NT Writers

[POI]

For the context of this discussion, let's roll with the definition of faith to mean -- "to trust in, or to apply hope in anyways, despite inference(s) to the contrary. " Since belief does not seem to be a choice, as I cannot simply chose to believe in fairies without proper demonstration, the term faith looks to be the work-around.

Further, many will also argue faith in Jesus is necessary, because all humans fall short. But if this is THE case, then 'morals' also look to become superfluous and/or irrelevant. Which then looks to be contradictory and/or illogical, as the NT expresses the need to follow a certain 'moral' code....

For debate: Were the NT writer(s) savvy enough to recognize that many would read this collection of writings and not believe -- (due to contradiction and/or illogic)? Hence, the workaround term faith was implemented?

[POI]

I think that is a pathetic attempt to make people to look wrong, by irrational interpretation. No good reason to expect the kingdoms to be seen directly* even on a flat earth, no matter how tall the mountain would be.

I'm going to use your rationale here 1213. Please tell me exactly where the Bible states the shape of the earth? And while you are at it, please also tell me exactly where the Bible states "Noah's flood" submerged the entire world/earth? This is where context comes into play again 1213. You read stories and discern what the author thought about basic ideas. When you read such stories, like in Genesis 6-9 for example, it looks to be pretty clear that the author intended to tell a tale of a global flood, and not a local one. And yet, countless Christians argue for a local flood, and will even cite Biblical verses to support their position. And why can Christians do this, you ask? Because the Bible tells stories. And sometimes, it is the reader's job to decipher a rationale conclusion, because the Bible does not come right out and give enough detail. Sometimes the description is clearer than others. Case/point, the ongoing thread about how one actually achieves 'salvation', in which you are still involved.

I'm using your rationale here. Meaning, it's like when you asked me in another thread (paraphrased), "please tell me where the Bible mentions chattel slavery specifically?" The Bible does not come right out and grant the term "chattel slavery". And yet, the Bible condones activities relating to chattel slavery behavior.

My over-arching point here 1213, is that the Bible does not come right out and state some things. And yet, using common sense, and reading the stories in context, we can surmise rationale conclusions. The writer thought the world was a round/flat disk. The writer meant to tell readers the entire earth was under water at one point. The writer(s) also sanctioned forms of chattel slavery. And yes, the NT writers propped up an early form of Pascal's Wager, (i.e.) blind faith and coercion, as the writers understood these NT stories are far-fetched to believe on their own merit(s). Case/point, the story of 'doubting Thomas' is one example. Most are like 'doubting Thomas.' And yet, most, if not all, are not going to get hard evidence, like this aforementioned fella Thomas seemed to have gotten. Telling folks "to believe just in case", admits the evidence is lacking. Blind faith ceases to exist if we have hard evidence. And in the case of the NT, we do not have any hard evidence. We instead have oral tradition, to be followed up by anonymous Gospel writers, decade(s) later. And their way to convince the reader, is to warn subsequent readers of the "eternal torment" to come if you do not possess the "faith".

[1213]

...Here is an image from an online introduction to geology textbook....

Thanks, I think it is not a good picture, because dimensions are not in right scale. But, what say you, why is there no volcanoes in the ocean ridge where the crust is thinnest in that image?

[1213]

... Please tell me exactly where the Bible states the shape of the earth?

In Bible earth means dry land, not the whole planet.

God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters he called Seas. God saw that it was good.
Gen. 1:9-10

In the beginning the edges of the dry land (the original single continent) were round.

When he set a circle on the surface of the deep,
Prov. 8:26-27
To him who spread out the earth above the waters; For his loving kindness endures forever:
Ps. 136:6

In the flood event the first continent was broken, which led to the modern continents.

Bible doesn't tell the shape of planet earth, but it is possible that it is a sphere, although UN map indicates otherwise.

And while you are at it, please also tell me exactly where the Bible states "Noah's flood" submerged the entire world/earth?

The waters grew strong, fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered.
Gen. 7:20

The writer thought the world was a round/flat disk.

No, that is what you think. Or do you even know who wrote the text?

And yet, most, if not all, are not going to get hard evidence... ...Telling folks "to believe just in case", admits the evidence is lacking. ...

One can always tell that there is not enough evidence. I think it is not useful to give more, if it would not make person righteous anyway.

[TRANSPONDER]

What you are ignoring is that the other ancients saw the earth as a flat round disk with a sky - dome over it and the Biblical text fits with that.

In the end, you can make up what you like as the Bible says nothing about any other land but the one God created. There is the passage that suggests that Jesus on top of a mountain could be shown all the nations or countries which again fits with a flat earth.

All the evidence fits with the common ancient view and nothing supports your suggestions.

So whatever you choose to believe there is no reason for anyone to conclude the the Bible - writers knew the earth was spheroid.

Along with Genesis saying the daylight (morning and evening, remember) made before the sun, and the order of creation that denied stratified evidence suggests that genesis is simply wrong, and written by people who did not know better.

This is not even to bother with the diversions about not knowing who was the writer, what the UN map shows or what makes a person Righteous. I'll just stick with what makes a person informed about what the Bible gets right and what it gets wrong.

[Difflugia]

Thanks, I think it is not a good picture, because dimensions are not in right scale.

How does that affect what you think is happening? The picture is obviously simplified to help students get an overview of what's going on. Even if the scale is off, it already corrects at least two misunderstandings that you've shown in this thread. Did you read the text? It fleshes out the detail quite nicely.

But, what say you, why is there no volcanoes in the ocean ridge where the crust is thinnest in that image?

Because people already know that the spreading of the ridge involves volcanic activity. You can see the mantle depicted as reaching the surface. The diagram is an intentional simplification designed to minimize distracting clutter and you're asking why it's missing some particular detail? Again, how does that detail affect what you think is going on?

[POI]

.....In Bible earth means dry land, not the whole planet..... Bible doesn't tell the shape of planet earth, but......

You are demonstrating my point(s).... You read the stories and commands, and translate context. So please stop responding, by telling me the Bible does not mention 'chattel slavery' by name -- (for example). Of course it doesn't, but it gives clear instructions which pertain to such practices. The Bible does not specify many things explicitly, but you read the description(s) and surmise what the author(s) obviously thought. This goes for the author(s) thinking the shape of the earth is flat, or that the flood was a completely global event, or that the NT author(s) knew blind faith was needed to be propped up, as evidence by the existence of "Pascal's Wager". The NT writers clearly propped up blind faith, reinforced by fear. How do we know this? Because the Bible mentions the contents of torment over 100 times. And when I posted all the verses prior, you simply ignored them. If the author(s) did not prop up the fear/torment factor, then why mention the topic of torment that many times?

No, that is what you think. Or do you even know who wrote the text?

The author of the Gospel of Matthew is unknown. But whoever wrote it, also believed the world was flat. Otherwise, the author would not have endorsed such a statement The author would realize it is silly to tell readers that "going up higher to see all the kingdoms" is a patently false statement. being that kingdoms exist on the other side of the sphere.

One can always tell that there is not enough evidence. I think it is not useful to give more, if it would not make person righteous anyway.

Again, the fact that this argument is in existence lends much credence to the conclusion that blind faith, propelled by fear, is very much a thing. This is how many believers attempt to conjure up new converts.

[1213]

Thanks, I think it is not a good picture, because dimensions are not in right scale.

How does that affect what you think is happening?

When it is drawn like that, it is more difficult to see the faults in the ideas.

Because people already know that the spreading of the ridge involves volcanic activity. ..

Any evidence for that?

[1213]

... the Bible does not mention 'chattel slavery' by name -- (for example). Of course it doesn't, but it gives clear instructions which pertain to such practices...

Why do you think it is so difficult for people to not ignore the "love your neighbor as yourself part"?

...but you read the description(s) and surmise what the author(s) obviously thought.

So, UN thinks earth is flat, because it is depicted in their flag that way? Clearly they must think so?



I think it is wrong o make up stuff that "some obviously thought". It can be totally wrong. Best is to remain what is actually said, without adding own imagination to it.

...The NT writers clearly propped up blind faith, reinforced by fear. How do we know this? Because the Bible mentions the contents of torment over 100 times. And when I posted all the verses prior, you simply ignored them. If the author(s) did not prop up the fear/torment factor, then why mention the topic of torment that many times?

I don't think that is true, for example because:

Peace I leave with you. My peace I give to you; not as the world gives, give I to you. Don't let your heart be troubled, neither let it be fearful.
John 14:27
There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear has punishment. He who fears is not made perfect in love.
1 John 4:18
For God didn't give us a spirit of fear, but of power, love, and self-control.
2 Tim. 1:7
But for the cowardly, ... ... and all liars, their part is in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.
Rev. 21:8

Fear should not rule anyone.

...But whoever wrote it, also believed the world was flat. Otherwise, the author would not have endorsed such a statement The author would realize it is silly to tell readers that "going up higher to see all the kingdoms" is a patently false statement. being that kingdoms exist on the other side of the sphere.

Probably the author thought it would be silly, if someone would take it as a comment of earths form, and therefore didn't add any clarification to an obvious matter.

[Difflugia]

When it is drawn like that, it is more difficult to see the faults in the ideas.

That's an interesting excuse, considering that the faults you were claiming before were based on a representation that was desperately wrong. Before you try to find details to nitpick, you should probably try to understand the big picture.

Because people already know that the spreading of the ridge involves volcanic activity. ..

Any evidence for that?

Evidence that the spreading of oceanic ridges involves volcanic activity or that people know about it? Did you read the chapter? Did you do any sort of search? There are videos of it happening in real time. There are videos of magma erupting underwater along various oceanic ridges and, since the Midatlantic Ridge runs through Iceland, there are videos of volcanic action along that particular ridge on land.

Here's a YouTube search query for Midatlantic Ridge Volcanism. Take your pick.

The videos are evidence that there is volcanic activity along oceanic ridges and the millions of views of individual videos are evidence that people know about it.

[POI]

Why do you think it is so difficult for people to not ignore the "love your neighbor as yourself part"?

No one is ignoring it. But like I stated in the OP of the slavery thread, if this is all that matters, then the Bible would be a one-pager. The Bible lists many exceptions. And chattel slavery is one of them. Differing rules apply to differing folks. Sure, if you are a free Hebrew male, then this "golden rule" may apply more-so. But it makes ZERO sense to apply a bunch of other rules, if everyone is just going to ignore them anyways. It's obvious that if you are not a Hebrew male, differing rules apply. As I also stated in the OP of the slavery thread, the specifics outweigh the generals. The "golden rule" is general, while the rules for slavery are specific and explain exactly how to enslave others. This means, many exceptions exist to the "golden rule", as chattel slavery and the 'golden rule' are not logically compatible.

So, UN thinks earth is flat, because it is depicted in their flag that way? Clearly they must think so?

This argument is completely lame. Well after the Bible was written, most still thought the globe was flat. This is, in part, why Columbus was deemed a 'hero' of his day. When the UN was formed, we already knew the earth was spherical. When you read all the verses in the Bible, in context, you get the impression that the author(s) thought the earth was a flat disk.

I think it is wrong o make up stuff that "some obviously thought". It can be totally wrong. Best is to remain what is actually said, without adding own imagination to it.

Then you have NO argument, because you already admitted that the authors do not state WHAT shape the earth really is. The Bible gives statements which suggests they think the earth is flat. The Bible gives no indication which leads the reader to believe the author(s) think the earth is spherical. I have receipts to surmise the authors thought the earth was flat, which is completely damning to your belief system since this would verify they were not getting their information from a higher source. But instead, a mere flawed human.

I don't think that is true, for example because:

Peace I leave with you. My peace I give to you; not as the world gives, give I to you. Don't let your heart be troubled, neither let it be fearful.
John 14:27
There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear has punishment. He who fears is not made perfect in love.
1 John 4:18
For God didn't give us a spirit of fear, but of power, love, and self-control.
2 Tim. 1:7
But for the cowardly, ... ... and all liars, their part is in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.
Rev. 21:8

Yes, these verses tell the reader that if they are not chosen, they get to enjoy "eternal torment". Thanks. This is why coercion is a keystone feature to try and win converts. Scare them onto your team. But since there exists such little evidence, prop up blind faith as well -- Courtesy of Pascal's Wager.

Probably the author thought it would be silly, if someone would take it as a comment of earths form, and therefore didn't add any clarification to an obvious matter.

No, What is silly, is even suggesting one can see all kingdoms, the higher you go.