Answers in Genesis and fractals

[Learner]

It could have added that the people on the side of the earth near God's throne look like grasshoppers. It could say the heavens are like a shell - shells are typically around ball-shaped objects. Though the heavens are actually a huge distance away.

It could have added that, but it may not of been that important in mind to mention.

If it said the heavens are like a shell around the ball of the earth then there would have been at least one Bible verse against a flat earth. BTW in the NIV Isaiah 40:22 says above "the circle of the earth".

I see what you're saying but as I said, this may not of been that important to mention, a ball earth or flat earth, and also considering this is described by the words of a mortal man who's world view of the time had no vocabulary for the cosmology we know today.

28.00000 or 29.5000000 days is very neat - and seems designed. 29.5306 days (but still not exact) appears like what you'd expect from an accident.

Thats a flawed way of determining design or not, when you can easily adjust 'conventional' units of time to fit exactly, by stretching the gaps between the increments, setting a new and precise standard.

The 365.24238 days in a year probably has endless random seeming decimal digits. And this isn't consistent -

Regardless of the variational changes through time, it has no effect in having the ability to divide 12 months and days equally, as humans can do, to mark time, as long as someone is willing to make those adjustments, to suit changes in time. And... why would a universe with variable changes be a difficult concept to grasp as design, as opposed to the concept of having exactly "rounded-off measurements units" for days in a year - exactly 365 days, or exactly 29 or 30 days in a month, not difficult to grasp as an indication of design?

apparently millions of years ago there were more than 400 days in a year

How long was an early Earth year?

Roughly how long did it use to take for the early Earth 4.5~ billion years ago to complete one revolution around the Sun? (I know the Earth was spinning much faster, so a day would only take 2-3 h...

astronomy.stackexchange.com

When I was at school as a kid, I was taught that the spin of the planet was faster and the days were much shorter. So this would mean logically, those 400 days in a year... may be a mistake on your part, and you posted hastily, or.... I'm really outdated still and millions of years ago, the days and years were "slower" than today as you're suggesting, and it's been speeding up ever since.

 

[excreationist]

If it said the heavens are like a shell around the ball of the earth then there would have been at least one Bible verse against a flat earth. BTW in the NIV Isaiah 40:22 says above "the circle of the earth".

I see what you're saying but as I said, this may not of been that important to mention, a ball earth or flat earth, and also considering this is described by the words of a mortal man who's world view of the time had no vocabulary for the cosmology we know today.

There are a large number of verses that suggest a flat earth
e.g. this talks about 200+ verses

Refuting flat earth

Refuting flat earth teachings with horizon, time zones, southern hemisphere, constellations, circumnavigation, South Pole.

creation.com

The Bible talks about numbers in their millions - surely it can talk about a shell and a ball.
If God knew the future he'd know that a significant number of people would come to believe in a flat earth - and a major reason for that is the Bible.

Regardless of the variational changes through time, it has no effect in having the ability to divide 12 months and days equally,

So then that's 30.436865 days in each month... (approximately)

as humans can do,

Actually in our culture we divide it into 28, 29, 30 or 31 day months.

to mark time, as long as someone is willing to make those adjustments, to suit changes in time. And... why would a universe with variable changes be a difficult concept to grasp as design, as opposed to the concept of having exactly "rounded-off measurements units" for days in a year - exactly 365 days, or exactly 29 or 30 days in a month, not difficult to grasp as an indication of design?

Let's say there were two situations - a solar system where there are 365.24238 days in a year and that is constantly changing - or 360.00000 days that is always exactly 360.0 days. If you were God and you wanted to show modern day atheists that you existed which would you prefer? Also you could make all of the other planets have random days and years so that the earth is obviously special.

How long was an early Earth year?

Roughly how long did it use to take for the early Earth 4.5~ billion years ago to complete one revolution around the Sun? (I know the Earth was spinning much faster, so a day would only take 2-3 h...

astronomy.stackexchange.com

When I was at school as a kid, I was taught that the spin of the planet was faster and the days were much shorter. So this would mean logically, those 400 days in a year... may be a mistake on your part, and you posted hastily, or.... I'm really outdated still and millions of years ago, the days and years were "slower" than today as you're suggesting, and it's been speeding up ever since.

Actually if you look at the link it says there are less days in a year but the days are getting longer. (there apparently used to be less than 18 hours in a day)

 

[Learner]

If it said the heavens are like a shell around the ball of the earth then there would have been at least one Bible verse against a flat earth. BTW in the NIV Isaiah 40:22 says above "the circle of the earth".

I see what you're saying but as I said, this may not of been that important to mention, a ball earth or flat earth, and also considering this is described by the words of a mortal man who's world view of the time had no vocabulary for the cosmology we know today.

There are a large number of verses that suggest a flat earth
e.g. this talks about 200+ verses

Refuting flat earth

Refuting flat earth teachings with horizon, time zones, southern hemisphere, constellations, circumnavigation, South Pole.

creation.com

The Bible talks about numbers in their millions - surely it can talk about a shell and a ball.
If God knew the future he'd know that a significant number of people would come to believe in a flat earth - and a major reason for that is the Bible.

Well there are many who don't believe in the flat earth. Quite a few well known preachers are publicly rubishing it.

Regardless of the variational changes through time, it has no effect in having the ability to divide 12 months and days equally,

So then that's 30.436865 days in each month... (approximately)

By the prefered units of measure acusstomed to ... absolutely.

as humans can do,

Actually in our culture we divide it into 28, 29, 30 or 31 day months.

Yes that's the Gregorian calender we're using today, which has alternating leap years.

to mark time, as long as someone is willing to make those adjustments, to suit changes in time. And... why would a universe with variable changes be a difficult concept to grasp as design, as opposed to the concept of having exactly "rounded-off measurements units" for days in a year - exactly 365 days, or exactly 29 or 30 days in a month, not difficult to grasp as an indication of design?

Let's say there were two situations - a solar system where there are 365.24238 days in a year and that is constantly changing - or 360.00000 days that is always exactly 360.0 days. If you were God and you wanted to show modern day atheists that you existed which would you prefer? Also you could make all of the other planets have random days and years so that the earth is obviously special.

It wouldn't matter to me as a human, to understand any concept for creation, be it exactly 360.0 days or 365.24238, It wouldn't matter to me as a creator, because there would be believers in any case, who could have been atheists once.

How long was an early Earth year?

Roughly how long did it use to take for the early Earth 4.5~ billion years ago to complete one revolution around the Sun? (I know the Earth was spinning much faster, so a day would only take 2-3 h...

astronomy.stackexchange.com

When I was at school as a kid, I was taught that the spin of the planet was faster and the days were much shorter. So this would mean logically, those 400 days in a year... may be a mistake on your part, and you posted hastily, or.... I'm really outdated still and millions of years ago, the days and years were "slower" than today as you're suggesting, and it's been speeding up ever since.

Actually if you look at the link it says there are less days in a year but the days are getting longer. (there apparently used to be less than 18 hours in a day)

Apologies, you are right here, my mistake. I was the one hastily posting not you, a brief moment of thinking in reverse. Yes of course ... shorter days would mean extra days in a given year.

 

[excreationist]

Well there are many who don't believe in the flat earth. Quite a few well known preachers are publicly rubbishing it.

But are there any Bible verses that are against a flat earth? I think Christians that are against a flat earth are basing it only on science

as humans can do,

Actually in our culture we divide it into 28, 29, 30 or 31 day months.

Yes that's the Gregorian calendar we're using today, which has alternating leap years.

But then there are further rules: "except for years evenly divisible by 100, but not by 400" - and even then it isn't fully correct.

Let's say there were two situations - a solar system where there are 365.24238 days in a year and that is constantly changing - or 360.00000 days that is always exactly 360.0 days. If you were God and you wanted to show modern day atheists that you existed which would you prefer? Also you could make all of the other planets have random days and years so that the earth is obviously special.

It wouldn't matter to me as a human, to understand any concept for creation, be it exactly 360.0 days or 365.24238, It wouldn't matter to me as a creator, because there would be believers in any case, who could have been atheists once.

Considering the Bible says that most people are going to hell eternally I thought he'd put more effort into trying to minimise this by providing a lot more evidence he exists - not just some kind of god, but the Christian God which is required to be saved.

 

[atrib]

There is a large number of things that God could have done to provide more evidence he exists. Considering the Bible says that most people are going to hell eternally I thought he'd put more effort into trying to minimise this by providing a lot more evidence he exists.

God wants people to burn in hell. why else would he create hell?

 

[excreationist]

There is a large number of things that God could have done to provide more evidence he exists. Considering the Bible says that most people are going to hell eternally I thought he'd put more effort into trying to minimise this by providing a lot more evidence he exists.

God wants people to burn in hell. why else would he create hell?

Matthew 25:41
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."

Though some Christians say:

Believe What the Jewish Apostles Taught -- Why Conditional Immortality Is True and Biblical

Why hell is destruction, not eternal torment. Absolute Biblical proof of conditional immortality. What was taught in the Old Testament? What did Judaism teach? In-depth discussion on Conditional Immortality, Annihilationism, Traditionalism, and more! Here are the answers/Scriptures that you...

www.jewishnotgreek.com

"It was never, never made for humans. Humans will perish in the fire, not be preserved in the fire"

 

[bilby]

There is a large number of things that God could have done to provide more evidence he exists. Considering the Bible says that most people are going to hell eternally I thought he'd put more effort into trying to minimise this by providing a lot more evidence he exists.

God wants people to burn in hell. why else would he create hell?

Matthew 25:41
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."

Though some Christians say:

Believe What the Jewish Apostles Taught -- Why Conditional Immortality Is True and Biblical

Why hell is destruction, not eternal torment. Absolute Biblical proof of conditional immortality. What was taught in the Old Testament? What did Judaism teach? In-depth discussion on Conditional Immortality, Annihilationism, Traditionalism, and more! Here are the answers/Scriptures that you...

www.jewishnotgreek.com

"It was never, never made for humans. Humans will perish in the fire, not be preserved in the fire"

Yeah, that's not really a defence.

It's like standing up at the Nuremberg trials and saying "I don't know what you guys are so upset about. We only targeted subhumans".

If the devil and his angels were moral agents (beings able to choose between good or bad actions), then excessive punishment (and infinite punishment for finite crimes can only be excessive) is immoral.

And if they were not moral agents, then punishment is literally insane - it puts God in the same absurd position as Basil Fawlty beating his car with a tree branch to punish it for not starting.

Cruel and unusual punishment isn't rendered acceptable, just because it's reserved for others.

 

[excreationist]

Matthew 25:41

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."

Though some Christians say:

Believe What the Jewish Apostles Taught -- Why Conditional Immortality Is True and Biblical

Why hell is destruction, not eternal torment. Absolute Biblical proof of conditional immortality. What was taught in the Old Testament? What did Judaism teach? In-depth discussion on Conditional Immortality, Annihilationism, Traditionalism, and more! Here are the answers/Scriptures that you...

www.jewishnotgreek.com

"It was never, never made for humans. Humans will perish in the fire, not be preserved in the fire"

Yeah, that's not really a defence.

It's like standing up at the Nuremberg trials and saying "I don't know what you guys are so upset about. We only targeted subhumans".

If the devil and his angels were moral agents (beings able to choose between good or bad actions), then excessive punishment (and infinite punishment for finite crimes can only be excessive) is immoral.

And if they were not moral agents, then punishment is literally insane - it puts God in the same absurd position as Basil Fawlty beating his car with a tree branch to punish it for not starting.

Cruel and unusual punishment isn't rendered acceptable, just because it's reserved for others.

I think eternal punishment just for immortal angels who chose to follow Satan is a huge improvement on the traditional church belief that most humans will receive eternal punishment. Note that the first sinners didn't even know what good and evil meant before they disobeyed God. I think the angels are a million times more deserving of eternal punishment than most humans are (assuming eternal punishment needs to be used at all).

 

[bilby]

Matthew 25:41

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."

Though some Christians say:

Believe What the Jewish Apostles Taught -- Why Conditional Immortality Is True and Biblical

Why hell is destruction, not eternal torment. Absolute Biblical proof of conditional immortality. What was taught in the Old Testament? What did Judaism teach? In-depth discussion on Conditional Immortality, Annihilationism, Traditionalism, and more! Here are the answers/Scriptures that you...

www.jewishnotgreek.com

"It was never, never made for humans. Humans will perish in the fire, not be preserved in the fire"

Yeah, that's not really a defence.

It's like standing up at the Nuremberg trials and saying "I don't know what you guys are so upset about. We only targeted subhumans".

If the devil and his angels were moral agents (beings able to choose between good or bad actions), then excessive punishment (and infinite punishment for finite crimes can only be excessive) is immoral.

And if they were not moral agents, then punishment is literally insane - it puts God in the same absurd position as Basil Fawlty beating his car with a tree branch to punish it for not starting.

Cruel and unusual punishment isn't rendered acceptable, just because it's reserved for others.

I think eternal punishment just for immortal angels who chose to follow Satan is a huge improvement on the traditional church belief that most humans will receive eternal punishment. Note that the first sinners didn't even know what good and evil meant before they disobeyed God. I think the angels are a million times more deserving of eternal punishment than most humans are.

A million times any finite number is no closer to infinity than the original number.

infinite punishment for finite crime is monstrous.

 

[excreationist]

I think eternal punishment just for immortal angels who chose to follow Satan is a huge improvement on the traditional church belief that most humans will receive eternal punishment. Note that the first sinners didn't even know what good and evil meant before they disobeyed God. I think the angels are a million times more deserving of eternal punishment than most humans are.

A million times any finite number is no closer to infinity than the original number.

infinite punishment for finite crime is monstrous.

Not only do large numbers of Christians say that eternal punishment for all unsaved humans is just, they can also say that God is infinitely loving.

 

[bilby]

I think eternal punishment just for immortal angels who chose to follow Satan is a huge improvement on the traditional church belief that most humans will receive eternal punishment. Note that the first sinners didn't even know what good and evil meant before they disobeyed God. I think the angels are a million times more deserving of eternal punishment than most humans are.

A million times any finite number is no closer to infinity than the original number.

infinite punishment for finite crime is monstrous.

Not only do large numbers of Christians say that eternal punishment for all unsaved humans is just, they also say that God is infinitely loving.

Yeah, which just goes to show how commonplace insanity is, and how vile and abhorrent apparently normal people are capable of being.

Which really shouldn't surprise anyone who has even a passing familiarity with history.

 

[Learner]

Well there are many who don't believe in the flat earth. Quite a few well known preachers are publicly rubbishing it.

But are there any Bible verses that are against a flat earth? I think Christians that are against a flat earth are basing it only on science

Verses against flat earth? Well that depends, how one sees it, for example the Christians against the flat earth, like W.C.Lane or John Lennox, also base their views of the bible on 'allegory, figure of speech, a manner of speaking'. Do you remember those debates on some of the earier threads or rather the previous forums where there were atheists who would argue that the bible was far more Allegoric than literal? The bible has it ALL, on many levels.

as humans can do,

Actually in our culture we divide it into 28, 29, 30 or 31 day months.

Yes that's the Gregorian calendar we're using today, which has alternating leap years.

But then there are further rules: "except for years evenly divisible by 100, but not by 400" - and even then it isn't fully correct.

Sure and it's not an issue, as I ve said - the idea that a creation can have variations, as I sort of summarized in a previous post.

The notion that "rounded numbers and repeatable precision, would somehow be the only means, or indication for a creation," and not the type of universe we live in - having all those variable changes (days and months as mentioned), can be problematic as I said in a previous post and may have some confliction with the simulation/ computer universe idea. although I think yours maybe a variant of that, perhaps we can discuss further sometime, on your dedicated thread.

Let's say there were two situations - a solar system where there are 365.24238 days in a year and that is constantly changing - or 360.00000 days that is always exactly 360.0 days. If you were God and you wanted to show modern day atheists that you existed which would you prefer? Also you could make all of the other planets have random days and years so that the earth is obviously special.

It wouldn't matter to me as a human, to understand any concept for creation, be it exactly 360.0 days or 365.24238, It wouldn't matter to me as a creator, because there would be believers in any case, who could have been atheists once.

Considering the Bible says that most people are going to hell eternally I thought he'd put more effort into trying to minimise this by providing a lot more evidence he exists - not just some kind of god, but the Christian God which is required to be saved.

When God's presence was around, engaging with humans through His prophets and whilst He passed judgement, there and then, as described in the OT, people still turned their backs on Him. However... since Jesus's departure... Christians have still gone out sharing the Gospel (for those who want to hear) till this day - it should be noted that despite the variations that exist as denomoinations... Christianity is the largest faith in the world.

 

[lostone]

The concept of Eternal punishment has served as justification for acts of great cruelty in punishing so-called heretics, sinners, and non-believers over the centuries. After all, from the viewpoint of clergy, such people endanger the souls of everyone else with their sins, heresies and/or non-belief, if they should cause anyone else to fall away from their faith. It served as justification for the Inquisition and rooting out paganism.

 

[steve_bank]

I know the Earth is the center of the universe, I can watch it rotatearound with my eyes.

Or, the Earth is at the center of a giant shell and those points of light are holes in the shell through which god;s light shines through.


The biblical literalist is incapable of telling the difference between fact and poetry, metaphor, allegory, and plain old story telling around the campfire.

A bucnch of nomadic camel jockeys sitting around the fire on a clear night speculating and making up stories about what te universe is, TV was yet to come, it is how they passed the time.

 

[excreationist]

Well there are many who don't believe in the flat earth. Quite a few well known preachers are publicly rubbishing it.

But are there any Bible verses that are against a flat earth? I think Christians that are against a flat earth are basing it only on science

Verses against flat earth? Well that depends, how one sees it, for example the Christians against the flat earth, like W.C.Lane or John Lennox, also base their views of the bible on 'allegory, figure of speech, a manner of speaking'. Do you remember those debates on some of the earier threads or rather the previous forums where there were atheists who would argue that the bible was far more Allegoric than literal? The bible has it ALL, on many levels.

I'd say William Lane Craig and John Lennox would say it isn't literal because their belief in a round earth is from science so they have to say that. Otherwise if it is literal and the Bible is true then they'd have to conclude that the earth is flat - which would make them a laughing stock.

 

[excreationist]

.....A bunch of nomadic camel jockeys sitting around the fire on a clear night speculating and making up stories about what the universe is, TV was yet to come, it is how they passed the time.

The New Testament also seems to have no verses against a flat earth and many that imply one.

 

[Jarhyn]

I'd say William Lane Craig and John Lennox ... they'd have to conclude that the earth is flat - which would make them a laughing stock.

I mean, they already are laughing stocks.

 

[excreationist]

I'd say William Lane Craig and John Lennox ... they'd have to conclude that the earth is flat - which would make them a laughing stock.

I mean, they already are laughing stocks.

I mean in an even worse way - amongst many fellow Christians.

 

[Jarhyn]

I'd say William Lane Craig and John Lennox ... they'd have to conclude that the earth is flat - which would make them a laughing stock.

I mean, they already are laughing stocks.

I mean in an even worse way - amongst many fellow Christians.

I mean... I can't help but think this is still already the case.

 

[excreationist]

I'd say William Lane Craig and John Lennox ... they'd have to conclude that the earth is flat - which would make them a laughing stock.

I mean, they already are laughing stocks.

I mean in an even worse way - amongst many fellow Christians.

I mean... I can't help but think this is still already the case.

I think both are against a young earth and Lennox at least is well respected - I mean Christians have given me books of his. I get the impression that mainly the only Christians against them are young earthers and flat earthers.