Did the apostles and the early Church believe the Earth was flat?

yeshuasavedme said:

I have many
I have asked you many times in the past to stop accusing me of being a flat earth believer.

Click to expand...

I simply included both Flatties and geocentrists in the same group. Both views are nonsense.

That is a lie against everything I write or believe.

Click to expand...

OK, so noted.

Hebrew OT word translated to English “world” means “globe”.

Click to expand...

Works for me.

I have repeated that with back up Scripture proof dozens of times.

Click to expand...

Good on ya.

So just stop.

Click to expand...

Didn't start.

Otherwise, you err, as you always have on this subject, believing neither the Word of God from Genesis 1 and on through the entire sacred Scriptures.

Click to expand...

Oh, I rather suspect I'm at least as as familiar with the Bible as you are. Maybe moreso when it comes to the New Testament.

there was no outer space when God created the heavens and the earth, just a globe of primal waters and the “firmament of His powers”, which He stretched out on day 2 of creation between the cut in two waters, and which stretched out firmament He named “two waters/ sha mayim”.
So it is not possible that anything but this very globe is the center of His stretched out heavens.
They all came from here.

Click to expand...

An interesting concept. A shame it doesn't really have anything much to do with what the Bible actually says. It's another of those many instances where your lot (yes, I'm including both Flatties and geocentrists of any other variety in the same category) take some Scripture, impose your own notions of what it really means on it, and declare the resulting (usually silly) result to be What The Bible Says, when in fact it says no such thing. But even so, you demand that we take your notions of what the Scripture "means" as authoritative, even though it bears no resemblance to what we can readily observe that God actually made.

My advice - leave off misinterpreting the Bible to suit your own presuppositions, get yourself a telescope, and "Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one faileth." (Isaiah 40:26) BTW, an 8" reflector would be a great start.

Shrewd Manager said:

It's not an article of faith, but may well be an article of reason.

Click to expand...

Why can't I see Philadelphia from here with a telescope? Or even Memphis?

Shrewd Manager said:

Astrolabe came first.

Click to expand...

Sextant is the same thing only moreso. They both make it possible to determine latitude by taking shots of the sun or Polaris to determone their height above the horizon. The sextant is more accurate, and more versatile, allowing the measurement of distances between two different celestial bodies and determining longitude.

Flat nonrotating earth assumption as I understand it

Click to expand...

Nope.

just like the most sophisticated flight and weapons guidance systems of today.

Click to expand...

Pure fantasy.

So, Stars come back to the earth, from where their origin is, as the Bible states. Outer space -the heavens- is stretched out from the earth, in Genesis 1, on day two.
Earth is the center of the entire creation.

Revelation chapter 12
I looked when He opened the sixth seal, and behold, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became like blood. 13 And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, as a fig tree drops its late figs when it is shaken by a mighty wind. 14 Then the sky receded as a scroll when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved out of its place. 15 And the kings of the earth, the great men,the rich men, the commanders, the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains, 16 and said to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?”

Jipsah said:

Why can't I see Philadelphia from here with a telescope? Or even Memphis?

Click to expand...

Haze. Obviously. Why they use infrared filters now. I'm bored of re-posting example after example of photos and videos from distances impossible on a globe. Why not do the honorable thing and accept the data rather than persisting in fruitless denial?

Shrewd Manager said:

I'm bored of re-posting example after example of photos and videos from distances impossible on a globe. Why not do the honorable thing and accept the data rather than persisting in fruitless denial?

Click to expand...

The technical term for the examples you've posted is "looming"
Looming and similar refraction phenomena - Wikipedia

Atmospheric refraction - Wikipedia

Mirages and Green Flashes

Simulation of Atmospheric Refraction

Shrewd Manager said:

Haze. Obviously. Why they use infrared filters now. I'm bored of re-posting example after example of photos and videos from distances impossible on a globe. Why not do the honorable thing and accept the data rather than persisting in fruitless denial?

Click to expand...

Haze, eh? How about Memphis, then? Or I'll settle for Manchester, only 20 miles from here. Can't see any of them from the highest hill around here. Should be able to see the ocean from Clingman's Dome, but you can't. Haze, right? <ROFL> Or maybe obscured by flocks of birds? Or chemtrails? (Bwahahahah!) BTW, when does the sun shift from its inner circuits to the outer ones? Can we see it happen? And why are the days shorter in Copenhagen than in Murfreesboro right now? Is the sun avoiding them, or does it have appointments elsewhere? Maybe the horses on Apollo's chariot are tired by the time they get there, reckon? And what causes eclipses? How do the sun and moon manage to get in each other's way?

I'm doing the only honorable thing to do when I'm handed jokes palmed off as facts. I laugh at them.

prodromos said:

The technical term for the examples you've posted is "looming"
Looming and similar refraction phenomena - Wikipedia

Atmospheric refraction - Wikipedia

Mirages and Green Flashes

Simulation of Atmospheric Refraction

Click to expand...

The air would need the refractive index of glucose in order to account for the necessary curve on some of these photos.

Shrewd Manager said:

The air would need the refractive index of glucose in order to account for the necessary curve on some of these photos.

Click to expand...

Why don't you do the math and find out?

Jipsah said:

Flat Earth!

Click to expand...

I win, thank you sir! (Just had a little side bet for a buck that Jipsah would respond as expected).

Anyway, the '95% stupid' is a quote from scientism's darling DeGrasse-Tyson speaking of standard model proponents, and the '100% erroneous' refers to the total absence of support for said model in the Bible.

So your part must be with the dreamers and the illusionists. You're going the wrong way man.

Shrewd Manager said:

I win, thank you sir! (Just had a little side bet for a buck that Jipsah would respond as expected).

Anyway, the '95% stupid' is a quote from scientism's darling DeGrasse-Tyson speaking of standard model proponents, and the '100% erroneous' refers to the total absence of support for said model in the Bible.

So your part must be with the dreamers and the illusionists. You're going the wrong way man.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you can explain how a flight from Perth to Johannesburg is only 15 minutes longer than a flight from Sydney to Beijing, when it is nearly twice the distance on the flat earth model?

Perhaps you can explain how lunar eclipses occur and how we are able to predict them accurately on the flat earth model?

Perhaps you can explain how Colin O'Brady was able to ski from south of South America to south of New Zealand in 54 days while pulling 100kg of supplies on a sled behind him?

Clearly it is the flat earthers who are the dreamers and illusionists.

prodromos said:

Perhaps you can explain how a flight from Perth to Johannesburg is only 15 minutes longer than a flight from Sydney to Beijing, when it is nearly twice the distance on the flat earth model?

Click to expand...

Wouldn't know, there's a ton of variables in those equations.

prodromos said:

Perhaps you can explain how lunar eclipses occur and how we are able to predict them accurately on the flat earth model?

Click to expand...

Don't know, but there was a good vid recently showing the relative size of the earth shadow on the moon as extrapolated from the last alleged moon shadow of some 70 miles diameter across the US in solar eclipse - they 'flipped it' to show that the earth shadow should only be some 240 miles diameter on the moon during a lunar eclipse. (At least enjoy the music)

Isn't the eclipse for both sun and moon based on a cycle (Saros cycle), it's just timing I think?

prodromos said:

Perhaps you can explain how Colin O'Brady was able to ski from south of South America to south of New Zealand in 54 days while pulling 100kg of supplies on a sled behind him?

Click to expand...

The huskies were on ice the whole way?

Shrewd Manager said:

I win, thank you sir! (Just had a little side bet for a buck that Jipsah would respond as expected).

Click to expand...

Kind of obvious, wasn't it?

Anyway, the '95% stupid' is a quote from scientism's darling DeGrasse-Tyson speaking of standard model proponents

Click to expand...

Give us the full quote on that por favor. Google doesn't seem to have heard of it, and you'll forgive me if I don't find the "quote" entirely credible.

and the '100% erroneous' refers to the total absence of support for said model in the Bible.

Click to expand...

The same may be said for the Bible's support for Ohm's Law, but it's true all the same.

So your part must be with the dreamers and the illusionists. You're going the wrong way man.

Click to expand...

As little as I like Tyson , that alleged quote from him doesn't ring true, and Flatties are known for, shall we say, taking liberties with the truth. Give us a reference to look at it if you don't mind.

Shrewd Manager said:

Wouldn't know, there's a ton of variables in those equations.

Click to expand...

On the globe earth the distances are very similar, only 7% different, so no surprise that the flight times are similar. Flying from Johannesburg to Perth takes even less time, more than 1 hour less.

Don't know, but there was a good vid recently showing the relative size of the earth shadow on the moon as extrapolated from the last alleged moon shadow of some 70 miles diameter across the US in solar eclipse - they 'flipped it' to show that the earth shadow should only be some 240 miles diameter on the moon during a lunar eclipse. (At least enjoy the music)

Click to expand...

Once again proving that flat earthers can't do basic maths. The earth's shadow is more than double the diameter of the moon. When the moon is casting a shadow on the earth, it is closer to the sun and being nearly one quarter the diameter of the earth produces a much shorter cone of shadow. When the Earth is casting a shadow on the moon, both the fact it is nearly 4 times larger than the moon, and it is further from the sun, means it produces a much longer cone of shadow.

However, the above is simply a diversion to avoid explaining how the earth can cast a shadow on the moon when in the flat earth model both the sun and moon are above the flat earth.

Isn't the eclipse for both sun and moon based on a cycle (Saros cycle), it's just timing I think?

Click to expand...

It is a lot more than that.
The Saros Cycle and Saros Series

Jipsah said:

Kind of obvious, wasn't it?

Click to expand...

As Vader says, 'All too easy'..

Jipsah said:

Give us the full quote on that por favor. Google doesn't seem to have heard of it, and you'll forgive me if I don't find the "quote" entirely credible.

Click to expand...

It's in a video where he's talking about dark matter/ energy using a pie graph, sums it up with that quote. You're just showing your lack of research into FE video research. Next time I come across it.

Jipsah said:

The same may be said for the Bible's support for Ohm's Law, but it's true all the same.

Click to expand...

120 pi ohms. Why can't we measure the resistance/ impedance of earth's motion?

prodromos said:

On the globe earth the distances are very similar, only 7% different, so no surprise that the flight times are similar. Flying from Johannesburg to Perth takes even less time, more than 1 hour less.

Click to expand...

Which globe earth projection are you using?

prodromos said:

When the moon is casting a shadow on the earth, it is closer to the sun and being nearly one quarter the diameter of the earth produces a much shorter cone of shadow.

Click to expand...

That's ridiculous, the difference in distance is negligible 25:9600.

prodromos said:

both the fact it is nearly 4 times larger than the moon, and it is further from the sun, means it produces a much longer cone of shadow.

Click to expand...

Fail. He's accounted for the size difference by x4.

prodromos said:

However, the above is simply a diversion to avoid explaining how the earth can cast a shadow on the moon when in the flat earth model both the sun and moon are above the flat earth.

Click to expand...

Just like when I see both sun and moon in the sky with the moon phase on.

prodromos said:

It is a lot more than that.
The Saros Cycle and Saros Series

Click to expand...

No, it's that and another one. The ancients had it covered, and guess what? They were of the feared and loathed flattie variety (well, then they were loved and respected most probably).

prodromos said:

On the globe earth the distances are very similar, only 7% different, so no surprise that the flight times are similar. Flying from Johannesburg to Perth takes even less time, more than 1 hour less.

Once again proving that flat earthers can't do basic maths. The earth's shadow is more than double the diameter of the moon. When the moon is casting a shadow on the earth, it is closer to the sun and being nearly one quarter the diameter of the earth produces a much shorter cone of shadow. When the Earth is casting a shadow on the moon, both the fact it is nearly 4 times larger than the moon, and it is further from the sun, means it produces a much longer cone of shadow.


However, the above is simply a diversion to avoid explaining how the earth can cast a shadow on the moon when in the flat earth model both the sun and moon are above the flat earth.

It is a lot more than that.
The Saros Cycle and Saros Series

Click to expand...

Here's another fun anomaly to keep you coming up with those creative ad hocs Prodromos.

Shrewd Manager said:

Which globe earth projection are you using?

Click to expand...

Why does that matter?

That's ridiculous, the difference in distance is negligible 25:9600.

Click to expand...

Do the math. It's simple ratios, you don't even have to touch the much feared trigonometry.

Fail. He's accounted for the size difference by x4.

Click to expand...

But not the difference in distance. Like I said, flat earthers can't do maths

Just like when I see both sun and moon in the sky with the moon phase on.

Click to expand...

So how do you get a New Moon in the flat earth model?

No, it's that and another one. The ancients had it covered, and guess what? They were of the feared and loathed flattie variety (well, then they were loved and respected most probably).

Click to expand...

They couldn't predict exactly when it would occur or exactly where the eclipse would be visible. The heliocentric model predicts it accurately to the metre and second.

Shrewd Manager said:

Here's another fun anomaly to keep you coming up with those creative ad hocs Prodromos.

Click to expand...

The only thing ad hoc around here is your supposed flat earth gotchas.
Tell me, why are people warned not to look directly at a solar eclipse?
Couple that with a large portion of the earth being under the penumbra of the moon's shadow, and the curvature of the earth's surface causing most of the sunlight to be reflected away from the moon, the moon's surface is going to be a lot less bright than normal and way dimmer than the visible corona of the sun. However if you take a photo with the corona masked out, you will be able to see the moon's surface. Another flat earth fail.