I am an atheist living in a theistic world. I was an atheist before I entered high school. The reason was that I was very interested in science and had decided that the world operated solely by natural means. I saw no need to invoke a God. It was not until after I had completed my PhD in neuroscience that I began to question further whether or not God existed. I proposed an hypothesis … that if God existed AND if the bible is a message to us from him, then the bible should show clear evidence of superior knowledge of the working of the universe. The second part of the hypothesis was that if the bible is not a message from God then it should contain clear signs of inferior knowledge (compared to what we have now) of the working of the universe. I tested the hypothesis by reading the bible carefully looking for such a sign. I found NO signs of superior knowledge, but quite a few examples of inferior knowledge. I found the evidence sufficiently convincing for me to rule out that the bible could possibly be a message to us from God.
At times I am very vocal in my atheism, but I do not think dogmatically so. I have been challenged by theists on numerous occasions concerning my views and I believe I have given their arguments a fair evaluation and still find them flawed. In this series of posts I will examine claims by theists that the bible does contain superior knowledge of the universe.
The claim I most often hear is that the bible says the earth is spherical ball in space. This claim derives from the following verses:
Isaiah 40:22
It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to live in; (NRSV)
Job 26:7
He stretches out Zaphon over the void, and hangs the earth upon nothing. (NRSV)
The claim is that the phrase “hangs the earth upon nothing” means the earth is in space, and the phrase “circle of the earth” means the earth is spherical. But does this claim really withstand scrutiny?
The first thing to note is that the biblical backing for it is pretty thin. 2 verses … and that is pretty much it! And this is the claim that numerous theists have mentioned to me is the most convincing.
I am going to argue that (1) even if we were to concede that the verses are describing a spherical earth suspended in space it still does not qualify as superior knowledge; and that (2) the claim itself rests on (a) an unduly credulous interpretation of the text, and (b) dismissal of numerous biblical verses that present an opposing picture of the earth.
(1) THE CLAIM DOES NOT REPRESENT SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE
The earliest parts of Isaiah were written in the 8th Century BCE. The Indian philosopher, Yajnavalkya, had already published in the Shatapatha Brahmana that the earth was a sphere almost a hundred years prior.
A hundred years is plenty of time for the concept to travel by word of mouth from India to Judah. Thus, even if we were to concede that the bible paints a picture of the earth as a sphere in space, it is much more reasonable to believe that Isaiah arrived at the concept naturally rather than by having an invisible superbeing tell it to him.
(2) THE CLAIM IS NOT VALID
(2a) UNDUE CREDULITY GIVEN TO THE INTERPRETATION
Nowhere in the bible does it actually say that the Earth is a sphere in space. Isaiah refers to it as a CIRCLE. A circle is flat two-dimensional surface. It is just the shape that a scientifically naïve person might suspect the world to be if he looked at it from a mountaintop or from aboard a ship.
If the bible had wanted to unequivocally indicate that the earth is spherical it could have used a word that unequivocally “sphere”. The bible DOES use such a word … once. And it is used in Isaiah.
Isaiah 22:17-18
“The Lord is about to hurl you away violently, my man. He will seize firm hold of you, whirl you round and round, and throw you like a ball into the wide land; there you shall die, and there your splendid chariots shall lie, O you disgrace to your master’s house.” (NRSV)
That obviously ISN’T talking about the shape of the Earth. So Isaiah only uses the unequivocal term “ball” when he is talking about something other than the shape of the Earth.
What about the Job quote? Does it really mean that the earth is in free space? Not really. Hebrew cosmology (see picture below)pictured the earth as being the base of a dome. Enclosing the dome was a clear firmament. The heavenly bodies (sun, moon, planets, and stars) were “hung” on the firmament. The Earth, being at the base of the dome of the firmament was hung on nothing.
(2b) CONTRADICTORY VERSES IN THE BIBLE ARE IGNORED
With Isaiah 40:22 Christian apologists are so eager to make use of the phrase “circle of the Earth” that they miss the implication of the second part of the verse … “who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to live in”.
The heavens are like a tent to live in? How does that square with a spherical earth? It doesn’t … but it sure is consistent with early Hebrew cosmology!
What about the first part of Job 26:7 … “He stretches out Zaphon over the void”? The reason the NRSV uses the Hebrew word “Zaphon” here is because the translators could not agree upon its meaning given the context of the verse. Most other English versions of the bible translate it as “north” or “northern sky”. If we go with them in this context then what does it mean to stretch the north or northern sky over a void?
A possible answer lies in Hebrew cosmology. There is a void between the firmament and the earth. The heavens are hung from the firmament and the Earth is stable. If that is the case then the firmament must turn. If a person living in Judah (which is in the Northern Hemisphere) would believe the center of rotation to be in the north since is around the North Star all the heavens seem to rotate. I believe it likely that Job is referring to the stars in the sky being spread out over the firmament in a traditional Hebrew cosmology.
Consistent with this interpretation are the subsequent verses (26:10 and 26:11) in which Job talks about a circle inscribed upon the waters at the boundary between light and darkness (where the dome of the firmament meets the Earth?) and the pillars of Heaven (supports for the dome of the firmament?).
So even the verses that Christian apologists use to claim the bible knows the earth is spherical seem to fit better with a flat earth model. So what does the rest of the bible say? Here the answer borders on unequivocal … the bible views the earth as flat.
In Matthew Chapter 4, Jesus is tempted by the Devil. The Devil takes him to a high mountaintop and shows him “all the kingdoms of the world”. This could only be done on a flat earth. Similarly, in Daniel Chapter 4, Nebuchadrezzar has a dream that Daniel must interpret for him. In that dream Nebuchadrezzar sees a tree grow up to the heavens which is “visible to the ends of the whole Earth”. Again, this is not possible on a spherical Earth.
Isaiah 44:24
“Thus, says the Lord, your Redeemer who formed you in the womb:
I am the Lord who made all things,
Who alone stretched out the heavens,
Who by myself spread out the Earth”
Spreading out the Earth certainly sounds more like a flat Earth to me. Note also that this verse refers the heavens being stretched out like Isaiah 40:22 does.
In numerous places the bible refers to the “ends of the Earth” (Deuteronomy 28:64, 33:17, 1 Samuel 2:10, Job 28:24, Psalm 19:4, 22:27, 46:9, 48:10, 59:13, 61:2, 65:5, Isaiah 41:9, Jeremiah 51:16, Mark 13:27). A sphere has no ends; a flat Earth does.
In numerous places the bible refers to the “corners of the Earth” (Job 37:3, Isaiah 11:12, Isaiah 41:9, Ezekiel 7:2, Revelation 7:1, 20:8). Again this is more descriptive of a flat Earth than a spherical one.
The above view of Hebrew cosmology is also supported by numerous biblical references. Genesis 1:6-9 discusses a firmament with waters above and below. Psalm 136:6 talks about the Earth being spread out (and therefore flat) upon the waters. Proverbs 8:27-29 talks about the “fountains of the deep” or the waters that the Earth rest on. Exodus 20:4, Deuteronomy 4:18 and 5:8 talk about “waters under the earth” , another reference to the waters that the Earth rests on. Job 22:14 describes “vault of Heaven” consistent with the picture of Hebrew cosmology. Job 37:18 describes the skies “hard as a molten mirror” and Proverbs 8:28 describes God making the skies “firm”, an excellent description of the firmament separating the Heavenly waters from the Earthly waters.
Clearly the bible presents a view of a flat Earth much more strongly than a spherical one. Claims made by Christian apologists to the contrary are the result of wishful thinking.
Cheers,
Darwin’s Beagle
===
Some popular Christian websites that make the claim that the bible says the world is a sphere.
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c015.html
http://www.livingwaters.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Product_Co...
I can't agree with your statement that,
>>>It is just the shape that a scientifically naïve person might suspect the world to be if he looked at it from a mountaintop or from aboard a ship."
Before 1492 when Columbus sailed the ocean blue, people were scared of falling off the edge and were not able to see around them far enough to think they were on a circle. If you look at the ancient map on this link it will give you an idea of the strange ideas they had:
http://www.nerc.ac.uk/press/releases/2004/11-ancientmariners.asp
I don't think the tallest mountain would give a person a view of the world sufficient to cause him to believe it was round. Look:
http://www.fs.fed.us/wildflowers/regions/pacificsouthwest/SlateMountain/...
http://www.rumblestrip.org/site-img/vrains-view.jpg
http://paul.rutgers.edu/~mcgrew/Europe/gifs/Swiss-1.gif
"The earliest parts of Isaiah were written in the 8th Century BCE. The Indian philosopher, Yajnavalkya, had already published in the Shatapatha Brahmana that the earth was a sphere almost a hundred years prior.
A hundred years is plenty of time for the concept to travel by word of mouth from India to Judah. Thus, even if we were to concede that the bible paints a picture of the earth as a sphere in space, it is much more reasonable to believe that Isaiah arrived at the concept naturally rather than by having an invisible superbeing tell it to him."
*************************************************************
While it is interesting to note that the Indian philosopher, Yajnavalkya, also may have written his idea that the earth was a circle; it doesn't serve to establish any basic facts such as he had the idea first since no one knows for sure when it was published. See the excerpt from the Wiki:
################
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shatapatha Brahmana (शतपथ ब्राह्मण śatapatha brāhmaṇa, "Brahmana of one-hundred paths", abbreviated ŚB) is one of the prose texts describing the Vedic ritual, associated with the Shukla Yajurveda. It survives in two recensions, Madhyandina (ŚBM, of the vājasaneyi madhyandina śākhā) and Kanva (ŚBK, of the kāṇva śākhā), with the former having the eponymous 100 brahmanas in 14 books, and the latter 104 brahmanas in 17 books.
The ŚB is notable as one of the oldest prose (non-metrical) Sanskrit texts altogether[1]. Linguistically, it belongs to the Brahmana period of Vedic Sanskrit, dated to the first half of the 1st millennium BCE (roughly 800 BCE, Iron Age India).
Among the points of interest are the mythological sections embedded in it, including myths of creation and the Deluge of Manu. The text describes in great detail the preparation of altars, ceremonial objects, ritual recitations, and the Soma libation, along with the symbolic attributes of every aspect of the rituals.
The 14 books of the Madhyandina recension can be divided into two major parts. The first 9 books have close textual commentaries, often line by line, of the first 18 books of the corresponding samhita of the Yajurveda. The following 5 books cover supplementary and ritualistically newer material, besides including the celebrated Brhadaranyaka Upanishad as most of the 14th and last book.
The Shatapatha Brahmana was translated into English by Prof. Julius Eggeling, in the late 19th century, in 5 volumes published as part of the Sacred Books of the East series.
>>>>>Some Hindu scholars have dated it to around 1800 BCE, based on the reference in it of migration from the Sarasvati river area to east India, because the river is said to have dried up around 1900 BCE[2]. Archaeoastronomers have dated it to around 2000 BCE based on a reference to the Pleiades (Krttikas) "rising in the east" at autumnal equinox (ŚBM 2.1.2.1). Such dating claims not accepted in mainstream scholarship (see also Hindu astronomy).
I can't get the book on Yajnavalkya at the library here or even on an inner-library loan. Do you by chance have the book so you could quote this sage as far as what exactly he said about the circle of the earth? I don't really feel like buying the book for$25 or so and then it being the wrong book.
Hi, first I just want to say that your knowledge of these scriptures is pretty puzzling and astonishing to me bc you surely realize that these scriptures and what they imply or at least seem to imply is not known to the ordinary Bible student, Jew, or Christian. Just the fact that you know they exist shows me that you are not unexperienced in what you are saying. I am trying to chase down your information and scriptures and interpret what you are saying and what they are saying. I know you are atheist(see, I remembered to spell it right); while I am a deist(believe in God; one God). I am not an expert in Apologetics but I enjoy them. You know more on that subject than me but I enjoy your blogs and insight that you demonstrate. How on earth did you ever know about these particular scriptures? Even people who read the Bible normally "miss" these implications. That is my question for now. I am sure that I will have more questions though.
It seems that the references in the Bible to the earth’s corners are figurative since as you have pointed out the shape of the earth is some round shape.
The transliteration chuwg actually found three times in the bible translated as circle (Isa 40:22), circuit (Job 22:14), and compass (Pro 8:27) has a meaning of a circle, sphere.
The word ball that seems to so definitely identify a spherical object and might seem to be a better choice to describe a spherical earth is from the transliteration duwr. This word is translated as a circle(Isa 29:3)a ball (Isa 22:18)and a burning pile, a round heap (Eze 24:5) Duwr comes from a root word that means to heap up, to dwell.
It seems as a writer I would use the first word to describe a spherical world rather than a word that could be taken to mean a heap.
Translations of the Bible can not always be given the same validity as the original writings.
Thank you for your response. Before I reply I would like to point out that even if I grant all your points, my blog presents enough other supporting evidence that the main thrust of my argument remains intact. In fairness to you, I do realize that you did not intend a comprehensive rebuttal to my blog, only a limited critique of a few points my blog brings up.
Now I would like to respond to your points:
(1) I do not know either Hebrew or Greek. I primarily rely on the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) which is a consensus translation of large number of biblical scholars who are proficient in Hebrew and Greek. It is the version that is most often quoted in modern biblical scholarship. In general, I feel like they are more likely to get it right than I am even if I consult a Hebrew or Greek source.
Here is a link to an online version of the NRSV:
http://bible.oremus.org/
Having said that, I am familiar with the arguments you make and I do have my own Strong’s Hebrew and Greek dictionaries. Furthermore, prior to posting this blog I did check into some of your concerns.
(2) Concerning “corners”
The verses I referenced with respect to “corners of the earth” the bible uses 2 different Hebrew words and 1 Greek word. Let’s look at them.
(2a) Kanaph (Strong’s #3671)
This is a Hebrew word that literally means “edge” or “extremity”. With respect to the Earth it refers to ¼ of it. Thus, it means “¼ of the edge of the earth”. This fits better with a flat earth than a spherical one.
(2b) Qatsah (Strong’s #7098)
This is a Hebrew word that with respect to Isaiah 41:9 could be interpreted to mean “coast”, “corner”, or “edge”. However, in context … “you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest [qatsah]” … the verse under any of those translations still presents a picture of the world that is more in line with a flat earth than a spherical one.
(2c) Gonia (Strong’s #1137)
This is a Greek word that means “angle” and in both verses from Revelation is best rendered as “corner”. However, there is no evidence that the author of Revelation thought the Earth was circular (or spherical), so there is no inconsistency there.
Thus, in none of the cases is there a compelling reason to believe that the term should be taken “figuratively” as you suggest. Without such a compelling reason, it is always best to assume that words mean what they would normally mean. This is especially true given the fact that we know early people DID believe in a flat Earth.
(3) Concerning Chuwg (Strong #2329)
This is a Hebrew word which does mean “circle”, “circuit”, or “compass”. It is indeed used in Isaiah 40:22, and in that context it is obvious that it should be rendered “circle”. You are incorrect in your assertion that it has the alternative meaning of “sphere”. At no place in the bible is it ever translated as such. I am afraid that is just wishful thinking.
(4) Concerning Durw (Strong #1754)
It is indeed a Hebrew word which has the meanings “circle”, “ball”, or “pile”. In context of Isaiah 22:18 – “… and throw you like a [durw] into a wide land; …” - it is obvious that it should be translated as “ball”.
Again you are incorrect in your renderings of the meanings in the other two verses you quote. In Ezekiel 24:5, durw does not mean “A pile”. Instead it is used as a verb, and means “TO pile”. Isaiah 29:3 is a verse in an oracle against the city of Ariel. In this particular verse Isaiah is saying that the forces of God are going to encamp around and therefore surrounding the city. Durw in this context is more properly rendered as “round about” than as “a circle”.
But the real question then is, “how would one interpret Isaiah 40:22 if the author had used the term ‘durw’ instead of ‘chuwg’”? Let’s look:
Isaiah 40:22 (with durw substituted for chuwg)
“It is he who sits above the [durw] of the Earth …”
“Circle” WOULD fit. “Ball” WOULD fit. “Pile” (especially as a verb) would not. Thus, you are correct in that using durw instead of chuwg would not have unequivocally settled the issue. HOWEVER, “durw” would have been much more in line with a spherical Earth than “chuwg”. And since Isaiah DID use the term to mean “ball” in Isaiah 22:18, I think “ball” would have been the preferred meaning in Isaiah 44:22. So the point remains that IF the bible would have wanted to picture the Earth as being spherical as opposed to flat, then it would have been much better to use the term in Isaiah 22:18.
Cheers,
Darwin’s Beagle
===
Evolution says that we share a common ancestor with a jackass. It does not give us license to act like one.
great defense you have!
if you look a little further, you will see why I say that. (my above post)
Let's not forget that nowhere in the Bible are micro-organisms mentioned. Such a lifeline from God to pre-microscope man would have done wonders for medicine and saved thousands if not millions from bloodletting and other bizarre homeopathy of the olden days.
"CONSERVATIVE, n.
A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others."
- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
"nowhere in the Bible are micro-organisms mentioned" No they aren't. But the health-laws are especially in Leviticus. They meaning the Hebrews were not supposed to eat certain things and God did not say why. If you look at the rules He gave them and try to figure out why nowadays, you'll note that :
1) pork has parasites in it that are able to do a lot of damage to a person if the meat is not cooked properly
2) pork is not the same as beef bc of the toxins in it; pigs don't sweat and eliminate toxins; they store them in their bodies
3) shellfish has similar problems; oysters, clams, are filters for the ocean while catfish are the garbage eaters and little vaccum cleaners
These laws were only for Jews, not for anyone else. The Jews were God's example to other people that He existed.