“The Church says that the Earth is flat, but I know that it is round. For I have seen the shadow of the earth on the moon and I have more faith in the Shadow than in the Church."
What the church says is not always the same thing as what the Bible says, unfortunately.
Magellan would have been referring to the Roman Catholic Church, which had drastically veered away from the Bible at this point. On the scientific front, they stubbornly held to Aristotle as gospel truth even when evidence suggested otherwise.
The adherence to Aristotle had to do with the geocentric view of the universe, not whether the Earth was flat. Gallileo argued for the heliocentric view, but there was no way to distinguish the two views, as they gave the same results. It took later work (measurement of stellar parallax) to determine the the Earth moved.
The Bible also did not say the earth is round. The Bible did insinuate the earth is more like a dome. Whatever... I'm here to read about vacc and such, we got more serious issues at hand.
People spend far too much time concerned about what others do and do not believe in and still try to keep people from using their OWN critical and logical thinking to come to their OWN conclusions on topics.
You can critically think all you want. If your critical thinking is wrong, it's still wrong. Facts don't care about your feelings or your beliefs on any subject.
Well, I am not a FEer by any means (it really doesnt matter to me WHAT shape the earth is, to be honest), but the problem lies in that this issue, along with many others, truly has NOT been declared unequivocally one way or the other. People should be able to debate/share their opinions on the issue though when they differ from another person's viewpoint, even within this community as well.
The Bible doesn’t say the earth is a dome either. The firmament being a solid canopy is a modern invention.
Where the Bible is silent, reason and scientific evidence must be used, and all of it points to a spherical earth. The best explanation for the firmament, then, is that it is the solid crust of the earth. This crust used to be connected all the way around the earth and had an ocean of water trapped underneath it. Genesis records that God called the firmament “heaven” because Earth was supposed to be heaven, the place where God dwelled with men. And one day it will be that way again.
During the Flood, this crust ruptured, allowing the “fountains of the deep” to break out and cover the earth in water.
There’s a difference between Big Science and actual scientific evidence. Scientific evidence and reason point both to the earth being a sphere and to the Covid “vaccines” being death jabs.
My problem with flat earthers is not that they inherently distrust institutions, it’s that their distrust is the only argument they have. If you want to propose an alternative model for how the world works, it has to be based in observational data and backed by reason. Every single flat earth argument and model falls apart under scrutiny. The evidence for the death jabs remains solid and plausible under scrutiny.
NASA isn’t right just because they’re right; they’re right because no one has proposed a better model that better explains the data.
Science did not give us the COVID vaccine. That's why all of the rational people distrusted it. If science gave us the COVID vaccine, it's much more likely it would be popular.
Aha. Anti-scientist bigotry. First, there is the collectivist assumption that ALL scientists are identically alike in their moral and intellectual qualities. Then there is the logical conclusion that collective guilt is both necessary and defensible. It couldn't be more tidy if all the scientists were Jews, could it?
Not the same bunch that gave us the COVID vaccine. Big difference between geography and astronomy vs. germ warfare research.
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.
Genesis 1 uses “firmament” and “firmament of the heavens”; two different phrases with two different meanings.
The Hebrew word rendered “firmament” is “raqia” a root word which means “to hammer or beat out with a hammer on an anvil”. What do you hammer out on an anvil? Metal, something both solid and dense. Firmament is used on its own to describe the action of days 2 and 3 of creation, where the firmament divides the waters. “Firmament of the heavens” used during the rest of the week to describe alternatively where the stars are created and the domain where birds fly. The word firmament by itself is not used to describe the atmosphere or outer space.
Combining this information with scientific data, the logical conclusion is the firmament is the solid crust of the earth, which used to have water both above and below. The firmament of the heavens then describes the atmosphere or outer space depending on context.
When the earth is stated to have foundations that don’t move, it’s referring to the fact that the crust had pillars that pushed through the subterranean water into the mantle, anchoring the crust to the mantle so it wouldn’t float around like a giant unstable water bed. The earth being “immovable” doesn’t refer to its lack of motion relative to other objects in outer space, it refers to Earth’s relative stability; the fact that it’s not going to randomly fall apart or blow up.
The Bible doesn’t say the earth is flat, despite multiple attempts to twist its words to fit flat earth theory.
“The Church says that the Earth is flat, but I know that it is round. For I have seen the shadow of the earth on the moon and I have more faith in the Shadow than in the Church."
~ Ferdinand Magellan
What the church says is not always the same thing as what the Bible says, unfortunately.
Magellan would have been referring to the Roman Catholic Church, which had drastically veered away from the Bible at this point. On the scientific front, they stubbornly held to Aristotle as gospel truth even when evidence suggested otherwise.
The adherence to Aristotle had to do with the geocentric view of the universe, not whether the Earth was flat. Gallileo argued for the heliocentric view, but there was no way to distinguish the two views, as they gave the same results. It took later work (measurement of stellar parallax) to determine the the Earth moved.
It's more of a philosophical position than a scientific one.
As for the parallax, the extent that's been measured was in the range of 0.00000x degrees of a shift.
He thinks he saw the shadow of the earth. He saw a shadow but has no proof it came from the earth.
pro-vaxxers: correlation!
but the big take away from that Magellan quote, is that "flat Earth" was actually an official Church position, not that long ago.
and yes, there are numerous verses in the bible that are used to support flat earth model.
The Bible also did not say the earth is round. The Bible did insinuate the earth is more like a dome. Whatever... I'm here to read about vacc and such, we got more serious issues at hand.
Maybe its round on one side, flat on the other.
People spend far too much time concerned about what others do and do not believe in and still try to keep people from using their OWN critical and logical thinking to come to their OWN conclusions on topics.
You can critically think all you want. If your critical thinking is wrong, it's still wrong. Facts don't care about your feelings or your beliefs on any subject.
Well, I am not a FEer by any means (it really doesnt matter to me WHAT shape the earth is, to be honest), but the problem lies in that this issue, along with many others, truly has NOT been declared unequivocally one way or the other. People should be able to debate/share their opinions on the issue though when they differ from another person's viewpoint, even within this community as well.
This forum isn't about "vacc and such". It's about Q and what they have posted and theories about what they have posted.
The Bible doesn’t say the earth is a dome either. The firmament being a solid canopy is a modern invention.
Where the Bible is silent, reason and scientific evidence must be used, and all of it points to a spherical earth. The best explanation for the firmament, then, is that it is the solid crust of the earth. This crust used to be connected all the way around the earth and had an ocean of water trapped underneath it. Genesis records that God called the firmament “heaven” because Earth was supposed to be heaven, the place where God dwelled with men. And one day it will be that way again.
During the Flood, this crust ruptured, allowing the “fountains of the deep” to break out and cover the earth in water.
👌
There’s a difference between Big Science and actual scientific evidence. Scientific evidence and reason point both to the earth being a sphere and to the Covid “vaccines” being death jabs.
My problem with flat earthers is not that they inherently distrust institutions, it’s that their distrust is the only argument they have. If you want to propose an alternative model for how the world works, it has to be based in observational data and backed by reason. Every single flat earth argument and model falls apart under scrutiny. The evidence for the death jabs remains solid and plausible under scrutiny.
NASA isn’t right just because they’re right; they’re right because no one has proposed a better model that better explains the data.
If you went up to space, and saw it for yourself, you'd still call it a hoax with that attitude.
Science did not give us the COVID vaccine. That's why all of the rational people distrusted it. If science gave us the COVID vaccine, it's much more likely it would be popular.
Aha. Anti-scientist bigotry. First, there is the collectivist assumption that ALL scientists are identically alike in their moral and intellectual qualities. Then there is the logical conclusion that collective guilt is both necessary and defensible. It couldn't be more tidy if all the scientists were Jews, could it?
Not the same bunch that gave us the COVID vaccine. Big difference between geography and astronomy vs. germ warfare research.
Isaiah 40:22
True it describes something that isn't a globe, Doesn't move, and has a firmament.
Heavens biblically is anywhere above earth.
Heaven and earth referred to together any times.
Firmament does not equal heaven.
Genesis 1 uses “firmament” and “firmament of the heavens”; two different phrases with two different meanings.
The Hebrew word rendered “firmament” is “raqia” a root word which means “to hammer or beat out with a hammer on an anvil”. What do you hammer out on an anvil? Metal, something both solid and dense. Firmament is used on its own to describe the action of days 2 and 3 of creation, where the firmament divides the waters. “Firmament of the heavens” used during the rest of the week to describe alternatively where the stars are created and the domain where birds fly. The word firmament by itself is not used to describe the atmosphere or outer space.
Combining this information with scientific data, the logical conclusion is the firmament is the solid crust of the earth, which used to have water both above and below. The firmament of the heavens then describes the atmosphere or outer space depending on context.
When the earth is stated to have foundations that don’t move, it’s referring to the fact that the crust had pillars that pushed through the subterranean water into the mantle, anchoring the crust to the mantle so it wouldn’t float around like a giant unstable water bed. The earth being “immovable” doesn’t refer to its lack of motion relative to other objects in outer space, it refers to Earth’s relative stability; the fact that it’s not going to randomly fall apart or blow up.