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.
Not true at all. There is nothing in the Bible to support a flat earth. People thought the earth was flat BEFORE Christianity even existed. Read about the ancient Chinese who thought the earth was flat and square.
In fact, the belief that most people thought the earth was flat in the past 2000 years is a myth. But they certainly did prior to about the fifth century BC.
Do you think that the flat earth ideas in the bible originated from the ancient Chinese?
Quote:
Ancient Israel imagined the earth to be a flat disk (Isa 42.5) resting on a foundation or pillars (Job 9.6). It is surrounded by the ocean (Pss 24.2; 136.6). It has four corners (Isa 11.12; Ezek 7.2; job 37.3; 38.13) and an edge (Isa 24.16) or ends (Isa 40.8; Job 28.4; Ps 48.11; Jer 6.22; 25.32). It also has a center or navel (Ezek 38.12). Except for the implication that Jerusalem is the earth’s center, ancient Israel’s view of the world did not differ from that of other ancient Near Eastern peoples.
They might if it would generate more "scientist" jobs. Who knows what will be in vogue 100 years from now? And does anyone really care? There is nothing in my life that will change regardless of the age of the earth.
Scientific discovery is dependent on how it affects your personal life? Mighty open minded thinking on your part there.
They might if it would generate more "scientist" jobs. Who knows what will be in vogue 100 years from now? And does anyone really care? There is nothing in my life that will change regardless of the age of the earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003
Astronomy is not physics.
Oh goodness.
Is this really the state of our education system, or just willful ignorance?
They might if it would generate more "scientist" jobs. Who knows what will be in vogue 100 years from now? And does anyone really care? There is nothing in my life that will change regardless of the age of the earth.
There is nothing in my life that will change regardless of who wins the World Series. So?
Understanding the universe better tends to have spinoffs that eventually affect us in ways that cannot be predicted.
Only Christians have ever made the ridiculous claim that the Earth was flat because they regressed after Rome fell and much of the ancient knowledge was lost.
There never was a flat earth dogma. When Columbus faced off with the Spanish cardinals, the issue was the size of the earth, not its shape.And the Cardinals were right: the earth was a heck of a lot bigger than Columbus believed. His mission was ill-conceived, and it failed. But it failed gloriously. Columbus went to his grave erroneously thinking he had bumped into some far corner of Asia.
.
.
. Within both science and religion, however, there lies inspiration to resist destructive tribalism. At its best, religion teaches us to be humble, to be instruments of divine peace, to seek to understand rather than to be understood. Likewise, at its best, science teaches us to falsify our most cherished and comforting ideas, seek to prove them wrong. Science and religion are not enemies of one another. Small minds and dim imaginations are enemies of them both.
Oh boy, I think I see why you are having difficulty understanding this.
It's rather like trying to discuss Chaucer with a giraffe. There simply isn't any common ground on which to meet, no reference point on which the two of you share to have a coherent discussion, is there?
My point is, short term observations in the big picture are only that and can be legitimately questioned.
This is true, and I doubt that any scientist or philosopher would disagree. But earlier you pointed out that scientists have been wrong before, and you asked "Why should we believe them now?" I'd like to answer your question this way:
You should not believe with 100% certainty that the universe is exactly 13.8 billion years old because (as you pointed out) in the bigger picture, the details of our scientific theories tend to change over time. Maybe twenty years from now the consensus estimate will be 14 billion years. But consider this:
Newton was wrong about the laws of physics. He did not know that a clock on a satellite would run slower than a clock on earth. Newton could never have made a GPS system work, even if you gave him all of the hardware he needed to build the system. Newton's laws worked great at one level of technological development, but fail in the long run. So why should we believe in relativity? (After all, Newton was wrong, so maybe Einstein is wrong too.) Answer: We should not believe in it with absolute 100% certainty, but we should believe it FAPP (For All Practical Purposes) because it works, and because it fits in nicely with a host of other theories and data.
Believing that the universe is 13.8 billion years old is a good FAPP belief because it is the best-fit, given our current level of technology. Should you believe that this estimate could be wrong? Yes, this too is a good belief. But if an all-knowing God forced you to guess at the age of the universe (with a substantial penalty if you guess wrong), what number should you pick for your guess? Rationally, you should guess the best FAPP answer that your technology can currently provide. Do you have to believe this number with 100% certainty? No. But you are smart to believe it as a FAPP guide to behavior, just as you are smart to believe that the laws of physics will be the same over the next several hours when you get on a jet. Logically, for reasons we don't understand at the moment, the laws of physics could be scheduled to change radically an hour from now. As a result, jets will fall from the sky. It would be silly, however, to refuse to fly just because you are paranoid about the laws of physics changing an hour from now. FAPP beliefs guide our behavior, and right now the best FAPP belief is that the universe is 13.8 billion years old. That is the sense in which you should believe this number (FAPP), and that's why you should believe this number (in the FAPP sense).
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 03-25-2013 at 10:01 AM..
It's rather like trying to discuss Chaucer with a giraffe. There simply isn't any common ground on which to meet, no reference point on which the two of you share to have a coherent discussion, is there?
It's a bit like trying to put lipstick on a pig - it aggravates the pig and doesn't make the pig look any cuter anyway. Doesn't this kind of thing reflect exactly what's wrong with our country? That there are so many uneducated people believing fairy tales?
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.
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.
