go back to even older sources than the KJV, they tend to be closer to the original and have the benefit of being translated into the language that you speak.

Some prefer the KJV because it is easier to abuse. I hope that is not your excuse.

I doubt anyone knows / admits they are abusing it.
But I dont think anyone can read
it with pure objecivity. Goddies least of all,
for lo, they go in with a load of presupposition,
including belief that the god they choose will
give them divine powers of right reading.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I doubt anyone knows / admits they are abusing it.
But I dont think anyone can read
it with pure objecivity. Goddies least of all,
for lo, they go in with a load of presupposition,
including belief that the god they choose will
give them divine powers of right reading.

The reason that I do not like the KJV is that the English language has changed quite a bit since that. That allows people to read that version and interpret it so that it matches their own prejudices. That is not so easy with more modern translations. When people claim that newer translations are "less accurate" they are actually saying that an accurate translation of the Bible does not support their own preconceptions.

 

[Audie]

The reason that I do not like the KJV is that the English language has changed quite a bit since that. That allows people to read that version and interpret it so that it matches their own prejudices. That is not so easy with more modern translations. When people claim that newer translations are "less accurate" they are actually saying that an accurate translation of the Bible does not support their own preconceptions.

Who cares? kJV is more sanctimonious to read,
and no translation has the least barrier to free
style interpretin'.

Notice the style of legal documents? Bible
is nowhere so precise.

Even then the interpretation requires agreed -to
definitions etc, and, attys argue over contracts
anyway!

 

[1213]

Why would you think that? ....

I think it is more accurate, because it is closer to the meanings of the original scriptures.

 

[sooda]

I think it is more accurate, because it is closer to the meanings of the original scriptures.

Not really.. They didn't know how to translate from Koine Greek and didn't have the Ugaritic tablets.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think it is more accurate, because it is closer to the meanings of the original scriptures.

Why would you think that? If anything it almost has to be further from the closer meanings of the originals. There are two huge problems with your belief. First the English language has changed quite a bit since the KJV was written so that it all but guarantees that you will misinterpret some passages since you are looking at it from a modern perspective. Second there are more sources available now, not less, than when the KJV was written. That allows them to use older sources. Ironically it is the New Testament, what most Christians would regard as the more important part of the Bible, that is clearly inferior. It was based largely on what is now thought to be an inferior 15th century translation. You can read more here:

Serene Musings: Why The King James Version of the Bible is an Inferior English Translation

One more time, the language has changed, and it is not based upon the best of sources. Many people like it because it is highly poetic. Unfortunately highly poetic also often means that one can put their own spin on the verses. It appeals to your own prejudices. It is better to use a more accurate translation even if the KJV makes you feel better.

 

[Muffled]

By "God"?

I believe God is literate.

 

[Muffled]

You know, we atheists might just start believing in
this "Wisdom from God", if you guys ever showed any.

It just is not enough to proclaim that you are wise
and wonderful, know just exactly what they bible
says and means.

For a keen start, you'd have to show you get the
same wisdom, not conflicting versions.

Instead we get one person who says that there
are flash frozen mammoths that prove the noahs
ark story, another who says it is about a river
flooding, and yet others who say it is all just
a metaphor.

WHY would we believe any of you?

I believe those are exceptions to the rule. The rule is that one should have wisdom from the Holy Spirit. The exceptions do not. I do but how would you know since you don't have the Holy Spirit by which to verify what God is saying?

 

[sooda]

I believe God is literate.

Lolol. Jesus taught in parables. Most of the bible is poetic allegories based on the ancient myths from the cultures around Israel. Bible scholars are thrilled to have the much older ugaritic tablets that the Hebrews borrowed from.

 

[Audie]

I believe those are exceptions to the rule. The rule is that one should have wisdom from the Holy Spirit. The exceptions do not. I do but how would you know since you don't have the Holy Spirit by which to verify what God is saying?

Reread what I said. Lo and many an inerrant reader filled
with holy interpretin' power reads the "bible" and, they
come up with as many distinct verdions as there are readers.

What fool would believe any of them?

And BTW, this claim you and others have that god
helps you read and that makes you sooo much
wiser than I?

Does your reading tell yiu therevwasca world wide flood?

 

[Muffled]

All this claiming the writers of the OT knew earth was a globe. Is very pointless the prevailing theory of the time was;


Early Mesopotamian mythology, The world was portrayed as a flat disk floating in the ocean with a hemispherical sky-dome above, and this forms the premise for early world maps like those of Anaximander and Hecataeus of Miletus.

Even if you had access to libraries or manuscripts of the time this would be the information they contained

But almost all myths have their origination in some kernel of truth. And many god myths talk about gods having sex w/ humans, which is what Genesis 6:1-4 tells us, and why Jehovah so drastically stepped in.

i do not believe that is the case. Although there is scant evidence the gods knew God at all, it doesn't seem that he thought of them as His people and didn't seem to interact with them much. It was the wickedness of the people of God that God took exception to.

Gen 6:5 The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually

 

[Muffled]

Lolol. Jesus taught in parables. Most of the bible is poetic allegories based on the ancient myths from the cultures around Israel. Bible scholars are thrilled to have the much older ugaritic tablets that the Hebrews borrowed from.

I believe Jesus is God in the flesh so that favors my point.

 

[sooda]

i do not believe that is the case. Although there is scant evidence the gods knew God at all, it doesn't seem that he thought of them as His people and didn't seem to interact with them much. It was the wickedness of the people of God that God took exception to.

Gen 6:5 The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually

In the earlier flood myths it wasn't because they were evil... it was because they were noisy.

 

[sooda]

I believe Jesus is God in the flesh so that favors my point.

Do you know what a parable is?

 

[Muffled]

Reread what I said. Lo and many an inerrant reader filled
with holy interpretin' power reads the "bible" and, they
come up with as many distinct verdions as there are readers.

What fool would believe any of them?

And BTW, this claim you and others have that god
helps you read and that makes you sooo much
wiser than I?

Does your reading tell yiu therevwasca world wide flood?

I believe again you have no way of determining who does or does not have the Holy Spirit. A disparity does not mean that they are all wrong all the time or that none of them had the Spirit. It only shows that here are some who do not.

I believe fools have a hard time believing anything.

I believe I can't vouch for the claims of others but it is true that wisdom comes from God and you have not said your concepts come from Him.

I believe what the Lord has shown me is that it was a flood local to Mesopotamia. It was the minds of men that misinterpreted "covered the whole earth" to mean the whole globe instead of the true meaning that it covered the whole earth in Mesopotamia. Sorry no giraffes or elephants. I am an iconoclast after all.

 

[Muffled]

In the earlier flood myths it wasn't because they were evil... it was because they were noisy.

i believe what God says is more valid than what men said.

 

[Muffled]

Why? How is that logical?

I believe the psalms are songs and therefore poetry. Metaphor is often used in poetry.

 

[sooda]

i believe what God says is more valid than what men said.

Then God must have been talking to the north coast Canaanites 1500 years before Genesis.

You sure that Bronze Age allegories, parables, poetry and didactic literature is "literal"?