Flat Earth V.S Round Earth? (Also helio/geocentrism)

Status
Not open for further replies.

christianpessimist

Active Member
Apr 5, 2017
74
21
31
Alabama
✟10,560.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
It isn't as important that the stars rotate a different direction as much as it is that they rotate around a different point. If the sky was a dome, then there would be only one point. If the earth was flat and the sky was a sphere, then only one point would be in the sky at a time because the other would be below the earth. Also, the night sky rotates perpendicular to the surface of the earth. Again this would be possible if the sky were in different pieces, but have we found where those pieces intersect? If it's a fluid then I'd expect the movements of the stars to be less predictable.



THis shows stars rotating perpendicular to the earth's surface

Northern hemisphere:


Southern hemisphere:

 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
An airplane leaves the ground and is, just like the bullet, now under the same influence. It is in the air and no longer connected to the ground. The earth is spinning under it. The pilot, therefore, would have to continually steer the plane to counter this problem.

The pilots do make continuous corrections. Before GPS they flew with a skilled navigator to inform the pilot of the necessary corrections.
 
Upvote 0

YHWH_will_uplift

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 31, 2016
1,402
364
36
California
✟163,014.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Modern or ancient, every culture operates within a certain cosmology or understanding of the universe. This cosmology sets the context of how a people understand their world and their place in it. With very few exceptions our modern day cosmology is shaped by the scientific discoveries of the past 500 years. Some of these discoveries have greatly upset religious understandings and it sometimes takes centuries to reconcile the differences. However, since we live in a culture that has been greatly shaped by the bible and Christian beliefs, it is worthwhile to ask about biblical cosmology.

The biblical understanding of the universe is much the same as that of the surrounding cultures in the ancient Middle East at the time when it was written. Unfortunately, nowhere does the bible attempt to present a comprehensive cosmology, so we are forced to rely upon individual passages and to attempt to understand them in the light of their culture and their history. To begin with, biblical cosmology can be characterized as a three-tiered universe. This strange phrase needs some explanation to make the concept clearer.

First, the surface of the earth is circular and flat except for geographical features like hills and valleys. This of course was the belief of the Sumerians. To these people it was theoretically possible to go high enough to see the entire earth, or to envision a tree tall enough that it could be seen from everywhere on the earth's surface, or even to build a tower to reach the sky. The sky was thought of as a solid bowl, called the firmament, that was upended over the circular earth to enclose a volume in the shape of a hemisphere. I should add that there are some bible verses that speak of the four corners of the earth. This was the view of the Babylonians. This would make the firmament look more like a tent than a bowl. The lights of the sky (sun, moon, planets and stars) were inside the firmament and were very much smaller than we presently understand. In fact they were very much smaller than the earth itself. The mechanism by which these celestial objects moved about is not really explained. The noncanonical Book of Enoch (mentioned in the bible as authoritive and part of the canon of Ethiopian Christians) speaks of gates in the east and west for the sun and the moon to enter and leave. Enoch also suggests that their movements are caused by winds.

What I have just described is the middle tier of the three. Above the firmament are waters. This region is described as heaven, the abode of God and the angels. There were also gates in the firmament to permit water to enter as rain. Below the earth are also waters. This region is described as sheol or hell. There were also gates in the earth to permit water to spring up from below. This three level universe is variously described as either hung on nothing or supported by pillars. Storehouses are also envisioned in heaven for the snow and hail.

How should a of Christian today react to this biblical cosmology? The vast majority of what might be described as 'mainline' Christians are actually quite comfortable with this seeming dichotomy. They recognize that the bible is the product of a relatively unsophisticated people with an entirely pre-scientific understanding of nature, who used poetic or metaphorical language to convey their spiritual understandings. On the other hand there is the minority point of view of those Christians who regard the bible to be inerrant and to be understood literally. This group has been forced into extreme apologetic efforts in order to reconcile the bible with modern scientific understandings.

Speaking personally, I find these apologetic attempts to be rather inventive and very strained. I believe that if the scripture writers and early target audience were to read these apologetics, they would find them extremely puzzling and entirely foreign. This is not to say that they were not intelligent people or not keen observers of nature but rather that that they lacked the intellectual basis to form scientific hypotheses and even the instrumentation to gather accurate data --- all that came about some 2,000 years later.

Isaiah 11:12And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. (KJV)

Revelation 7:1And after these things I saw four angels standing on FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. (KJV)

Job 38:13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV)

Jeremiah 16:19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. (KJV)

Daniel 4:11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV)

Matthew 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; (KJV)

Psalm 104:5 "He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved."(NIV)

Psalm 93:1"The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and is armed with strength. The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved." (NIV)

Psalm 96:10 "Say among the nations, "The LORD reigns." The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity." (NIV)

Ecclesiastes 1:5 "The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises." (NIV)

Isaiah 40:22 "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in." (NIV)

Job 9:6 He shakes the earth from its place and makes its pillars tremble. (NIV)

Job 26:11 The pillars of the heavens quake, aghast at his rebuke. (NIV)

Job 38:22 "Have you entered the storehouses of the snow or seen the storehouses of the hail," (NIV)

Amos 9:6 The One who builds His upper chambers in the heavens and has founded His VAULTED DOME over the earth, He who calls for the waters of the sea and pours them out on the face of the earth, The LORD is His name. (NASB)

The biblical flat earth cosmology persisted into New Testament times. However by the mid second century Christianity had largely lost its Jewish roots and understandings and had become a gentile Greek speaking movement. Of course the Greeks knew that the earth was a sphere thanks to Eratosthenes who actually was able to calculate the circumference around 240 BC. This knowledge gradually percolated into Jewish and Christian thought especially after Ptolemy introduced his cosmology in the mid second century. The earth became the center of the universe with the moon and then the sun and then the planets, with complicated epicycles, and then the “fixed” stars all in orbit around it. This was the cosmology accepted by Christianity until the revolution of Copernicus, Kepler. Galileo and Newton. This was resisted by Christianity largely on the basis that the earth was not the center of God’s creation. In a relatively short time even this scientific insight was not only accepted but accepted to the extent that the biblical cosmology of a flat earth was rejected. The flat earth was not only rejected but ridiculous arguments were even invented to suggest that the bible was not even suggesting a flat earth at all. Such, all too often, is the way some Christians react to new understandings and insights.

Even having said all this, the belief in a flat earth persisted for a very long time, even in educated circles, as is evidenced in this comment by Ferdinand Magellan, the first person to circumnavigate the globe: “The church says the earth is flat, but I know that it is round, for I have seen the shadow on the moon, and I have more faith in a shadow than in the church.” It took time but the modern cosmology took root in society at large, so much so that some Christians even return to the bible and attempt to reinterpret it in such a way as to “prove” that it was speaking of a spherical earth orbiting the sun all along.
The biggest problem with what you have said is that this is what is known as progressive teaching creeping in: you are saying that all things started out "true" and then were found to not be true, and those things which were discovered to prove what was not true...ended up not being true either. Yet you fail to explain how if God is true and all things that fall away from Him are false: what cosmology did Adam and Eve receive other than that which Moses writes in Genesis 1? What you're really saying is that after some time what we know as "true" will be proven to be "false": and that it only takes some time to accept a lie as truth...isn't that what Hitler preached? That if I tell people a lie long enough and loud enough: that it will eventualy become the "truth"?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Joshua_5
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
You presume the laws of motion are correct. In flat earthism those laws have to be, just have to be all wrong.

That is why they are called laws. In 500 years they have worked perfectly.
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
The biggest problem with what you have said is that this is what is known as progressive teaching creeping in: you are saying that all things started out "true" and then were found to not be true, and those things which were discovered to prove what was not true...ended up not being true either. Yet you fail to explain how if God is true and all things that fall away from Him are false: what cosmology did Adam and Eve receive other than that which Moses writes in Genesis 1? What you're really saying is that after some time what we know as "true" will be proven to be "false": and that it only takes some time to accept a lie as truth...is that what Hitler preached? That if I tell people a lie long enough and loud enough: that it will eventualy become the "truth"?

What if Genesis is entirely a human construct? Very few biblical scholars today would agree with the old legend that Moses wrote the Torah because it was written by several different authors over a time period of about four to five centuries. Even Rabbi Moses Maimonides warned us 700 years ago that most of Genesis is "tribal legend and borrowed folklore".
 
Upvote 0

I'm_Sorry

Taking a break from CF
Site Supporter
Oct 18, 2016
1,749
1,170
Australia
✟131,197.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
What if Genesis is entirely a human construct? Very few biblical scholars today would agree with the old legend that Moses wrote the Torah because it was written by several different authors over a time period of about four to five centuries. Even Rabbi Moses Maimonides warned us 700 years ago that most of Genesis is "tribal legend and borrowed folklore".

That's not what my very accredited Jewish psychologist states.
 
Upvote 0

YHWH_will_uplift

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 31, 2016
1,402
364
36
California
✟163,014.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
While I can't be strictly certain, I would propose the earth is a sphere. My biggest problem (among many) with "flat" is that the sun would never set in such a model. I've heard "explanations" for the setting of the sun, but none of them are reasonable at all.
Why be so much concerned about the shape of the earth when all you need to do is observe the shape it conforms to in nature? If anything view the movements of the heavenly lights and you will receive your answer: for objects in nature can only conform to the shape which they are traversing. We have all seen the sun rise and set since we can rememeber so, it sounds like the sun never setting on a 'flat earth' model is nothing but smokescreen. JackRT was more than kind enough to show that according to God the earth doesn't look like or do any of the things which modern science says it does.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Joshua_5
Upvote 0

YHWH_will_uplift

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 31, 2016
1,402
364
36
California
✟163,014.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
What if Genesis is entirely a human construct? Very few biblical scholars today would agree with the old legend that Moses wrote the Torah because it was written by several different authors over a time period of about four to five centuries. Even Rabbi Moses Maimonides warned us 700 years ago that most of Genesis is "tribal legend and borrowed folklore".
That is the problem isn't it? If we can cast doubt on the beginning of the story then we can cast doubt on the middle and, end of the story as well.
 
Upvote 0

I'm_Sorry

Taking a break from CF
Site Supporter
Oct 18, 2016
1,749
1,170
Australia
✟131,197.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
A psychologist?

Yes thats his bread, he specializes in PTSD

He has the Tree of life on his wall.

He knows the depths of Judaism and kabbalah.

I asked him directly regarding Genesis and Moses Authorship through the Holy Spirit.

He agrees its Revelation of the Holy Spirit.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SeventyOne

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
4,675
3,188
✟167,098.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
What if Genesis is entirely a human construct? Very few biblical scholars today would agree with the old legend that Moses wrote the Torah because it was written by several different authors over a time period of about four to five centuries. Even Rabbi Moses Maimonides warned us 700 years ago that most of Genesis is "tribal legend and borrowed folklore".

Quite honestly, I wouldn't consider such people to be scholars since Jesus said it was Moses and He was actually there. It's like being an evolutionary scientist, highly educated in many things that just aren't so.
 
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
53
Hyperspace
✟35,143.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Why be so much concerned about the shape of the earth when all you need to do is observe the shape it conforms to in nature?

Honestly, carnal/physical/material things do not concern me at all. They are irrelevent. But, they can be discussed. I sometimes enjoy indulging in a bit of, trivial propositioning.

If anything view the movements of the heavenly lights and you will receive your answer: for objects in nature can only conform to the shape which they are traversing. We have all seen the sun rise and set since we can rememeber so, it sounds like the sun never setting on a 'flat earth' model is nothing but smokescreen. JackRT was more than kind enough to show that according to God the earth doesn't look like or do any of the things which modern science says it does.

I'm not able to discern what you're trying to say here. What I was saying was that, on a flat earth, there could be no sunset/sunrise; but I observe both, so conclude the earth is not flat. In old times, people weren't aware that when it was dark in their region, it was light in another region. Thus they could believe a flat earth (if they did) because the sunset could be explained as the sun, going down into his chamber for the night. But today, we know that there is always light and always a sun in the sky. The sun can no longer go down into his chamber to explain flat earth since the sun is always in the sky above, someone.

Thus the sun is always in the sky, so on a flat earth it would never set; at most it would growing smaller until it vanished; but it would not "set" below a "horizon".
 
Upvote 0

I'm_Sorry

Taking a break from CF
Site Supporter
Oct 18, 2016
1,749
1,170
Australia
✟131,197.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Thus the sun is always in the sky, so on a flat earth it would never set; at most it would growing smaller until it vanished; but it would not "set" below a "horizon".

It does, just as a boat a appears to disappear over the horizon until you get a powerful enough zoom lens to bring it back into focus depending on atmospheric conditions.

Its perspective.
 
Upvote 0

christianpessimist

Active Member
Apr 5, 2017
74
21
31
Alabama
✟10,560.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
What if Genesis is entirely a human construct? Very few biblical scholars today would agree with the old legend that Moses wrote the Torah because it was written by several different authors over a time period of about four to five centuries. Even Rabbi Moses Maimonides warned us 700 years ago that most of Genesis is "tribal legend and borrowed folklore".

I think we're getting in to dangerous territory there. To believe in gap theory or theistic evolution is one thing, but to call Genisis folklore? I feel like Romans 5:12 looses it's credibility if Adam was folklore.
 
Upvote 0

LivingWordUnity

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic
May 10, 2007
24,496
11,193
✟213,086.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
"It is he that sitteth upon the globe of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as locusts: he that stretcheth out the heavens as nothing, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in."

- Isaiah 40:22 [Douay-Rheims (Traditional Catholic Bible)]
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

christianpessimist

Active Member
Apr 5, 2017
74
21
31
Alabama
✟10,560.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Thus the sun is always in the sky, so on a flat earth it would never set; at most it would growing smaller until it vanished; but it would not "set" below a "horizon".

Flat earthers tend to believe that the sun stays in the sky, but makes a circular path above it which would still only be lighting part of the world, but not all of it.

hqdefault.jpg
 
Upvote 0

I'm_Sorry

Taking a break from CF
Site Supporter
Oct 18, 2016
1,749
1,170
Australia
✟131,197.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
"It is he that sitteth upon the globe of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as locusts: he that stretcheth out the heavens as nothing, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in."

- Isaiah 40:22 (Douay-Rheims)

Correct translation =

Isaiah 40:22 King James Version (KJV)
22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:
 
Upvote 0

I'm_Sorry

Taking a break from CF
Site Supporter
Oct 18, 2016
1,749
1,170
Australia
✟131,197.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Flat earthers tend to believe that the sun stays in the sky, but makes a circular path above it which would still only be lighting part of the world, but not all of it.

That's right, the sun is smaller and closer than what the priests of scientism would have you believe.
 
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
53
Hyperspace
✟35,143.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
It does, just as a boat a appears to disappear over the horizon until you get a powerful enough zoom lens to bring it back into focus depending on atmospheric conditions.

Its perspective.

Perspective means, things diminish in size as they get farther away and disappear in the convergence point in the distance. It doesn't mean a ball of light remains the same size until it sets under the horizon.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Bugeyedcreepy
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
53
Hyperspace
✟35,143.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Flat earthers tend to believe that the sun stays in the sky, but makes a circular path above it which would still only be lighting part of the world, but not all of it.

hqdefault.jpg

Yes, I know; but that doesn't explain a sunset, or, the object remaining a continuous size until it slowly descends below a horizon. That model above would mean the sun is always above the disc, and never appear to descend slowly "below" it. At the least, the sun, as it moved away, would steadily diminish in size until it disappear at the convergence point well above the earth.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.