Does Modern Science Align with the Bible?

[Humble Penny]

Brothers and sisters is the earth round? If it's is then we shouldn't be able to zoom and bring ships back into focus since according to the globe model they would be below the observers line of sight after sometime. In like fashion the observer shouldn't be able to bring in any ship or landmass into view for the same reasons...but this video shows otherwise:

 

[Humble Penny]

Brothers and sisters is the earth round? If it's is then we shouldn't be able to zoom and bring ships back into focus since according to the globe model they would be below the observers line of sight after sometime. In like fashion the observer shouldn't be able to bring in any ship or landmass into view for the same reasons...but this video shows otherwise:

To add onto what I shared in post #121 here are some photos showing when the observer can and can't see the boat in a globe:

The pictures speak for themselves and show the obscurity of a globe earth. At the same time it helps us understand why independent photographers and videographers can bring long distance ships back into view although miles away.

 

[Humble Penny]

Brothers and sisters is the earth round? If it's is then we shouldn't be able to zoom and bring ships back into focus since according to the globe model they would be below the observers line of sight after sometime. In like fashion the observer shouldn't be able to bring in any ship or landmass into view for the same reasons...but this video shows otherwise:

To add onto what I shared in post #121 here are some photos showing when the observer can and can't see the boat in a globe:
View attachment 322814 View attachment 322815 View attachment 322816 View attachment 322817 View attachment 322818

The pictures speak for themselves and show the obscurity of a globe earth. At the same time it helps us understand why independent photographers and videographers can bring long distance ships back into view although miles away.

If one carefully meditated on my arguments in posts #121 and #122 then you will see that once you put the globe and boat to scale the ships will actually disappear below the horizon sooner on a globe earth model. And the only exception to this rule according to the globe earth model is if the observer happens to zoom in on the long distance ship(s) just as the earth is performing it's quarter turn...but since this isn't actually what is observed in reality we can conclude that we aren't on a globe but a plane surface. Anyone with some common sense would know that when you view any bridge from a certain vantage point it would like the bridge is elongating or shrinking itself...yet only simpletons would believe such a thing...for viewed straight on from a level horizontal position will show that the bridge remains the same size.

My readers would be hard pressed to find examples of train tracks not following a single datum line when being laid down for construction.

 

[Humble Penny]

With the various straightforward arguments and evidences I've presented in this thread it is clear that we cannot trust modern science and that we definitely don't live on a globe.

 

[Humble Penny]

Don't take my words for it brothers and sisters just look at some more second hand evidence from this 40 Minute video of a high altitude balloon reaching 120,000 Feet:

This and the other videos I've shared reveal that we've been lied to and that the earth is much broader than we've been led to believe on hand drawn maps. And just look at the sun in each of those videos it's so close to the earth.

 

[Paul4JC]

That was not a reference to any scripture, (if that is what you mean by text).

Okay, but why are you referring to the earth as a planet? Based on science right, not based on the Scripture?

 

[daq]

Okay, but why are you referring to the earth as a planet? Based on science right, not based on the Scripture?

Based on the empirical evidence I offered from the creation of Elohim. It's really all about equinoxes, sundials, and the apparent paths of the sun. Some of the ancients knew and understood these things: I have no doubt Mosheh was one of them.

All this talk about cameras, CGI, NASA lying, and internet flat-earth videos lead to nowhere. Real scientists do not ignore empirical evidence like flat-earthers do: for some reason flat-earthers seem to think that five or six videos with five or six different points somehow counteract one simple piece of empirical evidence to win their arguments. That's like someone posting five or six scripture passages ripped from their contexts to set against another scripture that was posted by someone they are debating. It's self-deception, not to mention pitting scripture against scripture: in the same manner, stacking five or six supposed truths up against observable and verifiable empirical evidence is meaningless. The flat-earther in this thread has already been refuted and simply doesn't know it because he doesn't understand sundials and how and why they work.

 

[Paul4JC]

Based on the empirical evidence I offered from the creation of Elohim. It's really all about equinoxes, sundials, and the apparent paths of the sun. Some of the ancients knew and understood these things: I have no doubt Mosheh was one of them.

All this talk about cameras, CGI, NASA lying, and internet flat-earth videos lead to nowhere. Real scientists do not ignore empirical evidence like flat-earthers do: for some reason flat-earthers seem to think that five or six videos with five or six different points somehow counteract one simple piece of empirical evidence to win their arguments. That's like someone posting five or six scripture passages ripped from their contexts to set against another scripture that was posted by someone they are debating. It's self-deception, not to mention pitting scripture against scripture: in the same manner, stacking five or six supposed truths up against observable and verifiable empirical evidence is meaningless. The flat-earther in this thread has already been refuted and simply doesn't know it because he doesn't understand sundials and how and why they work.

Can you give me some Scripture showing the earth is a planet?

 

[Humble Penny]

Based on the empirical evidence I offered from the creation of Elohim. It's really all about equinoxes, sundials, and the apparent paths of the sun. Some of the ancients knew and understood these things: I have no doubt Mosheh was one of them.

All this talk about cameras, CGI, NASA lying, and internet flat-earth videos lead to nowhere. Real scientists do not ignore empirical evidence like flat-earthers do: for some reason flat-earthers seem to think that five or six videos with five or six different points somehow counteract one simple piece of empirical evidence to win their arguments. That's like someone posting five or six scripture passages ripped from their contexts to set against another scripture that was posted by someone they are debating. It's self-deception, not to mention pitting scripture against scripture: in the same manner, stacking five or six supposed truths up against observable and verifiable empirical evidence is meaningless. The flat-earther in this thread has already been refuted and simply doesn't know it because he doesn't understand sundials and how and why they work.

And yet you cannot provide any first or second hand evidence showing the actual earth from far away as I have. Nor have you been able to demonstrate why the observer doesn't have to look down at the horizon as he rises in elevation, but instead reality shows us (as seen in the videos I posted) that the horizon always rises and falls relative to the observer; on top of this I've also shown that there is no curve from ground level as I've argued in posts #121 and #122.
Prayers to you brother daq...one day I hope you see the light as I have recently.

 

[daq]

Can you give me some Scripture showing the earth is a planet?

Why should I need to do that? I already said I was not referencing scripture when I used that word.

 

[daq]

And yet you cannot provide any first or second hand evidence showing the actual earth from far away as I have. Nor have you been able to demonstrate why the observer doesn't have to look down at the horizon as he rises in elevation, but instead reality shows us (as seen in the videos I posted) that the horizon always rises and falls relative to the observer; on top of this I've also shown that there is no curve from ground level as I've argued in posts #121 and #122.
Prayers to you brother daq...one day I hope you see the light as I have recently.

You never addressed what I posted about the straight line east-west shadow of a horizontal sundial on the equinoxes. And yet there is much more pertaining to sundials and how they work and how they refute a stationary flat-earth model. None of the things you have posted actually have any relevance to either proving or disproving whether the earth is a spinning globe or whatever it is that you say it is.

Here is another very simple refutation of the light you claim to have received:

The Angle of a Shadow During Equinox

The Angle of a Shadow During Equinox

"During an equinox (March 20 and September 22-23), the Sun is directly above the equator. If we are on the equator, an upright stick will not have a shadow in the middle of the day.

On any other location, the angle between the stick and the direction of sunlight will be the same as the observer’s latitude.

This fact can only occur if the Earth is a sphere, and only if the Sun is very far relative to the size of the Earth."
The Angle of a Shadow During Equinox

-----------------------------------------------

Very simple: a sundial will not work on a flat-earth model because the sun would be way too close to the earth and the constantly changing angles would throw everything off. The sun necessarily needs to be very, very, far away for a sundial to work in the manner in which they are designed.

 

[daq]

Do we read anything in the scripture about NASA, or cameras, or weather balloons, or sending rockets up to 100,000 feet with video cameras attached to them, or airplanes that fly at 30,000 feet?

Do we read anything in the scripture about a sundial and a shadow? Yes, 2 Kings 20:8-11 and Isaiah 38:4-8, and Elohim uses the shadow on the sundial to prove to king Hezekiah that he will go up into Yerushalem in the third day, (Matthew 27:50-53).

 

[Humble Penny]

You never addressed what I posted about the straight line east-west shadow of a horizontal sundial on the equinoxes. And yet there is much more pertaining to sundials and how they work and how they refute a stationary flat-earth model. None of the things you have posted actually have any relevance to either proving or disproving whether the earth is a spinning globe or whatever it is that you say it is.

Here is another very simple refutation of the light you claim to have received:

The Angle of a Shadow During Equinox

The Angle of a Shadow During Equinox

"During an equinox (March 20 and September 22-23), the Sun is directly above the equator. If we are on the equator, an upright stick will not have a shadow in the middle of the day.

On any other location, the angle between the stick and the direction of sunlight will be the same as the observer’s latitude.

This fact can only occur if the Earth is a sphere, and only if the Sun is very far relative to the size of the Earth."
The Angle of a Shadow During Equinox

-----------------------------------------------

Very simple: a sundial will not work on a flat-earth model because the sun would be way too close to the earth and the constantly changing angles would throw everything off. The sun necessarily needs to be very, very, far away for a sundial to work in the manner in which they are designed.

If only people knew their history about the modern equinox dates...tsk, tsk, tsk...they would know that they were created so that the Catholic Church wouldn't observe Passover on the same day as the Jews...this is well documented in the Paschal controversy of Church history...and on top of this the dates chosen actually coincided with Easter which is a pagan mystery in honor of Ishtar the Babylonian queen of heaven.

As for the shadow on sundials this doesn't prove the shape of the earth it only shows the shadow being cast. Now with the illustration you provided it would only be possible on a plane surface using plane geometry. When you compare the golf course with the second illustration we should observe a curved line instead of a straight line. Look at how the shadows behave on this sphere:

The shadows clearly don't behave this way in what you've provided...try again.

 

[daq]

Here is another easy to understand refutation of the light you claim to have received. It also contains a video presentation which is only about eight and a half minutes.

The Ultimate Way To Debunk Flat Earth Theory

 

[Humble Penny]

Do we read anything in the scripture about NASA, or cameras, or weather balloons, or sending rockets up to 100,000 feet with video cameras attached to them, or airplanes that fly at 30,000 feet?

Do we read anything in the scripture about a sundial and a shadow? Yes, 2 Kings 20:8-11 and Isaiah 38:4-8, and Elohim uses the shadow on the sundial to prove to king Hezekiah that he will go up into Yerushalem in the third day, (Matthew 27:50-53).

What does this have to do about proving a globe earth? Nothing...but let's use Scripture to refute a globe earth further by quoting the only two Scriptures which describe an explicit shape:

"It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in."
Isaiah 40:22 NASB1995

So God spread the heavens over the earth like a tent and sits above the circle of the earth...what does a tent look like again? Ah yes like this:

And we see that the earth is circular (i.e. a plane geometric shape) not spherical...

What does Wisdom tell us?

"When He established the heavens, I was there, When He inscribed a circle on the face of the deep,."
Proverbs 8:27 NASB1995

Now while i won't vouch for everything most typical flat earthers claim about the behaviour of the heavenly bodies or how the landmasses on earth actually look...the biblical descriptions sure sound like this:

And finally does the world move according to God?

God doesn't support a moving globe earth so neither do I.

 

[Humble Penny]

Here is another easy to understand refutation of the light you claim to have received. It also contains a video presentation which is only about eight and a half minutes.

The Ultimate Way To Debunk Flat Earth Theory

Yeah...if only you actually read your Bible...you'll see in post #135 that the Bible doesn't back globalists or their NASA god.

 

[daq]

If only people knew their history about the modern equinox dates...tsk, tsk, tsk...they would know that they were created so that the Catholic Church wouldn't observe Passover on the same day as the Jews...this is well documented in the Paschal controversy of Church history...and on top of this the dates chosen actually coincided with Easter which is a pagan mystery in honor of Ishtar the Babylonian queen of heaven.

There are countless megalithic structures, thousands of years older than the Catholic Church, which are aligned to the equinoxes and solstices. The equinoxes and solstices were known by the apparent motion of the sun, not Catholic Church decrees, and they were extremely important to agricultural societies for obvious reasons.

 

[Humble Penny]

There are countless megalithic structures, thousands of years older than the Catholic Church, which are aligned to the equinoxes and solstices. The equinoxes and solstices were known by the apparent motion of the sun, not Catholic Church decrees, and they were extremely important to agricultural societies for obvious reasons.

Except the actual equinox never truly falls on the modern equinox dates year after year...but if you want to be ignorant of the history of how we arrived at our modern equinox dates then go right ahead. Seeing that the modern equinox dates are tied to the Gregorian Calendar...you'll observe as an honest and objective reader...if that's what you truly are...that our modern calendar was never created to give you the right time: it was only to cause more separation between the Catholics and Jews...because the Catholics didn't want to celebrate Passover at the same time as the Jew, and then imposed their will on the rest of the other churches to step in line with them.

 

[Humble Penny]

Except the actual equinox never truly falls on the modern equinox dates year after year...but if you want to be ignorant of the history of how we arrived at our modern equinox dates then go right ahead. Seeing that the modern equinox dates are tied to the Gregorian Calendar...you'll observe as an honest and objective reader...if that's what you truly are...that our modern calendar was never created to give you the right time: it was only to cause more separation between the Catholics and Jews...because the Catholics didn't want to celebrate Passover at the same time as the Jew, and then imposed their will on the rest of the other churches to step in line with them.

I cover the history of the equinox dates and Paschal controversy here with a short commentary on the work of the scholar Georges Declercq :

Anno Domini: The Origins of the Christian Era

 

[Humble Penny]

Is heliocentrism based on any truth or a mythological pagan idea? Let's read the words of Copernicus himself:

“in the middle of all sits the Sun enthroned. In this most beautiful temple could we place this luminary in any better position from which he can illuminate the whole at once? He is rightly called the Lamp, the Mind, the Ruler of the Universe; Hermes Trismegistus names him the Visible God, Sophocles’ Electra calls him the All-seeing. So the Sun sits as upon a royal throne ruling his children the planets which circle around him.”
Revolution of the Heavenly Spheres (1543 AD)
​

So we see this so-called science of ours is not based in the Word of God but the mystery school of Trimegistus and Hermes. Yet many fools praise this man to the skies for his supposed "wisdom".

Let's expose more of the paganism and evil behind the heliocentric model by consulting the words of a well known philosopher by the name of Karl Popper:

“Copernicus studied in Bologna under the Platonist Novara; and Copernicus’ idea of placing the sun, rather than the Earth, in the center of the universe was not the result of new observations, but of a new interpretation of old and well-known facts in the light of semi-religious Platonic and Neo-Platonic ideas. The crucial idea can be traced back to the sixth book of Plato’s Republic, where we can read that the sun plays the same role in the realm of visible things as does the idea of the good in the realm of ideas. Now the idea of the good is the highest in the hierarchy of Platonic ideas. Accordingly the sun, which endows visible things with their visibility, vitality, growth and progress, is the highest in the hierarchy of the visible things in nature. Now if the sun was to be given pride of place, if the sun merited a divine status…then it was hardly possible for it to revolve about the Earth. The only fitting place for so exalted a star was the center of the universe. So the Earth was bound to revolve about the sun. This Platonic idea, then, forms the historical background of the Copernican revolution. It does not start with observations, but with a religious or mythological idea.”
Karl Popper, Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge p. 187 (emphasis added mine)
​

How sad...one would think that the disciples of the heliocentric model would at least bother to study the origins of their doctrines. What's worse is that believers in the body of Christ fall prey to these wolves in sheep's clothing....

But I guess promoting pagan lies is "not a salvation issue?"

@daq since you jumped into this thread you've failed consistently to refute the evidence I provided from the mouths of Nicholas Copernicus and Karl Popper who admit that the heliocentric model is based upon pagan religious mythology and not scientific observation in posts #45 and #52. Please provide evidence that those quotes aren't made by those men and evidence contrary to the fact from both of these men?