There is no ball earth in the bible so there is nothing to interpret it differently with except outside, secular sources. If I did that with any other bible topic you would call me out for it.
Time may not actually exist as such. We only experience time because we are 3 dimensional beings living on a 4 dimensional world. Really it's space-time.
You're a smart guy and I am sure you know what you're talking about. But you are part of a self-reinforcing group that has attained power and does not accept challenge. You are biased in that you believe your group is the only one that is objectively seeking truth and has found the truth. My critique is not scientific. It is philosophical.
You shouldn't be so open minded that your brains fall out.
The gospel is incompatible with secular logic. Gospel=truth. Secular logic=speculation.
I agree, but this is a subjective assessment. I think you science focused guys have totally missed the forrest for the trees. You believe the most incredibly outlandish things without second thought because some egghead has a math equation.
You are confusing secular logic with physical truths. Secular logic can be flawed. However there are some things that are hard and fast truth. I don't see a conflict in what the Bible says how the world actually is. The Bible is the inspired word of God. God inspired the ancient people who wrote it. He didn't write it himself. They existed within a context. I am amazed there aren't massive intractable problems with what they wrote but you can actually read what they said between the lines and it still agrees to how things are today. However, I do not believe it's correct to try and adjust your thoughts to be an iron age middle eastern goat herder mate. You have to read it as a modern person.
What does challenging look like to you then?
You mean I haven't been indoctrinated.
Science draws conclusions based on the data available and is therefore subject to change. Science is logic based, and the gospel is incompatible with secular logic so tell me how you are squaring those two things.
I would keep sheep, not goats.
That may be the case in the scientific community, but it is not some kind of universal law. I don't know which theories you are talking about or how they're put through the paces. I've mentioned the example that Newtonian physics have been superseded by Einstein's theories, but that doesn't mean Newton's calculations aren't practical. To that end, the last time we had this debate I put to Dan that as NASA uses a flat non-rotating earth for calculations yet claims the earth is spherical, once doesn't need to have the correct "story" for practical purposes, and furthermore that this example demonstrates how the math doesn't prove a theory.
I can understand that but it is just a clock. I mean it keeps time by bouncing atoms or whatever that clearly bounce slower when they’re moving faster and it is compelling if those equations actually match the ones Einstein came up with but I just have a hard time with the idea that time will obviously appear to pass as usual but my body will age MUCH slower.
That the Earth is round (spheroidal) isn't really science. it just is. It's not a theory that we need to prove with observable fact although you can treat it like that I guess. It's settled. Even I could take a photo of the curve of the earth as a private individual using a weather balloon and a Gopro.
This debate purposefully excludes photographic evidence because it can be manipulated. ...Why don't you put a weather balloon up? But don't use a go pro because they have fisheye lenses.