• no banana@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      The Bible says something about the earth and how it is good and the filament of the sky and something. The Bible that is, at least that’s what I read on the internet. Many fine people on the internet, the best people, but not me, I haven’t said it, but the best people probably. The best people say the earth may be - and I’m not saying it is but they are saying it - they say that the earth may be flat and that doesn’t take much text to cover I have heard.

    • bigfish@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      11 months ago

      If you squint a little, the 7 days of creation in Genesis are relativistic-ish. 1 day to separate light from darkness (photons at 1 microsecond after Big Bang), another to create the sky (opaque universe at 370k years), another to form dry land and create life (earth formed, 9.3 billion years, life at ~0.2by later), etc etc. Anyone with a physics degree able to say what fraction of light speed god must have been travelling to make this happen such that only days passed for them between these events?

      • flatearth@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        11 months ago

        They are literal days.
        Our God is King of leading by example.
        Also, man was made from the dust of the earth. It was fitting that earth be created before man (also very important for prideful man).
        As He did, so we must do.
        It is repeated constantly that we have 6 days to work, the 7th to be set apart.
        Why?

        • TurboDiesel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Rabbinical scholars argue about the correct translation of Genesis to this day. So you saying they’re “literal days” is meaningless.

          • flatearth@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Rabbinical scholars don’t believe many things now:
            Then, they believed the prophecy of Daniel and Herod even inquired from them (Herod did not want a rival king, so he ordered all new born infants to be killed. That was why Jesus, Mary and Joseph took refuge in Egypt).
            Rabbinical scholars of now don’t believe in Jesus Christ, and what do you want God to do to them?
            Rabbinical scholars of now don’t believe in Jesus Christ, and you expect me to believe rabbinical scholars?

            Exodus 31:16,17
            Let the children of Israel keep the Sabbath, and celebrate it in their generations. It is an everlasting covenant between me and the children of Israel, and a sign perpetual. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and in the seventh he ceased from work.

            Genesis 2:7
            Our Lord God therefore formed man of the slime of the earth: and breathed into his face the breath of life, & man became a living soul.
            [My comment] Not because Adam was difficult to make.

            Genesis 2:22
            And our Lord God built the rib which he took of Adam into a woman, & brought her to Adam.
            [My comment] Wo + man = woman.

          • flatearth@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            They are literal days but also have mystical signification.
            E.g. The sea (of our earth) can signify worldly people.
            Rock can signify Christ.
            The sun sometimes can signify Christ.
            Stars, candles, salt can signify Christians.
            Jerusalem can signify a place.
            Babylon can signify a place.
            Babylon can signify Antichrist.
            All the examples above are different interpretations amongst 4 kinds of interpretation.

            1. Literal (History is found here. Make sure they don’t contradict. Make sure they are not exclusive).
            2. Moral (you can derive many).
            3. Mystical (etc.)
            4. Anagogical (etc.)

            Before an interpretation is declared to be held universally, theologians can argue.
            A new modern rabbi can even say that 7 days is 2 days and we will begin to argue.
            Now we have AI image generation. If something about God is difficult for you, you can think of modern inventions.
            Theory of evolution by Darwin and others is surely rabbinically modern.
            God chose to create man on the 6th day (days are equally marked), and rest on the seventh.
            The sun marks the day for us.
            The moon marks the season/month.
            Stars mark the year.

            All these are what helped us arrive at our Gregorian calendar.
            If you want me to read your source, please post a link to the rabbinical scholars, because money is capable of damaging a long standing tradition.

    • MxM111@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      You are missing the point. The creation myths were considered complete. Nothing left to be known.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Well yes, people who believe things that aren’t true won’t admit that they don’t know anything. I’m not sure why that’s relevant though.

        • MxM111@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          You stated “this has been always true” to the statement that we have understanding that things are really complex and difficult to figure out. The answer to you was an example that there were times where we did not have such understanding.

        • no banana@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I think their actual point was that incomplete explanations are nonetheless explanations. Still wrong though.

        • flatearth@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Material things are way below what God planned for man.
          Man (Body + Soul) was meant to be like God (NB God is not material) (in a good way).
          The Bible is not meant to be a physics textbook.
          Nevertheless, God owns everything. So things were talked about here and there…

          • SatansInteriorDsgnr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            The Bible also isn’t meant to be real. It’s a compendium of stories all put into one book, with tons of different writers. It’s akin to The Odyssey and shouldn’t be taken literally. Zeus didn’t come to Earth as a golden shower to impregnate Danae, and Jesus didn’t come back from the dead. They’re just fables.

            • no banana@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Oh the Bible is definitely meant to explain things. It explains things through a bunch of different world views from different times.

            • flatearth@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              In the Old Testament, you’ll always see genealogies of key persons being discussed to Adam (the first man).
              In the New Testament, the genealogy is from Jesus Christ to Adam (in Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts and by Paul I think).
              Zeus and Diana (profligate) were humans. But pagans deify their rulers.
              Let me make a second post…

            • flatearth@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              11 months ago

              The Bible is historical too:
              When Moyses drowned the Egyptians (Old Testament which Jews held and kept sacred)
              When Jesus, Mary & Joseph took refuge in Egypt (New Testament which Christians hold and keep sacred)
              In the first example, we learn that Egyptians used chariots (even far back in the time of Moyses).

              ‘Satan’ is part of your name, so I guess you know who he was, and who he is now.
              ‘Satan’ is opposed to the coming of Christ (the reason for all those genealogies).
              ‘Satan’ would do everything to make people forget why Christ came.
              ‘Satan’ would make Christmas (we all have our birthdays) to seize.
              ‘Satan’ wants people to believe that Christ is like Zeus and Mary like Diana (profligate).

              But you should know that Satan is a fallen angel.

                • flatearth@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  Disciplines or fields or occupations (Doctors, lawyers, pilots, engineers, photographers, cartographers etc.)
                  I love science. What do you want to talk about?
                  Is it not wonderful what we are able to accomplish with 0s and 1s (by the grace of God)?

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Deal if you show me the scientific texts that covered these in 500bc since you think we’ve always know how complex this is.

      • XIN@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        If your point was that religions have oversimplified complex science to the point that people thought they fully grasped it, then I agree with you. Otherwise I have no idea what you are trying to say.