Whats on the other side of the earth?

Aetheric Wind is difficult to explain. Suffice it to say that it is a mysterious force about which FEers know little.

Aetheric Wind is difficult to explain.

and they read Scripture literally

As regards the Aetheric Wind, I don't know enough about the origin of the theory to talk rationally about it. But I suspect that it was NOT dependent on religious belief, as the Bible says nothing about it.

Well, I think some FEers would disagree with you, and would present what they consider to be proofs that FET is scientifically sound.

I suspect you've been reading my posts.

Tomstar, greeting!

Welcome to the FES! I am personally neither a rounder nor a flatter.

How can you be neither?

 I am examining both from the perspective of one who wants to see logically which theory better holds. So far, from a Biblical and zetetic perspective, Flat Earth Theory (FET) wins. But from a scientific and mathematical perspective, so far, Round Earth Theory (RET) wins. I am leaning toward a Flat Earth understanding of the world, because I am inclined to trust my own eyes and the Scripture more than I am mathematical equations, most of which I don't understand anyway. However, I cannot just ignore Facts. And all the scientific evidence seems to point to a Round Earth. So I am in debate.

Looking at it logically but choosing to ignore both science and maths? How is that logical? Why would you trust something you didn't understand, but also why would you think you had any idea as to the answer without understanding the reasons?

However, to answer your questions, What is on the other side of the Earth depends on which Flatter you talk to. Unfortunately, one of the weaknesses of FET

Yep, it's definitely one of them..

 is that there is no consensus on ANY topic except that the Earth is flat. Everything else is up for grabs. I will give you the answers I personally know, and am inclined to believe. In order to answer your questions, I am going to have to do more than that. I am going to have to give you the whole cosmology of my FET. So do be patient with me.

The Earth is indeed flat.

Indeed? So you've made a decision then

Above the Earth is the Sky, or Firmament. The stars, the planets, the Sun, and the Moon are there.

They're 'there' are they? Good stuff

 Above the Sky are the waters over the Firmament, which fall through the flood gates

The flood gates? How do these waters get renewed?

 to Earth in the form of rain, snow, hail, etc.

Snow comes from space?

 Above that is highest Heaven, where God dwells.

It's a strange situation where that sentence, in the midst of this call to reason, is allowed to pass

The Sky and the Earth meet where the mountains serve as the pillars of the Sky at the edge of the Earth. The pillars of the Earth are beneath the Earth and support it. This is where your question comes in. Beneath the Earth are the waters under the Earth. The seas and oceans surround the Earth, as the fountain of the deep (which is connected to the waters under the Earth). Beneath that is Sheol, the abode of the dead. Surrounding that are the waters of the nether world.

I'd love to see a drawing of this - what is keeping the waters under the Earth in place?

Fountain of the deep? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

This is the ancient Hebrew understanding of the world from the Bible.

It absolutely isn't

 As a traditional Jew, I am inclined toward accepting this cosmology of things. Naturally, the Earth is the center of the universe.

Although I am not certain of this view of things (given that math and science support a Round Earth), this is what I am working with right now. As to how thick the Earth is, that is a very good question. I don't know. And what happens, how does the Sky get held up by the pillars of the sky, the mountains? Well, basically, the sky comes down to meet the Earth. Exactly how it does that, I don't know. But there you are.

This paragraph says that you're not sure, inspite of the things which provide that surety, and you don't know some stuff but you do know some other stuff but not the reason for that stuff. Does that seem like an opinion worth trusting to you?

I hope this all helps. If I can be of further assistance, do let me know.

Actually, yes, there are pictures. Check Garwood, C. 'Flat Earth: the History of an Infamous Idea', p. 139 of the Nook e-reader edition. Also check the New American Bible, p. 5. A similar picture has also been posted here, but I don't recall which thread. And yes, it IS the ancient Hebrew understanding of the cosmos. Go look at the sources before you open mouth and insert foot next time.

Well, that really depends on how much value you place on Scripture. If you consider it inspired, divinely revealed, you then have to figure out how to interpret it. If it's all bilge and beanstalks to you, then naturally, you wouldn't consider what it has to say at all relevant to your understanding of the cosmos. So that is a difference between us. I regard Scripture as ultimately paramount. But, it is not a science book and never claimed to be. So how we interpret what it says about the Earth will depend on how we handle the subject of Scripture as such.

Well, Ruth is in the Hebrew Srriptures, commonly called the 'Old Testament'. The Gnostic Gospels are books written in the New Testament era. The Hebrew Scripures are indeed inspired and have been held as such for a very long time. The Christian Scripture, although I've read it twice, has no relevance to the Jew.

I am familiar with the 4 author theory. According to that, there was a Yahwist (J), Elohist (E), Priestly (P), and Deuteronomist (D) source that was responsible for the Torah. In a word, EXCREMENT! The theory was cooked up in the 19th century by German scholars, many of whom had little faith in the document they were supposed to be studying. If they had read Ezra, they would have found that he speaks of reading the Torah of Moses to the entire House of Israel. Our German scholar friends tell us the Torah was composed at about Ezra's time. But Ezra himself says that the Torah was located in the Temple, and then read to the people, to get them back to following it. So, either our German friends are wrong, or Ezra was a liar about finding the Torah. I choose, along with all the Sages and Rabbis of Israel from then to now, to believe Ezra over men of little or no faith seeking to tear down the edifice of Biblical truth by which my people has lived for 5000 years.

Quote from: Yaakov ben Avraham on October 05, 2013, 11:47:48 PM

I am familiar with the 4 author theory. According to that, there was a Yahwist (J), Elohist (E), Priestly (P), and Deuteronomist (D) source that was responsible for the Torah. In a word, EXCREMENT! The theory was cooked up in the 19th century by German scholars, many of whom had little faith in the document they were supposed to be studying. If they had read Ezra, they would have found that he speaks of reading the Torah of Moses to the entire House of Israel. Our German scholar friends tell us the Torah was composed at about Ezra's time. But Ezra himself says that the Torah was located in the Temple, and then read to the people, to get them back to following it. So, either our German friends are wrong, or Ezra was a liar about finding the Torah. I choose, along with all the Sages and Rabbis of Israel from then to now, to believe Ezra over men of little or no faith seeking to tear down the edifice of Biblical truth by which my people has lived for 5000 years.

So the proof is that someone in the book said it was real so it must be? Circular argument much?