All I was saying was that either the earth is flat, and the bible is correct, or the earth is round, and the bible is incorect, i'm going to study the issue more and deside for myself which route I want to take. Either Atheist evolutionist, who agrees with all of mainstream sciences, or flat earth litteral bible believer.
I'm leaning toward being an atheist, because if I can't believe the bible to be completly litteraly true, then I can't believe Jesus when he speaks about heaven, etc..
That would make the moon landing a fake, and pretty much all of modern science false...
50 comments
The Bible never actually said the Earth was flat. It was just the commonly held belief, and many of the most outspoken opponents of the theory were conservative religious figures. They were, of course, proven undeniably wrong.
Ed, there's a ton of stuff in the bible either directly stating or implying a flat Earth, for instance the temptation of Jesus where Satan led Jesus up to the top of a mountain so high where he could see the entire world. This is only possible on a flat Earth. Many books have been written on it. There are at least 50 references to a flat Earth, and not one to a spherical one.image
How does the third sentance follow from the first or second sentances?
It finally ALLLLL starts to make sense, now don't it? Keep using your brain, RickardT, it IS strange that so many follow the bibble so mindlessly, but you are seeing how it clashes with reality. That's a huge thing to get past, but you are headed in the right direction. It is impossible for a reasonable person to ignore the gaping holes in the logic of the bibble. Kudos to you! And just to keep your mind busy, GOD BLESS!
All I was saying was that either the earth is flat, and the bible is correct, or the earth is round, and the bible is incorect, i'm going to study the issue more and deside for myself which route I want to take.
Use independant sources and you'll find the truth. Good going so far.
Either Atheist evolutionist, who agrees with all of mainstream sciences
Fault one. Not all atheists believe all mainstream sciences. I'm a bit of a doubter when it comes to global warming (the causes and the periodic repeating of it and the relation of human factors attributing to it) and some other "main stream" sciences are pretty bogus. Think ID or creationism.
or flat earth litteral bible believer.
Just because the bible would be right on one part doesn't meant that all it says is correct. Remember, even a broken watch is right 2 times a day (analog watches, not the digital ones).
I'm leaning toward being an atheist, because if I can't believe the bible to be completly litteraly true, then I can't believe Jesus when he speaks about heaven, etc..
See previous.
That would make the moon landing a fake, and pretty much all of modern science false..."
Just think of how most modern sciences aren't wrong and contribute to your life on a daily basis.
You're off to a good start, richard! You're finally starting to use more of your brain than just the stem. Keep up the good work, and eventually, enough of your brain will be functioning that you'll make an intelligent atheist, rather than becoming one of the ill-considered atheists who lapses back into religion at the first dumbass argument you haven't heard before. As an added bonus, you won't say grammatically unclear and potentially nonsensical things like the last sentence quoted here.
*Ed, there's a ton of stuff in the bible either directly stating or implying a flat Earth,
Aesmael:
The only thing about this post that seems "fundie" to me is the fact that, with all his careful analysis of the situation indicating the weaknesses of the Bible when compared to reality, he is STILL hesitant about dropping religion.
at the risk of being the target of flame bait, but wouldnt a belief that "atheism = believing in science" be just at bad as christian fundamentalist? rather than saying "kudos" to this misguided fellow for choosing atheism because of science, it is better to remind him that science does not deal with the metaphysical and their choice of religion or lack of should not be based on science?
Remember, Dick, the truth told by "God" himself or the truth told by an evil, atheist, evolution-accepting scientist is still the truth.
I don't believe in a flat earth, but again, you are ignorant of falt earthism. For example, on a flat earth, if you were to depart from New York and go straight continuously( This would be curved on a flat earth map), you would come back New York. The only difference that I can see between flat earthism and geocentricity is that flat earthers reject pictures of the earth taken from space. I respect them for there views but don't agree with it.
"I don't believe in a flat earth, but again, you are ignorant of falt earthism."
So, RichardT, you see the photos of a spherical Earth taken from space, but reject that conclusive evidence in favor of a flat earth as recorded in the Babble. Come on, man, either get a grip or quit yanking our chains. If you actually believe this flat earth nonsense, it can only be self-induced stupidity and ignorance.
@"RichardT"
I don't believe in a flat earth, but again, you are ignorant of falt earthism. For example, on a flat earth, if you were to depart from New York and go straight continuously( This would be curved on a flat earth map), you would come back New York. The only difference that I can see between flat earthism and geocentricity is that flat earthers reject pictures of the earth taken from space. I respect them for there views but don't agree with it
<<< I don't believe in a flat earth, but again, you are ignorant of falt earthism. For example, on a flat earth, if you were to depart from New York and go straight continuously( This would be curved on a flat earth map), you would come back New York. >>>
Crosis, the most practical way to describe it is that a flat line relative to the earths surface APPEARS flat, but is actually curved. For example, a straight road across a 'flat' plain is actually curved, however, the shorter that road is, the more negligable the curve factor becomes, and the road could be considered flat for practical purposes.
<<< Crosis, the most practical way to describe it is that a flat line relative to the earths surface APPEARS flat, but is actually curved. For example, a straight road across a 'flat' plain is actually curved, however, the shorter that road is, the more negligable the curve factor becomes, and the road could be considered flat for practical purposes. >>>
Huh.
I don't think he's saying that modern science is false.
When I read this, I assumed he meant 'then I can't believe Jesus when he speaks about heaven, as that would make the moon landing a fake, and pretty much all of modern science false'.
Poor grammar? Yes.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
