Flat Earth Theory

[amigo de christo]

Why has no one circumnavigated the earth traveling south or north?

verily verily i say unto thee and unto all
whether the earth be flat or round
ALL upon it who rejected JESUS will be cast into the lake of fire at their end .
So whether it be round
whether it be flat
IT BE JESUS PREACHING TIME and ecumeincal HARLOT exposing time
for on the day of judg ment the second death awaits all who denied him and fell in love with the love of a harlot .

 

[TLHKAJ]

verily verily i say unto thee and unto all
whether the earth be flat or round
ALL upon it who rejected JESUS will be cast into the lake of fire at their end .
So whether it be round
whether it be flat
IT BE JESUS PREACHING TIME and ecumeincal HARLOT exposing time
for on the day of judg ment the second death awaits all who denied him and fell in love with the love of a harlot .

Yep, and any and all things in scripture are profitable to believe and discuss ...including Biblical cosmology.

 

[talons]

Why has no one circumnavigated the earth traveling south or north?

It was quite the ordeal to complete but they did !

Clip from link provided below .

The Transglobe Expedition entered the history books by becoming the first (and still only) successful attempt to circumnavigate the globe via both poles. As the team members celebrate the journey’s enduring legacy, crew member Anton Bowring relives the heroic, if less than straightforward attempts to bring it all together .​

Reliving the Transglobe Expedition: A journey to the ends of the Earth

The Transglobe Expedition made history by becoming the first (and still only) successful attempt to circumnavigate the globe via both poles

geographical.co.uk

 

[amigo de christo]

Yep, and any and all things in scripture are profitable to believe and discuss ...including Biblical cosmology.

Yep .

 

[TLHKAJ]

It was quite the ordeal to complete but they did !

Clip from link provided below .

The Transglobe Expedition entered the history books by becoming the first (and still only) successful attempt to circumnavigate the globe via both poles. As the team members celebrate the journey’s enduring legacy, crew member Anton Bowring relives the heroic, if less than straightforward attempts to bring it all together.​

Not quite a proof. One could make that flight pattern on a flat earth to some point along the ice wall calling it the "south pole."

 

[TLHKAJ]

It was quite the ordeal to complete but they did !

Clip from link provided below .

The Transglobe Expedition entered the history books by becoming the first (and still only) successful attempt to circumnavigate the globe via both poles. As the team members celebrate the journey’s enduring legacy, crew member Anton Bowring relives the heroic, if less than straightforward attempts to bring it all together .​

Reliving the Transglobe Expedition: A journey to the ends of the Earth

The Transglobe Expedition made history by becoming the first (and still only) successful attempt to circumnavigate the globe via both poles

geographical.co.uk

Why would it be "the first and only" flight over both poles. In this day and age, shouldn't technology have enabled this to be done many times over? So we can go to the moon, put satellites in "space", rovers on Mars, and send stuff outside our supposed "solar system" ....but we can't fly over Antarctica till recently?

 

[talons]

Not quite a proof. One could make that flight pattern on a flat earth to some point along the ice wall calling it the "south pole."

And around Antarctica we go ...

The Final Stretch (See video: The Antarctic Circle)

26 March 2018, Katharsis II, Southern Ocean Position: 57º49’29” S, 104º27’09” E, 93 days and 14,000 nautical miles from the Expedition’s port of departure Greetings from the deck […]

antarcticcircle60s.pl

 

[Adventageous]

Why has no one circumnavigated the earth traveling south or north?

Would you perhaps consider the following:

"... Polar circumnavigation is complete navigation around Earth through both the North Pole and the South Pole. The Rockwell Polar Flight was the first to complete a Polar Circumnavigation in 1965 that spanned more than 62 days. ...​

​

"... The Classic Lear Jet Foundation is planning their own Polar Mission from April 30 - May 3, 2025 as a fundraiser for their mission of restoring to flying condition the first Learjet delivered to a customer in 1964. Global Jetcare, an air ambulance service based in Florida, is handling all flight arrangements and donating their Learjet and crew of four in support of the Foundation’s work. ..." - The Polar Mission​

"... An international flight crew has broken the record for the fastest circumnavigation of the globe via the North and South Poles, with an impressive margin of almost six hours.​

​

The 25,000-mile mission, dubbed “One More Orbit” and counting a former International Space Station commander among its leaders, was launched in honor of the Apollo 11 moon landings, the 50th anniversary of which is later this month.​

​

The flight, in a Gulfstream G650ER ultra-long-range jet, was completed in 46 hours, 39 minutes and 38 seconds, with an average speed of 860.95 km/hr (534.97 mph). ..." - https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/speed-record-circumnavigate-intl-scli​

"... 14–17 November 1965: Captains Fred Lester Austin, Jr., and Harrison Finch, two retired Trans World Airlines pilots, took off from Honolulu on a 26,230-mile (42,213 kilometer), 57 hour, 27 minute flight around the world—from Pole to Pole!​

​

The pair leased a brand new Boeing 707-349C, c/n 18975, registered N322F, from Flying Tiger Line. Nick-named Pole Cat, the airplane was crewed by a total of five pilots, all rated captains. In addition to Austin and Finch, there were Captain Jack Martin, Chief Pilot of Flying Tigers Line; Captain Robert N. Buck, TWA; and Boeing Senior Engineering Test Pilot James R. Gannett. Three navigators and three flight engineers completed the flight crew. John Larsen, TWA’s chief navigator, did most of the planning and the other two navigators and all three flight engineers were Flying Tiger Line employees.​

​

Most of the cost of the flight was paid for by Colonel Willard F. Rockwell, Sr., founder of the Rockwell Corporation, who was one of 27 passengers aboard. The airliner was equipped with an experimental Litton Systems Inertial Navigation System (INS) and the very latest Single Side Band (SSB) communications equipment from Collins Radio.​

​

The flight departed HNL and flew north to the North Pole, then south to London Heathrow, where they stopped for fuel. Unexpected runway restrictions limited the 707’s takeoff weight, so they had to make an extra fuel stop at Lisbon, Portugal before flying to Buenos Aires, Argentina. After another fuel stop there, they continued south, circled the South Pole four times, then headed north to Christchurch, New Zealand. From there, they continued on to Honolulu.​

​

Total elapsed time for the flight was 62 hours, 27 minutes, 35 seconds with just under 5 hours on the ground. ..." - Pole Cat | This Day in Aviation​

Another / others:

​

"... It was not until 1965 that the first Polar Circumnavigation took place. Since then, only very few aircraft have completed a full polar circumnavigation. One of the first obstacles to consider is the distance required to traverse Antarctica. The shortest route over the South Pole runs from Ushuaia, Argentina, to Christchurch, New Zealand, spanning over 5,000 miles. The alternative route from Cape Town, South Africa, to Christchurch, New Zealand, is over 6,000 miles. This requires a range that very few aircraft possess. ..."​

​

"... While the Polar Circumnavigation Diploma requirements are far less demanding than the speed record requirements, as of this writing, only six pilots have received the Polar Diploma. There were two crew members per plane, so only three aircraft — a PC-12 and two TBMs — have ever met the diploma requirements. ..."​

​

"... I was part of a four-person crew that completed a Polar Circumnavigation Diploma flight in May 2025 in a 1976 Learjet 36A, S/N 022, N31GJ. If the application is accepted, it will be the fourth aircraft to meet the FAI Polar Circumnavigation Diploma requirements. The flight served as a fundraiser for the Classic Learjet Foundation, which is currently restoring Learjet 23 S/N 003, the first Learjet delivered to a customer in 1964. ..." - VIA The Poles: Journey Around the World’s Ultimate Flight Path : Air Facts Journal​

Also, just for information sake:

A listing of other circumnavigations west-east, east-west, &c. - List of circumnavigations - Wikipedia

 

[Adventageous]

That does not make sense to me. God says the earth is fixed and does not move. How can you interpret into that, that the earth spins?

So, please allow me to begin by saying at the outset (once more), "I" do not "interpret" scripture. "I" am forbidden from doing so by scripture. Consider I believe and adhere to the following scriptures:

God interprets God's own words, and cannot be broken, as they are internally (God inspired) defined:

Gen_40:8 And they said unto him, We have dreamed a dream, and there is no interpreter of it. And Joseph said unto them, Do not interpretations belong to God? tell me them, I pray you.​

​

Isa 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:​

​

Isa 28:13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.​

Not man, for man is only to "amen" what God already interpreted in the word:

2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.​

​

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.​

​

1Pe 4:11 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.​

​

Here is an example of God (not me) interpreting scripture, and line upon line:

​

1 John 1:5 KJB - This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.​

What is "light"?

[A1] God​

​

[B1] is​

​

[C1] light​

​

[A2] in him​

​

[B2] is​

​

[C2] no darkness at all​

​

Thus, the Bible says "God is light", and that "light" is "no darkness at all".

Another:

Isaiah 43:7 KJB - Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him.​

What are other words for "created"?

[A1] I have created [H1254] him​

​

[A2] I have formed [H3335] him​

​

[A3] I have made [H6213] him​

Three differing Hebrew words, which God uses interchangeably, as like an internally built thesaurus. I have several other examples of this, and each really.

What if I come across a word which some do not use a whole lot of today (though others may and do), like the word "eschew", or "ensue"? How can I know what they mean?

1 Peter 3:10 KJB - For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile:​

​

1 Peter 3:11 KJB - Let him eschew evil, and do good; let him seek peace, and ensue it.​

[A1] let him refrain his tongue from evil​

​

[A2] Let him eschew evil​

[B1] seek peace​

​

[B2] ensue it​

Notice the endcapping words ("Let him,", "evil", or words that are nouns to pronouns, "peace", "it") that bound the words under consideration. These are the 'bread' (word) crumbs (sections) that God leaves a trail of, to know that similar ideas are being presented, and though differing words may be used, they mean the same things.

I have many other exampls of this. A more complex mathematical one.

Another, more complex:

Jdg_9:2 Speak, I pray you, in the ears of all the men of Shechem, Whether is better for you, either that all the sons of Jerubbaal, which are threescore and ten persons, reign over you, or that one reign over you? remember also that I am your bone and your flesh.​

​

Jdg_9:4 And they gave him threescore and ten pieces of silver out of the house of Baalberith, wherewith Abimelech hired vain and light persons, which followed him.​

​

Jdg_9:5 And he went unto his father's house at Ophrah, and slew his brethren the sons of Jerubbaal, being threescore and ten persons, upon one stone: notwithstanding yet Jotham the youngest son of Jerubbaal was left; for he hid himself.​

​

Jdg_9:18 And ye are risen up against my father's house this day, and have slain his sons, threescore and ten persons, upon one stone, and have made Abimelech, the son of his maidservant, king over the men of Shechem, because he is your brother;)​

​

Jdg_9:24 That the cruelty done to the threescore and ten sons of Jerubbaal might come, and their blood be laid upon Abimelech their brother, which slew them; and upon the men of Shechem, which aided him in the killing of his brethren.​

​

Jdg_9:56 Thus God rendered the wickedness of Abimelech, which he did unto his father, in slaying his seventy brethren:​

How do I know what a "score" is or what "threescore" "and" "ten" is? Do I need Abraham Lincoln's address? No. Notice:

​

[A.] threescore and ten sons​

​

[B.] his sons, threescore and ten persons​

[C.] threescore and ten sons​

​

[D.] seventy brethren​

With this, we can even see how the Bible defines “score”, as twenty. Consider:

threescore and ten = seventy​

​

subtract, “take away” [Proverbs 25:4], “ten” from both sides; for the “ways of the LORD are equal” [Ezekiel 18:25] and “my [the LORD's] ways equal” [Ezekiel 18:29].​

​

threescore and ten “take away” ten = seventy “take away” ten​

​

threescore = sixty​

​

then “rightly divide” [2 Timothy 2:15] both sides by “three”, keeping them in equality.​

​

threescore divided by three = sixty divided by three​

​

score = twenty​

Didn't even need a dictionary, nor Abraham Lincoln [fourscore and seven years ago...] Again also notice the breadcrumb trail, or endcapping words, or surrounding words:

[A.] slew his brethren​

​

[B.] slain his sons​

[C.] the cruelty done to … sons​

​

[D.] slew them … in the killing of his brethren​

​

[E.] the wickedness … in slaying … brethren​

​

I hope that this somewhat addresses your concern about who interprets scripture. God therein, not "I" without. I without can only "amen" what is therein by God.

Now, please allow me to address your concerns in additional replies.

 

[Adventageous]

That does not make sense to me. God says the earth is fixed and does not move. How can you interpret into that, that the earth spins?

Ok, now that I have shown that "I" do not interpret scripture (and am forbidden to do so), but that God internally does therein - Flat Earth Theory

Please allow me to address your other concerns.

When you say, "God says the earth is fixed and does not move", what specific texts are you referring to. I would prefer not to be general or assume, but go to the exact texts / passages under consideration, so as not to have confusion on the subject. Would you be willing to provide the exact texts you are referring to? I do not necessarily mean all at once, but one example of each ("fixed", "does not move") is fine to begin with.

So, before addressing this question strictly from scripture, I will need just a bit more specific detail, and then I will look at each with you.

In a general understanding of how the words are used in scripture, the words "fixed" does not necessarily mean standing still or immobile. It simply means 'put in a place', and that place can be a single point, or even a track / path (such as put in a fixed path / way), &c. As for instance,

​

Psa_57:7 My heart is fixed, O God, my heart is fixed: I will sing and give praise.​

Psa_108:1 A Song or Psalm of David. O God, my heart is fixed; I will sing and give praise, even with my glory.​

Does this mean that the heart / mind is non-moving? No. It simply means the heart / mind is set into a right place / way of God. In other words a right way of thinking (God;s way). How do we (you and I, and all else) know it is speaking about a path to walk in in thinking? The context:

Psa 57:6 They have prepared a net for my steps; my soul is bowed down: they have digged a pit before me, into the midst whereof they are fallen themselves. Selah.​

​

Psa 108:11 Wilt not thou, O God, who hast cast us off? and wilt not thou, O God, go forth with our hosts?​

​

Psa 108:13 Through God we shall do valiantly: for he it is that shall tread down our enemies.​

In such a similar way, the earth / world can be in a 'fixed' place / way or track, and be completely moving in that place and not be moved out of that set path or circumnavigation, like a train on a track or circular track. The train is "fixed' into that position / way, and cannot move out of it unless it be moved out by a greater element.

Now, I do not desire to assume what texts you are referring to, nor do I desire to apply the above to those texts just yet. I want to look at the specific texts you are considering, and we can look together.

A few additional thoughts, is that sometimes when the Bible talks about "earth" it is referring to the peoples, not the dirt / ground. This will have to be addressed once you provide the texts for consideration.

Also, even addressing the texts on "fixed" would not, in any way, be speaking about the differing category of the "shape" of the earth / world. Therefore, when discussing "fixed", we should generally stay away from the category of "shape", since "shape" and "motion / non-motion" are two differing subjects / categories. Even if I were to demonstrate to you that "fixed" in the texts you will produce does not mean non-moving, but rather moving, such evidence would not necessarily be evidence for the shape of the world (though in a detailed explanation it can be a secondary evidence with other secondary evidences, but that is not really my goal at this time).

Also, the two things, "axial rotation" of the earth / world and its "circumnavigation" are two categories and not the same thing. Both would have to be demonstrated individually. So, even if I were to demonstrate "axial rotation", that is not demonstration of "circumnavigation" (around the sun / Sol), and so also vice-verse. If that makes sense, let me know please. I am attempting to be as accomodating as possible, and listen to your every concern with all earnestness (my last name is earnest also).

The sun was created after the earth according to scripture

Correct. I agree with you (but moreso with scripture, you are secondary to that, in an "Amen" of scripture with you) that the "greater light" (aka "sun" (2 Kin. 23:5; Psa. 148:3; Jer. 31:35 KJB, &c.), and otherwise known as "Sol" by others) was created after the earth / world (not dry land, that was on Day 3, Gen. 1:9,13 KJB, by the way all my references will be from KJB, unless otherwise specifically notated) was created by JEHOVAH Elohiym.

Day 1:

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.​

Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.​

​

Gen 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.​

Day 4:

Gen 1:16 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 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.​

, why do you believe the globe model that says the sun came first?

The "globe model" only refers to the shape of the world, not its origins. The "shape" and "origins" of the earth / world are two differing categories. Proving one does not necessarily prove (or give evidence to) the other. They (in general) must be demonstrated separately. Some may conflate the two, but they are differing categories. I have to stress this, as category error is one of the primary errors in the world today, and not just on this subject.

So, while I do believe the scriptures teach a "globe" that has nothing to say of its origins in that respect. We can look at those texts after your other texts. One thing at a time please.

I also believe the scriptures teach the earth / world came into existence (day 1; Gen. 1:1-2,5 KJB)) by JEHOVH Elohiym's creation / word before the sun (day 4; Gen. 1:16,19 KJB), as already noted above.

So, to be clear, I do not believe in the Jesuit (Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître, SJ) "big bang" model, as I know it to be falsified by many scientific (as well as scriptural first) evidences, which I may provide as needful. I do not adhere to the "accretion" models of the Local Sol system under the same "Big Bang" model, as it too violates many scientifically demonstrable principles, such as Boyle's Gas Laws, &c. Not believing in such has nothing really to say about the shape of the earth / world per se. This may be explained further as needful.

The Word says the sun stood still

I agree with the scripture here. However, the details of what it means when it says that, have to be looked at more specifically, would you not agree? However, one thing at at time, let's look at the first thing you mentioned first, and look at one thing at a time, please. Otherwise my responses will be pages of information on various subjects. It will get complicated fast for others to follow if too much is covered at once.

, the globe model would struggle with that.

Not particlarly. In brief, please allow me to just mention that while any given model (globe or "F.E.", "hollow earth", "expanding earth", "computer generated (sim-reality)", &c.) may be able to more easily explain a phenomena, that is no guarantee that is the way in which something occurred. Simple and complexity are not necessarily exclusive when it comes to demonstration of methodology of how something occurred. As a for instance, scientists used to believe in something called "pgiston" ( - Phlogiston theory - Wikipedia ) and it seemed to more easily explain certain phenomena, but when considered further, it could not explain other phenomena at all. Thus other proposals were made which were more complex in their solution on the how / why of those other things that "pgiston" seemed to easily explain, but the other proposals were also able to address those things which "pgiston" could not. So, even though it is granted that a "F.E." model seems to more easily explain how the "sun" could stop, there are other issues that the model used for it, cannot explain. So, if a more complex model were presented which could explain those other things that the "F.E." model cannot, and also explain in a more complex manner, how the sun could stop, why should complexity in answer not be considered above the one that seems (at first) simpler? We can look at this more after the original consideration, please.

... to be continued ...

 

[Adventageous]

It seems to me that scripture has to fit the box for the globe earth that the world teaches

The Bible is the book which definitely does not fit the "mould" or "box" of the world in general, since its teachings are pretty much contrary to most things, though not all things. Since JEHOVAH Elohiym also created this world / earth (Gen. 1-2 KJB), and inspired the Bible (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:21 KJB, &c.), much should be found in perfect harmony between them. The Bible is the foundational text of course (Isa. 8:20 KJB), though creation is often considered 'God's 'second book'', and yet due to the fallen angel / devil, sin, and other events, can only as a dark mirror (dark glass), reveal truths which must be corroborated by scripture (KJB).

Not everything that is taught in the world is wrong. Several examples may be given to demonstrate that.

, but it does not add up, I am sorry. It just does not.

You have several assumptions about me, my beliefs, and what I might present from scripture. Just give me some time, and be patient with me, and think on your questions before asking, and try to eliminate as much assumption out of the question as possible. I will try to do the same in my responses.

It is more comfortable to believe what everyone else believes

In a certain sense that is true. A mob-mentality. However, I am not one of those persons. I have been through several specific tests of my own person by God on this. I could share on some of those times if need be, but do not want to distract from the OP or present subject too much, but if you need me to, I will share some briefly. What I do find is that some persons watch a YT (etc.) video, and simply jump on a band-wagon (mob mentality) without deeply considering the material shared. It 'sounded good'. It 'sounded right', &c. I am not necessarily saying you (personally) did this, but I give a general example of some of experience I have noticed among the "F.E." and other groups (which can be named if you need).

[true] Christianity is about going against the general grain of the sinful world. It does not mean everything needs to be gone against, for not everything is wrong, only some things are. Even the devil, or serpent, in Gen. 3, spoke 2/3rd's truth, and 1/3 lie. Allow me to show you this:

​

[1/3rd Lie by serpent] Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:​

​

[the truth of God was:] Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.​

​

[2/3rds Truth by serpent] Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.​

Fulfillment:

Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.​

​

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:​

​

Gen 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.​

​

Gen 5:5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.​

Adam died (930 years) just short (70 years short) of the "day with the LORD" (or 1000 years, Psa. 84:10, 90:4; 2 Pet. 3:8 KJB). So, God had told the truth, while the serpent lied on that singular matter.

and not stand alone on God's Word. Please, forgive me, I do not want to offend. It is deception, only God can open the eyes.

You are not offending me. I understand where you are coming from, really. As I said, I have a friend in the same movement. He is the one who gave me the "F.E." documenation package (a rather voluminous thing, texts, videos, &c.) in the first place.

I agree there is deception afoot, and the Bible foretold this.

Well, according to scripture, even the devil can "open eyes" to evil / deception, but I get what you mean about God opening the eyes to truth and light. I agree with you about that. No matter what I share in evidence, it will only be God who can bring it to the heart, and so bring one to be receptive. God will not force it though. God only invites.

 

[David Lamb]

Why has no one circumnavigated the earth traveling south or north?

It has been done. A Google search brought up the following from an AI Overview:

"Key Examples of North-South Circumnavigation:

• Transglobe Expedition (1979–1982): The first complete longitudinal circumnavigation. Led by Ranulph Fiennes, the team traveled south from Greenwich, reached the South Pole, journeyed north to the North Pole, and returned to Greenwich, using only surface transport.
• Polar Aviation Records: Pilots like Robert DeLaurentis have completed pole-to-pole flights, often setting speed records, using biofuels, and carrying scientific experiments, demonstrating modern aviation's capability for polar circumnavigation.
• Karl Bushby's Continuous Journey (Ongoing): While more East-West focused, adventurers like Karl Bushby have undertaken extreme land/sea journeys, highlighting the challenges of traversing continents and poles in continuous expeditions. "

 

[Psalm-147:3]

The Bible is the book which definitely does not fit the "mould" or "box" of the world in general, since its teachings are pretty much contrary to most things, though not all things. Since JEHOVAH Elohiym also created this world / earth (Gen. 1-2 KJB), and inspired the Bible (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:21 KJB, &c.), much should be found in perfect harmony between them. The Bible is the foundational text of course (Isa. 8:20 KJB), though creation is often considered 'God's 'second book'', and yet due to the fallen angel / devil, sin, and other events, can only as a dark mirror (dark glass), reveal truths which must be corroborated by scripture (KJB).

Not everything that is taught in the world is wrong. Several examples may be given to demonstrate that.



You have several assumptions about me, my beliefs, and what I might present from scripture. Just give me some time, and be patient with me, and think on your questions before asking, and try to eliminate as much assumption out of the question as possible. I will try to do the same in my responses.



In a certain sense that is true. A mob-mentality. However, I am not one of those persons. I have been through several specific tests of my own person by God on this. I could share on some of those times if need be, but do not want to distract from the OP or present subject too much, but if you need me to, I will share some briefly. What I do find is that some persons what a YT (etc.) video, and simply jump on a band-wagon (mob mentality) without deeply considering the material shared. It 'sounded good'. It 'sounded right', &c. I am not necessarily saying you (personally) did this, but I give a general example of some of experience I have noticed among the "F.E." and other groups (which can be named if you need).

[true] Christianity is about going against the general grain of the sinful world. It does not mean everything needs to be gone against, for not everything is wrong, only some things are. Even the devil, or serpent, in Gen. 3, spoke 2/3rd's truth, and 1/3 lie. Allow me to show you this:

​

[1/3rd Lie by serpent] Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:​

​

[the truth of God was:] Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.​

​

[2/3rds Truth by serpent] Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.​

Fulfillment:

Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.​

​

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:​

​

Gen 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.​

​

Gen 5:5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.​

Adam died (930 years) just short (70 years short) of the "day with the LORD" (or 1000 years, Psa. 84:10, 90:4; 2 Pet. 3:8 KJB). So, God had told the truth, while the serprnt lied on that singular matter.




You are not offending me. I understand where you are coming from, really. As I said, I have a friend in the same movement. He is the one who gave me the "F.E." documenation package (a rather voluminous thing, texts, videos, &c.) in the first place.

I agree there is deception afoot, and the Bible foretold this.

Well, according to scripture, even the devil can "open eyes" to evil / deception, but I get what you mean about God opening the eyes to truth and light. I agree with you about that. No matter what I share in evidence, it will only be God who can bring it to the heart, and so bring one to be receptive. God will not force it though. God only invites.

I am not in any movement. God revealed the truth to me. It is a spiritual issue here, we don't wrestle against flesh and blood. I just really don't get how Christians go against God's Word. The Jehovas Witnesses have the same methods, pick one scripture and misinterpret it to make the person insecure and then come in with their lies. I am not saying that is your intend, but it looks like it. You cannot provide a scripture that tells about a spinning ball in space, instead, you try to refute the very scriptures that explain the earth very plain. What is the firmament to you? I will and can't go back to these lies no matter how hard you try. The truth makes free. Free of deception, it is just freeing. I will not go back into bondage of lies. But yeah, I will share some scripture in a moment and see what you say

 

[Psalm-147:3]

Sun moves, not earth: Genesis 15:12, Genesis 15:17, Genesis 19:23, Genesis 32:31, Exodus 17:12, Exodus 22:3, Exodus 22:26, Leviticus 22:7, Numbers 2:3, Numbers 21:11, Numbers 34:15, Deuteronomy 4:41, Deuteronomy 4:47, Deuteronomy 11:30, Deuteronomy 16:6, Deuteronomy 23:11, Deuteronomy 24:13, Deuteronomy 24:15, Joshua 1:15, Joshua 8:29, Joshua 10:27, Joshua 12:1, Joshua 13:5, Joshua 19:12, Joshua 19:27, Joshua 19:34, Judges 8:13, Judges 9:33, Judges 14:18, Judges 19:14, Judges 20:43, 2 Samuel 2:24, 2 Samuel 3:35, 2 Samuel 23:4, 1 Kings 22:36, 2 Chronicles 18:34, Psalm 50:1, Psalm 113:3, Ecclesiastes 1:5, Isaiah 41:25, Isaiah 45:6, Isaiah 59:19, Jeremiah 15:9, Daniel 6:14, Amos 8:9, Jonah 4:8, Micah 3:6, Nahum 3:17, Malachi 1:11, Matthew 5:45, Mark 16:2, Ephesians 4:26, James 1:11

Sun stops moving: Isaiah 60:20, Job 9:7, Joshua 10:12-14, Habakkuk 3:11

Sun moves backwards: 2 Kings 20:8-11

Earth is fixed and immovable:
1 Chronicles 16:30, Psalm 339, Psalm 93:1,
Psalm 96:10, Psalm 104:5. Psalm 119:89-90,
Isaiah 14:7, Isaiah 45:18, Zechariah 1:11, 2 Peter 3.5

 

[Psalm-147:3]

Just look at the stars!

 

[Adventageous]

I am not in any movement. God revealed the truth to me. It is a spiritual issue here, we don't wrestle against flesh and blood. I just really don't get how Christians go against God's Word. The Jehovas Witnesses have the same methods, pick one scripture and misinterpret it to make the person insecure and then come in with their lies. I am not saying that is your intend, but it looks like it. You cannot provide a scripture that tells about a spinning ball in space, instead, you try to refute the very scriptures that explain the earth very plain. What is the firmament to you? I will and can't go back to these lies no matter how hard you try. The truth makes free. Free of deception, it is just freeing. I will not go back into bondage of lies. But yeah, I will share some scripture in a moment and see what you say

I tried to help you in responding to the inquiries you had asked about. Since you have not provided the specific texts to consider, I cannot respond further to you about them. I am not going to assume which texts you are referring to, and neither am I going to spend the time in addressing them all here, as it would be too much.

I am not going to defend my belief here, as the OP is about "F.E." not globe, or any other model. It is not my place in this discussion to give evidence of my position, but I can respond to the evidence given by the OP position, and in so doing also present counter evidence which will aid in helping to establish a better position (the one I take). If I had created the thread about 'globe' I would be expected to provide the evidence, but the burden on 'proof' is not on me in this thread, however it is on those who make the "F.E." claim. This is standard 'debate' (conversational) regulation.

If you would like to discuss "firmament", instead of "fixed" and "does not move", then please produce the text you are referring to specifically, and we can then look at it together.

Whether you 'go back' is not so much my concern at this moment, since it looks like you had a misunderstanding originally also, and would not want you to 'go back' to a differing original error/s. My goal is simply to discuss the OP in the light of scriptures, and the claims made by the OP in matters "F.E." cosmology / theology / ideology / model/s.

Also, as a kindness to me, would you produce an exact model that you (personally) adhere to, either in picture or video, PC generated format so I can know which one you adhere to please. There are so many, I would like to be as specifc as possible with you, and not asume what your model is and perhaps get it wrong in the process. I also would like this, so that it is identified, and not switched out later by someone else referring to some other "F.E." model. We do not have to discuss that model next, as if you want to speak about "firmament" we can, just please provide the text you are specifically referring to and why you have the position / definition you do on it. Thank you. Otherwise, if not, I will simply move on, as I have spent quite a bit of time trying to enage with you, and not discount you or your words out of hand. I am giving you the opportunity to present / teach on each thing you bring up. I just hope I may have the same opportunity to consider what you share, and then respond, and you give me the same benefit in consideration.

 

[Adventageous]

Sun moves, not earth: Genesis 15:12, Genesis 15:17, Genesis 19:23, Genesis 32:31, Exodus 17:12, Exodus 22:3, Exodus 22:26, Leviticus 22:7, Numbers 2:3, Numbers 21:11, Numbers 34:15, Deuteronomy 4:41, Deuteronomy 4:47, Deuteronomy 11:30, Deuteronomy 16:6, Deuteronomy 23:11, Deuteronomy 24:13, Deuteronomy 24:15, Joshua 1:15, Joshua 8:29, Joshua 10:27, Joshua 12:1, Joshua 13:5, Joshua 19:12, Joshua 19:27, Joshua 19:34, Judges 8:13, Judges 9:33, Judges 14:18, Judges 19:14, Judges 20:43, 2 Samuel 2:24, 2 Samuel 3:35, 2 Samuel 23:4, 1 Kings 22:36, 2 Chronicles 18:34, Psalm 50:1, Psalm 113:3, Ecclesiastes 1:5, Isaiah 41:25, Isaiah 45:6, Isaiah 59:19, Jeremiah 15:9, Daniel 6:14, Amos 8:9, Jonah 4:8, Micah 3:6, Nahum 3:17, Malachi 1:11, Matthew 5:45, Mark 16:2, Ephesians 4:26, James 1:11

Sun stops moving: Isaiah 60:20, Job 9:7, Joshua 10:12-14, Habakkuk 3:11

Sun moves backwards: 2 Kings 20:8-11

Earth is fixed and immovable:
1 Chronicles 16:30, Psalm 339, Psalm 93:1,
Psalm 96:10, Psalm 104:5. Psalm 119:89-90,
Isaiah 14:7, Isaiah 45:18, Zechariah 1:11, 2 Peter 3.5

This response (above) is the fallacy of "gallop" or even "barrelling" or "steamrolling". It seeks to overwhelm with 'evidence'. As I had kindly asked for, a single example of each ("fixed" and "does not move") in my previous reply, so that we may look at each in context together. Why was that request ignored? Why was this logical fallacy given in response?

Since I have no idea which one you desire to discuss, I cannot. I am also not going to assume which you would like to address until you specifically say.

If you want the answers to all, you will have to wait for my book, which I already have all of those materials in, just not formatted to book style yet. I have been rather ill. So I am taking my time.

 

[Psalm-147:3]

This response (above) is the fallacy of "gallop" or even "barrelling" or "steamrolling". It seeks to overwhelm with 'evidence'. As I had kindly asked for, a single example of each ("fixed" and "does not move") in my previous reply, so that we may look at each in context together. Why was that request ignored? Why was this logical fallacy given in response?

Since I have no idea which one you desire to discuss, I cannot. I am also not going to assume which you would like to address until you specifically say.

If you want the answers to all, you will have to wait for my book, which I already have all of those materials in, just not formatted to book style yet. I have been rather ill. So I am taking my time.

I am sorry you are ill. Just know that the Lord is with you no matter what you are going through

 

[Adventageous]

Sun moves, not earth: Genesis 15:12, Genesis 15:17, Genesis 19:23, Genesis 32:31, Exodus 17:12, Exodus 22:3, Exodus 22:26, Leviticus 22:7, Numbers 2:3, Numbers 21:11, Numbers 34:15, Deuteronomy 4:41, Deuteronomy 4:47, Deuteronomy 11:30, Deuteronomy 16:6, Deuteronomy 23:11, Deuteronomy 24:13, Deuteronomy 24:15, Joshua 1:15, Joshua 8:29, Joshua 10:27, Joshua 12:1, Joshua 13:5, Joshua 19:12, Joshua 19:27, Joshua 19:34, Judges 8:13, Judges 9:33, Judges 14:18, Judges 19:14, Judges 20:43, 2 Samuel 2:24, 2 Samuel 3:35, 2 Samuel 23:4, 1 Kings 22:36, 2 Chronicles 18:34, Psalm 50:1, Psalm 113:3, Ecclesiastes 1:5, Isaiah 41:25, Isaiah 45:6, Isaiah 59:19, Jeremiah 15:9, Daniel 6:14, Amos 8:9, Jonah 4:8, Micah 3:6, Nahum 3:17, Malachi 1:11, Matthew 5:45, Mark 16:2, Ephesians 4:26, James 1:11

Sun stops moving: Isaiah 60:20, Job 9:7, Joshua 10:12-14, Habakkuk 3:11

Sun moves backwards: 2 Kings 20:8-11

Earth is fixed and immovable:
1 Chronicles 16:30, Psalm 339, Psalm 93:1,
Psalm 96:10, Psalm 104:5. Psalm 119:89-90,
Isaiah 14:7, Isaiah 45:18, Zechariah 1:11, 2 Peter 3.5

So, please allow me to try this again.

I already agree with all of the texts listed above, and use those same texts to demonstrate the globe & Sol system model.

Yes, the Sun "moves", and "moves backwards". Already agreed to in several ways.

1. The Sun actually has its own axial rotation, and own small (relatively) circumnavigation, in the Sol system model.​

2. The Sun moves through the "heavens" (1st & 2nd) as it appears to the viewers looking at it on earth. The texts all reveal this, but I am not going to detail each and every one here. Pick a single example, and we can look at each one individually. Simply vomiting out a response that has many texts is not evidence of anything. Each one has to be considered in its proper context. It's like replying to an atheist on a matter and simply listing generic fields of science, or listing a bunch of scientific articles. That's not evidence. That's wasting time. Each article would have to be considered indepently on their own merits.​

According to the same texts, in that context, the earth thus indeed "moves" and is able to be 'moved out of its place'. I may provide specific texts as well in demonstration of this, if you would like to pick any single text above and look at its context.

F.E. category error logical fallacies so far: The OP is all about "F.E.", being the "shape" of the earth. Arguments so far just in the last few responses:

• F.E. Argument 1: The Sun "moves". Has (essentially) nothing to do with shape, or motion / non-motion of the earth. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 2: Earth doesn't "move". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 3: The Sun "stops moving". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth, and neither really of the motion or non-motion of the earth. Differing categories.
• F.E. Argument 4: The Sun "moves backwards". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 5: Earth is "fixed". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 6: Earth is "immovable". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 7: The Earth has a solid "firmament". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth, neither of the motion / non-motion of the earth, nor of the motion / non-motion of the Sun.
• F.E. Argument 8: N.A.S.A. has erroneous / fraudulent materials (F.E. claim). Has (essentially) nothing to do with the actual shape of the earth, neither of the actual motion / non-motion of the earth, neither to do with the Sun & or Moon, or the word "Firmament", etc. N.A.S.A. is essentially a non-sequitur. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 9: There are no polar circumnavigations (F.E. claim). There actually are as already demonstrated, along with equatorial circumnavigations. Whether there were or were not, is (essentially) non-sequitur to the shape of the earth, or its motion / non-motion, or relevant to the Sun, Moon, and other Heavenly bodies.
• F.E. Argument &c.

What is amazing, is that the "F.E." person while claiming to have tons of evidence of a Flat (shape) Earth, I see very little of anything presented in the way of evidence for that specific claim, and instead I see all manner of category errors, non-sequiturs, distraction (red-herrings), and other logical fallacies brought in, to make it look like there is abundance of evidence for the claim, when so far, I have been presented with none (0, ziltch, nada, zip, bubkis, big fat goose egg, nothing, absence).

Then when asking for evidence of a domed "firmament", I get other category errors like motion / non-motion of the earth, or some speech about the sun and moon, all of which are not evidence for the claim made. They are differing categories.

When asked about motion / non-motion, I get talk about shape instead, and vice-versa, or some other tangent.

The OP claim is Earth is not a globe (oblate spheroid), but a (relatively) flat (whatever model, has yet to be actuallly imaged, shown) planar existence. Where is the text in scripture? (Let's start with the best one, and go from there, shall we?)

Whatever else is claimed, at least let's discuss the primary one of "F.E." itself. The motion / non-motion of earth, the location of sun, moon stars, whether the moon has its own light, is under a dome, etc., is all extra-stuff down the road, not of the same category as the claim of the shape of the earth.

Now, I ask again, in charity, What do you (Psalm-147:3) actually want to discuss. Pick one subject above, stick with it, and then pick one text te begin with on that subject, so that we can look at it. Are you willing to do this or not?

 

[Psalm-147:3]

So, please allow me to try this again.

I already agree with all of the texts listed above, and use those same texts to demonstrate the globe & Sol system model.

Yes, the Sun "moves", and "moves backwards". Already agreed to in several ways.

1. The Sun actually has its own axial rotation, and own small (relatively) circumnavigation, in the Sol system model.​

2. The Sun moves through the "heavens" (1st & 2nd) as it appears to the viewers looking at it on earth. The texts all reveal this, but I am not going to detail each and every one here. Pick a single example, and we can look at each one individually. Simply vomiting out a response that has many texts is not evidence of anything. Each one has to be considered in its proper context. It's like replying to an atheist on a matter and simply listing generic fields of science, or listing a bunch of scientific articles. That's not evidence. That's wasting time. Each article would have to be considered indepently on their own merits.​

According to the same texts, in that context, the earth thus indeed "moves" and is able to be 'moved out of its place'. I may provide specific texts as well in demonstration of this, if you would like to pick any single text above and look at its context.

F.E. category error logical fallacies so far: The OP is all about "F.E.", being the "shape" of the earth. Arguments so far just in the last few responses:

• F.E. Argument 1: The Sun "moves". Has (essentially) nothing to do with shape, or motion / non-motion of the earth. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 2: Earth doesn't "move". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 3: The Sun "stops moving". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth, and neither really of the motion or non-motion of the earth. Differing categories.
• F.E. Argument 4: The Sun "moves backwards". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 5: Earth is "fixed". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 6: Earth is "immovable". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 7: The Earth has a solid "firmament". Has (essentially) nothing to do with the shape of the earth, neither of the motion / non-motion of the earth, nor of the motion / non-motion of the Sun.
• F.E. Argument 8: N.A.S.A. has erroneous / fraudulent materials (F.E. claim). Has (essentially) nothing to do with the actual shape of the earth, neither of the actual motion / non-motion of the earth, neither to do with the Sun & or Moon, or the word "Firmament", etc. N.A.S.A. is essentially a non-sequitur. Different category.
• F.E. Argument 9: There are no polar circumnavigations (F.E. claim). There actually are as already demonstrated, along with equatorial circumnavigations. Whether there were or were not, is (essentially) non-sequitur to the shape of the earth, or its motion / non-motion, or relevant to the Sun, Moon, and other Heavenly bodies.
• F.E. Argument &c.

What is amazing, is that the "F.E." person while claiming to have tons of evidence of a Flat (shape) Earth, I see very little of anything presented in the way of evidence for that specific claim, and instead I see all manner of category errors, non-sequiturs, distraction (red-herrings), and other logical fallacies brought in, to make it look like there is abundance of evidence for the claim, when so far, I have been presented with none (0, ziltch, nada, zip, bubkis, big fat goose egg, nothing, absence).

Then when asking for evidence of a domed "firmament", I get other category errors like motion / non-motion of the earth, or some speech about the sun and moon, all of which are not evidence for the claim made. They are differing categories.

When asked about motion / non-motion, I get talk about shape instead, and vice-versa, or some other tangent.

The OP claim is Earth is not a globe (oblate spheroid), but a (relatively) flat (whatever model, has yet to be actuallly imaged, shown) planar existence. Where is the text in scripture? (Let's start with the best one, and go from there, shall we?)

Whatever else is claimed, at least let's discuss the primary one of "F.E." itself. The motion / non-motion of earth, the location of sun, moon stars, whether the moon has its own light, is under a dome, etc., is all extra-stuff down the road, not of the same category as the claim of the shape of the earth.

Now, I ask again, in charity, What do you (Psalm-147:3) actually want to discuss. Pick one subject above, stick with it, and then pick one text te begin with on that subject, so that we can look at it. Are you willing to do this or not?

So basically all the scripture that explain the earth and how God created it all have nothing to do with the earth? So if that has nothing to do with the shape of the earth, how does it confirm the globe in space? I think its cognitive dissonance here.