Is The Earth Flat Or Round?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Is The Earth Flat Or Round?


  • Total voters
    103

Moses_Young

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2019
9,016
4,891
113
I didn't know that was the motivation for new translations. I thought it was to help people of today understand the message. Sometimes I think the only way to reach people today is to update the entire thing - it's hard for people in 2022 to imagine a world in which there were no internet, smart phones, and flying cars. People like my family members are like "why should I care about things that happened thousands of years ago? I've never ridden a camel, wandered through a desert for 40 years, or seen someone stoned to death". Yeah, now they just kill the suspected guilty party with an AK-47.
If it was to help translate the message, why the copyrights on the new translations? That sounds like it's for money. And why the use of the questionable minority manuscripts that two Catholic-leaning scholars found in relatively recent history (one allegedly in the waste), the codex Sinaiticus and codex Vaticanus?
 
Dec 26, 2022
1
0
1
Gravity pushes down. If earth would be Round, then Gravity would miss parts of it.
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,003
3,941
113
mywebsite.us
So here, we only read the KJV? No NIV or other modern translations?
So the KJV is God breathing directly onto the pages, God directing the transcribers, and the others are just fallible men with their faulty translations?
Sometimes I think the only way to get the original meaning is to study Hebrew and Greek.
You may read whatever version you like; however, "be warned" that the version you choose may be corrupted. Books have been written that will show you exactly where-and-how different versions have been corrupted. If I remember correctly, there are over 1000 places in the NIV that omit or modify words in such a way that changes the meaning within the context of the verse/passage.

If you would like, I can give you the name of one or two very good books on the subject.

I highly recommend the KJV.

I believe the "God breathing" idea would only apply to the original manuscripts.

I believe that God has 'directed' the translation of some - but not all - bible versions in the past. (by-and-through the/His Holy Spirit)

I believe that most modern bibles are 'for profit' and for the advancing of a satanic agenda to spiritually 'dumb-down' the population of the earth.

Studying the Greek and Hebrew is not necessary to obtain the true meaning in the absolute majority of cases; albeit, it helps one to better understand the "fine details" of some things...

For example, while it is not actually "stated" in the Bible anywhere - it is 'presented' in the 'grammar of the language' that - pharmaceutical drugs are the 'sorcery' by which Satan deceives the [whole] world.

This conclusion may be derived from a study of certain words from the Greek and Hebrew in their usage in the context of certain verses/passages.
 

lonelysummer

Active member
Nov 30, 2022
127
27
28
Actually, the Bible I mostly read now is the New Revised Standard. It's actually the Oxford Annotated Bible.
 

GRACE_ambassador

Well-known member
Feb 22, 2021
2,923
1,349
113
Midwest
I think the issue is the Textus Receptus documents. Any "versions" using these, rather than the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, should be reasonably trustworthy, if the translation is accurate. But why the need to keep creating bible versions?
An Inaccurate ' word ' means NO hope for anyone, Correct?
I didn't know that was the motivation for new translations. I thought it was to help people of today understand the message.
Concerning God's ' Preserved (for ALL generations)' Scriptures:

An agenda to 1) question, 2) add to, 3) subtract from, 4) water down, and
5) Deny God's Word Of Truth Certainly does NOT "help understand" God's
Message Of Truth,
however:

God's Command in 2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV), Does Help!:

Study to Be APPROVED Open Bible.png
----------------------
Please Be Very RICHLY Encouraged And Edified In
The LORD JESUS CHRIST, And His Word Of Truth, Rightly
Divided
(+ I and II).

Grace, Peace, And JOY!
 

kinda

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2013
3,634
1,426
113
Give 5 reasons why you believe your view of the earth is correct, please include at least one scripture reference to support your view, and 5 reasons why you believe the other earth models are in error, please include at least one scripture reference to support why, the other models don't work, if possible.


Cellular Cosmology or Concave Hollow Earth.





5 Reasons to believe you are a caveman.


1. 1896-1897 U.S. Geodetic Survey results

"The United States Geodetic Survey crew for two years conducted further experiments, among them measuring the surface of a long lake in Florida on the theory that water conforms to the true curvature of the Earths surface regardless of how the land may be, thus giving a true level only to find that the water curved uphill in each direction rather than downhill. Can we blame them for deciding that to give these startling figures to the world would have no bearing on the practical problems of life, and was therefore best forgotten, since an explanation was beyond them?"

Link no longer works, but did find a video confirming survey was done. https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/hollow/palmer.htm






2. Tamarack Mine Shaft Experiment.

"Plumb bobs suspended in a single mine shaft gave too delicate a difference in measurement, and after all, were not accurate enough to give any reliable figures on the amount of deviation (for instance, per mile) and whether or not the deviation had any relation to the size of the earth. After all, it had originally been the purpose of the French Geodetic Survey to refine the actual size of the Earth as then known to a more accurate figure. They had something in mind concerning artillery, as well as astronomy.

A second series of experiments were conducted at Calumet. This time two elevator shafts into the mine were used instead of one, those numbered two and five. These two were 4,250 feet apart, and were also 4,250 feet deep. They were connected at the bottom by a perfectly straight transverse tunnel. Now, plumb bobs were hung in each shaft, and measurements were made. This time it was found that the plumb lines were 8.22 inches (21 cm) farther apart at the bottom than at the top.

It did not take the Tamarack engineer long to discover the divergence that would be necessary to complete a 360 spherical circumference. There was only one difficulty as expressed be the plumb lines, it would be the circumference of the inside of a sphere, and not the outside; Further, the center of gravity, as expressed by the angles formed by the plumb lines, would be approximately 4,000 miles out in space!

Obviously this could not be true, because if the Chinese were to make calculations based on a similar pair of mine shafts in their country, on the opposite side of the globe, the center of gravity would be found to be 4000 miles in the other direction. The center of gravity, according to the plumb lines, was a spheres surface, some 16 000 miles in diameter. Any place, 4 000 miles up, was the center of gravity".

Once again, link is no longer functional, but a google search should be able to find the article about the Tamarack Mine.

https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/hollow/palmer.htm

Found a different link from Michigan Tech to confirm.

https://www.mtu.edu/physics/department/history/1901-1916/


3. Airplanes fly nose up to prove curvature of earth is concave. Also, commercial airline flights work seemlessly in a concave hollow earth.

Commercial flights fly at about 600 miles per hour, with their nose angled up about 2.5 degrees, Concorde Jet flew at 1,300 mph, with nose angled up at 5 degrees, while SR-71 flew at 2,100 mph, and flew with it's nose up at 7-8 degrees.

"The SR-71 is a delta-wing aircraft designed and built by Lockheed. They are powered by two Pratt and Whitney J-58 axial-flow turbojets with afterburners, each producing 32,500 pounds of thrust. Studies have shown that less than 20 percent of the total thrust used to fly at Mach 3 is produced by the basic engine itself".

https://irp.fas.org/program/collect/sr-71.htm#:~:text=The SR-71 is a,by the basic engine itself.

What is considered a delta wing?


"In airplane: Wing types. Delta wings are formed in the shape of the Greek letter delta (Δ); they are triangular wings lying at roughly a right angle to the fuselage. The supersonic Concorde featured delta wings".

https://www.britannica.com/technology/delta-wing

1672261790815.jpeg 1672261833663.jpeg 1672261888565.jpeg 1672265289853.jpeg



The SR 71 is so suppose to be the fastest plane in the world, and the plane flies nose up at 7-8 degrees. To further the point, lets do some math.

If the SR-71 flies for one hour at top speed of 2,100 mph, how much would the earth curve in the same distance?

Glad you asked.

( 2,100 X 2,100 ) X 8 inches = Rough estimate of curvature of the earth.

4,410,000 X 8 inches = 35,380,000 inches, or 2,940,000 feet, or 556 miles.

The SR-71 flew at 16 miles above sea level, or 85,000 feet, so one would conclude that, it's better to keep your nose up.

Now let's think about this shall we?

If you believe in a convex earth (Heliocentric Model), the earth would drop approximately 500 miles after flying just one hour in the SR-71. If you believe this, than you believe the SR-71 is loosing about 500 miles of altitude, when flying nose up at 7-8 degrees. To summarize at 2,100 mph at angle of attack of 7-8 degree (nose up), the SR-71 is losing 500 miles of altitude in an hour with Pratt and Whitney J58 engines. These engines have like 32,000 pounds of thrust. (1 reason why I don't believe in the Heliocentric Model)

Take a look how flat those SR-71 wings, and how arrow dynamic the plane is. There is no way that plane is losing 500 miles of altitude, with 30k pounds of thrust, with the nose pointing up at 7-8 degrees in one hour, and traveling 2,100 mph. NOT A CHANCE.

This is the silver bullet for Concave Hollow Earth. Concave Earth explains why planes fly nose up with relationship to the earth.


OR

If you believe in a concave earth, the earth would be rising about 500 miles after flying just one hour in the SR-71. In the Concave Earth Model, planes are always flying up hill with relation to earth (sea level), so that's why the SR-71 has such a steep nose angle pointing up, when flying. If it wasn't for this high angle of attack, the plane would hit the earth in 10-15 minutes, depending how much angle the plane dips below 7-8 degrees. This is why even with 30k pounds of thrust keeping the SR-71 flying, it still needs to fly nose up, because the earth is waiting to catch you.



4. The earth is stationary, and the sun and moon are mobile.

Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever. Psalm 104:5

The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises. Ecclesiastes 1:5

At that time Joshua spoke to the Lord in the day when the Lord gave the Amorites over to the sons of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, “Sun, stand still at Gibeon, and moon, in the Valley of Aijalon.” And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in the midst of heaven and did not hurry to set for about a whole day. There has been no day like it before or since, when the Lord heeded the voice of a man, for the Lord fought for Israel. Joshua 10:12-14



There is zero evidence that the earth is moving. None. If you say the sun is the center of the universe and it's stationary, this going against scripture, and observation from the earth.

(2nd reason why, I don't believe in the Heliocentric model.)


To be continued in another post or two, due to the length of post, and media limits.................
 

kinda

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2013
3,634
1,426
113
Give 5 reasons why you believe your view of the earth is correct, please include at least one scripture reference to support your view, and 5 reasons why you believe the other earth models are in error, please include at least one scripture reference to support why, the other models don't work, if possible.


Cellular Cosmology or Concave Hollow Earth.


To be continued in another post or two, due to the length of post, and media limits.................

4 reasons have already been given for Concave Hollow Earth, so 1 more to go. I might be able to write a book on this now. lol

To continue on.....


5. Glass Sky

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 1&version=KJV



One time I left the shower on by accident, when I finally went to the bathroom, the whole room was filled with steam, and the water was dripping from the ceiling.

When this happend, I concluded that, there must be a glass ceiling like the concave hollow earth points to. When there is enough steam/clouds that collects above the skies, the water falls, just like my bathroom when the shower was left on.




Many that believe in the concave hollow earth, believe there is two spheres inside of earth. The celestial sphere and the lower sphere (whatever they call it) at 100km or 60 miles up.


The concave hollow earth theorizes that the glass ceiling explains the moon dogs and sun dogs.

1672267299285.jpeg

1672267334782.jpeg

Look at your flashlight, do you notice a glass, or plastic iece in front of the lightbulb? Compare flashlight beam and sun/moon dogs.




Also rainbows!


1672267380616.jpeg


We can all thank the glass sky for rainbows, which God created to show us that HE will not flood the world again.







O.k., now the other 3 reasons why, Heliocentric Universe doesn't work.

3. Some of the stuff that Heliocentric says, seem so made up. There is no evidence, only unprovable theories.

For instance, Heliocentric model concludes, that the sun is 93 million miles away, and that the sun is 800,000 miles in diameter. This is total and utter non-sense. This is a joke. Unprovable and there is no way to observe this, plus, it just sounds foolish to me.

Also, the moon is suppose to be 250,000 miles away from earth, this is another NASA joke, that not to many people have laughed at yet.

Should I remind people that modern science is dominated by heathen, the same heathen that teach Macro-evolution?!?!


4 & 5 Air pressure and Earth's climate.

"The typical pressure at sea level is 1013.25 millibars or 14.7 pounds per square inch".

https://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/educate/pressure.shtml#:~:text=When gravity acts on the,14.7 pounds per square inch.


1672268837096.jpeg 1672268860911.jpeg

1672268925336.jpeg

O.k., this is just sort of my perspective here. I think the earth would be much easier to heat and keep warm if it was enclosed like a house fire place, instead of an outdoor fire pit. If the sun is outside the earth, like the Heliocentric model points to, you would lose heat so quick, it would barely do much.

Air pressure is another concern I have with the Heliocentric model. How do you keep air on earth, when the earth is traveling 66,6000 mph, and spinning 1,000 mph on top of a soccer ball?!?! Hello? It just doesn't make sense to me.

If makes far more sense that living inside enclosed spherical earth would be easier to contain air pressure and heat. This is point number 4 & 5, why I don't believe in the Heliocentric model. Concave Hollow Earth makes more sense!

The Flat Earth?!?!

I will briefly give reasons why the Flat Earth doesn't work, even though it's been discussed at nauseam.

Flat Earth doesn't have a model with the sun, moon, planets, and etc. It's pretty hard to point out it's errors, if there isn't anything to test.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: Genesis 1:14 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 1&version=KJV

It's pretty hard to show seasons, when there isn't a model to show how the sun rotates. Someone mentioned this verse in the thread earlier, so I thought it would be good one to expose the Flat Earth on this one.

Planes


Stars


Flat Earth needs to create a model, explain away planes, and Stars before it's even in a position to be discussed. Not to mention, where is the edge of the earth?!?! Gonna need proof of this one. Maybe there will be a flat earth safari one day, to find the edge. lol

P.S. To answer the poster who said, the seasons only work in Heliocentric Model, well, that is wrong. Take a look at the rough sketch of the Concave Hollow Earth, and imagine the sun orbiting lower in Winter, and orbiting higher in the summer. Model was in my first post.

This was really fun! I think there was much more to add, but plenty was written in these two posts.
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,003
3,941
113
mywebsite.us
Though there are superior versions, even the worst carries the same essential message.
Even if the 'worst' had/has "the same essential message" (assuming you mean the gospel), what about Christian growth and maturity?

If you are going to "get [deep] into the meat of the word", you certainly don't want to study a corrupted bible.

Why would anyone want anything less than the most correct and sure version they could obtain?
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
18,152
7,208
113
Even if the 'worst' had/has "the same essential message" (assuming you mean the gospel), what about Christian growth and maturity?

If you are going to "get [deep] into the meat of the word", you certainly don't want to study a corrupted bible.

Why would anyone want anything less than the most correct and sure version they could obtain?
That is why, given the choice, one would not choose the worst.....
 

lonelysummer

Active member
Nov 30, 2022
127
27
28
Even if the 'worst' had/has "the same essential message" (assuming you mean the gospel), what about Christian growth and maturity?

If you are going to "get [deep] into the meat of the word", you certainly don't want to study a corrupted bible.

Why would anyone want anything less than the most correct and sure version they could obtain?
If you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, can't you depend on him to steer you to the best Bible?
 

Moses_Young

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2019
9,016
4,891
113
An Inaccurate ' word ' means NO hope for anyone, Correct?
I believe the Gospel can still be believed despite one using an inaccurate translation (unless the inaccuracy extends even to the Gospel, and it is a false gospel that is believed). But I do believe that an inaccurate translation leads to an incorrect understanding of God (and therefore, ourselves and our behaviour). And as we have seen, the more that Christians are willing to accept inaccuracy in translations, the more churches depart from the truth. While not strictly a salvation issue (immediately), I believe over generations, poor translations become even moreso (as I believe it is Satan's intent to slowly draw the believers from the true Church into a worthless and salvation-less cult).

If you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, can't you depend on him to steer you to the best Bible?
If you let Him. If you ignore Him every time He sends someone to tell you your bible might not be the best... well, that's on you.
 

Moses_Young

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2019
9,016
4,891
113
The Flat Earth?!?!

I will briefly give reasons why the Flat Earth doesn't work, even though it's been discussed at nauseam.

Flat Earth doesn't have a model with the sun, moon, planets, and etc. It's pretty hard to point out it's errors, if there isn't anything to test.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: Genesis 1:14 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 1&version=KJV

It's pretty hard to show seasons, when there isn't a model to show how the sun rotates. Someone mentioned this verse in the thread earlier, so I thought it would be good one to expose the Flat Earth on this one.

Planes


Stars


Flat Earth needs to create a model, explain away planes, and Stars before it's even in a position to be discussed. Not to mention, where is the edge of the earth?!?! Gonna need proof of this one. Maybe there will be a flat earth safari one day, to find the edge. lol

P.S. To answer the poster who said, the seasons only work in Heliocentric Model, well, that is wrong. Take a look at the rough sketch of the Concave Hollow Earth, and imagine the sun orbiting lower in Winter, and orbiting higher in the summer. Model was in my first post.

This was really fun! I think there was much more to add, but plenty was written in these two posts.
All your evidence of Concave Earth over Heliocentrism can be equally be applied in favour of Flat Earth (i.e. your "proofs" do not favour Concave Earth over Flat Earth). And as Flat Earth is the one that has scriptural support over Concave Earth, wouldn't a more rational conclusion be to go with what we observe - that the Earth is flat?
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,555
13,320
113
If I remember correctly, there are over 1000 places in the NIV that omit or modify words in such a way that changes the meaning within the context of the verse/passage.
“Changes” in relation to what? The original text, or the KJV? The KJV is not the standard by which other English translations should be judged.
 

Moses_Young

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2019
9,016
4,891
113
“Changes” in relation to what? The original text, or the KJV? The KJV is not the standard by which other English translations should be judged.
Changes in relation to the Textus Receptus, I think? Basically, changes like dumbing down Christ's divinity (e.g. reducing the number of verses that support this). Changes that shouldn't be regarded as trivial.
 

kinda

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2013
3,634
1,426
113
All your evidence of Concave Earth over Heliocentrism can be equally be applied in favour of Flat Earth (i.e. your "proofs" do not favour Concave Earth over Flat Earth). And as Flat Earth is the one that has scriptural support over Concave Earth, wouldn't a more rational conclusion be to go with what we observe - that the Earth is flat?


Your statements are just opinions, and your post gave no specific reasons why you came to your conclusions. Not to mention you sort of skipped over all the points, why flat earth is not worth discussing.

It would be like me saying, you are David Banner, and when you get angry, you turn into the incredible hulk. Notice how it's just a baseless claim, without any support?!?! Probably not. lol

Here is my criticism about the Flat Earth again, maybe you can acknowledge these points, and give actual "reasons" why they are wrong with specific reasons?!?! You know have specific reasons, why you see it differently, and not just say, "well, that proves flat earth". lol Am I talking to the ice wall, or a human? lol


1672322442945.jpeg


The Flat Earth?!?!

I will briefly give reasons why the Flat Earth doesn't work, even though it's been discussed at nauseam.

Flat Earth doesn't have a model with the sun, moon, planets, and etc. It's pretty hard to point out it's errors, if there isn't anything to test.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: Genesis 1:14 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 1&version=KJV

It's pretty hard to show seasons, when there isn't a model to show how the sun rotates. Someone mentioned this verse in the thread earlier, so I thought it would be good one to expose the Flat Earth on this one.

Planes


Stars


Flat Earth needs to create a model, explain away planes, and Stars before it's even in a position to be discussed. Not to mention, where is the edge of the earth?!?! Gonna need proof of this one. Maybe there will be a flat earth safari one day, to find the edge. lol


2nd attempt to let Flat Earthers summarize their views......No further prompting will be given.


Give 5 reasons why you believe your view of the earth is correct, please include at least one scripture reference to support your view, and 5 reasons why you believe the other earth models are in error, please include at least one scripture reference to support why, the other models don't work, if possible.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,540
3,503
113
“Changes” in relation to what? The original text, or the KJV? The KJV is not the standard by which other English translations should be judged.
Is the original text the standard? Where is it? The original commandments were destroyed. The original book of Jeremiah was cut up and burned in a furnace. It's impossible to have the original. Let's not place more emphasis on the original than God. If God thought the original was necessary, then God would have preserved the original.
 

Moses_Young

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2019
9,016
4,891
113
Your statements are just opinions, and your post gave no specific reasons why you came to your conclusions. Not to mention you sort of skipped over all the points, why flat earth is not worth discussing.

It would be like me saying, you are David Banner, and when you get angry, you turn into the incredible hulk. Notice how it's just a baseless claim, without any support?!?! Probably not. lol

Here is my criticism about the Flat Earth again, maybe you can acknowledge these points, and give actual "reasons" why they are wrong with specific reasons?!?! You know have specific reasons, why you see it differently, and not just say, "well, that proves flat earth". lol Am I talking to the ice wall, or a human? lol


View attachment 247123






2nd attempt to let Flat Earthers summarize their views......No further prompting will be given.


Give 5 reasons why you believe your view of the earth is correct, please include at least one scripture reference to support your view, and 5 reasons why you believe the other earth models are in error, please include at least one scripture reference to support why, the other models don't work, if possible.
I think it's more like you saying "I can prove that there are goblins on the outskirts of the forest." Then you setting up some cameras, and showing the video produced, evidencing no fairies on the outskirts of the forest. And as there are no fairies evidenced, concluding "See, I have proved that there are goblins on the outskirts of the forest."

Your points help refute ball-Earth. They don't support concave-Earth. Flat Earth is the observation, so is the logical conclusion.