Poptart's hero...

[Softball Bat]

1. People just can't get enough of fl@t earth talk.

2. I have previously talked about this Hughes asshat. Not IN.

[Softball Bat]

Seriously - you entertain me with your flat thoughts.

Yes, the topic is very interesting, imo.

People should do their own research on it, if they want to.


Just one quick comment...

Imagine, if you can, that you were schooled from Kindergarten that the earth is flat, stationary, and that the sun, moon, and stars move above our flat plane.
This model was drilled into your brain, and was continuously reinforced daily, through all media.
For 40-something years this was your reality.

The flat model seems perfectly reasonable.
It's what we experience.

We don't feel ourselves moving.
It seems that we are on "flat" ground.
It seems that the sun, moon, and stars are moving above our plane.

So imagine that this is the reality you have lived with for decades.


Then one day...

Someone comes along and says, "No, no, you see... the earth is a ball."
You (on this ball) are spinning - 1,000 mph.
And you and the ball are also revolving around the sun at 67,000 mph.


You'd be like... :?


Wtf is this guy smoking?

[Left Seater]

I don’t feel driving 65 mph down the highway or 500 plus mph in a plane either. I do notice acceleration and deceleration. But to imagine what you just asked us to I would have to suspend the reality of seasons and sunsets and time zones and eclipses and the phases of the moon and airplane flights and shadows and vast international conspiracies just as a start.

[Mikey]

Imagine, if you can, that you were schooled from Kindergarten that the earth is flat, stationary, and that the sun, moon, and stars move above our flat plane.

Somebody must have brought up this question here before but, to tell you the truth, I haven't been following this discussion too closely.

In your world, where does the sun go between the time it disappears in the west and then reappears in the east? Does it, like, turn off so we just can't see it go back over there?

This reminds me of a class picture that was taken at our high school. Everybody was lined up on risers in, like, four rows, and they had one of those panoramic cameras that would actually rotate from one end of the row to the other. One guy was on the end where the camera started, jumped down and ran behind the risers, and got to the other end in time to show up there twice in the same picture. Maybe the sun is doing something like that?

[Softball Bat]

Lefty's 100% accurate, 'tart. Sorry.

People will come to their own conclusions.
Folks should do their own research on flat earth.

Personally, I recognize that the globe is entirely nonsensical.

'Spray, I don't think you would have ever believed in the globe if it wasn't for NASA's bullshit all of these decades.

Do you honestly think people in space, on cords,in space suits, with thick gloves on, assembled the ISS -- and they got it all sealed up airtight, just perfectly so?

Oh my goodness.

Do they have a machine shop up there on the ISS?

How in fuck's name do you imagine they maintain the craft and live up there?

It is totally preposterous.

A complete and utter fairy tale.

NASA tells you that you are on a ball.

YOU have never seen the ball.
YOU have never even seen the curve.

Oh well...

In your world, where does the sun go between the time it disappears in the west and then reappears in the east? Does it, like, turn off so we just can't see it go back over there?

The clouds move far enough away so that they finally sink out of view under the horizon.

I suspect it is the same with the sun.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

So wait...NASA can fake lunar eclipses, too? The ones we can observe with our own eyeballs? Far out, man.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Personally, I'm more of a cat earth guy.

[Softball Bat]

So wait...NASA can fake lunar eclipses, too? The ones we can observe with our own eyeballs? Far out, man.

I have never said that.

If you think the heliocentric model is the only explanation for lunar eclipses, then feel free to enjoy that view.

[Softball Bat]

There are other Christians on the board.

I'd like to see your takes on three cases from Scripture.


1.
- God placed lights (sun, moon, stars) in the firmament - Genesis 1:14-16.
- God established a firmament which divides the waters above the firmament from the waters below the firmament - Genesis 1:6-7.
- God established the waters above the firmament forever, by a decree that shall never pass - Psalms 148:1-6.

Where do you think the waters above the sun, moon, and stars are located?


2. Tower of Babel - Genesis 11:1-9

The people built a tower that sought to reach up to heaven.
The Lord came down (v.5) and scattered them all on the earth.

How do you reconcile this with the spinning globe?


3. Joshua 10:13

God had the sun (and the moon) stand still in the sky for about a day.

How do you reconcile this with the heliocentric model?



Your thoughts, please.

[Rooster]

#4) “As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our
transgressions from us.”
Psalm 103:12

The operative concept here is that unlike the north and south poles which are fixed points on a globe, there is no definitive place where the east and west begins or ends, thus the distance is immeasurable.

[Softball Bat]

I hope that isn't your Biblical case for the globe.


I can comment on your post (and probably will), but don't you first have any take at all on the three cases I first posted?

Are you a rude person?


:)

[Goober McTuber]

'Tart - I would consider myself a Christian.

Yes, you certainly live it every day on these boards.

And by the way, Mr. Christian, God (allegedly) created the earth in six days.

[Left Seater]

I consider myself to be a Christian. I believe their is some sort of higher power, but who knows if Christians, Jews, Islams, etc have it correct. I have issues with most modern religion in that the so called beliefs are used to bash others or to bring power or wealth to someone who claims to have a direct line to "God."

That said looking at your quotes, let me first say they are all from the Old Testament. For much of that time there wasn't a written language. Stories were passed down generation to generation. This isn't at all reliable. Further the word firmament appears only in King James versions of the Bible. This is a translation decision. But even with that, since this is a written version of an oral history passed down for generations, the author or translator is free to use a word or words they believe will help the reader understand. Thousands of years ago it would probably make sense to think there was some sort of dome over the earth.

As for the tower of Babel, again a written version of an oral history. Of course the people were going to build a tower UP. Why build one sideways when they could just walk sideways? Digging into the ground isn't feasible so they likely assumed that "God" lived above them. This is a common belief in many including Indian tribes of the US and nomadic peoples of Africa. Saying "God" came DOWN is their way to try to explain what happened. There aren't stories saying what "God" looked like as the tower was destroyed. Instead it was likely weather that may or may not have been "sent" by "God."

As for the Sun and Moon standing still in the sky, you can observe it happen yourself. Just get close to the poles, you won't see a sunset for a period of time. Who knows where the person originally telling this story was when the sun and moon appeared to stand still in the sky. Again this is an oral history written down centuries later.

So why do you take such a literal interpretation of these translations? Many clergy and religious scholars don't take this same view.

[Softball Bat]

So why do you take such a literal interpretation of these translations? Many clergy and religious scholars don't take this same view.

1. Jesus (the way, truth, and life) is the very Word of God (John 1:1-3).
He referenced Old Testament Word many times, verifying it's authenticity and truthfulness.

2. The first chapter of Genesis is very straight forward and direct.
If God intended to inform us that the sun, moon, and stars are contained within a firmament, above which rests water -- how would He do it?
He would do it exactly as it is written in Genesis 1.

Nobody could read Genesis 1 and imagine that God is telling us that we live on a spinning ball that is also revolving around a massive sun that is 93 million miles away.
Nor could anyone read Genesis 11 or Joshua 10 and think such things.

[Softball Bat]

'Tart - I would consider myself a Christian.

Yes, you certainly live it every day on these boards.

And by the way, Mr. Christian, God (allegedly) created the earth in six days.

Resting on the 7th was part of the process, dumbass. 7 of HIS days. As old as you are, one of your days = at least two days.

Goober will be 120 years old (like Moses) any day now.

[Left Seater]

The Old Testament is oral stories written down centuries later. It is quite different from the gospels. This is not up for debate.

[atmdad]

1. Jesus (the way, truth, and life) is the very Word of God (John 1:1-3).
He referenced Old Testament Word many times all the time, verifying it's authenticity and truthfulness.[/quote]

FTFY :)

Nobody could read Genesis 1 and imagine that God is telling us that we live on a spinning ball that is also revolving around a massive sun that is 93 million miles away.
Nor could anyone read Genesis 11 or Joshua 10 and think such things.

I have to disagree with you Pop, these are some of the hardest verses I find to wrap my head around. Scientific evidence over the decades proves that our planet is a spec in a vast system of of other planets and stars. Fossil evidence shows there were early creatures and plant forms greater than 6000 years old. Does that mean the Bible is bunk? No! The problem lays in trying to use our human mind and logic to comprehend the infinite reach of a CREATOR that is incomprehensible. GOD came to us as a man to provide the only link to HIM, all we have to do is ask.

[Softball Bat]

Fossil evidence shows there were early creatures and plant forms greater than 6000 years old. Does that mean the Bible is bunk? No!

Be straight here.
You are saying that Genesis 1, Genesis 11, and Joshua 10 are bunk.
The heliocentric model is surely not described.

Why did God lied to us?

Can God lie?
See Numbers 23:19, Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18, and others...

Jesus (WHo is God, and Who is The Word) verified the OT (Word) to be accurate and true.

[Softball Bat]

#4) “As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our
transgressions from us.”
Psalm 103:12

The operative concept here is that unlike the north and south poles which are fixed points on a globe, there is no definitive place where the east and west begins or ends, thus the distance is immeasurable.

1. The ironic thing here is that the verse just prior to the one you cited (Psalms 103:11) says that the heaven is high above the earth. If I am on a flat plane, yep, the heaven is high above the earth. If I am on a globe, the heaven is also below the earth.

2. What you posted is editorial. The Scripture there says nothing at all about north and south, and it also certainly says nothing about N and S being fixed points. You pulled that out of your ass.

[Left Seater]

The whole Old Testament is editorial. Why is the word firmament only in the King James versions?

[Softball Bat]

The NRSV calls it a dome.
The OJB calls it an expanse, dome, firmament.
The Wycliffe Bible calls it a firmament.
The DRA calls it a firmament.
The NKJ calls it a firmament.
The KJ21 calls it a firmament.
The ASV calls it a firmament.



The word is raqiya`.


Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon
Click, scroll down slightly, and read the lexicon entry - https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/le ... 549&t=NASB

It is interesting, no?

Above the raqiya ' (which contains the sun, moon, and stars) are waters.
Genesis 1:6-7 and Psalms 148:1-6.

[Goober McTuber]

'Tart - I would consider myself a Christian.

Yes, you certainly live it every day on these boards.

And by the way, Mr. Christian, God (allegedly) created the earth in six days.

Resting on the 7th was part of the process, dumbass.

Really? What part of the earth did he create on the 7th day, moron?

[Goober McTuber]

Resting on the 7th was part of the process, dumbass. 7 of HIS days. As old as you are, one of your days = at least two days.

Goober will be 120 years old (like Moses) any day now.

And smarter, more virile and better looking that either of you.

[Mikey]

In your world, where does the sun go between the time it disappears in the west and then reappears in the east? Does it, like, turn off so we just can't see it go back over there?

The clouds move far enough away so that they finally sink out of view under the horizon.

I suspect it is the same with the sun.

So how does it get back to the other side without us seeing it?
Or maybe there's a new one generated each morning?

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

So wait...NASA can fake lunar eclipses, too? The ones we can observe with our own eyeballs? Far out, man.

If you think the heliocentric model is the only explanation for lunar eclipses, then feel free to enjoy that view.

What are the other explanations? Please cite specific scientific theory, not hocus pocus.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Resting on the 7th was part of the process, dumbass.

Lazy ass.

[Dinsdale]

It's hilarious that Poptard has never looked through a telescope at the moon, since you can clearly see, beyond any doubt, that it's a sphere.

But then again, he is pretty fucking stupid, so there's that.

[Softball Bat]

In your world, where does the sun go between the time it disappears in the west and then reappears in the east? Does it, like, turn off so we just can't see it go back over there?

The clouds move far enough away so that they finally sink out of view under the horizon.

I suspect it is the same with the sun.

So how does it get back to the other side without us seeing it?
Or maybe there's a new one generated each morning?

This is kind of a basic "flat earth" question.
Look it up.

The last "flat earth" thread reached a point where it was more than clear that people were not willing to have a real discussion, so I left it.
And as I said many times prior to that thread that I am not interested in talking about flat earth here.
But people kept begging for it, so I finally consented.

I'm not going to begin down the path again.
People can do their own research and think whatever they want.

'Spray started this thread, so i decided to point out what the Bible says on this issue.
I will discuss that here, but nothing else.

[Softball Bat]

So wait...NASA can fake lunar eclipses, too? The ones we can observe with our own eyeballs? Far out, man.

If you think the heliocentric model is the only explanation for lunar eclipses, then feel free to enjoy that view.

What are the other explanations? Please cite specific scientific theory, not hocus pocus.

There are other theories.
I have no theory that I am willing to accept as absolutely true.

You can certainly do research on it if you care to.


Are you sure that the sun and moon are objects?

Well, they are lights.

[Softball Bat]

It's hilarious that Poptard has never looked through a telescope at the moon, since you can clearly see, beyond any doubt, that it's a sphere.

Assume that you are right that the moon is a sphere.

How does that prove that the earth is your globe?

[Softball Bat]

I consider myself to be a Christian.
The whole Old Testament is editorial

:?



Jesus Christ is God (John 1:1-3).
Jesus Christ is the Word (John 1:1-3).


Genesis 1:6
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters,...


The Word of God.




Pause, reflect, deeply consider what you think and say.

[Jay in Phoenix]

Assume that you are right that the moon is a sphere.

How does that prove that the earth is your globe?

If the moon is a sphere, or shaped like a globe, as are all the other planets in the solar system, as is the sun, then it stands to reason that the Earth is as well.

No assumption, just provable scientific fact. These aren't "lights in the sky". They are planets, stars and satellites.

As Dinsdale said, get a telescope and look for yourself.

[Left Seater]

Still Old Testament. It is someone’s take on what happened. It isn’t the Gospels.

But this discussion using the Bible is silly. You nor I can prove God or what he actually wanted imperfect humans to write and translate. Hence why we call it faith.

Instead we have all of these observations and facts that you just write off, dismiss, ignore etc.

[Dinsdale]

I consider myself to be a Christian.
The whole Old Testament is editorial

:?



Jesus Christ is God (John 1:1-3).
Jesus Christ is the Word (John 1:1-3).


Genesis 1:6
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters,...


The Word of God.




Pause, reflect, deeply consider what you think and say.

After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth

It is He who sits above the circle of the earth

Tht's a very credible science book you so frequently cite.

[Derron]

Hearing anybody on this crew discuss religion with their theological ideas is hilarious.

Even more hilarious is all your attempts to reason, argue, cajole,about science with the the biggest crack smoker ever to post here.

[Softball Bat]

1. I don't claim that the Bible is a science book. I claim it is the Word of God.

2. What is the "four corners of the earth" supposed to prove?

3. The verse you cite is Isaiah 40:22. Speaking of God, it says...

It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers;
that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:


Isaiah used the word chuwg in 40:22 - translated as circle.

Previously, Isaiah spoke of a ball (Isaiah 22:8) and guess what?
He actually used the word ball (duwr) when he wanted to express the meaning... ball.

He didn't call the earth a BALL in that verse you cited.
No, he used CIRCLE, on purpose.

Look at the lexicon entry for circle (chuwg).
Scroll down slightly and read it... https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/le ... 2329&t=KJV

It speaks of the arch or vault of the sky.
That is what God sits upon, Isaiah says.
See Job 22:14.








And looking down from the top, perhaps the surface of the earth has the four corners.
Something like this...










Any time you want to contribute to the discussion, fire away, Derron.



*burp*

[Derron]

Any time you want to contribute to the discussion, fire away, Derron.



*burp*

This is not a discussion. These are the David Koresh type of ramblings by a crack smoking moron who's dome is getting verrrry crowded with the various people who keep handing your ass to you. and you just keep rolling out the lame ass "proof" you allege.

At least you are still here so that we can heap abuse on somebody, with Moving Bitch in the basement and Screwy on a Trump sucks hiatus, the amusement is severally lacking these days.

[Softball Bat]

Derron, if you think I am a David Koresh type, it should be pretty easy for you to shut me down.

There are other Christians on the board.

I'd like to see your takes on three cases from Scripture.


1.
- God placed lights (sun, moon, stars) in the firmament - Genesis 1:14-16.
- God established a firmament which divides the waters above the firmament from the waters below the firmament - Genesis 1:6-7.
- God established the waters above the firmament forever, by a decree that shall never pass - Psalms 148:1-6.

Where do you think the waters above the sun, moon, and stars are located?


2. Tower of Babel - Genesis 11:1-9

The people built a tower that sought to reach up to heaven.
The Lord came down (v.5) and scattered them all on the earth.

How do you reconcile this with the spinning globe?


3. Joshua 10:13

God had the sun (and the moon) stand still in the sky for about a day.

How do you reconcile this with the heliocentric model?



Your thoughts, please.

So far I have been pretty underwhelmed by what believers have posted about these passages.

Maybe you can raise the bar?


GO...

[atmdad]

*burp*

This makes me think you are a Marty troll, Canada as the center of the universe? I've been to Canada, I don't think so, but then again I didn't go into a Tim Horton's, so I may be wrong.

Seriously though,

Poptart, like I said, the book of Genesis is the hardest to wrap my head around in the face of scientific fact. My career has been in a STEM field, I can not suspend my understanding of gravity to make it fit in a flat earth scenario with your mind play games. The earth is a spheroidal type object surrounded by many other spheroidal and ellipsoid type objects in an immense universe.

You are the one the that seems to be limiting the infinite capability of God by trying to fit the world as you know it into something you think you understand with your misguided altruistic interpretation of the Bible. Left Seater pointed out that there is a thing called Faith, something I like to think I have, that is not questioned by those with narrow legalistic mindsets.

You like to through out mind play games. Try this one, what if instead of 2000 +/- 100 years ago, God sent Jesus to visit us today to provide us salvation?
Would the message be any different?

[Softball Bat]

your misguided altruistic interpretation of the Bible

It is misguided to interpret Genesis 1, Genesis 11, and Joshua 10 as the heliocentric model.
God told us in the VERY FIRST CHAPTER OF HIS WORD what the nature of our environment is -- and it most definitely does not match in the slightest bit with the globe.

You think what is written in Genesis 1, 11, and Joshua 10 is blatantly FALSE.


God's SAID, "Let there be a firmament..." etc.

Jesus Christ IS the Word of God -- and beyond that, Jesus repeatedly upheld the Old Testament as authentic and true.


You have not properly addressed this, nor have you addressed why you think God blatantly lied about the nature of His creation.

Try this one, what if instead of 2000 +/- 100 years ago, God sent Jesus to visit us today to provide us salvation?

Would the message be any different?
I imagine the message of Jesus would be the same today.
It is the same today.

The shape of the earth is not a salvation issue.

That said, with a enclosed, flat, stationary plane, it is pretty damn hard for one to deny that there is a Creator.
With the heliocentric model, one can much more comfortably deny that there is a Creator.