Earthsphere

Wallpaper Other

Source (link to git-repo or to original if based on someone elses unmodified work): Add the source-code for this project on opencode.net

0
5 .0
Description:

Isaiah 40:22a (written 8th century, B.C.) refers to the "circle" or "vault" of the earth. The original Hebrew word means "sphere". The Latin is "orbis terrarum". Again, presented for other believers with a view to bolstering confidence in God's Word, which speaks with accuracy.
Last changelog:

17 years ago

Modified description.

fauzie

17 years ago

How can the earth be sphere? The word translated as "circle" in this verse is the Hebrew "Chuwg", which can mean circle, but can also mean circuit or compass. And you should know from your basic geometry that circle is a 2D shape, flat, as opposed to the 3D sphere. The correct word for a sphere in Hebrew will be "Duwr". Also check out these phrases.

After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth to prevent any wind from blowing on the land or on the sea or on any tree. (Rev 7:1)

for he views the ends of the earth and sees everything under the heavens. (Job 28:24)

He unleashes his lightning beneath the whole heaven and sends it to the ends of the earth. (Job 37:3)

He will raise a banner for the nations and gather the exiles of Israel; he will assemble the scattered people of Judah from the four quarters of the earth. (Isaiah 11:12)

Also, remember that Satan showed Jesus "All nation of earth" from a very high mountain. Do you think it is possible with a sphere earth?

So you're wrong, the earth is flat, and it is 6000 years old.

Report

fauzie

17 years ago

Something is wrong with your reasoning. If the so called "figures of speech" is allowed, then you are saying that the bible is not to be taken literary. With that basis, you can came up with any conclussion that you want from the bible.

Why would you take the ressurection as literal, while rejecting flat earth? Did God really created the universe in 6 days? Or is it just a metaphore?

With your point of view, the bible is not a reliable book, it is just a thick book where people can find justification for anything. The "allowances" as what you described is against the fundamental idea of Christianity of infallible Words of God.

So you should either accept the literal view of the bible (the earth is flat and the rest is from the evil atheists conspiracy), or interpret the bible to your liking (which means evolution and continental drift may be true, and non believers may go to heaven).

Report

C

timbrown527

17 years ago

Let me make one more addition to the above list...actually an expansion to "Context". There are many times where one scripture, coming later in the Bible, will illuminate the meaning of the earlier. This is an additional "check and balance" in the system that keeps us from simply making things mean what we want them to mean.

Again, thanks.

Tim

Report

C

timbrown527

17 years ago

No, it's not a problem. For example, if you tell me that you got up at sunrise and was unable to start your car I don't take that to mean that the sun literally moved upward while the earth stood still and then you went out and couldn't start your car. On the other hand I also don't say "...there must be some deeper hidden mystical meaning to the car thing...".

When you say that "the sun came up this morning" we know you are speaking in terms that couch things as they appear to the human eye.

To say that it's all one way or the other is to create a false delimma.

We take the Bible in it's literal, historical, grammatical and contextual sense. That means, we let it say what it says (while allowing for obvious figures of speech)...you and I do that all the time as in the example above! We put a given verse in it's historical context...so when, for example, Paul talks about female head coverings in 1 Corinthians, we understand why that was an issue of the day...it had to do with being different than the pagan women who made political statements by cutting their hair.

The verse in question must also be looked at in it's immediate context. So, when someone says "See, Galatians teaches salvation by baptism" I can point at the rest of the verse and say "No, read the rest of the verse..." This also has to do with the harmony of the passage in light of the immediate context as well as the given book of the Bible and how it fits with the whole of scripture.

Then of course there is the grammatical principle which has to do with the meaning of words, their syntax, etc. I always cringe when I see someone reach for an english dictionary when wanting to know the meaning of a word in Scripture. The original languages we deal with are Hebrew and (koine) Greek. I have a set of works on New testament Greek by Gerhard Kittle, ten volumes...with maybe 100 pages on a given word and how it was used in various ways.

People want to talk about "love". Yet noone can define it apart from *feelings* There are four words for Love: Storge, Agape, Phileo, and Eros.

Phileo--a brotherly love.

Storge--familial love (if I recall correctly)

Eros--erotic in nature, meant for those who are married.

Agape -- Acts of self-sacrifice which seek the true good of the object and doesn't count the cost or the worthiness of the person being loved (roughly stated). This is the word Jesus used when he said "No greater love has any man than this that he should lay down his life for his friends"...Which he then did on the cross, dying for our sin so we could be reconciled to God.

So, while we talk about "figures of speech", we don't do that flippantly.

The principles of hermeneutics can be expanded to more than this but that is the essense. But the main point is that they all work together...by accomodating something that is a figure of speech, we are not therefore forced to take the rest of the Bible as allegory.

I've said this tons of times here but for a long time people scoffed at the idea that Solomon lived. Christians were mocked, etc....then some archaeologist discovers something major that proves solomon really lived...and somehow it's "now ok" to believe that Solomon lived. The same is true for David, etc. This is only a couple of the things that have been uncovered by archaeology.

Again, we know from even secular history that CHrist really lived. Josephus, Turtullian and others testify to this. We also know Jesus CHrist died on the cross...but that he didn't remain in the tomb.

BUt all of this is meaningless if you don't know Christ."the natural man does not comprehend the things of God" the scriptures teach. The theme of the Bible is "God is on a mission to save mankind". From what? Sin. Rebellion. The things that we do that offend God. It's not about lighting candles, chanting or observing a mass or keeping a list of rules. It's about knowing the Person of Jesus Christ through a personal relationship. He made us...he made us all for the purpose of knowing Him and enjoying Him forever! That is why people fill their lives with *stuff* and still aren't happy. That *stuff* can be anything, no matter how *innocent* or perverse.

Blaise Pascal wrote "Inside every human heart is a God-shaped vacuum only God, as revealed through Jesus CHrist, can fill." He was right! That's why you see so many people work to get to "the top" only to say "there's gotta be more" when they get there. That's wjy people get into drugs, alcohol, pornography etc. (just like I did a long time ago). They are looking for Love, affirmation and ultimate purpose which can only be found from our Creator.

Anyway, thanks...

Tim

Report

C

timbrown527

17 years ago

Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot to make the tie-in between the hebrew and Latin: The Hebrew term can also mean "Sphere" which is no doubt what the Latin translators caught.

Re: Satan showing Christ the nations of the earth...You are trying to apply natural limits to the supernatural. I'm sure that even from the pinnacle of the temple, a person could not "See the nations of the world" even with a flat earth. So, a flat earth doesn't help!

Tim

Report

C

timbrown527

17 years ago

Well; we can agree on one thing; the Jewish scholars are right in saying that we have a young earth...about a flat earth, however, that would *have* to be another story.

One principle of biblical hermeneutics is that you must allow for figures of speech. Normally we take scripture in it's literal sense, but we do make allowances just the way we do in other things.

You know, we often say "wasn't that a beautiful sunrise" but we know the sun didn't "Rise". Ok, I guess we should say "Isn't that a nice rotation of the earth?" Regarding the "four corners" of the earth, we hear that expression from people even today who believe the earth is a *GLOBE*. It speaks of completeness.

Next time you say "at least today the sun is shining" i hope you aren't thinking that literally. You know it always is. Yet we all speak in ways that express things as they APPEAR...not always in literal terms.

Four quarters? I can have four quarters of an orange can't I?

With all due respect to you, if you *really* believe the earth is flat after all the space missions we've had, all the photos we've taken, and all the *oberservation* that has been done, there are more basic things I think I'd work on if I were you...

By the way, I think the Latin translators, who sought accuracy, DID use the word for globe.

Best wishes in any case,

Tim

Report

metrol

17 years ago

Duh, my bad. You were quoting Isaiah not Job. I'll just correct my own bad self here.

On the general point of my prior post I still stand by it.

Report

metrol

17 years ago

Figures of speech? I'm sorry, but if you take a presently known thing and compare it to something commented on 4000 years ago while ignoring the words used then nothing means anything. Anything stated or written can then be interpereted into whatever you want it to say.

Furthermore, Job isn't the only reference to a flat or circular shaped earth. Please refer yourself to Isaiah 40:22 and Matthew 4:8. One states it, the other infers it.

It should also be noted that if the sphererical notion of the Earth were translated "into" the Bible by Roman scholars, it may have had a little something with the fact that the Greeks had mathemetically proved not only that the Earth was in fact sphere, but also came pretty darn close to the correct diameter. They had no way of knowing that it wasn't a perfect sphere.

None of what I've stated invalidates the Bible any more than your statements validate it. After seeing a couple of your posts, with quite nice graphics I might add, that state a tid bit of Biblical verse as though it existed in a vacuum I felt I had to reply to this. By doing this you do not validate the Bible's authenticity. You simply open the floor to arguing validity on the basis of whether or not these tid bits of knowledge are unique to the Bible.

In essence, you're no longer discussing the existence or belief of God. You're reduced to quibbling over what color God is.

Report

C

timbrown527

17 years ago

You know, I've had the feeling I've left something out; I think I may know what it was.

First, you must remember my target audience. I state clearly in the description who my work is for. They will have no problem with what I'm saying.

Secondly, while I am not able to know your specific motives, I have to question why someone would want to create a false dilemma between "Taking the bible literally at all times...and therefore it teaches error" or "Take it figuratively and it can mean anything...so everyone goes to heaven regardless" (and therefore nothing.)

Either path emasculates scripture whether it is intended or not.

The truth is that when the scriptures are approached it should be to 1)Find out what a verse SAYS. 2).Find out what it MEANS by what it says and 3)how it applies to my life.

The first is found just by reading the given passage a few times to let it soak in. The second is accomplished by using the principles of biblical hermeneutics, or principles of interpretation.

For example, you said I was using various scriptures as if they were in a vacuum. I would challenge you to prove the truth of that statement. My "Earthsphere" paper implements a verse from Isaiah 40, which is a chapter on the dominion of God and how He works in his Creation. Then you get to verse 22, which states that God "...sits above the vault (circle) of the earth". We know that God doesn't sit above the earth; God is a Spirit. This is called an "anthropomorphism" which depicts his dominion over us and the planet we live on, which He created. It's in context.

Job's verse on the Plaiedes and Orion; in context.

Job's statement about the Earth hung on nothing...in context.

Job through divine inspiration writes an allusion to the hydrologic cycle. In context.

You know, for many years, liberal and neo-orthodox theologians laughed at taking Jonah literally...why? "Because we all know that a man cannot be swallowed by a fish and live". So, they tried to make it refer to Israel as an allegory regarding captivity or some silly thing. Yet, in the past century, this has happened...a man was cut out of the whales belly...bleached and hairless, but alive.

If you are not a Christian (and I get the sense you are not), then you will NOT understand the care we take in interpretation. Can people get sloppy sometimes? Sure! But that is no reason to create this "Either/Or" bit.

Here's a very contemporary example of scripture abuse and what end up happening when you compare scripture with scripture...

"Gay theology" teaches that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of a "lack of hospitality", stating that evangelicals are wrong that it had to do with the sin of homosexuality. You really have to do some literary gymnastics to get there and it violates the obvious meaning of the text. Plus they fail to compare scripture with scripture...Jude states that it was because of the aforesaid immorality. This is an example of twisting the scriptures, which appears be with a view to justifing a political agenda or at least a preferred lifestyle.

So, if you are working with the scriptures correctly, you don't run into yourself somewhere else.

You know, I said the Bible teaches God is spirit...yet the bible says he protects his own beneath his "wings". That's just a word picture to show he cares for His children as a mother bird.Shelter; security. The bible also says that the Father will make earth the Son's footstool; yet I am not looking for very large sandals to appear that have "Red Wing" on the soles.

Anyway, I know I can't convince you against your will. If you don't know Christ, this issue is the least of your concerns. The Bible's theme is "God on a mission to save mankind". From Sin and condemnation and ultimate damnation. It tells us how He gave His One and Only Son for us...and how He forgave us even as our sins put us there...and when we were spitting in His face...which is what we do until we accept Him and His grace by faith! (Eph. 2:8,9).

'Tis it for me. Like I said, I KNEW I had left something out earlier. It was a post after this that helped me catch it.

Regards,

Tim

Report

C

timbrown527

17 years ago

That's right; nothing you've said invalidates the Bible. That's because history has demonstrated the accuracy of the Bible as well as archaeology.

The scriptures stand alone in their accuracy. Furthermore, even secular history records that Jesus Christ actually lived and died on a cross. But He didn't stay there...and athiests have come to faith in Christ after beginning a mission to disprove Christianity. They did this on their own, doing their own investigation.

So, when we Christians come to the scriptures and see verses that touch on things such as the Earth being hung on nothing (Job), the principle of hydrology (Job), the concept that visible things are made of things we can't see and other things, we rejoice! And please remember who my audience is.

The meaning of this word can mean a circle, a 'vault', or sphere. The meaning of the word is context driven. If you want to believe that it means the earth is like a dime on it's edge...go ahead. The point of the passage is that of God's dominion over the earth. The Unique validity of the Gospel remains and God's Word stands in either case.

I'm not surprised when people come along and choke on stuff like this. I don't know about you but there are lots of people who can't swallow their pride and even consider a possibility that there is one who made everything (which we normally expect when we see stuff around us) and will be Judge.

Thanks for your input.

Tim

Report

Soyburg

17 years ago

Well; we can agree on one thing; the Jewish scholars are right in saying that we have a young earth...

Do you consider 4.2 billion years to be young? Just curious...

Report

soulrebel

17 years ago

i am not christian so maybe i dont really understand the picture....
anyway it's good to have a lot of stuff from different cultures religions et cetera; that's what makes linux, having soo many different people getting along well and still satisfying their individual interests. ;-)
it would be cool to see some religious non-christian art too though.(nothing against you, i am atheist, but i really would like to see some chrome-buddha on some flashy backgrounds.......probabaly your the wrong one to tell.....)
never mind...
peace

Report

C

timbrown527

17 years ago

Hi Soulrebel:

Thanks for the input. The paper is a reference to scripture that makes a reference to the spherical nature of the earth. Job was written Thousands of years ago; supposedly at a time when people did not understand this fact. Yet, here it is, recorded in Scripture. The Bible makes many such references, contrary to popular belief.

Thanks,

Tim

Report

flamy

17 years ago

finally you havent just put some bible text on a background...you could actually use this as a wallpaper. Its not really to my taste...but it will be to others
:0
Oh and you did it in the Gimp, right? ;) THE GIMP RULES!!

Report

C

timbrown527

17 years ago

Text doesn't disqualify something as good wallpaper; I've seen good examples of that at digitalblasphemy.org among other places, including here.

Thanks for the complement in any case,

Tim

Report

kuba

17 years ago

Hi, there, thats cool, of course I'd remove the "Isaiah 40:22a" bit if I use it. Maybe you could post one without it!

Report

C

timbrown527

17 years ago

Thanks Kuba! I appreciate the input!

Tim

Report

kuba

17 years ago

thats okay Tim

Report

17 years ago

Modified description.

12345678910
Be the first to comment
File (click to download) Version Description Downloads Date Filesize DL OCS-Install MD5SUM
*Needs pling-store or ocs-url to install things
Pling
0 Affiliates
Details
license
version
updated Sep 28 2003
added Sep 20 2003
downloads 24h
0
mediaviews 24h 0
pageviews 24h 0