Flat Earth And Christianity

[Subduction Zone]

It never implies a flat earth either. Very little in the Bible is a commentary on any spatial issues. The Bible is much more concerned with human issues.

I've had these discussions with the Flat Earthers. The scriptures describe the surface level experiences of humans on earth ... plains, mountains, deserts, skies, seas, lakes, etc.

But it does if one understands the Hebrew and the math involved. The word used is that of an inscribed circle, as with a compass. It describes that from above and a sphere from above looks like a sphere, not an inscribed flat circle. Like it or not it describes a flat Earth and the writers likely believed in a flat Earth. That they did not know the Earth was a sphere is not an insult towards them since they had no way of knowing. You are reinterpreting the Bible after the fact.

 

[A_Thinker]

But it does if one understands the Hebrew and the math involved. The word used is that of an inscribed circle, as with a compass. It describes that from above and a sphere from above looks like a sphere, not an inscribed flat circle. Like it or not it describes a flat Earth and the writers likely believed in a flat Earth. That they did not know the Earth was a sphere is not an insult towards them since they had no way of knowing. You are reinterpreting the Bible after the fact.

I believe that you are going too far in your interpretation.

The Bible supports no particular theory of the shape of the earth. As you point out, the writers didn't have the benefit if the observations we now have access to. They were, ultimately, concerned with survival, agriculture, war, peace, taxes, heritage, illness, etc. For them, it was not the time ... to speculate upon the nature of the earth.

Further, the language you seek to interpret so explicitly ... is poetic, and believed to be inspired by the touch of God. The Isaiah passage isn't the only one to perhaps offer otherwise esoteric hints of truth ...

Job 26:7 God stretches the northern sky over empty space ... and hangs the earth upon nothing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe that you are going too far in your interpretation.

The Bible supports no particular theory of the shape of the earth. As you point out, the writers didn't have the benefit if the observations we now have access to. They were, ultimately, concerned with survival, agriculture, war, peace, taxes, heritage, illness, etc. For them, it was not the time ... to speculate upon the nature of the earth.

Further, the language you seek to interpret so explicitly ... is poetic, and believed to be inspired by the touch of God. The Isaiah passage isn't the only one to perhaps offer otherwise esoteric hints of truth ...

Job 26:7 God stretches the northern sky over empty space ... and hangs the earth upon nothing.

I agree with you. My point was that if one is excessively literal one ends up with a Flat Earth belief and that is the wrong way to approach the Bible.

 

[Paul4JC]

I’ve gone through 15 pages here as well as read other FE threads in this forum. I think there is truth of both sides and through other reading have made some conclusions. However the belittling is not constructive. It sad to have people insulting each other over this. As Abraham said ….


Genesis 13:8–9 (ESV): 8 Then Abram said to Lot, “Let there be no strife between you and me, and between your herdsmen and my herdsmen, for we are kinsmen. 9 Is not the whole land before you? Separate yourself from me. If you take the left hand, then I will go to the right, or if you take the right hand, then I will go to the left.”

The whole universe is there for you.

The whole 3-tier cosmology is there for you.

There should be a FLAT EARTH VIEW SAFE HOUSE forum where people who believe this and those who want to explore the idea can do so without battling with people who don’t agree with this view.

Peace in Christ

 

[Subduction Zone]

I’ve gone through 15 pages here as well as read other FE threads in this forum. I think there is truth of both sides and through other reading have made some conclusions. However the belittling is not constructive. It sad to have people insulting each other over this. As Abraham said ….


Genesis 13:8–9 (ESV): 8 Then Abram said to Lot, “Let there be no strife between you and me, and between your herdsmen and my herdsmen, for we are kinsmen. 9 Is not the whole land before you? Separate yourself from me. If you take the left hand, then I will go to the right, or if you take the right hand, then I will go to the left.”

The whole universe is there for you.

The whole 3-tier cosmology is there for you.

There should be a FLAT EARTH VIEW SAFE HOUSE forum where people who believe this and those who want to explore the idea can do so without battling with people who don’t agree with this view.

Peace in Christ

Is correction of obviously wrong thinking "belittling"? When a person refuses to learn from one's errors what should others do?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I’ve gone through 15 pages here as well as read other FE threads in this forum. I think there is truth of both sides

Please explain how the Earth can be both flat and spherical.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Is correction of obviously wrong thinking "belittling"? When a person refuses to learn from one's errors what should others do?

But how does that wrong thinking of the other person affect me? I have been guilty often of trying to convince a person something who doesn't WANT to be convinced. That's the thing. I mean, if a person wants to believe an error and doesn't want to listen to the truth, it makes no sense to continue in the argument. You state the truth and show them why it is the truth. When they don't accept it, move along. It's out of frustration when the other person won't accept what we say that we question their intelligence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But how does that wrong thinking of the other person affect me? I have been guilty often of trying to convince a person something who doesn't WANT to be convinced. That's the thing. I mean, if a person wants to believe an error and doesn't want to listen to the truth, it makes no sense to continue in the argument. You state the truth and show them why it is the truth. When they don't accept it, move along. It's out of frustration when the other person won't accept what we say that we question their intelligence.

Not necessarily their intelligence, though that may be part of it. And in a sense I appreciate Flat Earthers since they can be used to show how ridiculous the positions of creationists are. But number one this is a debate and discussion forum. If one insulates oneself from criticism there is not much in the way of debate. Besides, many Flat Earthers can learn from their errors.

 

[SeventyOne]

Besides, many Flat Earthers can learn from their errors.

That's why we are flat earthers. Now, if only many ballers could do the same, that would indeed be a sight worthy of watching.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's why we are flat earthers. Now, if only many ballers could do the same, that would indeed be a sight worthy of watching.

Now now, the term "ballers" is derogatory and flaming. You could say "realists".

The one that one checks to see if one's beliefs are correct is with falsifiable hypotheses. Without a falsifiable hypothesis one cannot even claim to have scientific evidence. The Flat Earthers cannot even explain something as simple as a sunset. If one model can explain all observations and another fails time and time again the rational action is to accept the one that explains observations. And one must be wary of making strawman arguments. In other words one must be careful not to make false claims about the models of opponents. That is why you are bound to get questions on how your model would explain observations. People are not being mean or derisive in doing so. If one claims to have a model then one is claiming to be able to explain observations.

 

[SeventyOne]

Now now, the term "ballers" is derogatory and flaming. You could say "realists".

The one that one checks to see if one's beliefs are correct is with falsifiable hypotheses. Without a falsifiable hypothesis one cannot even claim to have scientific evidence. The Flat Earthers cannot even explain something as simple as a sunset. If one model can explain all observations and another fails time and time again the rational action is to accept the one that explains observations. And one must be wary of making strawman arguments. In other words one must be careful not to make false claims about the models of opponents. That is why you are bound to get questions on how your model would explain observations. People are not being mean or derisive in doing so. If one claims to have a model then one is claiming to be able to explain observations.

"Realist" would not be a term I could use. I really don't like lying.

I'm also not getting dragged into another conversation with you people about the concept when foolish things like "Flat Earthers cannot even explain something as simple as a sunset" are said. But there is amusement to be had in seeing those who think they are so smart trying to explain away a concept way above their current understanding.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"Realist" would not be a term I could use. I really don't like lying.

I'm also not getting dragged into another conversation with you people about the concept when foolish things like "Flat Earthers cannot even explain something as simple as a sunset" are said. But there is amusement to be had in seeing those who think they are so smart trying to explain away a concept way above their current understanding.

That would not be a lie. We can support our claims. Those that believe in a Flat Earth not so much.

And what makes you think that my claim is foolish? Instead of calling a claim "foolish" you should be showing why it is foolish. I know that Flat Earth believers love to abuse the word "perspective" but simple geometry refutes their claims about the setting Sun. This is why being able to make a working model is so important. If one cannot form a working model then one by definition does not have scientific evidence for one's beliefs.

 

[pitabread]

But there is amusement to be had in seeing those who think they are so smart trying to explain away a concept way above their current understanding.

Indeed, I've seen that a lot in Flat Earther videos when they start talking about geometry and perspective. They really do struggle with spatial geometry.

 

[sjastro]

There should be a FLAT EARTH VIEW SAFE HOUSE forum where people who believe this and those who want to explore the idea can do so without battling with people who don’t agree with this view.

Peace in Christ

Flat Earth discussions belong here.

 

[Paul4JC]

Flat Earth discussions belong here.

Why? (Is this some conspiracy?)

 

[Strathos]

Oh joy, the flat earthers are back, just when I was getting bored with the forums.

 

[Shemjaza]

Why? (Is this some conspiracy?)

Probably so they can't derail topics about normal physics and geology.

It keeps a place for Flat-Earth (and others) topics, while making them off topic for common discussions.

It's probably the same reason they started enforcing Creation/Evolution topics being moved to the sub forum.

 

[Paulos23]

Oh joy, the flat earthers are back, just when I was getting bored with the forums.

It is funny, since I just watched some videos on why flat earthers believe the world is flat yesterday. I found them fascinating, and I think I have a better understanding of flat earthers.

But, I still don't agree with them.

 

[ruthiesea]

Historically, the Catholic Church produced or approved of maps that showed a flat, circular Earth with Jerusalem in the center. Maps that did not follow this model, like the heliocentric model of the solar system, were considered to be heresy. In most of the rest of the world people believed their eyes in that, especially on the water, objects did not just grow smaller until out of sight. Rather they could be seen disappearing over the horizon. While Europeans worried about sailing off the Earth’s edge, Chinese ships sailed to the East coast of Africa, and possibly farther.

 

[pitabread]

Oh joy, the flat earthers are back, just when I was getting bored with the forums.

Flat Earthers don't really engage in discussion, though. They're kinda boring that way.