Matt. 4:8

[RichardT]

Matt. 4:8

Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

Can someone help me out with this verse? It really bothers me in that it implies a flat earth, does anyone else here have any other idea as to how to interpret this verse in a non flat earth way?

Maybe satan took Jesus up to a high mountain for fun, than with his 4th dimensionnal powers, showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the world...

That is my guess, as lame as it is.

[ZiSunka]

It's as good a guess as any Bible commentator has ever made as far as I know.

Clearly the Bible states the earth is a sphere, so we know that this verse isn't saying the earth is flat.

[MrJim]

I never thought of looking at it that way...

[arunma]

The way my pastor explains it, the Biblical authors didn't know that the earth was round, so it is folly to look for statements to the effect of "the earth is round" in the Bible. Does this mean the Bible isn't inerrent? No, because God has clearly had an inspirational role in the writing of the Bible, so that fallible humans would not put false scientific information into the Scriptures. That said, we shouldn't look to the Bible as if it is supposed to teach us science.

So how did the devil show Christ all of the earth? I don't know, and it doesn't really bother me at all. But I can speculate. He very well could have simply shown Christ the whole of Palestine, since the Bible sometimes uses phrases such as "all the nations" to refer to small regions. In the book of Jeremiah, God tells Jeremiah that he has delivered all the nations of the world to the yoke of King Nebuchadnezzar. But clearly, most of the world was never subjugated under Babylon. Thus, it's wrong to assume that Satan showed Christ the entire world.

[MrJim]

...4th dimensional powers...

[DeaconDean]

You know, I never gave any thought to the "flat earth" theory myself in connection with this verse. I just took it to mean Satan took Jesus somewhere high where it was just the two of them alone. I did find a good commentary on this though:


John Gill's Exposition of the Bible
Matthew 4:8
Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high
mountain…
That is, he took him off from the pinnacle of the temple, and carried him through the air, to one of the mountains which were round about Jerusalem; or to some very high mountain at a greater distance; but what mountain is not certain; nor can it be known; nor is it of any moment; it has been said to be Mount Lebanon: here he
sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and glory of them.
By "all the kingdoms of the world" are meant, not only the Roman empire, as Dr. Lightfoot thinks, though that was, to he sure, the greatest in the world at that time; but all the kingdoms in the whole world, which subsisted in any form, whether within, or independent of the Roman empire; or whether greater or lesser: and by "the glory of them", is meant, the riches, pomp, power, and grandeur of them. Now the view which Satan gave Christ of all this, was not by a representation of them in a picture, or in a map, or in any geographical tables, as some have thought; since to do this there was no need to take him up into a mountain, and that an exceeding high one; for this might have been done in a valley, as well as in a mountain: and yet it could not be a true and real sight of these things he gave him; for there is no mountain in the world, from whence can be beheld anyone kingdom, much less all the kingdoms of the world; and still less the riches, glory, pomp, and power of them: but this was a fictitious, delusive representation, which Satan was permitted to make; to cover which, and that it might be thought to be real, he took Christ into an high mountain; where he proposed an object externally to his sight, and internally to his imagination, which represented, in appearance, the whole world, and all its glory. Xiphilinus reports of Severus, that he dreamed, he was had by a certain person, to a place where he could look all around him, and from thence he beheld (pasan men thn ghn, pasan de) (thn yalassan) "all the earth, and also all the sea"; which was all in imagination. Satan thought to have imposed on Christ this way, but failed in his attempt. Luke says, this was done
in a moment of time,
in the twinkling of an eye; as these two phrases are joined together, (1 Corinthians 15:52 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=1co+15:52)) or "in a point of time". The word (stigmh) , used by (Luke 4:5 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=lu+4:5)) sometimes signifies a mathematical point, which Zeno says is the end of the line, and the least mark; to which the allusion may be here, and designs the smallest part of time that can be conceived of. Antoninus the emperor uses the word, as here, for a point of time; and says that the time of human life, and the whole present time, is but (stigmh) a point. Would you know what a moment, or point of time is, according to the calculation of the Jewish doctors, take the account as follows; though in it they differ: a moment, say they, is the fifty six thousandth, elsewhere the fifty eight thousandth, and in another place, the fifty three thousandth and eight hundredth and forty eighth, or, according to another account, eighty eighth part of an hour. If this could be thought to be a true and exact account of a moment, or point of time, it was a very short space of time indeed, in which the devil showed to Christ the kingdoms of this world, and their glory; but this is not more surprising than his vanity, pride, and impudence, in the following verse.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GillsExpositionoftheBible/gil.cgi?book=mt&chapter=004&verse=008&next=009&prev=007

[ZiSunka]

The way my pastor explains it, the Biblical authors didn't know that the earth was round, so it is folly to look for statements to the effect of "the earth is round" in the Bible. Does this mean the Bible isn't inerrent? No, because God has clearly had an inspirational role in the writing of the Bible, so that fallible humans would not put false scientific information into the Scriptures. That said, we shouldn't look to the Bible as if it is supposed to teach us science.



Isaiah 40:22 It is God who sits above the circle of the earth. The people below must seem to him like grasshoppers! He is the one who spreads out the heavens like a curtain and makes his tent from them.

Yep, I think they did know the earth is a sphere. "Circle of the earth, according to all the commentaries, is the archaic way of saying, "sphere" or "globular form".

I'd be suspicious of a Bible in which God didn't tell the authors the truth about the geometry of the earth...:D

Clearly, even as we know the earth is round, even from the highest mountain you cannot see all the kingdoms of the earth, in fact, from Mt Everest you can't see any signs of civilization at all, so something supernatural had to be going on when satan showed Christ all the kingdoms of the earth.

[MrJim]

so something supernatural had to be going on when satan showed Christ all the kingdoms of the earth.


Yeah, the 4th dimension...where can I learn more about this...and which dimension do we live? Or is it dementia;) ?

[ZiSunka]

Yeah, the 4th dimension...where can I learn more about this...and which dimension do we live? Or is it dementia;) ?

Standard known dimensions:

Height
Width
Length
Time

We already have four dimensions that we use every single day. You live in the fourth dimension silly. Aren't you getting older every day? Don't you watch your kids growing up and say, "Wow, where is time going so fast?" Time, that's the fourth dimension.

Why is it so hard to believe that supernatural things can happen?

What kind of faith do we have if we only believe in things we have seen and events we have personally experienced?

[RichardT]

Standard known dimensions:

Height
Width
Length
Time

We already have four dimensions that we use every single day. You live in the fourth dimension silly. Aren't you getting older every day? Don't you watch your kids growing up and say, "Wow, where is time going so fast?" Time, that's the fourth dimension.

Why is it so hard to believe that supernatural things can happen?

What kind of faith do we have if we only believe in things we have seen and events we have personally experienced?

I and he meant 4th spacial dimension, sorry I ddin't mention it.

But ya, even if they were implying a flat earth, it would be absolutely impossible to even see 1 kingdom and ALL OF ITS GLORY, from a mountain. I understand now.

[MrJim]

...

[MrJim]

Standard known dimensions:

Height
Width
Length
Time

We already have four dimensions that we use every single day. You live in the fourth dimension silly. Aren't you getting older every day? Don't you watch your kids growing up and say, "Wow, where is time going so fast?" Time, that's the fourth dimension.


And I thought arunma was the only genius around here:P

I must have been sick the day they taught that...

[arunma]

Isaiah 40:22 It is God who sits above the circle of the earth. The people below must seem to him like grasshoppers! He is the one who spreads out the heavens like a curtain and makes his tent from them.

Yep, I think they did know the earth is a sphere. "Circle of the earth, according to all the commentaries, is the archaic way of saying, "sphere" or "globular form".

I'd be suspicious of a Bible in which God didn't tell the authors the truth about the geometry of the earth...:D

Well sister, there must be a blue moon out, because we actually disagree on something! I suppose it had to happen sometime. When my pastor talked about the so-called "scientific miracles" in the Bible, he actually brought up this specific verse, and ultimately concluded that it can't be regarded as a definitive statement that the earth is round (and my pastor does believe in Biblical inerrency, his name is John Piper if you want to look up some of his writings).

Here's the problem. According to Strong's Dictionary, the Hebrew in question signifies not sphericity, but a circle in the sense of a circuit, or something that is compassive. I suppose that if ancient Hebrew were spoken today, the same word might be used to refer to an electric circuit or to a paper route.

As far as I can tell, this verse is the best anyone can find in the Bible to a statement of support for a round earth. It is unfortuante, then, that the best verse in the entire Bible doesn't clearly say "the earth is spherical." Instead it uses a word that could easily be taken to mean something else. So if we apply the same interpretive method to certain other Biblical verses, we may have to conclude that the earth is flat. Here's an example from the same book of Isaiah,
He will raise a signal for the nations and will assemble the banished of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. (Isaiah 11:12)
If we claim that the Bible's spiritual statements (of which many are found in Isaiah), then we would have to concede here that the earth is flat. Now, there are a few cases in which we can interpret the Bible scientifically. For example, the creation account of Moses says that God created the entire human race from one man (Acts 17:26). This is certainly a scientific statement. But I don't think that Isaiah 40:22 can be taken as a scientific statement.

Yeah, the 4th dimension...where can I learn more about this...and which dimension do we live? Or is it dementia;) ?

Well I've taken general relativity, and I still don't think of time as a dimension in the classical sense of the word. The reason physicists started saying that time is a dimension is because this is how it is treated in general relativity (which is why I shamelessly refer to my resume on this one). As you know, space is constantly being stretched out. Physicists invent a mathematical object called a metric tensor to describe how much space has been stretched. The metric tensor includes terms for three dimensions of space. But because the universe is changing in time, there is a fourth term added for time.

As Lambslove mentioned, there are three spatial dimensions. These can be called length, width, and height. This is, in fact, how we measure space in a Cartesian system. But there are many other ways. For example, you can also measure space in a spherical system. In a spherical system, locations are measured in terms of their absolute distance from a reference point, as well as two angles. Or you can use a cylindrical system, in which you refer to locations using two absolute distances and one angle. In any case, three pieces of information are always needed (hence three dimensions). But those dimensions can mean different things.

But as you can probably tell from all of this, time cannot be "transformed" in the same way as spatial coordinates. It is included in the metric tensor purely for calculational purposes That's why I tend to not view it as a dimension.

[MrJim]

Well sister, there must be a blue moon out, because we actually disagree on something! I suppose it had to happen sometime. When my pastor talked about the so-called "scientific miracles" in the Bible, he actually brought up this specific verse, and ultimately concluded that it can't be regarded as a definitive statement that the earth is round (and my pastor does believe in Biblical inerrency, his name is John Piper if you want to look up some of his writings).

Here's the problem. According to Strong's Dictionary, the Hebrew in question signifies not sphericity, but a circle in the sense of a circuit, or something that is compassive. I suppose that if ancient Hebrew were spoken today, the same word might be used to refer to an electric circuit or to a paper route.


As far as I can tell, this verse is the best anyone can find in the Bible to a statement of support for a round earth. It is unfortuante, then, that the best verse in the entire Bible doesn't clearly say "the earth is spherical." Instead it uses a word that could easily be taken to mean something else. So if we apply the same interpretive method to certain other Biblical verses, we may have to conclude that the earth is flat. Here's an example from the same book of Isaiah,He will raise a signal for the nations and will assemble the banished of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. (Isaiah 11:12)

If we claim that the Bible's spiritual statements (of which many are found in Isaiah), then we would have to concede here that the earth is flat. Now, there are a few cases in which we can interpret the Bible scientifically. For example, the creation account of Moses says that God created the entire human race from one man (Acts 17:26). This is certainly a scientific statement. But I don't think that Isaiah 40:22 can be taken as a scientific statement.



Well I've taken general relativity, and I still don't think of time as a dimension in the classical sense of the word. The reason physicists started saying that time is a dimension is because this is how it is treated in general relativity (which is why I shamelessly refer to my resume on this one). As you know, space is constantly being stretched out. Physicists invent a mathematical object called a metric tensor to describe how much space has been stretched. The metric tensor includes terms for three dimensions of space. But because the universe is changing in time, there is a fourth term added for time.

As Lambslove mentioned, there are three spatial dimensions. These can be called length, width, and height. This is, in fact, how we measure space in a Cartesian system. But there are many other ways. For example, you can also measure space in a spherical system. In a spherical system, locations are measured in terms of their absolute distance from a reference point, as well as two angles. Or you can use a cylindrical system, in which you refer to locations using two absolute distances and one angle. In any case, three pieces of information are always needed (hence three dimensions). But those dimensions can mean different things.

But as you can probably tell from all of this, time cannot be "transformed" in the same way as spatial coordinates. It is included in the metric tensor purely for calculational purposes That's why I tend to not view it as a dimension.

:eek: Does your brain ever hurt from carrying around all this knowledge?

[ZiSunka]

Well sister, there must be a blue moon out, because we actually disagree on something! I suppose it had to happen sometime. When my pastor talked about the so-called "scientific miracles" in the Bible, he actually brought up this specific verse, and ultimately concluded that it can't be regarded as a definitive statement that the earth is round (and my pastor does believe in Biblical inerrency, his name is John Piper if you want to look up some of his writings).

I checked 8 commentaries and Young's Dictionary and all agree that "cricle of the earth" means "globe", "sphere," "arched vault," or "the geometry of the earth and its atmosphere." I even looked at a 19th century commentary, "Westminster Commentary of the Bible." It says, "'Circle of the earth' is an indication of ancient knowledge of the shape of the earth. We know from ancient writings of the Egyptians and Greeks that the earth was known to be round or spherical. It was during the early to mid Middle Ages that folklore of ships falling off the edge of the earth brought on a widespread belief that the earth is flat. This belief was adopted by the Church around the same time as the belief that the earth was the center of the universe. The latter belief was generated for spiritual as well as ancedotal reasons--the theologists of the early church reasoned that since the Earth was the site of God's incarnation as a man, the Earth must be the most important of the known planets and was thus the center of the universe, not only physically, but more importantly, spiritually."

Additionally, representations of the earth as a globe were common by the time of Archimedes (in 212 BC, conquering armies found two terrestrial globes built by Archimedes in Syracuse and the earliest recorded terrestrial globes dated from several centuries before that http://www.math.nyu.edu/~crorres/Archimedes/Sphere/SphereIntro.html ),

Pliny and Ptolemy drew their famous maps based on a spherical earth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth

It was the early church fathers (Saint Cyril of Jerusalem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_of_Jerusalem), Saint John Chrysostom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Chrysostom), Diodorus of Tarsus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diodorus_of_Tarsus), Severian (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Severian%2C_Bishop_of_Gabala&action=edit), and Cosmas Indicopleustes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmas_Indicopleustes) most notably) that argued that theologically, the earth HAS to be flat.

It is not the ancients who believed incorrectly, it is the Church itself that spread that old lie.

[ZiSunka]

And you can tell John Piper (whoever he is) that he can go ahead and use my research when he revises his books that teach that the ancients believed in a flat earth. ;)

[arunma]

I checked 8 commentaries and Young's Dictionary and all agree that "cricle of the earth" means "globe", "sphere," "arched vault," or "the geometry of the earth and its atmosphere." I even looked at a 19th century commentary, "Westminster Commentary of the Bible." It says, "'Circle of the earth' is an indication of ancient knowledge of the shape of the earth. We know from ancient writings of the Egyptians and Greeks that the earth was known to be round or spherical. It was during the early to mid Middle Ages that folklore of ships falling off the edge of the earth brought on a widespread belief that the earth is flat. This belief was adopted by the Church around the same time as the belief that the earth was the center of the universe. The latter belief was generated for spiritual as well as ancedotal reasons--the theologists of the early church reasoned that since the Earth was the site of God's incarnation as a man, the Earth must be the most important of the known planets and was thus the center of the universe, not only physically, but more importantly, spiritually."

Additionally, representations of the earth as a globe were common by the time of Archimedes (in 212 BC, conquering armies found two terrestrial globes built by Archimedes in Syracuse and the earliest recorded terrestrial globes dated from several centuries before that http://www.math.nyu.edu/~crorres/Archimedes/Sphere/SphereIntro.html ),

Pliny and Ptolemy drew their famous maps based on a spherical earth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth

It was the early church fathers (Saint Cyril of Jerusalem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_of_Jerusalem), Saint John Chrysostom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Chrysostom), Diodorus of Tarsus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diodorus_of_Tarsus), Severian (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Severian%2C_Bishop_of_Gabala&action=edit), and Cosmas Indicopleustes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmas_Indicopleustes) most notably) that argued that theologically, the earth HAS to be flat.

It is not the ancients who believed incorrectly, it is the Church itself that spread that old lie.

I didn't know that early church fathers argued for a flat earth. Can you refer me to some writings in which they say this? I'd genuinely like to learn more about this doctrine.

[DeaconDean]

John Gill's Commentary on the Whole Bible:

Isaiah 40:22 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Isaiah/40.html#22)

Ver. 22. It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth,.... Or, "the globe {z}" of it; for the earth is spherical or globular: not a flat plain, but round, hung as a ball in the air; here Jehovah sits as the Lord and Sovereign; being the Maker of it, he is above it, orders and directs its motion, and governs all things in it: Kimchi rightly observes, that the heavens are the circle of the earth, which is the centre of them, and around which they are; and so it signifies, that the Lord sits or dwells in the heavens, from whence he beholds the children of men:

and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; or "locusts {a}"; as one upon a very great eminence looking down beholds creatures as exceeding small and little; and if the Israelites were to the "anakim" or giants as grasshoppers, Nu 13:33 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Numbers/13.html#33), much more must puny mortals be such in the sight of God, and in comparison of him; and this may denote, not only the minuteness of men, but what weak, impotent, useless, worthless, and short lived creatures men are:

that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain; alluding to the firmament or expanse made at the creation, and still continued; which is as a curtain to himself, which he draws around himself, he dwelling in the highest heavens, and in light inaccessible to mortals; and which he stretches out as a canopy around this earth, for the use of the inhabitants of it: or, "as a little thing"; or, as a little skin {b}; and which he stretches out as easily as a man can stretch out that:

and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in it; for himself to dwell in, and so stretches out the heavens like curtains about him; tents being made of such, and often of skins.

{z} gwx le "super sphaeram", Pagninus; "globum", Montanus Vatablus; "super orbem telluris", Vitringa. {a} Mybgxk "ut locustae", Pagninus, Montanus, Cocceius, Vitringa; "tanquam locustae", Munster; "velut locustae", Junius & Tremellius, Piscator. {b} qdk "velut tenue", Montanus; "tenuissimum", Vatablus; "pellem." Munster; so some in Vatablus; "pellculam", Gataker.

http://www.freegrace.net/gill/ (http://www.freegrace.net/gill/)

[arunma]

OK, I admit it. It's getting harder and harder for me to argue that Isaiah wasn't aware of the sphericity of the earth. Of course, I think we're all in agreement here that the Bible contains no scientific errors, so I suppose that this isn't one an issue of great consequence.