Genesis 1: What is a 'firmament'?

[joshuabgood]

Can any of you actually prove round earth with testable understandable science that the average individual can do?

What about heliocentric versus geocentric?

Can you disprove the theory of the massive gyroscopic universe without very specialized equipment or access to space?

Can you prove the curve you see actually extends past the "ice barrier" that you cannot go past? How many of us have seen the compass spin at the south pole? How many of us have looked at the stars from the south hemisphere and the north hemisphere?

When I fly from LA to Philly the round nature of the earth and sun setting/rising times shifts are obvious.

Flat earth talk is delusional. I hate to say it that strong but it needs to be said. The earth isn't flat.

[Ken]

Can any of you actually prove round earth with testable understandable science that the average individual can do?

What about heliocentric versus geocentric?

Can you disprove the theory of the massive gyroscopic universe without very specialized equipment or access to space?

Can you prove the curve you see actually extends past the "ice barrier" that you cannot go past? How many of us have seen the compass spin at the south pole? How many of us have looked at the stars from the south hemisphere and the north hemisphere?

Yes, I can do all of those things:

1. I have traveled around the earth as have many millions of people since the time of Magellan via plane and boat. One does not even have to travel. One can easily re-create Eratosthenes famous experiment from 240 BC to demonstrate a spherical earth.



2. Yes, the movement of the planets around the sun is easy to document by simple astronomical observation. You don't even need a telescope. I have also done celestial navigation at sea which is premised on a heliocentric universe and would not work if the earth were stationary and everything else revolved around it.



3. massive gyroscopic universe? What?

4. Yes, I lived and worked in Alaska for a decade and traveled well past the ice edge on the Bering Sea and Beaufort Sea various times and can confirm that the curvature of the earth continues.



How about you? Can you prove (1) flat earth, (2) geocentric universe, (3) massive gyroscopic universe (whatever that is), and (4) that the earth stops at the "ice barrier" using any sort of science at all that isn't completely laughable?

[Soloist]

When I fly from LA to Philly the round nature of the earth and sun setting/rising times shifts are obvious.

Flat earth talk is delusional. I hate to say it that strong but it needs to be said. The earth isn't flat.

The flat earthers have explained what you mentioned and your evidence is flawed.

Yes, I can do all of those things:

1. I have traveled around the earth as have many millions of people since the time of Magellan via plane and boat. One does not even have to travel. One can easily re-create Eratosthenes famous experiment from 240 BC to demonstrate a spherical earth

Eratosthene did not prove that the earth was round. He started with a premise that the earth was round and was estimating the circumference. His data could have proved round earth if he had taken more data points, that was not what he set out to do though as the Greeks of the time already believed it to be round.

Eratosthenes' model depends on the assumption that the sun is far away and therefore produces parallel rays of light all over the earth. If the sun is nearby, then shadows will change length even for a flat earth. A flat earth model is sketched at the right. The vertical stick casts shadows that grow longer as the stick moves to the left, away from the closest point to the sun. (The sun is at height h above the earth.)

https://www.millersville.edu/physics/ex ... /index.php

2. Yes, the movement of the planets around the sun is easy to document by simple astronomical observation. You don't even need a telescope. I have also done celestial navigation at sea which is premised on a heliocentric universe and would not work if the earth were stationary and everything else revolved around it.

While I believe in a round earth, I find the only convincing evidence of a heliocentric model is the parallax measurements which have a very small margin outside of satellite measurement. The stars appear to move around us as does the sun and planets. If you pick up an Orrery by the sun, everything moves around it, if you pick it up by any planet, the reverse is true.

3. massive gyroscopic universe? What?

https://www.robertsungenis.org/2021/05/ ... trism.html
https://www.amazon.com/Geocentrism-101- ... pldnSite=1
https://www.theprinciplemovie.com

I'm sure you laugh, but there are legitimate scientists who study the possibility. Their conclusions seem absurd though.

4. Yes, I lived and worked in Alaska for a decade and traveled well past the ice edge on the Bering Sea and Beaufort Sea various times and can confirm that the curvature of the earth continues.

This proves nothing, the models the flat earthers use have the north pole in the center. South pole is necessary to disprove it.

How about you? Can you prove (1) flat earth, (2) geocentric universe, (3) massive gyroscopic universe (whatever that is), and (4) that the earth stops at the "ice barrier" using any sort of science at all that isn't completely laughable?

I see no reason to advance nonsense. I'm pointing out its not that easy to actually engage people and show them they are wrong with this. The few points I made are the plausible ways to engage someone and disprove flat earth. Geocentrism removes some speculative unobservable theories and is relatively impossible to disprove from earth itself. How do we know the universe is moving? if you are on a train looking at your seat is it moving? We are on the train. Its impossible for us to know if it is moving or not by looking at earth. The only way to differentiate between the two theories is to use parallax measurements of stars. The parallax is something very difficult to do as the margin is very small. Its childs play with a telescope in space.

[joshuabgood]

I have read all the flatearther stuff. It is well, not compelling at all. Followers of Jesus that espouse this nonsense do harm to the kingdom of God.

Finny K notes that it s like mental pornagraphy. People have a need to have "insider info" that makes them feel like they alone have a secret knowledge and everyone else is deluded. This same trait is what drives other conspiracies. Like the rhe USA never landed on the moon...Elvis is alive...aliens landed on earth..chemtrails...non evidenced based medicine...etc.

[Neto]

I'm going to say just a bit more here, because I do not sense that anyone has really understood what I was trying to say in my previous post

What I'm saying is that what people down through the ages (even the original hearers) have THOUGHT a given Scripture means is not necessarily an accurate picture of its actual intent. As I said, people groups impose their own worldview on truth when it is spoken to them. The Israelites had been told, and shown, who Yahweh is, but they didn't even get out of the wilderness before they were worshiping an idol of gold - the calf that Aaron said "just came up out of the fire". That was paganism imposed on real truth. I've seen the light shining for the first time in a people group, and even accepting it with joy, distortions are easy. I haven't mentioned this here before, I don't think, but even after the Banawa began to worship God, they told me that "God lives up in the headwaters of the Kitia River, where there is a waterfall; in that pool is where he lives." (They also talked about the place in the sky where they thought he lived, but this was the local area, the place on earth where he lives.) The world view, belief system, to which a person's culture ascribes battles against Truth anytime there is a conflict. And false beliefs may persist.
The discussion here demonstrates this as well. A certain word was used by Moses when he wrote what we know of as Genesis 1. He doesn't say more about how he was using that word, or what it meant. Comments here are looking at what others said it meant. We encounter the same questions concerning many other words or texts throughout the Scripture, and sometimes all of our digging will not find the sort of answer we think we need. As a Bible translator, I sometimes spent a lot of time digging through all of the commentaries in our translation library, searching for the elusive answer I felt I needed in order to translate for the Banawa. Searching for the answer to a question that the best commentators admitted they could not find. I also, in my quest, looked at very old commentaries that didn't just parrot one another, but referred back to the Jewish Targums. So we do the best we can.
But to go a step farther, and say (or infer) that Moses himself was thinking pagan thoughts when he wrote down these words is a huge leap farther. Sure, I might be wrong, but this is my understanding of revelation, and of inspiration.

[Soloist]

I have read all the flatearther stuff. It is well, not compelling at all. Followers of Jesus that espouse this nonsense do harm to the kingdom of God.

Finny K notes that it s like mental pornagraphy. People have a need to have "insider info" that makes them feel like they alone have a secret knowledge and everyone else is deluded. This same trait is what drives other conspiracies. Like the rhe USA never landed on the moon...Elvis is alive...aliens landed on earth..chemtrails...non evidenced based medicine...etc.

Its interesting how some items are so important to us that there isn't other options. Would you accept a flat earther in your church? I hope you don't mistake me for endorsing flat earthism. Its not very compelling to me either, but I took the time to study it and consider the possibility, I chose to reject it based on what I understood the Scriptures to be saying and what science seemed to suggest. There are some very confusing arguments based on how light is perceived and visibility of distant objects which requires some understanding most don't have naturally unless they understand how light works. The moon naturally can cause confusion based on what we see, these things are explainable but to the eyes, they can trick you. Ultimately, if the earth is flat, our theology isn't changed. I would say that people who espouse evolution do harm to the kingdom of God, but several people on Menno would object to that. I think that our absolute opinions on these things do harm.

A flat earther can still be a Christian, can someone who rejects them still be a Christian? I think not. I actually know three flat earthers and am friends with them. Yes, they believe some nutty things, but we can still worship the same King in holiness and share in needs and concerns. They reject R/S curriculum as well coincidently so I guess some of you share common beliefs with them.

[silentreader]

I have read all the flatearther stuff. It is well, not compelling at all. Followers of Jesus that espouse this nonsense do harm to the kingdom of God.

Finny K notes that it s like mental pornagraphy. People have a need to have "insider info" that makes them feel like they alone have a secret knowledge and everyone else is deluded. This same trait is what drives other conspiracies. Like the rhe USA never landed on the moon...Elvis is alive...aliens landed on earth..chemtrails...non evidenced based medicine...etc.

...CRT...

[temporal1]

Waters above and waters beneath, could be demonstrated with a modern globe.

Let me just say I think it's interesting how the CFs, guessing upon the language of Genesis, thought all the water vapors in the air condensed into rain, causing the Deluge.

Flat or round, clouds are referenced as part of the heavens, rain comes down from clouds.
You quoted on P.2:

Supporting Scripture:
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.

And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth — Genesis 1:16-17

Flat or round, the sun and the moon.

[joshuabgood]

I have read all the flatearther stuff. It is well, not compelling at all. Followers of Jesus that espouse this nonsense do harm to the kingdom of God.

Finny K notes that it s like mental pornagraphy. People have a need to have "insider info" that makes them feel like they alone have a secret knowledge and everyone else is deluded. This same trait is what drives other conspiracies. Like the rhe USA never landed on the moon...Elvis is alive...aliens landed on earth..chemtrails...non evidenced based medicine...etc.

Its interesting how some items are so important to us that there isn't other options. Would you accept a flat earther in your church? I hope you don't mistake me for endorsing flat earthism. Its not very compelling to me either, but I took the time to study it and consider the possibility, I chose to reject it based on what I understood the Scriptures to be saying and what science seemed to suggest. There are some very confusing arguments based on how light is perceived and visibility of distant objects which requires some understanding most don't have naturally unless they understand how light works. The moon naturally can cause confusion based on what we see, these things are explainable but to the eyes, they can trick you. Ultimately, if the earth is flat, our theology isn't changed. I would say that people who espouse evolution do harm to the kingdom of God, but several people on Menno would object to that. I think that our absolute opinions on these things do harm.

A flat earther can still be a Christian, can someone who rejects them still be a Christian? I think not. I actually know three flat earthers and am friends with them. Yes, they believe some nutty things, but we can still worship the same King in holiness and share in needs and concerns. They reject R/S curriculum as well coincidently so I guess some of you share common beliefs with them.

Whether or not flatearthers can be Christian is another topic. I am not one that thinks God is waiting to disown people that are confused or delusional. I do think it is an indication of an unwillingness to learn or be taught which is an indication of arrogance.

The problem with flateartherism is it demonstrates serious problems with discernment and tying it, as is usually done, to the scripture interpretation and theology does harm to the Kingdom of God.

[joshuabgood]

I have read all the flatearther stuff. It is well, not compelling at all. Followers of Jesus that espouse this nonsense do harm to the kingdom of God.

Finny K notes that it s like mental pornagraphy. People have a need to have "insider info" that makes them feel like they alone have a secret knowledge and everyone else is deluded. This same trait is what drives other conspiracies. Like the rhe USA never landed on the moon...Elvis is alive...aliens landed on earth..chemtrails...non evidenced based medicine...etc.

...CRT...

My suggestion is have this conversation on the CRT thread. However suffice it to say that any sociological theory is different in kind from whether Elvis is alive or the earth is flat surrounded by a wall of ice covered by a dome with God knows what underneath.