Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wrong - I know the difference between a circle and a sphere.
Then why did you earlier try to argue that a circle was a sphere?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
What I did claim(correctly, I might add) is that the Bible describes the Earth as a sphere.
Sadly, when asked to show that, you failed. You were instead able to show only where the Bible described the earth as a circle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
You are the one who made the nonsensical argument that it says the earth is flat.
Which then inspired you to cite even another verse of the Bible that proved I was correct. That was probably the most fun moment I have had in this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
Only someone with a biased and hostile attitude towards the Bible could make such an inane assertion.
I hold no more hostility towards the Bible than I do any other ancient work of fiction. But of course I am biased, just like you. The difference between us is that my biases regarding the Bible do not derive from pure sectarian prejudice.
Sadly, when asked to show that, you failed. You were instead able to show only where the Bible described the earth as a circle.
Which then inspired you to cite even another verse of the Bible that proved I was correct. That was probably the most fun moment I have had in this thread.
Both verses demonstrated that the Bible describes the earth as a sphere.
Last edited by CaseyB; 03-17-2013 at 04:02 PM..
Reason: off topic
Wrong - I know the difference between a circle and a sphere.
What I did claim(correctly, I might add) is that the Bible describes the Earth as a sphere.
You are the one who made the nonsensical argument that it says the earth is flat.
Only someone with a biased and hostile attitude towards the Bible could make such an inane assertion.
Quote:
The Bible doesn't always reflect that we live on a spinning, revolving, sphere... which I would think that God would have known and would have inspired the authors to tell, but he didn't. That is why the Bible reflects that we live on a flat earth.
The term "ends of the earth" is used quite a bit in the Bible. I have received hundreds of e-mails saying "the term 'ends of the earth' is a saying, it's not literal", but they forget that it is a figurative saying today. When the Bible was written it wasn't a figure of speech... it was a fact. Even as late as 1492, people were convinced that silly old Columbus was going to fall off of the earth. But as we know today, the earth is a sphere, and there are no ends on a sphere. Just pick up a ball and find its ends.
Even if one was to accept that God was foreseeing enough to put futuristic lingo which matched the beliefs of the day in. But Job 38:13 speaks of the earth being taken by the physical ends with "That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?"
Why would you ask me for evidence of creation when (a) creationism is not the topic of the thread and (b) I have repeatedly stated that neither evolution or creation should be taught in public schools?
The topic of the thread is teaching evolution in public schools.
Evolution, if valid, should stand on its own - not be supported by comparing it to alternative explanations for the origin of life, of which there are many.
Try to stay on topic.
Which it does, in spades. You are one of the few whose agenda (religion dogma) prevents any sort of understanding
There are so many inconsistencies, impossibilities, and outright lies involved in ToE that anyone who believes such nonsense ought to have their head examined.
Itemize them starting here: (or accept that the proofs I provided, by reference establish the llegitimacy of the Law of Evolution)
Why would you ask me for evidence of creation when (a) creationism is not the topic of the thread and (b) I have repeatedly stated that neither evolution or creation should be taught in public schools?
The topic of the thread is teaching evolution in public schools.
Evolution, if valid, should stand on its own - not be supported by comparing it to alternative explanations for the origin of life, of which there are many.
Try to stay on topic.
You should take your own suggestion.
The topic is whether the Law of Evolution should be taught in school, NOT, whether it is fact or not, yet you keep demanding proof it is fact, when science has already done that repeatedly. You reject their evidences and conclusions, but your dogma is so strong that no level of proof could ever overcome your pre-conceived notion it is false.
If you think that there is any scientific laws of anything, then you don't understand the first thing about science.
Don't you know that the highest scientific status of anything is a theory?
Except the Law of Gravity, et al. Give it up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.