This is what was posted on I Am An Atheist
Lynn Get yer bibles out believers!! ( Probably never even read one )!!
May 3 at 10:25am • 1
Eric Christ lol…
May 3 at 10:27am
May 3 at 10:42am
Stewart From the creators of “Star Wars”, “Lord Of The Rings”, “Game Of Thrones”, and “Twilight”, the newest, action packed, entirely fictional, with more bullshit than ever, “Religion”!
May 3 at 3:32pm • 2
The Insanity of Christianity
May 3 at 4:21pm
May 3 at 4:33pm
Philosophers of America most excellent post
May 3 at 8:09pm
May 3 at 8:44pm
Brian No no no, THAT stuff is POETRY. It’s the OTHER stuff, the stuff that tells you how to live your life (except the parts I don’t like, those are poetry too) that is cold hard undeniable FACT!! Praise the lard!!!
May 4 at 9:21am
Preston you missed the burning bush thing.
May 4 at 3:27pm
Here was my comment:
Once again how do you deal with someone who is so ignorant of the subject matter they are attempting to talk about, that it makes you want to scream. The atheists continue to feed their own disbelief, arrogance, and foolishness by continually trying to take certain Biblical passages out of context and tie them together in a way to support their delusional beliefs. I’ll just point out to them why they are wrong on the first two scripture passages they list.
Let us start with “the flat earth syndrome .”
First, the phrase, ‘four corners of the earth,’ only appears in the New Testament in Revelation 7:1 and 20:8 in descriptive statements by the Apostle John. Jesus speaks only of the ‘four winds of the earth’ (Matthew 24:31 and Mark 13:27), as does John in Revelation 7:1. These are all the New Testament occurrences of these phrases. In the Old Testament ‘four corners of the earth’ appears only in Isaiah 11:12. The same Hebrew words appear in Ezekiel 7:2 but are correctly translated as ‘four corners of the land’ in the KJV, NKJV, NAS and NIV since the preceding words in the verse show that eretz (the Hebrew word that can be translated either as ‘earth’ or ‘land,’ depending on context) is referring to the land of Israel, not the whole planet as in Isaiah 11:12.
Second, we should note that all of the above passages are in prophetic, apocalyptic sections of Scripture, where (unlike Genesis) figurative language is frequently used. Therefore, a discerning reader will be careful about interpreting these phrases literally.
Third, given the biblical allusions to the earth’s sphericity in Job 26:10; Proverbs 8:27; Ecclesiastes 1:6; Psalm 19:6 and Isaiah 40:22 and the fact that the ancients long before the time of Christ had figured out that the earth is a sphere, there is no reason to imagine that Christ or his disciples actually thought the earth was flat and that the wind only blew in one of four directions.
Fourth, the church never interpreted the ‘corners of the earth’ to mean that the earth is flat. It is a myth that the church ever believed in a flat earth. As historian Jeffrey Russell shows, that was the view of only a very few odd individuals scattered throughout the last twenty centuries. We use similar figures of speech today. Something is scattered ‘to the four corners of the earth’ meaning ‘all over the earth.’ The convention has always been to talk of four directions, or four compass points—north, south, east and west. Neither we nor the ancients ever took this to mean that there are only four directions in which one can travel, just as one still talks of the ‘four winds.’
Fifth, these phrases are not worded as statements of literal geographical or atmospheric fact. In other words, neither in these verses nor in any other part of the Bible do we read statements like ‘the earth has four corners’ or ‘there are only four winds that blow on the earth.’
All careful readers would know instinctively that the phrases ‘four corners of the earth’ and ‘four winds of the earth’ are idioms, meaning ‘everywhere on the earth’ or ‘from all directions.’14 In fact, Mark 13:27 shows that Jesus is not teaching geography or atmospheric science in that ‘from the four winds’ is used as a parallel synonym for ‘from the farthest end of the earth to the farthest end of heaven.’
Both my granddaughters had this unicorn fetish thing as they grew up, probably pushed by Mattel or whoever it was that created My Little Pony and the other toys. But what are we really talking about in the great reference book known as the Bible.
In the Authorized (King James) Version of the Bible we read of God questioning Job (Chapter 39:9,10): ‘Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?’
The unicorn is also mentioned in Deuteronomy 33:17, Numbers 23:22 and 24:8; Psalm 22:21, 29:6 and 92:10; and Isaiah 34:7. Nowhere in these passages is there any suggestion that anything other than a real animal is being described.
But the unicorn is well known to be a product of legend, a creature whose remains have never been found and about whom fabulous tales have been told. Some have used this to attack the Bible—this proves that the writers were simply retelling widely believed myths, they say.
It is well known that the unicorn horns were greatly prized because of the belief that they were able to render poisons harmless. Sailors occasionally found the tooth of a male narwhal washed up (a narwhal is an Arctic whale, the male of which has a long, spirally twisted tusk), and assumed that it was the only remaining part of a once-living unicorn. Fabulous prices were often paid for these—Queen Elizabeth I is said to have had one which was valued at 100,000 pounds!
So what was the animal described in the Bible as the ‘unicorn’? The most important point to remember is that while the Bible writers were inspired and infallible, translations are another thing again. The word used in the Hebrew is רְאֵם (re’em). This has been translated in various languages as monoceros, unicornis, unicorn, einhorn and eenhorn, all of which mean ‘one horn’. However, the word re’em is not known to have such a meaning. Many Jewish translations simply left it untranslated, because they were not sure which creature was being referred to.
Archaeology has in fact provided a powerful clue to the likely meaning of re’em. Mesopotamian reliefs have been excavated which show King Assurnasirpal hunting oxen with one horn. The associated texts show that this animal was called rimu. It is thus highly likely that this was the re’em of the Bible, a wild ox.
It appears that the reason it was shown in Assyrian (but not Egyptian) art as one-horned was as an artistic way of expressing the beauty of the fact that these horns on the rimu/re’em were very symmetrical, such that only one could be seen if the animal was viewed from one side. The first to translate the Hebrew Old Testament into Greek probably knew that the rimu/re’em was depicted as one-horned, so they translated it as monoceros (one horn).
The real re’em or wild ox was also known as the aurochs (Bos primigenius). This was the original wild bull depicted in, for example, the famous Lascaux (Cro-magnon) cave paintings. This powerful, formidable beast is now extinct, though its genetically impoverished descendants lived on as domestic cattle.