A question for flat earth people

A_Thinker said:

Not particularly ...

Click to expand...

So you cherry pick what you like

Acts 20:27 King James Version (KJV)
27 For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.

JacksBratt said:

I think you mean "mass".

And... things were heavier or lighter... before the theory of gravity.. and it only depends on gravity if you need to explain a globe model and why people don't fall off the bottom.... or which is the bottom...

So... gravity made the outside of the globe the top and the top is all around and we are all drawn to the center... Problem solved...

Click to expand...

Mass is simply the total volume of the matter of any particular object.

Mass takes on "weight" due to the effect of gravity.

Put any matter into a context without gravity ... and there is no corresponding weight. There is no lighter ... or heavier.

Chinchilla said:

1 Corinthians 3:19 King James Version (KJV)
19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

Click to expand...

Back to the Chinchilla? Are you tag teaming?
What is the context of that quote, as in what is being addressed by Paul in chapter 3? Why do you think it applies to ideas about the cosmos?

Tom Farebrother said:

Back to the Chinchilla? Are you tag teaming?
What is the context of that quote, as in what is being addressed by Paul in chapter 3? Why do you think it applies to ideas about the cosmos?

Click to expand...

1 Timothy 6:19-21 King James Version (KJV)
19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.

20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.


I just want to tell you that nobody of us went to flat earth school so something had to happen to us who believe to change our minds and if people think we are creazy then we don't mind because God told Isaiah that he should walk naked to prophecy the nakedness of Israel so people were probably calling him creazy aswell but still in the end Isaiah was right .

Tom Farebrother said:

Ok right somehow it was in the back of my mind that passage referred to Lucifer and I didn’t re-read the context before posting.

Click to expand...

God didn't create Satan, man did. Satan (ha'shaitan) occurs by name in the Old Testament in the Book of Job, and here it's clear that the angel Satan is not the Devil! The Devil is supposedly banished from the presence of God, yet in Job, Satan is allowed to talk with and to come and go from God's presence and on a mission for God yet! What's going on? Satan here is not "the Devil" but sort of God's prosecuting attorney. There is a very common perception that the 'Lucifer' in Isaiah 14:12ff refers to Satan, the supernatural personification of evil. This misconception comes from two sources. The first is wishful thinking in the sense that it is nice to think that 'the Enemy' will get his come-uppance eventually. The second has to do with the old caution that scripture is to be read only 'in context'. This requires going back and reading all of Isaiah 13 and the earlier verses in Isaiah 14. When this is done we suddenly realize that scripture is not speaking of a supernatural Satan at all but of a Babylonian king with an immense ego. Read Isaiah 14: " 4 you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon:" What follows is a long rant against this oppressive king filled with numerous reference to his human nature like Isaiah 14: "16 Those who see you stare at you, they ponder your fate: Is this the man who shook the earth and made kingdoms tremble, 17 the man who made the world a desert, who overthrew its cities and would not let his captives go home?" This passage is in no way a reference to Satan or the devil. The Jews did not originally believe in devils but they picked up this concept during the Babylonian Exile from the Persians who followed Zoroastrianism. The Zoroastrians believed in both a god of good (Ahura-Mazda) and a god of evil (Ahrulman) engaged in a cosmic struggle. The Jews picked up and ran with this idea. It was easy to cast YHWH in the role of the God of good. They took also the angel ha'shaitan (Satan) in the book of Job and recast that character as Satan the near divine force of evil. Up to that time, their concept of God was of a being responsible for everything, both good and evil. Isaiah 45:”7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.” is just one quote that demonstrates this. The Jews never connected Satan to the serpent in the Garden of Eden. It was the second-century Christian martyr, Justin of Samaria, who was first to argue that Satan appeared as a serpent to tempt Adam and Eve to disobey God.

Chinchilla said:

1 Timothy 6:19-21 King James Version (KJV)
19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.

20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

Click to expand...

What makes you think that Paul was talking about different understandings of the cosmos here?

Tom Farebrother said:

What makes you think that Paul was talking about different understandings of the cosmos here?

Click to expand...

Because it's not coherent with Scriptures .

Ways to demonstrate that the earth is spherical ...

1. Watch a ship sail off to sea

Without being very high in Earth's atmosphere, it is impossible to see the curvature of the Earth. However, you can always see a demonstration of this if you visit a harbor or any place with a wide-open view of the water.

If you are able to watch a ship sail off to sea, watch its mast and flag as it fades off into the distance. You will notice that, in fact, it does not "fade off into the distance" at all; instead, you will see its mast and flag appear to slowly sink into the water (until you can no longer see it). The ship sailed beyond the point at which you would see it because the curvature of the Earth obscures your line-of-sight.

It's as if you're watching it go over to the other side of a hill. This phenomenon can only be explained by a sphere-shaped planet.

2. Watch a lunar eclipse

Solar eclipses get all the attention, but if you are able to catch a glimpse of a lunar eclipse, you can see evidence that the Earth is, indeed, round. Here's how it works: Earth passes between the moon and sun, so that the sun projects Earth’s shadow onto the Moon in the night sky. You've probably seen a partial lunar eclipse without even noticing it; if the moon looks orange, that's a sign of a lunar eclipse. If you've ever seen a total lunar eclipse, you probably noticed that the shadow did not look like this.

A Lunar Eclipse flat-Earthers have never seen. pic.twitter.com/HuApDwa85n

— Neil deGrasse Tyson (@neiltyson) November 26, 2017

Rather, in a lunar eclipse, a round shadow crossed over a round object. This does not sound like a thing that would happen if we were on a plane with all of the celestial bodies simply hovering overhead—or if the sun were orbiting Earth and not vice versa. The last total lunar eclipse took place on July 27, 2018.

3. Climb a tree

Imagine a vast plane with but one tree smack in the middle. If the earth were flat, your vision would extend exactly as far while standing at the base of the tree as it would when at the top of the tree. However, the farther up you climb, the farther your line of sight will extend to the horizon.

That's because parts of Earth that were concealed from view by its curvature are now revealed because your vertical position has changed.

4. Watch a sunset

Pick a nice spot from which you can watch a sunset (we'll call this point A). Ideally, you'd have a clear horizon in front of you, and behind you would be some sort of elevated point that you can quickly access (a hill, a building with at least two floors, or perhaps the aforementioned tree; we'll call this point B).

Watch the sunset from point A, and once the sun is out of sight, hurry on over to point B. With the added elevation provided by point B, you should be able to see a portion of the sun above the horizon. If Earth were flat, the sun would not be visible at any elevation once it had set. Because Earth is round, a portion of the sun will come back into your line of sight.

If you don't have a hill, you could even try lying on your stomach to watch the sunset and then standing up to get a higher line of sight.

Chinchilla said:

Because it's not coherent with Scriptures .

Click to expand...

Not coherent with your understanding of the scriptures perhaps. It’s still a bit of a stretch though, there’s nothing in the text to suggest Paul was thinking about how teachings on creation should be interpreted, if that was an issue at the time.

Tom Farebrother said:

Not coherent with your understanding of the scriptures perhaps. It’s still a bit of a stretch though, there’s nothing in the text to suggest Paul was thinking about how teachings on creation should be interpreted, if this was an issue at the time.

Click to expand...

So do you believe in evolution and big bang aswell ?

Chinchilla said:

So do you believe in evolution and big bang aswell ?

Click to expand...

Both the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution are very well established major theories, with enormous levels of verification and evidence. The ToE is stronger, probably, than the BBT, but it's sort of like saying 'steel is fairly strong but titanium alloy is stronger' - either one will serve for tableware with no danger of failure due to stress. At this point there are no known major issues with either theory. Details to be filled in? Yes. Serious difficulties? No.

A_Thinker said:

The story is told ... of Sir Isaac Newton napping under an apple tree ... when an apple fell and hit him on the head. Happenings like these led to the initial study on the phenomenon of gravity ... long before we contemplated a spinning disk.

From https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/question232.htm

Every time you jump, you experience gravity. It pulls you back down to the ground. Without gravity, you'd float off into the atmosphere -- along with all of the other matter on Earth.

You see gravity at work any time you drop a book, step on a scale or toss a ball up into the air. It's such a constant presence in our lives, we seldom marvel at the mystery of it -- but even with several well-received theories out there attempting to explain why a book falls to the ground (and at the same rate as a pebble or a couch, at that), they're still just theories. The mystery of gravity's pull is pretty much intact.

So what do we know about gravity? We know that it causes any two objects in the universe to be drawn to one another. We know that gravity assisted in forming the universe, that it keeps the moon in orbit around the Earth, and that it can be harnessed for more mundane applications like gravity-powered motors or gravity-powered lamps.

As for the science behind the action, we know that Isaac Newton defined gravity as a force -- one that attracts all objects to all other objects. We know that Albert Einstein said gravity is a result of the curvature of space-time. These two theories are the most common and widely held (if somewhat incomplete) explanations of gravity.

In this article, we'll look at Newton's theory of gravity, Einstein's theory of gravity and we'll touch on a more recent view of the phenomenon as well.

Although many people had already noted that gravity exists, Newton was the first to develop a cohesive explanation for gravity, so we'll start there.

In the 1600s, an English physicist and mathematician named Isaac Newton was sitting under an apple tree -- or so the legend tells us. Apparently, an apple fell on his head, and he started wondering why the apple was attracted to the ground in the first place.

Newton publicized his Theory of Universal Gravitation in the 1680s. It basically set forth the idea that gravity was a predictable force that acts on all matter in the universe, and is a function of both mass and distance. The theory states that each particle of matter attracts every other particle (for instance, the particles of "Earth" and the particles of "you") with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

So the farther apart the particles are, and/or the less massive the particles, the less the gravitational force.

Click to expand...

None of this explains anything more than the fact that things fall down.

The difference is that thing fall down in the USA and they fall down in Australia... and the two "downs" are in opposite directions.. there in lies the problem.

One of the most ignorant, arrogant and totally useless displays of a celebrity actor/scientist... ever.. for the argument for gravity was Neil Disgust Tyson dropping a mike on the stage.... totally no point was made, no evidence and not conclusion could be drawn from it.

Meanwhile, all the sheeple applauded it.

Chinchilla said:

So do you believe in evolution and big bang aswell ?

Click to expand...

As well as what? As far as I know evolution is the best available explanation regarding how life has developed and diversified on earth. The Big Bang? Seems legit, I mean as an explanation for the mechanics of how everything in the physical universe came to be.
Here’s a more literal, word for word, translation of the first verses of Genesis, from The Mechanical Bible:

In the origin Elohiym shaped the skies and the land, and the land had existed in confusion and was unfilled, and darkness was upon the face of the deep water and the wind of Elohiym was fluttering upon the face of the water.

As you can see it’s more about bringing order than creating ‘stuff’. John H Walton in his book The Lost World of Genesis One delves into thinking about ‘creation’ in the ancient world, and, along with a technical analysis of the Hebrew, draws out what the account was likely to have meant to the first Israelites, which was quite different to our assumptions about the text today.

JackRT said:

Both the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution are very well established major theories, with enormous levels of verification and evidence. The ToE is stronger, probably, than the BBT, but it's sort of like saying 'steel is fairly strong but titanium alloy is stronger' - either one will serve for tableware with no danger of failure due to stress. At this point there are no known major issues with either theory. Details to be filled in? Yes. Serious difficulties? No.

Click to expand...

Do you not have problem with death before sin in ToE ? If Jesus came to restore things , that would mean he came to restore everything prior to sin but there still would be death.

But we are told there will be no more death .
Revelation 21:4 King James Version (KJV)
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

Chinchilla said:

So do you believe in evolution and big bang aswell ?

Click to expand...

The Big Bang theory was a major boost for the creationist point-of-view because the Big Bang posits a beginning to the universe (i.e. an effect) ... and Science had already theorized that every effect ... must have a Cause.

Hence, God is identified by some as ... the First Cause ...

JacksBratt said:

One of the most ignorant, arrogant and totally useless displays of a celebrity actor/scientist... ever.. for the argument for gravity was Neil Disgust Tyson dropping a mike on the stage.... totally no point was made, no evidence and not conclusion could be drawn from it.

Meanwhile, all the sheeple applauded it.

Click to expand...

Sounds like an opinion ...

Tom Farebrother said:

As well as what? As far as I know evolution is the best available explanation regarding how life has developed and diversified on earth. The Big Bang? Seems legit, I mean as an explanation for the mechanics of how everything in the physical universe came to be.
Here’s a more literal, word for word, translation of the first verses of Genesis, from The Mechanical Bible:

In the origin Elohiym shaped the skies and the land, and the land had existed in confusion and was unfilled, and darkness was upon the face of the deep water and the wind of Elohiym was fluttering upon the face of the water.

As you can see it’s more about bringing order than creating ‘stuff’. John H Walton in his book The Lost World of Genesis One delves into thinking about ‘creation’ in the ancient world, and, along with a technical analysis of the Hebrew, draws out what the account was likely to have meant to the first Israelites, which was quite different to our assumptions about the text today.

Click to expand...

Do you not have problem with death before sin in ToE ? If Jesus came to restore things , that would mean he came to restore everything prior to sin but there still would be death.

But we are told there will be no more death .
Revelation 21:4 King James Version (KJV)
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

Chinchilla said:

Do you not have problem with death before sin in ToE ? If Jesus came to restore things , that would mean he came to restore everything prior to sin but there still would be death.

But we are told there will be no more death .
Revelation 21:4 King James Version (KJV)
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

Click to expand...

Sorry I don’t get the connection you are making there.

JacksBratt said:

None of this explains anything more than the fact that things fall down.

The difference is that thing fall down in the USA and they fall down in Australia... and the two "downs" are in opposite directions.. there in lies the problem.

Click to expand...

Why ... do things fall DOWN ?

Why don't they fall UP ... or SIDEWAYS ?

What force causes things to uniformly fall DOWN ???

Tom Farebrother said:

Sorry I don’t get the connection you are making there.

Click to expand...

If you believe ToE then you believe first bacteria then as time went by things evolved to point where bird eats worm.

Bird is live being
Worm is live being.
Bird kills worm by eating it , therefore there is death .

There were birds and worms prior to man , so there was death before man .
But we are told there was no death and that Lion ate straw according to Scriptures .