Does scripture teach a Flat Earth Cosmology?

• The Scriptures were written to a people whose cosmology was that the earth was flat and probably as presented on the apocryphal Book of Enoch.
  
  
• Hence many believe that the Bible was never intended to teach "Cosmology" and simply contains the cosmology of the time.

• That of Ptolemy as believed by the early Church and the Reformers, John Calvin and Martin Luther?
• That of Nicolaus Copernicus or of Tycho Brahe?
• That of Galileo, Kepler and Newton etc?
• That of "Modern Science"?

I don't remember ever having touched a bible.
I will recuse myself from this discussion. 

So you posed a question with the word "teach" in it and then objected to the wording of your own question?

There are lots of threads on the forum regarding the Biblical reasons for FE, we even have some stuff in our library https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/library/newspaperandmagazine/Flat%20Earth%20Bible,%20The%20(Schadewald).pdf   

I don't know where you want this thread to go, and I don't know why you posted it down here.

Seems like posting it directly in the thread you are referring to would have made the most sense. Anyway, I'm moving this to FE General.

• The Scriptures were written to a people whose cosmology was that the earth was flat and probably as presented on the apocryphal Book of Enoch[/
  

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 03:11:27 AM

• The Scriptures were written to a people whose cosmology was that the earth was flat and probably as presented on the apocryphal Book of Enoch[/
  

God could have easily told a simplified version of modern cosmology instead of claiming idiotic falsehoods..... (hypothetically speaking)
Please let me try.....

I really think no goathherder would have objected to this version of modern creation one bit.

Either you believe in God and the bible or you don’t.

I know what you believe, but do you know it too rabinoz?

You know my point of view..... modern cosmology is antichrist in every thinkable way and from every thinkable angle.

Yes it does.  This  may  be by accident, but its clear from historical record that those who wrote the scripture believed in a flat earth, and there is no doubt it would come into play in scripture (at least before translation.) For a detailed argument, look to Wardlaw who dissects the bible, sometimes in its original tongue, to prove this inconclusively.

I imagine the argument might be that there is no "bringing up to date" the scriptures. They were written perfectly by a perfect creator.

Also we are still validating Tycho Brahes observations and predictions even today.  I think we need more than to say "its impossible" to support his model is incorrect (though it is, but a far shot better than the heliocentric nonsense out there.)

Tychonic system
The Tychonic system (or Tychonian system) is a model of the Solar System published by Tycho Brahe in the late 16th century, which combines what he saw as the mathematical benefits of the Copernican system with the philosophical and "physical" benefits of the Ptolemaic system. The model may have been inspired by Valentin Naboth and Paul Wittich, a Silesian mathematician and astronomer. A similar model was implicit in the calculations a century earlier by Nilakantha Somayaji of the Kerala school of astronomy and mathematics.

It is conceptually a geocentric model: the Earth is at the centre of the universe, the Sun and Moon and the stars revolve around the Earth, and the other five planets revolve around the Sun. At the same time, the motions of the planets are mathematically equivalent to the motions in Copernicus' heliocentric system under a simple coordinate transformation, so that, as long as no force law is postulated to explain why the planets move as described, there is no mathematical reason to prefer either the Tychonic or the Copernican system.


The Tychonic system, with the objects that rotate around the Earth shown on blue orbits and the objects that rotate around the Sun shown on orange orbits.
Around all is a sphere of stars, which rotates.

The Planets
Solar System
Q. What does the Solar System look like in FET?

A. In FET the planets are revolving around the sun, while the sun itself revolves around the Northern Hub.

Quote from: Bullwinkle on December 22, 2018, 03:21:39 AM

I don't remember ever having touched a bible.
I will recuse myself from this discussion. 

Fine, this thread is no more than a place to to put that material.
But what bugs me is the number of flat-earthers on YouTube pushing Scripture as proof of the flat-earth.
It's not very prevalent on this site, though a few effectively try it and initially Astronomy did and might "revert to type".
And debating them by simply claiming Scripture is bunkum (not that I believe that anyway) doesn't work.
It would be like debating Tom Bishop (bless his atheistic soul ) by claiming his Sacred texts,  ENaG by the patron Saint of Flat Earthism, Saint Samuel Birley Rowbotham was bunkum - sacré bleu!

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 04:02:29 AM

Quote from: Bullwinkle on December 22, 2018, 03:21:39 AM

I don't remember ever having touched a bible.
I will recuse myself from this discussion. 

Fine, this thread is no more than a place to to put that material.
But what bugs me is the number of flat-earthers on YouTube pushing Scripture as proof of the flat-earth.
It's not very prevalent on this site, though a few effectively try it and initially Astronomy did and might "revert to type".
And debating them by simply claiming Scripture is bunkum (not that I believe that anyway) doesn't work.
It would be like debating Tom Bishop (bless his atheistic soul ) by claiming his Sacred texts,  ENaG by the patron Saint of Flat Earthism, Saint Samuel Birley Rowbotham was bunkum - sacré bleu!

They use scriptures because many consider scripture to be divine.
If you can get divinity on your side that's a pretty cool player to have on your team. And because it doesn't talk back it is difficult to argue against.

Quote from: Shifter on December 23, 2018, 08:36:12 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 04:02:29 AM

Quote from: Bullwinkle on December 22, 2018, 03:21:39 AM

I don't remember ever having touched a bible.
I will recuse myself from this discussion. 

Fine, this thread is no more than a place to to put that material.
But what bugs me is the number of flat-earthers on YouTube pushing Scripture as proof of the flat-earth.
It's not very prevalent on this site, though a few effectively try it and initially Astronomy did and might "revert to type".
And debating them by simply claiming Scripture is bunkum (not that I believe that anyway) doesn't work.
It would be like debating Tom Bishop (bless his atheistic soul ) by claiming his Sacred texts,  ENaG by the patron Saint of Flat Earthism, Saint Samuel Birley Rowbotham was bunkum - sacré bleu!

All you can do is present evidence in the hope that a few might be encouraged to investigate further and convince themselves. It has happened.

How is that working out for you?

Quote from: rabinoz on December 23, 2018, 09:42:12 PM

Quote from: Shifter on December 23, 2018, 08:36:12 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 04:02:29 AM

Quote from: Bullwinkle on December 22, 2018, 03:21:39 AM

I don't remember ever having touched a bible.
I will recuse myself from this discussion. 

Fine, this thread is no more than a place to to put that material.
But what bugs me is the number of flat-earthers on YouTube pushing Scripture as proof of the flat-earth.
It's not very prevalent on this site, though a few effectively try it and initially Astronomy did and might "revert to type".
And debating them by simply claiming Scripture is bunkum (not that I believe that anyway) doesn't work.
It would be like debating Tom Bishop (bless his atheistic soul ) by claiming his Sacred texts,  ENaG by the patron Saint of Flat Earthism, Saint Samuel Birley Rowbotham was bunkum - sacré bleu!

All you can do is present evidence in the hope that a few might be encouraged to investigate further and convince themselves. It has happened.

How is that working out for you?

• one case was TigerDan925 on YouTube and TigerDan925 "convinced himself" from his attempts to make an "accurate flat-earth map".
  He couldn't get Antarctica to "fit", so looking closer he gave up on the flat altogether after posting many videos supporting the flat earth.
  Since then he has made a series starting with:
         Flat earth could be a big deception? Liars Scared. MAP SCAM exposed!!! TigerDan925 and then Flat Earth Deception Part 2. Exposing Myself & others. TigerDan925
  and received plenty of criticism from other flat-earthers for "betraying the cause".
  
  
• Another is cikljamas who is a member and current "debater" here. He convinced himself after some of his own careful measurements were enough for him to accept that the earth (water in a long long tube) really curved.
  I've no idea whether any debates here had anything to do with his change of opinion. Mind you he is still a geocentrists and we still have much the same debates but at least from the viewpoint of a spherical earth and that simplifies things a bit.
  
  His YouTube channel is odiupicku (AKA cikljamas).
  Until, as far as I can tell around Jul 8, 2017, he made numerous flat-earth videos but this video seems to be "where he came -out":
        THE FINAL WORD ON THE FLAT-EARTH ISSUE : FLAT EARTH IS A PSYOP DESIGNED TO CONCEAL GEOCENTRIC TRUTH! odiupicku after that video he commented:
  Quote from: odiupicku, Published on Jul 8, 2017

  I was patient enough, but time has come to put cards on the table :
  1. The earth is 100 % stationary, but the earth isn't flat!
  2. 1A) There is mountain of evidence in favor of the stationary earth, but in the same time we (flat-earthers) are not able to address sanely following problems:
  <<etc, etc. >>

  And now he posts videos supporting a stationary Globe and still attacks NASA .
  He's made a series that are a "take-off" of Eric Dubay's 200 proofs, starting with ERIC DUMBAY'S 201st PROOF-make it viral or stay dumb, odiupicku, Published on Aug 18, 2017..
  
  I've no idea if any of the debates had any effect, who knows?
  

But not being an expert in such matters,

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 03:11:27 AM

But not being an expert in such matters,

Quote from: Danang on December 24, 2018, 04:28:04 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 03:11:27 AM

But not being an expert in such matters,

And also no tattoos and much less hair .

Quote from: John Davis on December 23, 2018, 11:17:34 AM

Yes it does.  This  may  be by accident, but its clear from historical record that those who wrote the scripture believed in a flat earth, and there is no doubt it would come into play in scripture (at least before translation.) For a detailed argument, look to Wardlaw who dissects the bible, sometimes in its original tongue, to prove this inconclusively.

I don't believe that I disputed that and Robert J. Schadewal also states clearly that he believes that as in The Flat Earth Bible © 1987, 1995 by Robert J. Schadewal from The Flat Earth Society library.

Quote from: John Davis

I imagine the argument might be that there is no "bringing up to date" the scriptures. They were written perfectly by a perfect creator.

I would claim that the purpose of the perfect creator was not to teach cosmology and that would only be a distraction.
Rather than interfere with normal human progress He chose to let people investigate things in their own way "in the fullness of time" (apologies to Sir Humphrey Appleby)

Quote from: rabinoz on December 23, 2018, 01:00:07 PM

Quote from: John Davis on December 23, 2018, 11:17:34 AM

Yes it does.  This  may  be by accident, but its clear from historical record that those who wrote the scripture believed in a flat earth, and there is no doubt it would come into play in scripture (at least before translation.) For a detailed argument, look to Wardlaw who dissects the bible, sometimes in its original tongue, to prove this inconclusively.

I don't believe that I disputed that and Robert J. Schadewal also states clearly that he believes that as in The Flat Earth Bible © 1987, 1995 by Robert J. Schadewal from The Flat Earth Society library.

No one said you did dispute it. I'm glad we agree that scripture talks of a flat earth.

Quote

Quote from: John Davis

I imagine the argument might be that there is no "bringing up to date" the scriptures. They were written perfectly by a perfect creator.

I would claim that the purpose of the perfect creator was not to teach cosmology and that would only be a distraction.
Rather than interfere with normal human progress He chose to let people investigate things in their own way "in the fullness of time" (apologies to Sir Humphrey Appleby)

If the purpose of a creator is not to teach cosmology (and all of his works which should be celebrated), then why would he have created the cosmos?

"The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork."

He explicitly states to ask nature for wisdom in Job, and that it is no distraction as it builds praise for him in his works :
7 But ask the animals, and they will teach you, or the birds in the sky, and they will tell you;
8 or speak to the earth, and it will teach you, or let the fish in the sea inform you.
9 Which of all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this?
10 In his hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind.

A primary message of Job, in fact, is to trust the word of God and not presume you know how the universe works.

Science and Religion: Two Books
Galileo argued that God has written two books — the Book of Nature and the Book of Scripture — and that these two books do not, because they cannot, contradict. That means that if one has a well-established scientific explanation of the physical world that seems to contradict a passage of Scripture, one has good reason to reconsider one’s interpretation of Scripture. The surface meaning of the Bible may not be its true meaning.
<< see the rest for more detail >>

Quote from: John Davis on January 11, 2019, 10:40:16 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on December 23, 2018, 01:00:07 PM

Quote from: John Davis on December 23, 2018, 11:17:34 AM

Yes it does.  This  may  be by accident, but its clear from historical record that those who wrote the scripture believed in a flat earth, and there is no doubt it would come into play in scripture (at least before translation.) For a detailed argument, look to Wardlaw who dissects the bible, sometimes in its original tongue, to prove this inconclusively.

I don't believe that I disputed that and Robert J. Schadewal also states clearly that he believes that as in The Flat Earth Bible © 1987, 1995 by Robert J. Schadewal from The Flat Earth Society library.

No one said you did dispute it. I'm glad we agree that scripture talks of a flat earth.

Quote

Quote from: John Davis

I imagine the argument might be that there is no "bringing up to date" the scriptures. They were written perfectly by a perfect creator.

I would claim that the purpose of the perfect creator was not to teach cosmology and that would only be a distraction.
Rather than interfere with normal human progress He chose to let people investigate things in their own way "in the fullness of time" (apologies to Sir Humphrey Appleby)

If the purpose of a creator is not to teach cosmology (and all of his works which should be celebrated), then why would he have created the cosmos?

"The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork."

He explicitly states to ask nature for wisdom in Job, and that it is no distraction as it builds praise for him in his works :
7 But ask the animals, and they will teach you, or the birds in the sky, and they will tell you;
8 or speak to the earth, and it will teach you, or let the fish in the sea inform you.
9 Which of all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this?
10 In his hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind.

A primary message of Job, in fact, is to trust the word of God and not presume you know how the universe works.

I agree exactly.

But what I do not agree with is that Scripture is intended to spoon-feed us with the "Theory of Everything".

Mankind has been given the ability to find this knowledge from studying "Nature".

Galileo was, of course, referring to Geocentrism vs Heliocentrism issue but on this issue he argued that God wrote two books:

Quote from: Kelly James Clark

Science and Religion: Two Books
Galileo argued that God has written two books — the Book of Nature and the Book of Scripture — and that these two books do not, because they cannot, contradict. That means that if one has a well-established scientific explanation of the physical world that seems to contradict a passage of Scripture, one has good reason to reconsider one’s interpretation of Scripture. The surface meaning of the Bible may not be its true meaning.
<< see the rest for more detail >>

Galileo's letter can be found at: Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina of Tuscany (1615) (abridged) by Galileo Galilei

They do not and cannot contradict because reality is a flat earth.

Quote from: rabinoz on December 23, 2018, 01:00:07 PM

Quote from: John Davis on December 23, 2018, 11:17:34 AM

Yes it does.  This  may  be by accident, but its clear from historical record that those who wrote the scripture believed in a flat earth, and there is no doubt it would come into play in scripture (at least before translation.) For a detailed argument, look to Wardlaw who dissects the bible, sometimes in its original tongue, to prove this inconclusively.

I don't believe that I disputed that and Robert J. Schadewal also states clearly that he believes that as in The Flat Earth Bible © 1987, 1995 by Robert J. Schadewal from The Flat Earth Society library.

No one said you did dispute it. I'm glad we agree that scripture talks of a flat earth.

Quote

Quote from: John Davis

I imagine the argument might be that there is no "bringing up to date" the scriptures. They were written perfectly by a perfect creator.

I would claim that the purpose of the perfect creator was not to teach cosmology and that would only be a distraction.
Rather than interfere with normal human progress He chose to let people investigate things in their own way "in the fullness of time" (apologies to Sir Humphrey Appleby)

If the purpose of a creator is not to teach cosmology (and all of his works which should be celebrated), then why would he have created the cosmos?

"The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork."

He explicitly states to ask nature for wisdom in Job, and that it is no distraction as it builds praise for him in his works :
7 But ask the animals, and they will teach you, or the birds in the sky, and they will tell you;
8 or speak to the earth, and it will teach you, or let the fish in the sea inform you.
9 Which of all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this?
10 In his hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind.

A primary message of Job, in fact, is to trust the word of God and not presume you know how the universe works.

The bible is full of allegories, and bible interpretation, subjective. You can twist bible words to mean whatever you want them to mean.

The four corners of the earth could refer to North, South, East, and West. The Earth stabilizing, is often used by flat earth to mean, the earth is stationary. But it could refer to continental drift slowing down, natural disasters being less, or earths rotation and orbit stabilising.