Beliefs

[HankD]

No. It is also generic, just like chug: it can mean a two dimensional circle (such as a disc) or a sphere. Either one.

Yes, I acknowledged that possibility, I said it was a functional word. This is idiomatic to Hebrew much like English but worse, one word can function with many meanings which often times makes a translation word choice difficult, occassionaly the meaning cannot even be determined by the context because more than one of the functional meanings will fit.

In addition if one translates from the the ancient Hebrew before the Masora was codified, there are no vowel points confusing the issue even more.

Oops, DUG is actually DUR. After going back to look at the word I see that it ends with a Resh and not a Gimmel.

The vowel points are what determine the word DUR as to its function. The letters are Daleth-Vav-Resh.
When the Vav has a dagesh point it turns the letter into a Shurek and indicates that the Masoretes determined the word to have a form, shape or a compassing function:

Isaiah 22:18 He will surely violently turn and toss thee like a ball into a large country: there shalt thou die, and there the chariots of thy glory shall be the shame of thy lord's house.​

Isaiah 29:3 And I will camp against thee round about, and will lay siege against thee with a mount, and I will raise forts against thee.​

You said...

'Chug' can mean either a literal circle (two dimensional) OR a sphere (three dimensional). In fact, several languages have words for "sphere" or "ball" which etymologically are derived from this word, such as German.

I'll say this way, IMO, the use of the word KOOG for "circle" in the Hebrew Scripture is correct as 2 dimensional and is never used as "sphere".​

I challenge you to show me an occassion in the Hebrew Scripture (not German) where the word KOOG is used as a "sphere" or "ball" such as the word DUR.​

HankD

 

[Johnv]

"Chug" can mean either a literal circle (two dimensional) OR a sphere (three dimensional). In fact, several languages have words for "sphere" or "ball" which etymologically are derived from this word, such as German.

That's not quite correct. The Hebrew word Chuwg means a flat-circle like a coin as already noted. The Hebrew word for a sphere like a ball is Duwr. However, it is duwr, not chuwg, that is not exclusively a word for sphere. Duwr can also simply refer to an infite space.

The German word for "ball", btw, is "ball".

 

[Winman]

I know you were not trying to prove the earth was flat. I just think that sometimes we get caught up in useless arguments because we don't interpret Scripture properly. I suspect that if we reread Jacob's dying words to his sons we would see a lot of metaphorical expressions.

Actually I believe that at sea you can discern that the earth is spherical. You see the horizon and then see the top of another ship below the horizon and as the distance is closed the ship appears above the horizon. This is particularly apparent when you are elevated above sea level such as the crows nest on the type of ship I served on.

This may be the reason that people like Columbus and Magellan did not believe in a flat earth when others did.

I grew up in a beach town in Florida, and to my eyes I could see the curvature of the earth north to south. When you can see that much expanse, you can see the slight curvature. And as you said, we could see the ships coming in, especially the large ships like aircraft carriers that came into Mayport a naval base about 10 miles north of where I lived. You would see the mast several minutes before the superstructure came into view.

 

[Havensdad]

That's not quite correct. The Hebrew word Chuwg means a flat-circle like a coin as already noted.

No it doesn't. It means "round". The Corresponding word in the Greek Septuagint is "Kamaran" which means a 3 dimensional arch, or curvature. This, coupled with the generic term "chug" which just means "round" would demand a 3 dimensional round shape. Besides personal study, I have about 12 different Hebrew resources: not a single one of them indicate the meaning of a "flat disk". Since this would be completely incompatible with the word used in the Greek Septuagint, which demands a three dimensional curvature, you have absolutely no basis for what you are saying.

The Hebrew word for a sphere like a ball is Duwr. However, it is duwr, not chuwg, that is not exclusively a word for sphere. Duwr can also simply refer to an infite space.

Actually, this word means a "chunk" or "mound", which may or may not be spherical, or the compass of that object. (can refer to a square chunk of rock)

The German word for "ball", btw, is "ball".

The German dish "Kugel" comes from an ancient Germanic root meaning "ball" or "sphere". This term has it's roots in Yiddish, which some believe borrowed the term from Hebrew.The term is still used in Geometry..

If you can understand German, you can look here:http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kugel

 

[Havensdad]

The Hebrew word translated "circle" is "chuwg". It referrs to a flat disc, like a frisbee.

This is impossible. Either that, or the people who translated the Septuagint were idiots, who did not know Hebrew. It has to be a three dimensional curved shape.

Not only that, no Hebrew lexicon translates this word as a flat disk. So basically all the people who know the most, disagree with you.

The Hebrews believed their world was a flat circle, with an expansed dome above it holding back waters.

This is completely unsubstantiated. There is no actual historical evidence to back this up: it is based on an atheistic, naturalistic interpretation of scripture, and I am surprised that any Christian would appeal to it.

A circle isn't a sphere. Not remotely. By translating it as "sphere" you are guilty of adding to scripture, which you accused me of.

As already shown, from the Greek Word, which is a three dimensional curvature, and the Hebrew word, which, as already shown, is the generic word for round (at least, in every Hebrew lexicon), the translation demands a spherical shape: the only thing that could fit both.

 

[Johnv]

Actually, this word means a "chunk" or "mound", which may or may not be spherical, or the compass of that object.

Yes, "Duwr" can, in context, refer to a mound. Duwr can refer to a two dimensional space or three dimensional space. OTOH, "chuwg" is generally referring to a disc-shaped space, not a sphere-shaped space. The "arch" reference isn't one of dimensionality, it's one of expanse (it requires some eisegesis here to make "chuwg" a sphere). The context of chuwg isn't not spherical, and the meaning in the passage "he who sits upon the circle of the earth" is by no means an attempt by the author to define a spherical shape.

 

[Havensdad]

Yes, "Duwr" can, in context, refer to a mound. Duwr can refer to a two dimensional space or three dimensional space.

It refers to ANY shape, not necessarily a circular one.

OTOH, "chuwg" is generally referring to a disc-shaped space, not a sphere-shaped space.

The word DOES NOT mean a flat disc. It just means circle, or round.

The "arch" reference isn't one of dimensionality, it's one of expanse (it requires some eisegesis here to make "chuwg" a sphere).

Yes, it is. The Greek Word Kamaron means curved or arched. It implies a circular shape, not an "expanse".

The context of chuwg isn't not spherical, and the meaning in the passage "he who sits upon the circle of the earth" is by no means an attempt by the author to define a spherical shape.

The two words used, one which means circular, and the other which means a three dimensional curve, demands a sphere. That is exactly what the author intended.

 

[Havensdad]

I guess you have some atheist garnered answer for this one, too...

Job 26:7 He stretches out the north over the void and hangs the earth on nothing.

How did the Hebrew writers know that the earth was free floating?

 

[Johnv]

The word DOES NOT mean a flat disc. It just means circle, or round.

but it doesn't have a definition of "sphere" as we know it. It use in "he who sits upon the circle of the earth" was not intended to describe a person sitting on a sphere. To imply that is exegetically absent, and eisegetically incorrect.

The Greek Word Kamaron means curved or arched. It implies a circular shape, not an "expanse".

Again, a curve at its edge, not a three dimensional sphere as we understand it.

 

[Havensdad]

but it doesn't have a definition of "sphere" as we know it. It use in "he who sits upon the circle of the earth" was not intended to describe a person sitting on a sphere. To imply that is exegetically absent, and eisegetically incorrect.

It is the word "circle" or "round". It is the only word that could have been used, to denote a definitively round shape.

Again, in conjunction with the word for "curved" in the Greek, it is exegetically demanded! No other interpretation could even fit.

Also, once again: NO Hebrew lexicon demands a "flat" or "two dimensional" shape for this word. It simply means round, or circle. You are imposing flatness, with absolutely no basis.

Again, a curve at its edge, not a three dimensional sphere as we understand it.

Not at all. Kamaron means "Curved, circular in shape, or arched."

Why do you feel it necessary to attack this so vigorously? Does it really offend you so badly, that God's Word teaches that the Earth is round? Since it is God's infallible Word, it SHOULD teach this, should it not?

I am having a major problem with the attitude you are exhibiting: you act as if the deity of Christ were being attacked, rather than God's Word being upheld...

 

[Winman]

It is the word "circle" or "round". It is the only word that could have been used, to denote a definitively round shape.

Again, in conjunction with the word for "curved" in the Greek, it is exegetically demanded! No other interpretation could even fit.

Also, once again: NO Hebrew lexicon demands a "flat" or "two dimensional" shape for this word. It simply means round, or circle. You are imposing flatness, with absolutely no basis.



Not at all. Kamaron means "Curved, circular in shape, or arched."

Why do you feel it necessary to attack this so vigorously? Does it really offend you so badly, that God's Word teaches that the Earth is round? Since it is God's infallible Word, it SHOULD teach this, should it not?

I am having a major problem with the attitude you are exhibiting: you act as if the deity of Christ were being attacked, rather than God's Word being upheld...

Well, I don't know how someone can sit on top of a 2 dimensional circle, but someone could sit on top of a globe or sphere.

From other conversations with Johnv, I don't think he likes to believe that the scriptures are scientifically correct.

 

[Johnv]

It is the word "circle" or "round". It is the only word that could have been used, to denote a definitively round shape.

Totally off topic here, and I apologize in advance.

We might be arguing incorrectly here. I'm curious why you're using the word "round" as a definition of a sphere. "Round" carries a definition of a circular shape, not a sphereical shape. A circle is two deminsional, not three dimensional. Ask any math teacher. Heck, ask any carpenter.

That's why I'm concurring with your exegetics, but disagreeing with your eisegetics.

Well, I don't know how someone can sit on top of a 2 dimensional circle, but someone could sit on top of a globe or sphere.

Sit in the center of a coin. You're not sigging in a circle. That's roughly the context of the passage.

From other conversations with Johnv, I don't think he likes to believe that the scriptures are scientifically correct.

That's an ad hominem, which are generally frowned upon, and I'm surprised that you would stoop that low.

 

[webdog]

Well, I don't know how someone can sit on top of a 2 dimensional circle, but someone could sit on top of a globe or sphere.

From other conversations with Johnv, I don't think he likes to believe that the scriptures are scientifically correct.

Draw a circle in your driveway with chalk and sit on it

 

[Johnv]

(double post... sorry)

 

[Winman]

The scriptures show the earth as three dimensional, not two.

Isa 42:5 Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

Prov 25:3 The heaven for height, and the earth for depth, and the heart of kings is unsearchable.

Matt 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Eph 4:9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?

 

[Johnv]

The scriptures show the earth as three dimensional, not two.

Yes, but that's not the same as saying scripture describes a spherical earth.

 

[webdog]

The scriptures show the earth as three dimensional, not two.

Isa 42:5 Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

Prov 25:3 The heaven for height, and the earth for depth, and the heart of kings is unsearchable.

Matt 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Eph 4:9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?

I don't think anyone's arguing it isn't. Anyone who is not blind knows it is, saved and lost alike. I think the disagreement is in the text being used to show a circle must mean sphere. A sphere is a circle, but the converse is not also always true as is being argued. A coin is not a sphere, tire is not a sphere, etc.

 

[Winman]

I don't think anyone's arguing it isn't. Anyone who is not blind knows it is, saved and lost alike. I think the disagreement is in the text being used to show a circle must mean sphere. A sphere is a circle, but the converse is not also always true as is being argued.

I realize that a circle is not a sphere, but a sphere is a circle, but if you put all the scriptures together I believe it strongly implies the earth is a sphere.

And verses that show that the earth is a sphere where it is day on one side, and night on another are in Luke.

Luke 17:34 I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.
35 Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
36 Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

You see in verse 34 that it is night and men are in bed, but in verse 36 it is day and men are in the field.

 

[Havensdad]

Totally off topic here, and I apologize in advance.

We might be arguing incorrectly here. I'm curious why you're using the word "round" as a definition of a sphere. "Round" carries a definition of a circular shape, not a sphereical shape. A circle is two deminsional, not three dimensional. Ask any math teacher. Heck, ask any carpenter.

That's why I'm concurring with your exegetics, but disagreeing with your eisegetics.

A sphere IS round, when measured two dimensionally. We do this all the time: it is called a circumference. This is also normal usage, in nearly every language in the world. Only with the relatively recent developments in geometry, has there become such a distinction between "round" or "circle" and spherical. A person living a thousand years B.C., would just say "the ball is round".

Again: Chug is the only word that could have been used to denote a specifically curved or circular shape. Had the word "dur" been used, it would have denoted God as sitting on top of a pile, or heap.

Sit in the center of a coin. You're not sigging in a circle. That's roughly the context of the passage.

No, unless the Septuagint translators are completely wrong. Because He is sitting ON a circular object, which is also three dimensionally curved, or circular. That can only be a ball or sphere.

 

[Johnv]

And verses that show that the earth is a sphere where it is day on one side, and night on another are in Luke....
You see in verse 34 that it is night and men are in bed, but in verse 36 it is day and men are in the field.

That's a misapplication of the passage. You can no more imply a spherical earth from that passage that you can imply that the Coming of the Kingdom of God will occur at night, or that there are two people in every bed.