Shopping & Style1 min ago
Life On Earth, Science Vs Religion
I don't wish to denigrate any individuals beliefs, but I am curious how this story is received by those who follow religion and the origins of the earth taught through religion.
Do some Christians take the biblical accounts of creation literally, believing that they describe exactly how the universe and human beings were created.
http://
Do some Christians take the biblical accounts of creation literally, believing that they describe exactly how the universe and human beings were created.
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by jd_1984. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Divebuddy, From your link (although I’ve no idea who ‘myself’ is – or ‘Mike’).
//The point of all this is to note the fact that none of the elements of Ezekiel's vision are foreign to religious iconography of the times (or before Ezekiel's era). The cloud / storm element of the vision is very common to the Old Testament, and is chiefly aimed at Baal, the king of the gods at Ugarit (the storm god), which is outside Babylon, both terribly common to Israelite thinking. Hence the vision of Ezekiel, in many respects, is an amalgam of familiar (early) Israelite theophanic portrayals of Yahweh and Babylonian elements, all designed to put Yahweh "in the picture," ousting the pagan god(s).//
….. or alternatively it could mean that Ezekiel wasn’t the first to have experienced such a ‘vision’, not something your author considers. Interestingly, a chap called Josef Blumrich, former chief of NASA's systems layout branch of the program development office, whilst still in office, set out to debunk Ezekiel’s spaceship. He analysed several different translations of the bible and ended up writing a book describing and illustrating in detail what he thought Ezekiel actually saw. A spaceship. He concluded that the technology of the builders must have been somewhat in advance of mankind’s at present, and said he had “seldom felt as delighted, satisfied, and fascinated by being proven wrong”. He also published an article "The spaceships of the prophet Ezekiel", in the UNESCO journal ‘Impact of Science on Society’.
//The point of all this is to note the fact that none of the elements of Ezekiel's vision are foreign to religious iconography of the times (or before Ezekiel's era). The cloud / storm element of the vision is very common to the Old Testament, and is chiefly aimed at Baal, the king of the gods at Ugarit (the storm god), which is outside Babylon, both terribly common to Israelite thinking. Hence the vision of Ezekiel, in many respects, is an amalgam of familiar (early) Israelite theophanic portrayals of Yahweh and Babylonian elements, all designed to put Yahweh "in the picture," ousting the pagan god(s).//
….. or alternatively it could mean that Ezekiel wasn’t the first to have experienced such a ‘vision’, not something your author considers. Interestingly, a chap called Josef Blumrich, former chief of NASA's systems layout branch of the program development office, whilst still in office, set out to debunk Ezekiel’s spaceship. He analysed several different translations of the bible and ended up writing a book describing and illustrating in detail what he thought Ezekiel actually saw. A spaceship. He concluded that the technology of the builders must have been somewhat in advance of mankind’s at present, and said he had “seldom felt as delighted, satisfied, and fascinated by being proven wrong”. He also published an article "The spaceships of the prophet Ezekiel", in the UNESCO journal ‘Impact of Science on Society’.
Ronald Story in his book Guardians of the Universe? (1980)stated "Blumrich doctors up his Biblical quotes just a smidgen to make them conform a little better to his spaceship interpretation", and "The Spaceships of Ezekiel, in all honesty, can only be described as an extreme form of rationalisation, with a good supply of technical jargon, charts, and diagrams, carefully designed to impress the general reader. The book does contain a good collection of impressive drawings which prove nothing more than that whoever prepared them is a good draughtsman." Jerome Clark wrote that Blumrich "... offered a creative but misplaced effort to translate the metaphorical biblical account into a properly engineered spacecraft.
https:/
https:/
