Rotating Earth vs. Biblical Literalism

Rotating Earth vs. Biblical Literalism September 5, 2012

This is what Ken Ham and other young-earth creationists would stand for if they were at least trying to be consistent Biblical literalists. This is not a parody, it is a genuine argument for the flat and fixed Earth viewpoint.

To any young-earth creationist reading this, I would like to know whether or not you accept the argument in the video, and if you don’t, why not, since to someone who is not (or like me, is no longer) a young-earth creationist, it sounds like pretty much the same sorts of arguments used by young-earth creationists to try to dispute evolution.

"Of note, Kautsky was not a mythicist. He regarded Jesus as a historical revolutionary type ..."

Cercetări în Istoria Propagandei Comuniste despre ..."
"Unfortunately my Romanian is sloppy and I haven't been able to come across much. The ..."

Cercetări în Istoria Propagandei Comuniste despre ..."
"I'm guessing that autocorrect has been at work here. You need to write about Cybermen ..."

Doctor Who: Ascension of the Cybermen
"good grief. How can video games be both the opiate of the masses and at ..."

Heroes of the Bible

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Dr, David Tee

    Secular Science is wrong in that it is blind, deceived and cannot understand what the Bible is talking about. The above video people are simply misguided and di dnot take the time to grasp what the Bible is teaching and apply the words to the wrong topic.
    But people like Dr. McGrath latch onto these videos to do their personal attacks, while refusing to honestly see the error and correct it properly. They rather mock and ridicule than treat people with compassion, truth, loving kindness, and so on.
    This is type of post is evidence that Dr. NcGrath doesn’t have the truth as he treats others who make mistakes as subhuman, inferior, third class and in other ways disobedient to biblical teaching.
    He has chosen science to be his god and is as blind as any other false teacher.

    • Of course I have compassion and concern for young-earth creationists and flat earthers. Do you think that I would spend so much time, day after day, trying to get through to you despite your stubbornness and hardness of heart, if I wasn’t concerned? The problem is that you fail to see how much your own stance is like that in the video, the only difference being that you are less consistently a literalist than they are.

      • rmwilliamsjr

        Do you think that I would spend so much time, day after day, trying to get through to you despite your stubbornness and hardness of heart, if I wasn’t concerned?

        this is what makes watching your blog so useful.

      • Dr. David Tee

        There is no such thing as a ‘flat earther’. I also doubt your claim of compassion and concern. You still haven’t produced one scripture verse where God said there is evidence for origins in nature and that it is okay to disregard His word for secular science and its words.

        • friendly reader

          I’ve met a flat-earther before, so they exist.

        • Ecclesiastes 3:11 – “He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end.”
          What’s curious about this verse is that it could be rendered, “He is having everything made beautiful in its time,” without any interpretation of the presentation of the text.
          Incidentally, the second half of the verse reveals the arrogance of creationists, who spend so much time and energy trying to reveal the work of God, literally from beginnign to end, when He himself has said that it’s impossible.

          • Dr, David Tee

            He is not speaking against YECers but evolutionists who are the ones trying to figure everything out from beginning to end. YECers already know that God created everything by speaking, we creationists do not have to figure anything out we already have the answer

          • “we creationists do not have to figure anything out we already have the answer”

            this is precisely why creationism is not science and why it should never be taught as an “alternative” to evolution in science classes.

          • It’s not a theology blog. It’s “A blog on the lands of the Bible”. You know my opinions of theologians-
            Tell this to Lori.

          • Ohdeargodno. I left middle school decades ago and have no intentions of returning.

    • rmwilliamsjr

      what a gift it would be, for a moment, for you to see what you post from it’s readers’ POV.

      if there is any truth in what you say, no one will pause long enough to understand it given how repulsively you express your viewpoint.

      the real shame is how you have no idea how deeply your means wreaks your cause. if you did, you would have paid heed to: Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.

      • Dr. David Tee

        I have yet to do as you say. Because print does not indicate emotion or tone I am sure you are placing your own ideas on my words then accusing me of something I did not do.
        If you look at Dr. McGrath’s words, you will see that I am correct. He had no intention of doing anything other than mocking musguided people and using it to further his own false agenda.
        He is also falsely accusing Ken Ham of things he is not doing plus demonstrating that he does not know what a biblical literalist is.A biblical literalist knows the difference between true teaching and false teaching, they know that God wrote the truth or there is no God.
        They also know when people are misguided and not lying.

        • rmwilliamsjr

          i came across this interesting essay on mills and trolls

          Says Mill: “We can never be sure that the opinion we are endeavouring to stifle is a false opinion; and if we were sure [that the opinion was false], stifling it would be an evil still… All silencing of a discussion is an assumption of infallibility”. Are we really so certain of our views that we will hear nothing even remotely that will undermine it? Certainty of a view is not the same as its reality or morality. The assumption of infallibility is one of the many forces that often lead to much human error as history has shown.Or as Mill more eloquently put it: “The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing when it is no longer doubtful, is the cause of half their errors.”

          A biblical literalist knows the difference between true teaching and false teaching

          —it is the strong belief that we(&those like us) are completely right that stifles our learning curve needed to show us when we are not.

          the truth is that we are amalgams of true and false teaching, mixtures of being right and being wrong, our churches & communities are often wrong and seldom absolutely correct, like us they bear the burden of being human-being sinful bundles of contradictions and not so hidden errors.

          like m.twain the atheist said: What gets us into trouble is not what we don’t know, it’s what we know for sure that just ain’t so.

          • Dr. David Tee

            Here is a good example of the difference between a ‘literalist’ and a biblical literalist: a literalist would read the passage where Moses killed an Egyptian and figure it is okay for him to kill an oppressor as well. A biblical literalist would read the same passage and conclude that Moses was a murderer who was forgiven by God and received so much grace that he was able to be called ‘God’s friend’

          • “Dr. Tee”

            I see you’re still trolling anonymously. How about giving your credentials? Do you have any degrees worth mentioning? Are you really a “Doctor”, or is that a lie?

          • Ken Gilmore

            Most academics usually list their qualifications and publication history on their website, but eschew the honorific in conversation. Tee does the opposite. His reluctance to tell us what diploma mill granted him his qualifications is indeed curious.

          • Dr, David Tee

            If you do not listen to me now what makes you think you will listen to me if i list my credentials? The truth doesn’t need support from human degrees and anyone can find the truth and proclaim it. Just be content with the idea that i aachieved my doctorate.

          • arcseconds

            If someone says they read an account of a murder literally, you think that means they take the murder as an example of how to live?

            You’re a very odd person and that’s a very odd understanding of what a literal reading is.

  • Ken Gilmore

    Robert Schadewald put it best when he said “”young-earth creationism, geocentrism, and flat-earthism are respectively the liberal, moderate, and conservative branches of the Bible-science tree.” Ken Ham and the other YECs are rejecting the clear references to a fixed earth and a solid firmament, which tends to undercut their claims to be taking the Bible as the only reliable guide to origins. Looks like they’re being influenced by godless geographers and astronomers after all. For shame!

  • smijer

    Not parody? Maybe not… but I’m not persuaded it’s a legitimate argument. Looks like an elaborate troll to me. Maybe the he never actually rode on an airplane, but he suggests that there is a physical sensation of speed (not just acceleration) while flying in one, and expects it to be proportional to the magnitude of speed (while simultaneously suggesting that violent illness is produced by “speeds of 40 miles per hour” on a boat). He even includes a clip of the asshole husband telling his wife that they’ll take the plane on the way back, without worrying that it would be worse.

  • smijer

    by the way… if it isn’t a hoax, the POV seems to be geocentric / stationary earth, but not flat earth. In the YouTube comments, it even seems to acknowledge basic orbital science.

  • dongisselbeck