Proof the Earth is Flat

Shrewd Manager said:

He is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path. Amen.

Click to expand...

What sort of lamp? As we are taking texts literally here, I'm assuming you have a particular type in mind. What's the official version?

christine40 said:

I've flown to the other side of the world

if the earth is flat, why didn't I fall off?

Click to expand...

Maybe because it's flat. You should be more worried about flying off or tumbling off a spinning ball.

Tom 1 said:

What sort of lamp? As we are taking texts literally here, I'm assuming you have a particular type in mind. What's the official version?

Click to expand...

Taking texts literally? Let's not get too caught up in the translations. I was using the NASB, but why not the KJV?

And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. (Gen 1:16)

And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. (Rev 21:23)

Nice pair, isn't it? The upgrade from just 2 ordinary lights, to the 2 lights of God and Christ. Maybe also a bit non-trinitarian, but that's not important right now.

Shrewd Manager said:

And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

Click to expand...

Clever - but do you think this means literally that Jesus is an actual light source? Would that mean that he follows a certain path each day, or that he walks around, lighting up places at random?

What do you believe is meant by lights 'ruling' the day and night? What powers do they have?

Shrewd Manager said:

Maybe also a bit non-trinitarian, but that's not important right now.

Click to expand...

That's always important. Non-Trinitarianism is non-Christianity.

Tom 1 said:

Clever - but do you think this means literally that Jesus is an actual light source? Would that mean that he follows a certain path each day, or that he walks around, lighting up places at random?

What do you believe is meant by lights 'ruling' the day and night? What powers do they have?

Click to expand...

Rev 21:24-26 are instructive:

The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it. In the daytime (for there will be no night there) its gates will never be closed; and they will bring the glory and the honor of the nations into it;

Basking in the eternal light of the fullness of the glorious presence of God and Christ. The nations and kings of earth repentant and worshipful. The consummation of divine promise of salvation of all (Isa 45:23) and the time of restoration of all things (Acts 3:21) where God will be all in all (1 Cor 15:28).

2 lights in the present age, 2 in the age to come.

Radagast said:

That's always important. Non-Trinitarianism is non-Christianity.

Click to expand...

Well, this is what happens when you put dogma first. But if the scriptures reveal otherwise (and I'm not saying they necessarily do in toto on this issue, just that the separation/ distinction of God and Jesus at this point is indicative), you gotta let go the dogma. Agreed?

Shrewd Manager said:

Rev 21:24-26 are instructive:

The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it. In the daytime (for there will be no night there) its gates will never be closed; and they will bring the glory and the honor of the nations into it;

Basking in the eternal light of the fullness of the glorious presence of God and Christ. The nations and kings of earth repentant and worshipful. The consummation of divine promise of salvation of all (Isa 45:23) and the time of restoration of all things (Acts 3:21) where God will be all in all (1 Cor 15:28).

2 lights in the present age, 2 in the age to come.

Click to expand...

Quite, it all seems rather figurative. Ways of conveying the idea of something not literally described in language.

Tom 1 said:

Quite, it all seems rather figurative. Ways of conveying the idea of something not literally described in language.

Click to expand...

Yes it's post-the marriage of heaven and earth, so describing a highly spiritualised state using visionary, symbolic, apocalyptic, prophetic language, more in the tradition of Daniel, Isaiah and Ezekiel. This is why I have a problem with the kind of carnal thinking that renders the lake of fire as some kind of glorified bbq. John even emphasises at the outset that the visions were 'signified' to him by the angel (Rev 1:1-2). It's a very Hebraic book, in the sense of the kind of word-pictures that intend to carry meanings (connotations, allusions, types etc) developed through scripture since the beginning.

Shrewd Manager said:

Yes it's post-the marriage of heaven and earth, so describing a highly spiritualised state using visionary, symbolic, apocalyptic, prophetic language, more in the tradition of Daniel, Isaiah and Ezekiel. This is why I have a problem with the kind of carnal thinking that renders the lake of fire as some kind of glorified bbq. John even emphasises at the outset that the visions were 'signified' to him by the angel (Rev 1:1-2). It's a very Hebraic book, in the sense of the kind of word-pictures that intend to carry meanings (connotations, allusions, types etc) developed through scripture since the beginning.

Click to expand...

Indeed, as with the Genesis narrative stylised language is used to convey the order of things, who is in charge and so on. Not a literal description.

Tom 1 said:

Indeed, as with the Genesis narrative stylised language is used to convey the order of things, who is in charge and so on. Not a literal description.

Click to expand...

I don't see why it has to be either/or. Earthly (literal sense) and heavenly (allegorical sense) can apply simultaneously to the same passage. It's a question of register. At very least, the literal and figurative shouldn't be inconsistent. So when in Gen 1:16 we have a 2 lights, and this is alluded to in Rev 21:23, I'd feel fairly safe that there are 2 literal and figurative lights being taught. To doubt that is to reject that any meaning can be taken from those scriptures, is it not?

Shrewd Manager said:

To doubt that is to reject that any meaning can be taken from those scriptures, is it not?

Click to expand...

No, not remotely. Quite the opposite. Scholars of both the Hebrew language and the ancient world context like Robert Miller II and John Walton etc shed a lot of light onto what it all meant to the original writers, which makes the whole thing a lot more coherent than when it’s looked at from a modern perspective.

Shrewd Manager said:

What's rot - That the Bible describes a flat, still, domed earth, with sun and moon each giving their own light?

And the city has no need of the sun or of the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God has illumined it, and its lamp is the Lamb. (Rev 21:23)

Don't like it, find another faith. But pls don't trash ours. Too much to ask?

Click to expand...

I am a Christian, I certainly do not use the Bible as a science text. Do not think to lecture me on what Christians' believe.

Shrewd Manager said:

I don't see why it has to be either/or. Earthly (literal sense) and heavenly (allegorical sense) can apply simultaneously to the same passage. It's a question of register. At very least, the literal and figurative shouldn't be inconsistent. So when in Gen 1:16 we have a 2 lights, and this is alluded to in Rev 21:23, I'd feel fairly safe that there are 2 literal and figurative lights being taught. To doubt that is to reject that any meaning can be taken from those scriptures, is it not?

Click to expand...

Look, buddy (Note: I say these words with a tone of love):

People have seen the stars rotating in different direction on the North pole hemisphere vs. the South pole or hemisphere. Pay close attention to the pic below, and you will see the stars rotating in different directions.



That's observable Science that only works on a globe and not a flat Earth. You can do an experiment at home by putting cameras (or taping your smartphone) on a globe vs. a flat disk like a pizza or something. You have to cheat and put the cameras or smartphone underneath the flat disk in order to make your theory of a flat Earth work.

While the Bible does appear to at first glance make it appear like the Earth is flat, there are tons of other metaphors or other words in the Bible that if taken too literally do damage to our understanding of what His Word is really saying. Context is key. There are verses that support a globe Earth, as well. These verses may be more subtle in expressing this truth, but they are true nonetheless.

Compass Directions East & West and Psalm 103:12.

I am thankful for CF poster "Brad B" for this discovery. He said, I quote:


This is from Psalms 103, and it says,

It is true there are no points for an East or West. However, there are points for a North and South. They are called the North and South poles for a reason on our spherical Earth. But on a Flat Earth, South is outward in all directions on a Flat disk. On a Flat Earth: The South is an infinite circle (sort of like a pizza crust) and it does not have any one ending point exactly. Granted, while God's Word is not a Science book, we should see it line up with Scientific truths because God created the Science of our universe. So when the Bible talks about Scientific things like North, South, East, and West, we would expect to see the truth of God's Word support the physical real world we live on in light of the truth of God's Word; And in this case, Psalms 103:12 makes more sense with a spherical Earth than a Flat Earth.

Side Note:

Oh, and I am also not intending Psalms 103:12 to be the one and only verse that refutes a Flat Earth. I believe it is merely one link in a Scriptural chain of evidences (of which I hope glorifies Jesus Christ).

Jerusalem (North) is Above According to Galatians Four.

25 "For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all."
(Galatians 4:25-26).

In Galatians 4, Sarai/Isaac is paralleled with Jerusalem (Representing Faith and Freedom) and Hagar/Ishmael is paralleled with Mt. Sinai (Representing Law and Bondage). Again, I believe Mt. Sinai is Mt. Jabal al Lawz in Saudi Arabia - Which lines up with Paul essentially saying, Jerusalem is above Mount Sinai in Arabia (i.e. Saudi Arabia)).

The phrase, “Jerusalem, which is above [Mount Sinai],” clarified that Jerusalem and Mount Sinai corresponded to the same line of longitude. “Above” is translated from the Greek ano, a word that can also mean “upward” or “on the top” (ibid., #507). It appears in the NT nine times. Of chief interest here is its specific geographical meaning of “on the north” or “northward.” The word was used in this manner by the notable Greek historian Herodotus (Liddell and Scott 1889, 83-84). Paul’s inclusion of ano defined Jerusalem as being north of Mount Sinai on his line of sustoicheo.With these observations in mind, the geographical concepts in Galatians 4:25-26 can be summarized as follows:


Plotting Paul’s location for Mount Sinai

The map in Figure 4 shows the 35-15’E longitude meridian that passes just east of the Old City of Jerusalem. Moving southward, the line crosses the mountains of western Jordan, the ancient place of Mount Seir. Long before the Exodus, this region was synonymous with Edom, land that had been divinely granted to Esau, the brother of Jacob (Israel). Several arguments exist for not placing Mount Sinai in Edom, among them the biblical injunction that Esau’s territory was not to be violated by the Israelites.



It must be taken under consideration that Jerusalem is not higher in elevation from Mt. Jabal al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia (i.e. Mt. Sinai).





So Flat Earthers cannot object and say that Jerusalem is above in relation to elevation here.

Note: If you never heard about Jabal al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia as being Mt. Sinai, then you need to check out the following video (within my post). For it reveals amazing discoveries made at Mt. Sinai. Such as Elijah's cave, certain artifacts, and the split rock (showing us that it is indeed Mt. Sinai).

In fact, today, people have witnessed the burned top of Mt. Sinai. A Mountain that is now called "Jabal al Lawz" in Saudi Arabia. A mountain that you can see that is burned at the top.








If you don't like the resolution of the video at YouTube, I do believe the DVD is still available on Amazon or other select sites.


Anyways, getting back on topic: Galatians 4:25-26 is telling us that Jerusalem (Which is North of Mt. Sinai) is above. On a Flat Earth, North is considered the center point of a pizza or flat disk. There is no true North on a Flat disk. Maps would look like one would be going up or above, but on a flat disk Earth, going in the direction of North would not be going "above" but it would be going to the center of the map. North would technically be a lie. Yet, God's Word using directions of North, South, East, and West many times.

Note: Here is an illustration of a false map (showing North) according to the Flat Earthers:


And here is an illustration of the real world we live on:




Source used:
http://ancientexodus.com/2013/04/11/mount-sinai-and-the-apostle-paul/

kiwimac said:

I am a Christian, I certainly do not use the Bible as a science text. Do not think to lecture me on what Christians' believe.

Click to expand...

Not interested in what Christians are said to believe. Just the witness of scripture. Why come to this forum if you're not willing to be open? I'm asking for your scriptural proofs of heliocentrism/ big bang/ ball earth. Do you have any?

God stretches out the North - Job 26:7

"God stretches the northern sky over
empty space and hangs the earth on nothing."
(Job 26:7 NLT).

Here is the Northern sky on spherical Earth:




So I can see God stretching the northern sky over empty space on our spherical planet. This model works.

But how exactly does this work with a Flat Earth with an atmospheric dome (with magnetic North being the point or center of the map)?





On a spherical Earth, I can separate true North and true South by the equator. Water spins in one direction above the equator vs. below the equator. The same is true for storms and stars. Stuff like that does not make any lick of sense on a flat Earth that has an atmospheric dome.

Or even on this model of a flat Earth:



Where is the North sky that God has stretched out so as to hang the Earth upon nothing?

In other words, I guess what I am saying is why call it the North sky if it is not easy to point out or find? Especially seeing that this Northern sky is stretched out, too.

The Orion and Pleiades Star Clusters:





The Orion star cluster has been set loose and the stars within this star cluster have been drifting away from each other. Whereas the Pleiades star cluster is gravitationally held together as a group. God asked Job thousands of years ago if he can bind the Pleiades and loose the bands of Orion. We did not truly confirm this until the Science of Astronomy discovered such a thing. However, Flat Earthers believe gravity is a lie and or not true. Yet, we can observe gravity take place all around us. It is how the rings of Saturn do not float away from Saturn. There is some kind of force keeping those rings there. We call this gravity because it is a force that connects certain objects like a apple from a tree hitting the head of a person. In this case, in Job 38, we learn of how of how gravity (or unseen pull on objects) can be loosened and or increased by God's power.

Also, all other planets and the sun in the solar system are spheres. We can clearly observe this. It would be very strange and odd if Earth was the only exception to this, unless one thinks the NASA conspiracy has even reached to secretly alter all high powered telescopes and observatories on our planet.

Bible Highlighter said:

God stretches out the North - Job 26:7

"God stretches the northern sky over
empty space and hangs the earth on nothing."
(Job 26:7 NLT).

Here is the Northern sky on spherical Earth:




So I can see God stretching the northern sky over empty space on our spherical planet. This model works.

But how exactly does this work with a Flat Earth with an atmospheric dome (with magnetic North being the point or center of the map)?





On a spherical Earth, I can separate true North and true South by the equator. Water spins in one direction above the equator vs. below the equator. The same is true for storms and stars. Stuff like that does not make any lick of sense on a flat Earth that has an atmospheric dome.

Or even on this model of a flat Earth:



Where is the North sky that God has stretched out so as to hang the Earth upon nothing?

In other words, I guess what I am saying is why call it the North sky if it is not easy to point out or find? Especially seeing that this Northern sky is stretched out, too.

Click to expand...

Support Job 26:7 ( the way it is falsely translated) from other areas of the Bible.

Show just one verse that supports Job 26:7