<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.11" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Exodus Revealed, the Sequel</title>
	<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel</link>
	<description>Keeping the Radical Right at Bay</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:03:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.11</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Sue Blue</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25278</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 03:35:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25278</guid>
					<description>Not only is there no mention of the earth as a sphere in the Bible, the goatherding nomads of the day also seemed to have no clue that the moon and sun are spheres.  In Genesis 1:14-18 (day 4 of creation - one wonders what the light source was in "let there be light" on day 1), the sun and moon are called "lights" and God "set them in the firmament" to rule over the day and night.  There is not even a mention of any movement, rotation, phases of the moon, or any other celestial facts that were obvious to other ancient cultures clear back to Stonehenge and beyond.  Not only were the biblical authors ignorant by today's standards, they weren't even up to par 3,000 years ago.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not only is there no mention of the earth as a sphere in the Bible, the goatherding nomads of the day also seemed to have no clue that the moon and sun are spheres.  In Genesis 1:14-18 (day 4 of creation - one wonders what the light source was in &#8220;let there be light&#8221; on day 1), the sun and moon are called &#8220;lights&#8221; and God &#8220;set them in the firmament&#8221; to rule over the day and night.  There is not even a mention of any movement, rotation, phases of the moon, or any other celestial facts that were obvious to other ancient cultures clear back to Stonehenge and beyond.  Not only were the biblical authors ignorant by today&#8217;s standards, they weren&#8217;t even up to par 3,000 years ago.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Parrotlover77</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25138</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 15:19:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25138</guid>
					<description>They see a vague reference to "circle" and assume circle = sphere.  Obviously a circle is no more a sphere than a triangle is a pyramid, a square is a cube, or a Mac is useful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They see a vague reference to &#8220;circle&#8221; and assume circle = sphere.  Obviously a circle is no more a sphere than a triangle is a pyramid, a square is a cube, or a Mac is useful.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Andrew N.P.</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25065</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2008 22:54:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25065</guid>
					<description>Thank you, Ron.  I still can't figure out why bibliolaters use that verse as evidence of a spherical earth.  Do these people not know what a tent looks like?  A solid sheet propped up over a flat bottom... hey, a lot like the cosmos of the Ancient Near East.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you, Ron.  I still can&#8217;t figure out why bibliolaters use that verse as evidence of a spherical earth.  Do these people not know what a tent looks like?  A solid sheet propped up over a flat bottom&#8230; hey, a lot like the cosmos of the Ancient Near East.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Sarah</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25041</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2008 08:39:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25041</guid>
					<description>All of them. Just the sheer amount...Ugh..how can they NOT notice!?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All of them. Just the sheer amount&#8230;Ugh..how can they NOT notice!?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Ron Britton</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25034</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2008 05:31:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25034</guid>
					<description>Greg:

It's odd that you refer us to Isaiah 40:22.  That passage refers to the Earth being flat.  Two good articles discuss that:

&lt;a href="http://www.goatstar.org/the-bibles-flat-earthsolid-sky-dome-universe/" target="_blank" title="Go to article. Opens in new window." rel="nofollow"&gt;The Bible’s flat earth/solid sky dome universe&lt;/a&gt;
and
&lt;a href="http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/febible.htm" target="_blank" title="Go to article. Opens in new window." rel="nofollow"&gt;The Flat-Earth Bible&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Greg:</p>
<p>It&#8217;s odd that you refer us to Isaiah 40:22.  That passage refers to the Earth being flat.  Two good articles discuss that:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.goatstar.org/the-bibles-flat-earthsolid-sky-dome-universe/" target="_blank" title="Go to article. Opens in new window." rel="nofollow">The Bible’s flat earth/solid sky dome universe</a><br />
and<br />
<a href="http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/febible.htm" target="_blank" title="Go to article. Opens in new window." rel="nofollow">The Flat-Earth Bible</a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Ron Britton</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25033</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2008 05:23:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25033</guid>
					<description>Sarah:

Which fallacies are you referring to?  There are quite a few on this page!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sarah:</p>
<p>Which fallacies are you referring to?  There are quite a few on this page!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Sarah</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25032</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2008 05:19:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25032</guid>
					<description>(Facepalm) So many fallacies...I think I lost five more brain cells, Ron.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Facepalm) So many fallacies&#8230;I think I lost five more brain cells, Ron.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Greg</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25026</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2008 01:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-25026</guid>
					<description>Parrotlover,

Try Isaiah 40:22.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Parrotlover,</p>
<p>Try Isaiah 40:22.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mr. Logic</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-23456</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 03:10:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-23456</guid>
					<description>I am an ex Agnostic.  Hated being one but was until 38 years old. I honestly didn't think that there was any real proof of God.  boy was I wrong, but I was wrong because of all the bad defenses put up by Christians!  "Just believe"?  Is that a defense?

The problem come in when People are told that they must believe in Christianity rather than Christ.
They are also told that they must believe in "The Bible", Note:  One is Catholic and one Protestant, yet you must believe in "It"?

I remember when I had already been a serious student of the Word for about 5 years when I heard a Radio Preacher say that Luther rejected James.  This is just one of the things censored from the General Public.  I rejected James about 2 years earlier so was quite impressed with Luther, whom I knew little about prior to that time.
Funny how so many have gone back to their old Catholic ways of the Mother church (World church).
Luther was a seeker in many areas, so was way ahead of most "Religious" Leaders.
I have proven myself that 1. Jesus never commanded a dip in water with 3 names chanted over someone. 2 That James was written by the Head of a Different kind of Chrisianity than Paul taught.
3. That no writer in the N.T. ever said a word about believing in a completed canon (Bible).  The scriptures are plural.
4. That the Church Age began on Pentecost.  Jesus said before that "On this rock "I will" build my church (future tense). Most think that Peter and John etc. were part of the Church, but it didn't exist until after Christ died.  Jesus said "keep the Law of Moses" when the Law was still in effect.  No one needs to keep the law of Moses today, for the law of Christ is inward, and automatic.
A changed heart doesn't need to be threatened to do the right thing.  Hope this helps someone.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am an ex Agnostic.  Hated being one but was until 38 years old. I honestly didn&#8217;t think that there was any real proof of God.  boy was I wrong, but I was wrong because of all the bad defenses put up by Christians!  &#8220;Just believe&#8221;?  Is that a defense?</p>
<p>The problem come in when People are told that they must believe in Christianity rather than Christ.<br />
They are also told that they must believe in &#8220;The Bible&#8221;, Note:  One is Catholic and one Protestant, yet you must believe in &#8220;It&#8221;?</p>
<p>I remember when I had already been a serious student of the Word for about 5 years when I heard a Radio Preacher say that Luther rejected James.  This is just one of the things censored from the General Public.  I rejected James about 2 years earlier so was quite impressed with Luther, whom I knew little about prior to that time.<br />
Funny how so many have gone back to their old Catholic ways of the Mother church (World church).<br />
Luther was a seeker in many areas, so was way ahead of most &#8220;Religious&#8221; Leaders.<br />
I have proven myself that 1. Jesus never commanded a dip in water with 3 names chanted over someone. 2 That James was written by the Head of a Different kind of Chrisianity than Paul taught.<br />
3. That no writer in the N.T. ever said a word about believing in a completed canon (Bible).  The scriptures are plural.<br />
4. That the Church Age began on Pentecost.  Jesus said before that &#8220;On this rock &#8220;I will&#8221; build my church (future tense). Most think that Peter and John etc. were part of the Church, but it didn&#8217;t exist until after Christ died.  Jesus said &#8220;keep the Law of Moses&#8221; when the Law was still in effect.  No one needs to keep the law of Moses today, for the law of Christ is inward, and automatic.<br />
A changed heart doesn&#8217;t need to be threatened to do the right thing.  Hope this helps someone.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Parrotlover77</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-20095</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:30:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-20095</guid>
					<description>Yay!  Biblical interpretation gymnastics!  I would love to see a link to the Isaiah passage mentioning specifically a "ball."  I have never heard that one before.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yay!  Biblical interpretation gymnastics!  I would love to see a link to the Isaiah passage mentioning specifically a &#8220;ball.&#8221;  I have never heard that one before.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Ron Britton</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-20081</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:28:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-20081</guid>
					<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Genesis was never meant to be a scientific journal&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Tell that to the millions of people who claim it is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Genesis was never meant to be a scientific journal</p></blockquote>
<p>Tell that to the millions of people who claim it is.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: James</title>
		<link>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-20080</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:22:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/archives/90/exodus-revealed-the-sequel#comment-20080</guid>
					<description>Just a few quick responses.

We usuallly round off pi to the hundreths, 3.14.  Though 3.1415926535897.... would be move accurate, it does not invalidate 3.14 as pi.  Though less accurate than 3.14, when rounded to a whole number 3 would be the correct answer.  Like the Greeks, the ancient Hebrews used letters for numbers and did not have a system for fractions, dealing with whole numbers only.  Hence the number 3 would be correct.  Not to mention the fact that they were measuring a man made object which might not have been perfectly round to begin with.

Isaih said the earth was a ball hanging in the heavens.

The Bible also states "a day is as a thousand years, a thousand years a day to the Lord".  Time has no meaning to an eternal being.  Genesis was never meant to be a scientific journal, more of an illustration in a prescientific era that God created the world in 6 primary "evolutionary" stages ending with the advent of man.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a few quick responses.</p>
<p>We usuallly round off pi to the hundreths, 3.14.  Though 3.1415926535897&#8230;. would be move accurate, it does not invalidate 3.14 as pi.  Though less accurate than 3.14, when rounded to a whole number 3 would be the correct answer.  Like the Greeks, the ancient Hebrews used letters for numbers and did not have a system for fractions, dealing with whole numbers only.  Hence the number 3 would be correct.  Not to mention the fact that they were measuring a man made object which might not have been perfectly round to begin with.</p>
<p>Isaih said the earth was a ball hanging in the heavens.</p>
<p>The Bible also states &#8220;a day is as a thousand years, a thousand years a day to the Lord&#8221;.  Time has no meaning to an eternal being.  Genesis was never meant to be a scientific journal, more of an illustration in a prescientific era that God created the world in 6 primary &#8220;evolutionary&#8221; stages ending with the advent of man.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
