Scripture Based Flat Earth Proposition

[Zandar]

So I take it that flat earther believe in math? Didn't use that part since it doesn't equal 6'.

If that was true then you wouldn't be saying the earth was flat because you haven't seen the whole earth at one time. Moreover, if you educate yourselves by observation, where do you see the flat earth?

The water might be flat by observation but the earth certainly isn't flat.

And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: Gen 1:10

A more accurate explanation of flat earthers can be found in 2 Tim 3:5-7

5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

I like Pa's math better.

 

[GaryA]

Get yourself to the Southern Hemisphere

Oh - and - I don't want to see you write anything more in support of Ball Earth until you can personally go into space and take a clear unedited single photograph of the entire earth...

"You first!"

 

[GaryA]

Didn't use that part since it doesn't equal 6'.

I think there is some "globe math" that you need to learn/relearn/review...

If that was true then you wouldn't be saying the earth was flat because you haven't seen the whole earth at one time. Moreover, if you educate yourselves by observation, where do you see the flat earth?

You are being ridiculous - 'flat' is all we ever see - everywhere we look - flat as far as you can see - never seen any curvature.

And, if anyone wants to say "But - I have seen curvature!" - well - good! - wonderful! - however - "talk is cheap" - where are the pictures and/or video?

The water might be flat by observation but the earth certainly isn't flat.

How do you [really really really actually] know with [absolute] certainty that the earth is not flat?

 

[GaryA]

It's not the mountain that was required...

My question to you was based not so much on the mountain being required as it was about the fact that it happened. And, in that sense - yes - it was required! Absolutely!

Matthew 4:

8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

Luke 4:

5 And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.

In the context of these verses - the devil did actually in fact "take" Jesus up onto a high mountain. And, that being the case - why would that need to happen if natural physical eyesight did not have a part in it somehow? No one needed to go up onto a high mountain to imagine the kingdoms - or "see" them in any other way. The very fact that they went up onto a high mountain makes it very clear that natural physical eyesight was involved.

These verses say nothing about them being able to see the whole earth - only, all of the kingdoms of the world at that time in history.

How do we know that natural eyesight back then could not see [even a little bit] further than we can see today?

Don't assume too much about what everything was like back then - accept what the Bible says and make that your base foundation for truth.

 

[Dino246]

Oh, I would just love to do that; however, some serious preventative issues exist.

Oh - and - I don't want to see you write anything more in support of Ball Earth until you can personally go into space and take a clear unedited single photograph of the entire earth...

As I have not made any statements about photographs of the Earth, I reject your accusatory requirements. I'm satisfied that extant photos of surficial phenomena amply prove the spherical nature of Earth.

 

[MerSee]

As I have not made any statements about photographs of the Earth, I reject your accusatory requirements. I'm satisfied that extant photos of surficial phenomena amply prove the spherical nature of Earth.

 

[MerSee]

As I have not made any statements about photographs of the Earth, I reject your accusatory requirements. I'm satisfied that extant photos of surficial phenomena amply prove the spherical nature of Earth.

 

[MerSee]

As I have not made any statements about photographs of the Earth, I reject your accusatory requirements. I'm satisfied that extant photos of surficial phenomena amply prove the spherical nature of Earth.

 

[Dino246]

"You first!"

I'm not the one rejecting the premise. I accept the truth of photos showing that the sun rises well South of due East and sets well South of due West at latitudes South of the Tropic of Capricorn. You reject them. Even were I to go and make careful observations, you would reject them. So it is on you to make the trip and find the truth for yourself. Only your own in-person observations will prove the matter to you.

 

[Dino246]

View attachment 264838

Irrelevant to the point of utter stupidity.

 

[MerSee]

As I have not made any statements about photographs of the Earth, I reject your accusatory requirements. I'm satisfied that extant photos of surficial phenomena amply prove the spherical nature of Earth.

 

[MerSee]

I'm not the one rejecting the premise. I accept the truth of photos showing that the sun rises well South of due East and sets well South of due West at latitudes South of the Tropic of Capricorn. You reject them. Even were I to go and make careful observations, you would reject them. So it is on you to make the trip and find the truth for yourself. Only your own in-person observations will prove the matter to you.

 

[Dino246]

View attachment 264842

The ability to post a meme does not indicate intelligence. Your choice of an ignorance-based meme does lead me to question your intelligence.

 

[MerSee]

The ability to post a meme does not indicate intelligence. Your choice of an ignorance-based meme does lead me to question your intelligence.

 

[Sculpt]

Irrelevant to the point of utter stupidity.

I'm telling yawl, MerSee must be a bot/AI. It doesn't really appear to read the post it's "replying" to. It doesn't answer or address simple questions and issues you address to it.

We could test it. I bet if I reply to it with the word satellite, it'll repost the message about posting a picture of a "group of satellites"... which is something a bot/AI would do.

 

[GaryA]

You could always post one of those make-sure-you-are-human puzzles for him to solve...

 

[GaryA]

Thread posters -- I think MerSee is a bot/AI. Not joking.

I think MerSee is a thinking human who keeps asking the same question because no one can/will tell him what device exists that will measure curvature...

 

[Sculpt]

You could always post one of those make-sure-you-are-human puzzles for him to solve...

I've heard of those puzzles. I've tried to probe that with live chat "individuals" as a fun mental exercise, trying to find those parameters. I've seen some good AI, but I haven't researched what those puzzles are. Do you know anything about it, or have any links to them?

 

[Sculpt]

I think MerSee is a thinking human who keeps asking the same question because no one can/will tell him what device exists that will measure curvature...

Nope. I never addressed the "measure curvature" at all. I asked it "What possesses you to say there's no such thing as satellites?" and it just repeated the same message part word-for-word about posting a picture of a "group of satellites"... that doesn't even make any sense. A bot often parrots a message with repetition based on a word or phrase but has no conversational and/or logical coherence.

Its also just flooding the thread with "drive-by-memes" that has no coherence with the message its replying to. Bots do that too. People don't do that, especially on a christian forum.

 

[NightTwister]

There is no such thing as Satellites.

Please explain how GPS works.