Christians Should Mind Their Own Business

[Revmitchell]

The Roman Catholic Church used to teach that Genesis 1-11 is an accurate historical account of actual events—the very same belief that our fundamentalist churches have adopted as being “biblical truth.”

First evolution did not become popular until about 200 years ago. Creationism is not the new comer, evolution is. A literal Genesis was not the invention of the Catholic church. It was the exceptipted theology prior to.

Jesus also affirmed the narratives found in Genesis 1-11. Sooooo.....your issue is not with the Catholic churches or fuindamentalists. It is with Jesus.

In fact when you look at Mark 10:6 He said "But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.'"
Jesus Himself referred to Noah several times as a literal person and the flood as a literal event. Luke even includes Noah in the Genealogy. If you take away the genealogy then you have a huge issue with who Christ is.

Peter saw Genesis as literal:

2Pe 3:4 They will say, "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation."
2Pe 3:5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God,
2Pe 3:6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.
2Pe 3:7 But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

The Old Testament attests to Genesis 1-11 as being literal. I Chronicles 1 speaks of the genealogy of Adam and Noah. Even Hosea talks about Adam.

And oh yea Peter prophesied that folks like you would deny the flood:

2Pe 3:5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God,
2Pe 3:6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.

This statement is a good illustration of what happens when Christians know almost nothing about science and even less about the Bible.

This statement is a good illustration of what happens when hyper-intellecutalist snobs interpret scripture through the lens of "science" (even when it is bad science tainted by and agenda) instead of interpreting science through the lens of scripture.

Evolution is an observable and predictable process brought about through natural selection in which the characteristics of plants and animals change as they adapt to changes in their environment. Atheism is the disbelief in the existence of God; or more broadly, the disbelief in the existence of deity.

Evolution is a science created by humanists who want to deny the reality of God. However there are those in the evolution community who would deny that evolution is a predictable process:

"I argue that the "theory of evolution" does not make predictions, so far as ecology is concerned, but is instead a logical formula which can be used only to classify empiricisms and to show the relationships which such a classification implies....these theories are actually tautologies and, as such, cannot make empirically testable predictions. They are not scientific theories at all."

1. R. H. Peters, "Tautology in Evolution and Ecology," American Naturalist, Vol. 110, No. 1, 1976, p. 1. Emphasis his.

What one man in Kansas believes is irrelevant to the truth—and the truth is that tens of millions of evangelical Christians believe in the theory of evolution, and their belief in the theory of evolution does not in any way weaken or lessen their faith in Christ and His redemptive work on the cross; and it does not in any way weaken or lessen their faith in His resurrection from dead.

This is the bandwagon fallacy. The number of people who believe in it are not relevant to its reality. What that one Kansas professor believes is an example of the prevalent mindset throughout the scientific community. Evolution is about natural selection and leaves no room for a creator.

I find it humorous that those who call themselves Christians and believe in evolution and condemn those who do not by suggesting that we are unintelligent, ignorant, and look foolish are the same people the majority of the evolutionary community sees as ridiculous to believe in both God and evolution.

 

[Craigbythesea]

First evolution did not become popular until about 200 years ago.

On November 24, 1859, Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species was published and immediately very well received by the scientific community, but much less well by Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Even today, the very large majority of Sunni Muslims reject the theory of evolution as a lie due to their literal interpretation of Genesis 1-11. The same is true of Shia Muslims, but to less of an extent. The very large majority of Jews today fully embrace the theory of evolution, and the cognizant and reasonably well educated Christians by and large embrace the theory.

Creationism is not the new comer, evolution is.

I agree—belief in a nearly spherical earth rather than a flat earth and belief in the theory of evolution came very much later than the belief that the earth was created by God in six days.

A literal Genesis was not the invention of the Catholic church. It was the exceptipted theology prior to.

The Bible, when interpreted literally, teaches that the earth is flat, and this literal interpretation was nearly universally held by Christians until the Roman Catholic Church accepted as true what had been taught by scientists for centuries regarding the shape of the earth—and our fundamentalist Baptist Churches tenaciously hold to that Roman Catholic point of view.

Jesus also affirmed the narratives found in Genesis 1-11. Sooooo.....your issue is not with the Catholic churches or fuindamentalists. It is with Jesus.

In fact when you look at Mark 10:6 He said "But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.'"

Jesus Himself referred to Noah several times as a literal person and the flood as a literal event. Luke even includes Noah in the Genealogy. If you take away the genealogy then you have a huge issue with who Christ is.

Peter saw Genesis as literal:

2Pe 3:4 They will say, "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation."

2Pe 3:5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God,
2Pe 3:6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.
2Pe 3:7 But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

The Old Testament attests to Genesis 1-11 as being literal. I Chronicles 1 speaks of the genealogy of Adam and Noah. Even Hosea talks about Adam.

And oh yea Peter prophesied that folks like you would deny the flood:

2Pe 3:5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God,
2Pe 3:6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.

Who told you that Jesus affirmed the narratives found in Genesis 1-11? Most certainly the Bible does not tell us that—and I do NOT believe the Jesus believed that the earth is flat! Jesus, Luke, Paul, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Peter, and Jude all used popular stories from the Old Testament to teach their lessons—just as Sunday school teachers do today, but that does NOT mean that they all believed that the earth is flat!

This statement is a good illustration of what happens when hyper-intellecutalist snobs interpret scripture through the lens of "science" (even when it is bad science tainted by and agenda) instead of interpreting science through the lens of scripture.

I suppose that there might be some hyper-intellecutalist snobs [who] interpret scripture through the lens of ‘science’, but that would be ridiculous foolishness because religion is religion, and science is science—and anyone who confuses the two does not understand either of them.

Evolution is a science created by humanists who want to deny the reality of God.

This statement is a lie from hell!

However there are those in the evolution community who would deny that evolution is a predictable process:

"I argue that the "theory of evolution" does not make predictions, so far as ecology is concerned, but is instead a logical formula which can be used only to classify empiricisms and to show the relationships which such a classification implies....these theories are actually tautologies and, as such, cannot make empirically testable predictions. They are not scientific theories at all."

1. R. H. Peters, "Tautology in Evolution and Ecology,"American Naturalist, Vol. 110, No. 1, 1976, p. 1. Emphasis his.

Quotes taken out of context with the deliberate and willful purpose to deceive Christians are an abomination!

What that one Kansas professor believes is an example of the prevalent mindset throughout the scientific community. Evolution is about natural selection and leaves no room for a creator.

I find it humorous that those who call themselves Christians and believe in evolution and condemn those who do not by suggesting that we are unintelligent, ignorant, and look foolish are the same people the majority of the evolutionary community sees as ridiculous to believe in both God and evolution.

Please stop lying about the scientific community, and about the tens of thousands of evangelical Christians who believe in the theory of evolution but would never condemn those who do not!

 

[Revmitchell]

As the title to this thread attests and this last absurd response by you continues to testify of your hostility to a true understanding of scripture, your dishonest attempt to tie unrelated statements to believing in a flat earth, and your unwillingness to address the quotes I provided both from scripture and by the scientific community which were all well sourced, it is apparent that your disdain has blinded you.

I will leave you to your misery.

 

[Craigbythesea]

I see well as the title to this thread attests and this last absurd response by your continues to testify of your hostility to a true understanding of scripture, your dishonest attempt to tie unrelated statements to believing in a flat earth, and your unwillingness to address the quotes I provided both from scripture and by the scientific community which were all well sourced, it is apparent that your disdain has blinded you.


I will leave you to your misery.

This post, and most of the other posts by this individual, are inconsistent with the facts.

During my early years at the university, I studied evolutionary biology and I earned degrees in that field. Subsequently, I had an encounter with Christ and was baptized in the Holy Spirit. I read through the Bible cover to cover three times, and then read through the New Testament another twelve times. I joined a church, and on the early evenings in which they had an evening service, I attended that service; and on the other early evenings I went to Christian fellowships in the community. In the late evenings, I went to a small park in the hub of the city because I could easily find people there to witness to. I saw several lives radically transformed as the people with whom I had shared the gospel and prayed for believed the gospel and prayed for Jesus to save them.

Years later, I found myself serving as the senior pastor of an interdenominational evangelical church and still had the same love for God and His word that I had from the beginning of my Christian life. Indeed, my zeal was so great that it overflowed into the lives of my associate and assistant pastors and we never closed the doors to the church before midnight. Monday through Friday evenings we held an evangelistic service at 7:00 p.m. and had a Bible study from 9:00 till 10:00. On Sunday mornings and evenings, we had a worship service, and at 2:00 on Sundays we served dinner and followed it up with a chapel service. Our graphic arts department produced two monthly publications and the Lord blessed the Church so generously that we never used the publications for fund raising, and we took up an offering only on Sunday mornings.

A young man in the church was instantly healed from a devastating injury, and a 14-year-old boy who was paralyzed when struck by a car regained the use of all of his limbs. One of our hostesses was diagnosed with an especially lethal kind of leukemia and we all saw her body deteriorating from the disease. Therefore, the other hostesses took turns praying for her every night till midnight as she lay on the floor in our prayer room too week to do anything else. She refused hospitalization, but had a blood transfusion every day. She reached the point where she had less than a week to live, and even if the leukemia were to go into remission, the disease had so seriously damaged her body that she would not be able to live even close to a normal life. Nonetheless, God totally healed that sister in Christ not only of the leukemia, but also from all of the damage that the disease had done to her body. She married a young Christian worker in the church and gave birth to four healthy children over a period of several years.

My belief in evolution never for a moment lessened my love for God and His word, and even enhanced it as I saw very clearly that human beings are born into this world as animals desperately in need of regeneration, and that belief in Christ can deliver a man or woman even from the very worst of life-controlling sins.

Is a literal interpretation of Genesis 1:6 supported by science?

Genesis 1:6. And God said, “Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” (NRSV)

This is a strictly literal translation of Gen. 1:6 that is perfectly harmonious with other parts of Genesis, especially chapters 6-8 in which we read of the flood. Notice especially 7:11,

7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. (KJV)

7:11. In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened. (NRSV)

What were the flood gates of the sky if they were not gates (or windows, KJV) in the dome? This was the literal interpretation by Christian fundamentalists until nearly the middle of the last millennium. Indeed, these Christians dearly held to the ancient Jewish interpretation that the earth was flat and covered with a dome that separated the waters above the dome from the seas and oceans of the earth. This was seen as a biblical truth that Satan and his hosts were seeking to destroy by the liberal teaching that the earth was nearly a perfect sphere rather than a disk covered by a dome. After all, if the earth was spherical, it could not be covered with a dome and the biblical account of the flood could not be true. Today’s Christian fundamentalists argue that the NRSV was translated predominately by liberals—and so it was—but their translation of Genesis 1:6 is a very literal translation that is in perfect harmony with the understanding of the story of the flood by Christian fundamentalists until comparatively recent times.

Therefore, I ask myself, “Is the story of the flood in Gen. 6-8 an accurate account of an historic event, or is it something else? Has God chosen to teach us fundamental truths about Himself and His creation, including man, using a series of epic tales, myths, legends, or sagas? In these latter times, is God making clear details regarding Genesis 1-11 that had not been clear in earlier times? Should not Genesis 1-11—and indeed all of Scripture—be approached in an attitude of prayer and a desire to learn from our heavenly Father through the ministry of the Holy Spirit the truths that He desires for us to know and understand?”

Macroevolution is a term used by fundamentalist Christians and Muslims for the later stages in evolution which occur though the same mechanisms that bring about the early stages in evolution that Christians and Muslims call microevolution —the differences are merely quantitative rather than qualitative. Macroevolution has been observed and documented in both plants and animals.

http://atheism.about.com/od/evolutionexplained/a/ObservedEvolution.htm

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/100201_speciation

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

In the scientific community, evolutionary biology is universally referred to as a science. Who is better qualified to tell us whether evolutionary biology is a science—one of well over 3,000,000 million scientists living today who have earned at least a Ph.D. in a field of science, or a ….

 

[annsni]

I thought of this thread as I read this today:

http://www.worldmag.com/2016/03/did_moses_edit_noah/page1

 

[tyndale1946]

As the title to this thread attests and this last absurd response by you continues to testify of your hostility to a true understanding of scripture, your dishonest attempt to tie unrelated statements to believing in a flat earth, and your unwillingness to address the quotes I provided both from scripture and by the scientific community which were all well sourced, it is apparent that your disdain has blinded you.

I will leave you to your misery.

I think he's pretty happy in his misery... But I know I won't be, reading these biblical untruths and scientific misunderstanding... So with that said my learned brethren I will bow out... Brother Glen

 

[Craigbythesea]

I thought of this thread as I read this today:

http://www.worldmag.com/2016/03/did_moses_edit_noah/page1

The article linked to in this post is shamefully dishonest nonsense because it willfully and deliberately attempts to deceive its readers into believing that there are scholars of Genesis today who believe that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are an accurate account of historic events, but neither Gary Vander Hart nor any one else can name even so much as one scholar of Genesis today publishing his research on Genesis 1-11 in a peer-reviewed biblical journal who believes such nonsense! Such extreme and unwarranted dishonesty on the part of a man representing himself as a Christian is absolutely appalling and inexcusable!

 

[annsni]

The article linked to in this post is shamefully dishonest nonsense because it willfully and deliberately attempts to deceive its readers into believing that there are scholars of Genesis today who believe that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are an accurate account of historic events, but neither Gary Vander Hart nor any one else can name even so much as one scholar of Genesis today publishing his research on Genesis 1-11 in a peer-reviewed biblical journal who believes such nonsense! Such extreme and unwarranted dishonesty on the part of a man representing himself as a Christian is absolutely appalling and inexcusable!

Seriously? Do you have a requirement for what a "scholar of Genesis" is? Is it only those who say that the first 11 chapters of Genesis is a fable and Jesus got it wrong when He addressed Adam as an actual human being?

 

[Craigbythesea]

Seriously? Do you have a requirement for what a "scholar of Genesis" is? Is it only those who say that the first 11 chapters of Genesis is a fable and Jesus got it wrong when He addressed Adam as an actual human being?

Is it impossible on a Christian message board to ask a question in a polite manner without any snarling innuendos?

I defined in my post that has been quoted above what I mean by a “scholar” of Genesis 1-11,

A current researcher “publishing his research on Genesis 1-11 in a peer-reviewed biblical journal.”

For more than a century, it has been nearly universally acknowledged by scholars of Genesis that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are written a genre of literature that is distinctly different from the rest of Genesis. Indeed, in my very early days as a Christian, before I even knew what a Bible commentary was, while reading Genesis I noticed that beginning in Genesis 12:1 I was reading literature written in a genre very different from what I had been reading.

Even a cursory examination of the research being published today on Genesis will show that Genesis 1-11 is being studied today as a distinct unit of Scripture, and that Genesis 12-50 is being studied today as another distinct unit of Scripture, and that both units of Scripture are being interpreted according to the Genre of literature in which they are written. It should be observed, however, that within Genesis 12-50 there is a considerable amount of poetry that is, of course, being studied as poetry.

 

[annsni]

Is it impossible on a Christian message board to ask a question in a polite manner without any snarling innuendos?

I defined in my post that has been quoted above what I mean by a “scholar” of Genesis 1-11,

A current researcher “publishing his research on Genesis 1-11 in a peer-reviewed biblical journal.”

For more than a century, it has been nearly universally acknowledged by scholars of Genesis that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are written a genre of literature that is distinctly different from the rest of Genesis. Indeed, in my very early days as a Christian, before I even knew what a Bible commentary was, while reading Genesis I noticed that beginning in Genesis 12:1 I was reading literature written in a genre very different from what I had been reading.

Even a cursory examination of the research being published today on Genesis will show that Genesis 1-11 is being studied today as a distinct unit of Scripture, and that Genesis 12-50 is being studied today as another distinct unit of Scripture, and that both units of Scripture are being interpreted according to the Genre of literature in which they are written. It should be observed, however, that within Genesis 12-50 there is a considerable amount of poetry that is, of course, being studied as poetry.

So poetry can't reflect the actual truth of what happened?

 

[Revmitchell]

Is it impossible on a Christian message board to ask a question in a polite manner without any snarling innuendos?

But it is possible to start a thread without such a hostile title. The so called "snarling' began there.

 

[Revmitchell]

So poetry can't reflect the actual truth of what happened?

First, it is not poetry. Second, these so called "scholars' he holds up as the only reliable standard are ones in secular schools who are driven by the very liberal higher criticism. In other words liberalism is the standard. Of course old craigbythesea did not actually deal with the content of your post he only engaged in adhominem.

 

[Kevin]

I defined in my post that has been quoted above what I mean by a “scholar” of Genesis 1-11,

A current researcher “publishing his research on Genesis 1-11 in a peer-reviewed biblical journal.”

So what you are saying is you have more faith in your scientific journals and indoctrination into evolution you received, then the words of Jesus and others as found in the Bible.

I know, we need to get a copy of your interpretation of the Bible where you have made all of your translation changes to fit your thinking.

Sorry I will stick with Jesus, the creator of everything.

 

[Craigbythesea]

So poetry can't reflect the actual truth of what happened?

Of course poetry can reflect the actual truth of what happened—but that fact is irrelevant to what I posted.

 

[Craigbythesea]

First, it is not poetry.

There are some liberal Bible scholars who insist that the creation accounts in Genesis are poetry rather than prose, but I firmly believe that these scholars are seriously mistaken. However, there are in Genesis numerous examples of poetry. In the Gen 1-11 we find the following examples,

Genesis 1:27; 3:14-19; 4:23-24; 8:22; 9:6, 25-27

The example in chapter four is especially beautiful,

23. Lamech said to his wives:
“Adah and Zillah, hear my voice;
you wives of Lamech, listen to what I say:
I have killed a man for wounding me,
a young man for striking me.
24. If Cain is avenged sevenfold,
truly Lamech seventy-sevenfold.” (NRSV)

Second, these so called "scholars' he holds up as the only reliable standard are ones in secular schools who are driven by the very liberal higher criticism. In other words liberalism is the standard.

Some of these men teach in universities; others teach in seminaries representing a very wide range of Christian denominations—including Baptist denominations. Some are conservative in their theology; others are liberal in their theology. However, they all have one thing in common—they have such an ardent love of the Scriptures that they have chosen to devote their lives to the study of them. However, what matters is that the data supports their conclusions—which we have not yet gotten to in this thread.

 

[Craigbythesea]

So what you are saying is you have more faith in your scientific journals and indoctrination into evolution you received, then the words of Jesus and others as found in the Bible.

I know, we need to get a copy of your interpretation of the Bible where you have made all of your translation changes to fit your thinking.

Sorry I will stick with Jesus, the creator of everything.

No, my faith is in our Lord Christ Jesus and in the word of God—but how should we interpret the word of God as it is presented to us in Gen. 1-11? Should we interpret it in a strictly literal sense as did most Jews and Christians until the 15th century when the Roman Catholic Church yielded to centuries of scientific investigation which conclusively proved that the earth is not flat, but nearly spherical?


Genesis 1:6. And God said, “Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” (NRSV)

This is a strictly literal translation of Gen. 1:6 that is perfectly harmonious with other parts of Genesis, especially chapters 6-8 in which we read of the flood. Notice especially 7:11,

7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. (KJV)

7:11. In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened. (NRSV)

What were the flood gates of the sky if they were not gates (or windows, KJV) in the dome? This was the literal interpretation by Christian fundamentalists until nearly the middle of the last millennium. Indeed, these Christians dearly held to the ancient Jewish interpretation that the earth was flat and covered with a dome that separated the waters above the dome from the surface of the earth—and the waters below the earth which the Bible calls “the great deep.” This was seen as a biblical truth that Satan and his hosts were seeking to destroy by the liberal teaching that the earth was nearly a perfect sphere rather than a disk covered by a dome. After all, if the earth was spherical, it could not be covered with a dome and the biblical account of the flood could not be true. Today’s Christian fundamentalists argue that the NRSV was translated predominately by liberals—and so it was—but their translation of Genesis 1:6 is a very literal translation that is in perfect harmony with the understanding of the story of the flood by Christian fundamentalists until comparatively recent times.

Therefore, I ask myself, “Is the story of the flood in Gen. 6-8 an accurate account of an historic event, or is it something else? Has God chosen to teach us fundamental truths about Himself and His creation, including man, using a series of epic tales, myths, legends, or sagas? In these latter times, is God making clear details regarding Genesis 1-11 that had not been clear in earlier times? Should not Genesis 1-11—and indeed all of Scripture—be approached in an attitude of prayer and a desire to learn from our heavenly Father through the ministry of the Holy Spirit the truths that He desires for us to know and understand?”

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Ancient Hebrew cosmology expressly teaches that the earth is flat and covered with a dome, and that teaching is expressly taught in the Bible.

This is all I have to say on the subject...

 

[Craigbythesea]

This is all I have to say on the subject...

What happened to my post that you quoted from!

 

[Craigbythesea]

What happened to my post that you quoted from!

Well…apparently some kind of a glitch occurred so I will repost it.

CbySea, are you gonna answer this question:


Is resurrection of a dead body scientifically possible or impossible?

Is itdisgracefully unbelievablethat a man be resurrected and bodily rise to heaven?


Or are you still gonna play buffet with your "If it's scientifically impossible, it didn't happen" discord?

Science does not take a stand either for or against miracles because miracles are outside of it scope. I am a conservative evangelical Christian who has posted in this very thread that I not only believe in miracles, but have witnessed them myself.

Ancient Hebrew cosmology expressly teaches that the earth is flat and covered with a dome, and that teaching is expressly taught in the Bible.

ויעשׂ אלהים את־הרקיע ויבדל בין המים אשׁר מתחת לרקיע ובין המים אשׁר מעל לרקיע ויהי־כן׃ Gen. 1:7

Gen. 1:7. So God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome. And it was so.

The NRSV correctly translates the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ (râqı̂ya‛) as “dome.” The evidence for the correctness of this translation is found in the use of this word in ancient Hebrew literature. Based upon this usage, the Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament by Brown, Driver, and Briggs published by Oxford University gives us the following meaning of it in Gen. 1:7, “the vault of heaven, or ‘firmament,’ regarded by Hebrews as solid, and supporting ‘waters’ above it.” (p. 956)

According to ancient Hebrew cosmology based upon Genesis, Job, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and other books in the Old Testament, the universe is composed of three parts.

The heavens (Hebrew = שָׁמַיִם [shâmayim]) above,
The earth (Hebrew = אֶרֶץ [eh'-rets]) in the middle
The world of the dead (Hebrew שְׁאוֹל [sheh-ole'] below

For a diagram of this universe, and much more information from Christian scholars, please see here, http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/gre13.htm

The story of the Genesis flood is dependent upon this cosmology:

Gen. 1:6. And God said, “Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.”
7. So God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome. And it was so.
8. God called the dome Sky. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.
9. And God said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so.
10. God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. (NRSV)

Gen. 7:11. In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened.

12. The rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. (NRSV)

Moreover, only a flat earth has four corners:

Isa. 11:12. He will raise a signal for the nations,
and will assemble the outcasts of Israel,
and gather the dispersed of Judah
from the four corners of the earth. (NRSV)

Rev.7:1. After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth so that no wind could blow on earth or sea or against any tree. (NRSV)

The literal four corners of the earth in the Bible gave rise to today’s popular expression.

Furthermore, Jesus was able to see all the kingdoms of the world from “a very high mountain.” This would have been impossible on a spherical earth:

Matt. 4:8. Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor; (NRSV)

 

[TCassidy]

Ancient Hebrew cosmology expressly teaches that the earth is flat and covered with a dome, and that teaching is expressly taught in the Bible.

Not quite.

From ISBE:


(1) The Hebrew Conception
Above the spherical earth was stretched out the “firmament” (rāḳı̄a‛) made on the second day of creation to “divide the waters from the waters” (Gen 16). To the Hebrews the “firmament” was the apparent void above, in which clouds float and the lights of heaven pursue their appointed paths. The word rāḳı̄a‛, by its etymology, suggests an expanse, something stretched, spread or beaten out, as when Isaiah (Isa_40:22) says that the Lord “stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in.” But the Greek word steréōma, by which the Septuagint rendered rāḳı̄a‛, gives the meaning of a firm and solid structure, and our translators have carried out this same idea in their English rendering of “firmament.”

[The "solid dome" error was caused by the mistranslation found in the LXX and denies both the etymology and philology of the Hebrew word.]

(2) The Alexandrian Conception
In this however the Septuagint simply expressed the astronomical science of their day as accepted in Alexandria, where the doctrine of a succession of solid crystalline spheres, each carrying a planet, held currency. But in order to express the Hebrew idea, rāḳı̄a‛ should be rendered “expanse” or “space”; it corresponds to the “empty space” of Job_26:7.