Flat or round earth -The final experiment.

[Phil G]

Will that be sparkling or flat ?

I see what you did there….

 

[Apple Sky]

I have to say that Eric Dubay in particular has been exposed as a 'typical flat earther'. For years he has been claiming that there is no 24 hour sun in Antarctica and now that the opportunity has come up to prove that once and for all, he is now saying that even if there is it won't prove anything.

That is dishonest. Eric Dubay has been making money out of his flat earth conspiracy claims for years. People have been buying his books and watching his YouTube videos but now, instead of respecting his followers by accepting an opportunity to show for certain that he is telling the truth, he instead changes what he has been saying and ridicules a flat earther (Jeran Campanella) who not only said what Eric Dubay has been saying all along, that a midnight sun in Antarctica is impossible on a flat earth, but is also prepared to take part in this opportunity to put his claims to the test.

That puts Eric Dubay firmly into the 'shill' territory himself. And if you can't see that then you are following Eric Dubay in a cult-like delusion.

I agree, I found out that he ban's anyone from his forum who talks about Jesus & I just found this video of Eric talking about God in the negative.

I reckon Eric Dubay is a government paid shill who mixes half truths with lies & from now on I will not be posting anymore of his videos.

 

[Phil G]

I agree, I found out that he ban's anyone from his forum who talks about Jesus & I just found this video of Eric talking about God in the negative.

I reckon Eric Dubay is a government paid shill who mixes half truths with lies & from now on I will not be posting anymore of his videos.

Well good for you, however I don't agree that he is 'a government paid' shill. This is falling into conspiracy theory territory again. The evidence does not support that. The evidence supports that he is a self-gratifying shill who preys on people's vulnerabilities.

I'm personally looking forward to what is revealed in Antarctica this December by 'The Final Experiment'. I believe there will be 24 hour daylight and a midnight sun.

First, it matches the globe earth model.

Second, the evidence of videos already available have confirmed it. These videos were not 'faked'. Neither were they made by people who are out to debunk a flat earth. The people making these videos are recording a fascinating phenomenon which can be experienced there. They have no axe to grind about the shape of the earth. There is no evidence to the contrary.

Third, a 'government conspiracy' would have already stopped this trip in its tracks if there is any conspiracy at all. A government conspiracy only makes sense if one is to believe all the stuff that Eric Dubay has promoted. And all of that stuff makes no sense in itself.

I really hope that flat earthers put their own claims to the test and travel there with globe earthers, as they too put their claims to the test. There should be a spirit of cooperation to find the truth, whatever it is, about the matter. Any put-down of this trip should be viewed with disdain.

 

[Phil G]

Well good for you, however I don't agree that he is 'a government paid' shill. This is falling into conspiracy theory territory again. The evidence does not support that. The evidence supports that he is a self-gratifying shill who preys on people's vulnerabilities.

I'm personally looking forward to what is revealed in Antarctica this December by 'The Final Experiment'. I believe there will be 24 hour daylight and a midnight sun.

First, it matches the globe earth model.

Second, the evidence of videos already available have confirmed it. These videos were not 'faked'. Neither were they made by people who are out to debunk a flat earth. The people making these videos are recording a fascinating phenomenon which can be experienced there. They have no axe to grind about the shape of the earth. There is no evidence to the contrary.

Third, a 'government conspiracy' would have already stopped this trip in its tracks if there is any conspiracy at all. A government conspiracy only makes sense if one is to believe all the stuff that Eric Dubay has promoted. And all of that stuff makes no sense in itself.

I really hope that flat earthers put their own claims to the test and travel there with globe earthers, as they too put their claims to the test. There should be a spirit of cooperation to find the truth, whatever it is, about the matter. Any put-down of this trip should be viewed with disdain.

The other thing I can say about this is that a globe earth in no way contradicts Scripture. The verses used by flat earthers to claim that the Bible indicates or proves a flat stationary earth are not about the earth, but about God and His character - who He IS!

He is infinite and His creation is beyond human understanding. The discoveries of scientists on this earth reveal a complexity which always moves beyond their reach. For every discovery there is much more to be discovered. If this observation is to continue beyond the earth, then it must follow the same pattern, if God is who He says He is in Scripture. Each discovery must lead to an ever more complex universe beyond human understanding.

A flat stationary earth would diminish almighty God to a finite god with a limited, easy to understand creation. And so man can become as God because he has discovered all there is to discover about the earth’s place in His creation.

This is not consistent with Scripture. God is so much more than that!

A globe earth being a tiny speck in an unmeasurable universe speaks to me of God’s infinite character. A flat earth speaks to me of a weak insignificant god.

 

[trophy33]

A globe earth being a tiny speck in an unmeasurable universe speaks to me of God’s infinite character. A flat earth speaks to me of a weak insignificant god.

Its because of our modern perspective, after all the discoveries in science, after all the development in philosophy and theology.

However, the ancient writers of the Old Testament - bronze age/iron age culture - had a different, rather mythological perspective of the world. Bible does not teach the flat earth universe, but refers to it as to something that was commonly known and accepted by the original audience.

 

[trophy33]

If Bible referred to, for example gravity, it would refer to the Aristotelian view of gravity in the times of Aristotle (objects attract each other because they like each other), it would refer to the Newtonian view of gravity several centuries ago (objects attract each other by their mass) and it would refer to the Einstein's view in our times (gravity is a curved space caused by the mass of objects). Or possibly even to some quantum theory view of it.

Bible would not teach any of it, but it would use it to illustrate some theological point in a way familiar to the original audience.

 

[Phil G]

Its because of our modern perspective, after all the discoveries in science, after all the development in philosophy and theology.

However, the ancient writers of the Old Testament - bronze age/iron age culture - had a different, rather mythological perspective of the world. Bible does not teach the flat earth universe, but refers to it as to something that was commonly known and accepted by the original audience.

While I agree with the view that the ancient Israelite writers used terminologies which were common at the time, I don’t believe that they necessarily believed flat earth cosmology.

The purpose of Scripture as written was and is to proclaim God and who He is. I don’t accept that Scripture was dictated word for word by God but that God described Himself to the Scripture writers within the framework of terminologies used at the time, not necessarily within the framework of a belief system of the time.

But this is a topic for another thread.

 

[Apple Sky]

The other thing I can say about this is that a globe earth in no way contradicts Scripture. The verses used by flat earthers to claim that the Bible indicates or proves a flat stationary earth are not about the earth, but about God and His character - who He IS!

I have to disagree with you here, the scriptures in the Bible refer to an earth that is unmovable, stationary & with a firmament above it, it don't get more clearer than this.

 

[trophy33]

While I agree with the view that the ancient Israelite writers used terminologies which were common at the time, I don’t believe that they necessarily believed flat earth cosmology.

The purpose of Scripture as written was and is to proclaim God and who He is. I don’t accept that Scripture was dictated word for word by God but that God described Himself to the Scripture writers within the framework of terminologies used at the time, not necessarily within the framework of a belief system of the time.

I do not believe Bible is inspired in anything else than in main theological or moral points. This view works best for me.

 

[Phil G]

I have to disagree with you here, the scriptures in the Bible refer to an earth that is unmovable, stationary & with a firmament above it, it don't get more clearer than this.

This is error. For instance the earth being immovable as in physically stationary is not supported in Scripture. If this was the case then as I pointed out to you before, David would have had to remain physically stationary when he said the he will not be moved.

The earth’s foundations do not define physical foundations but principles upon which God established His creation, such as the laws of physics.

Jesus is defined in Ephesians as being the cornerstone and the prophets and apostles as foundations. These terms are used not to define the church as something physical, but something spiritual.

If Scripture does state that the earth is flat & stationary & you believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, then you will be in a bit of a quandary if flat earthers acknowledge 24 hour sunlight in Antarctica in December. Your only choices will be either to deny reality or declare God a liar.

There’s no point in saying now that there won’t be 24 sunlight & therefore it’s a waste of time because that’s not being prepared to put it to the test.

 

[Phil G]

I do not believe Bible is inspired in anything else than in main theological or moral points. This view works best for me.

That’s ok if it works best for you, but it doesn’t for me. I don’t see God revealing Himself to His people by supporting false belief systems. I do see Him using terminologies that were common at the time.

 

[trophy33]

That’s ok if it works best for you, but it doesn’t for me. I don’t see God revealing Himself to His people by supporting false belief systems. I do see Him using terminologies that were common at the time.

Thats what I was trying to say - not being inspired meaning it was not God revealing it or using the terminologies. It was the people.

 

[trophy33]

I don’t see God revealing Himself to His people by supporting false belief systems.

A primitive worldview is not a "belief system", IMO.

Even the term "system" is from the Greek philosophy. We are talking about mythological era here, it was not even philosophy as we know it, with systems or logic, with the line between "natural" and "supernatural", between "physical" and "spiritual" etc. This is all our culture, not theirs.

They did not, therefore, care about logical problems or about physical impossibilities. It could be all miraculous or cause by gods, as far as they were concerned. They did not see the universe as something mechanical, obeying natural laws, mathematics or formal logic.

 

[Phil G]

A primitive worldview is not a "belief system", IMO.

Even the term "system" is from the Greek philosophy. We are talking about mythological era here, it was not even philosophy as we know it, with systems or logic, with the line between "natural" and "supernatural", between "physical" and "spiritual" etc. This is all our culture, not theirs.

They did not, therefore, care about logical problems or about physical impossibilities. It could be all miraculous, as far as they were concerned. They did not see the universe as something obeying natural laws or formal logic.

Ok, we’re getting a bit off topic here. The original point I was trying to make is that when Scripture is viewed as the inerrant Word of God and people believe it indicates or proves that a flat stationary earth is reality, this is a bad witness to who God is and brings the Gospel into disrepute.

That’s because the realty is that the earth is a globe and that Scripture is not contradicted by the reality. That’s because Scripture is about God, His character and His provision for our salvation. Using it as a science book to define cosmology is to defy God’s own purpose for His Word.

 

[Apple Sky]

That’s because Scripture is about God, His character and His provision for our salvation. Using it as a science book to define cosmology is to defy God’s own purpose for His Word.

So to quote what it states in scripture is to deny God's word ? I don't think so.

 

[Phil G]

So to quote what it states in scripture is to deny God's word ? I don't think so.

As I have said before Psalm 104:5 is not literally saying that the earth is stationary. It is poetry. David says in Psalm 16:8 that he will not be moved. Is this him saying he will not be physically moved? I don't think so, yet to say so would be to quote Scripture as it is written. It says it clearly, "I shall not be moved". Even the Hebrew is the same as in Psalm 104:5. But to insist that that is what Scripture says, that David is saying he will not be physically moved, would be to deny God's word and be a bad witness for the Gospel.

 

[Apple Sky]

Ok, we’re getting a bit off topic here. The original point I was trying to make is that when Scripture is viewed as the inerrant Word of God and people believe it indicates or proves that a flat stationary earth is reality, this is a bad witness to who God is and brings the Gospel into disrepute.

That’s because the realty is that the earth is a globe and that Scripture is not contradicted by the reality. That’s because Scripture is about God, His character and His provision for our salvation. Using it as a science book to define cosmology is to defy God’s own purpose for His Word.

I cannot read Genesis 1 in any other way other than what it reveals.

 

[Phil G]

I cannot read Genesis 1 in any other way other than what it reveals.

Ok then, tell me what it reveals about a flat stationary earth.

 

[Apple Sky]

Ok then, tell me what it reveals about a flat stationary earth.

There are 200 verses which relate to a level, stationary earth & not 1 to a spinning earth that orbits the sun, if there is I can't find.

 

[Phil G]

There are 200 verses which relate to a level, stationary earth & not 1 to a spinning earth that orbits the sun, if there is I can't find.

I'm talking first about Genesis 1, which is the chapter you brought up. My position is and always has been that Scripture neither refers to a flat stationary earth nor a rotating globe.

So I repeat, tell me what Genesis 1 reveals about a flat stationary earth.