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

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,883
4,345
113
mywebsite.us
So we look to the Bible and see references to "the ends of the earth", "four corners of the earth" and we think we're reading a science book.
The key thing is not that the Bible is a book of science; rather, it is that the Bible is a book of truth.

Do they have to be actual pillars of the earth for us to believe God created our world and all the creatures in it?
This is how Satan wants you to think: "Did God really say..."
 

lonelysummer

Active member
Nov 30, 2022
127
27
28
The key thing is not that the Bible is a book of science; rather, it is that the Bible is a book of truth.


This is how Satan wants you to think: "Did God really say..."
The Bible we read today, though, it not the original. It has been translated many many times throughout history, into many different languages. I don't believe it's out of the question that sometimes the original meaning gets lost in the translation.
 

kinda

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2013
3,946
1,507
113
This article breaks it down quite well.

https://chefin.com.au/blog/these-6-christmas-traditions-are-actually-pagan-customs/


1671982473078.jpeg



Jeremiah

10 Hear what the Lord says to you, people of Israel. 2 This is what the Lord says:

“Do not learn the ways of the nations
or be terrified by signs in the heavens,
though the nations are terrified by them.
3 For the practices of the peoples are worthless;
they cut a tree out of the forest,
and a craftsman shapes it with his chisel.
4 They adorn it with silver and gold;
they fasten it with hammer and nails
so it will not totter.
5 Like a scarecrow in a cucumber field,
their idols cannot speak;
they must be carried
because they cannot walk.
Do not fear them;
they can do no harm
nor can they do any good.”
 

kinda

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2013
3,946
1,507
113
This article breaks it down quite well.

https://chefin.com.au/blog/these-6-christmas-traditions-are-actually-pagan-customs/


View attachment 246986



Jeremiah

10 Hear what the Lord says to you, people of Israel. 2 This is what the Lord says:

“Do not learn the ways of the nations
or be terrified by signs in the heavens,
though the nations are terrified by them.
3 For the practices of the peoples are worthless;
they cut a tree out of the forest,
and a craftsman shapes it with his chisel.
4 They adorn it with silver and gold;
they fasten it with hammer and nails
so it will not totter.
5 Like a scarecrow in a cucumber field,
their idols cannot speak;
they must be carried
because they cannot walk.
Do not fear them;
they can do no harm
nor can they do any good.”
Sorry about this, wrong thread. A mod can delete this.

I meant to put it in this thread. https://christianchat.com/miscellaneous/annual-christmas-is-pagan-thread.195235/page-4
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,883
4,345
113
mywebsite.us
The Bible we read today, though, it not the original. It has been translated many many times throughout history, into many different languages. I don't believe it's out of the question that sometimes the original meaning gets lost in the translation.
Do you not believe that God is able to preserve His word?

Did He not say that He would?

The KJV was translated once - from original manuscripts - then edited a number of times for mostly spelling errors.

Yes - to interpret it properly requires that you know something about the 'grammar of the language' at the time it was written; however, you can learn that (God will help you) - and then, you are "good for life"...
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,883
4,345
113
mywebsite.us
The KJV is as 'pure' as it gets. It is the most correct English translation available today.

(There are a few others which are predecessors.)

The original manuscripts were in Greek, Hebrew, and Chaldean.

There was no Latin involved - despite what some will tell you.

It has stood the test of time for over 400 years.
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,883
4,345
113
mywebsite.us
I meant to say that I would happily agree that nothing is better than the originals.

I do not "worship" the KJV - I just believe it to be the best available English translation available today.

I also believe that all of the other modern bibles are "corrupted" in varying degree.
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,883
4,345
113
mywebsite.us
I also believe that all of the other modern bibles are "corrupted" in varying degree.
Because they all were translated from corrupted manuscripts.

It is the manuscripts from which they were translated that are corrupted; therefore, they will "naturally" be corrupted.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
23,789
8,616
113
from original manuscripts
Nope. From copies of original manuscripts. There was not one known so-called original manuscript left on earth back when the KJV was translated.
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,883
4,345
113
mywebsite.us
Nope. From copies of original manuscripts. There was not one known so-called original manuscript left on earth back when the KJV was translated.
Well - okay - I stand corrected on this one particular point. My apologies to everyone.

We have every reason to believe that the manuscripts were not necessarily THE original manuscripts; however, we also have every reason to believe that God saw fit that they were very carefully copied so that error was not introduced into the new manuscript copies. (They were extraordinarily excruciatingly careful when they made copies back in those times.)

This is what I really meant. The point was that there were not multiple translations involved.
 

lonelysummer

Active member
Nov 30, 2022
127
27
28
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.
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,441
3,220
113
O.k., who is gonna take the torch for the globalist agenda?!?! Ball Earthers the floor is yours.

Flat Earthers are second, because there are about a dozen flat earth related threads on CC.

Concave Hollow Earth will be last, because nobody really cares about Cellular Cosmology. :confused: I should be thankful, that I'm even allowed to post in this thread. lol


How long do they get to state their case, before they lose my default?


Given a sufficiently powerful telescope, it should, in FE fairyland, be able to see Iceland from the Northern part of Scotland. How much naval warfare would be different if that were possible. Ships would be visible hundreds of miles away by simple optics instead of hugely complex and expensive radar. Navigation would be easier and safer. You could see land from far further than is possible in reality. Mariners who got lost pre radar and radio days would have been able to find land with no trouble. And there's the rub. The curvature of the earth prevents anyone seeing more than a few kilometres. The curve of the earth is about 160 mm per kilometre. So the viewing distance depends on the height of the viewing point.
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,441
3,220
113
Fixed it for you... ;)
My bad, typo. Answer me this:

Given a sufficiently powerful telescope, it should, in FE fairyland, be able to see Iceland from the Northern part of Scotland. How much naval warfare would be different if that were possible. Ships would be visible hundreds of miles away by simple optics instead of hugely complex and expensive radar. Navigation would be easier and safer. You could see land from far further than is possible in reality. Mariners who got lost pre radar and radio days would have been able to find land with no trouble. And there's the rub. The curvature of the earth prevents anyone seeing more than a few kilometres. The curve of the earth is about 160 mm per kilometre. So the viewing distance depends on the height of the viewing point.
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,441
3,220
113
Please define 'FAKE' in the context of this statement from two different posts.

Are you saying that Buzz Aldrin did not actually have a conversation with the little girl, answering her questions one by one?
The video has been edited to make Aldrin seem to deny that he went to the moon. That is a lie. You can find a video where he punched Bart Sibrel, who called him a liar. Aldrin was 72 at the time. Sibrel still maintains his idiotic conspiracy theory. Sibrel may be legally insane:

insanity. n. mental illness of such a severe nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy from reality............
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
23,789
8,616
113
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.
Helpful for sure but not absolutely necessary by any means. The Bible is sort of like a hologram. The information is distributed throughout. You take away a chapter or a book.....and the meaning/image (the Savior Jesus), though less clear, remains.

Same goes for different translations. Though there are superior versions, even the worst carries the same essential message.
 
Sep 15, 2019
9,989
5,540
113
Given a sufficiently powerful telescope, it should, in FE fairyland, be able to see Iceland from the Northern part of Scotland. How much naval warfare would be different if that were possible. Ships would be visible hundreds of miles away by simple optics instead of hugely complex and expensive radar. Navigation would be easier and safer. You could see land from far further than is possible in reality. Mariners who got lost pre radar and radio days would have been able to find land with no trouble. And there's the rub. The curvature of the earth prevents anyone seeing more than a few kilometres. The curve of the earth is about 160 mm per kilometre. So the viewing distance depends on the height of the viewing point.
Incorrect. This assumes the atmosphere is totally transparent. It is not.

The video has been edited to make Aldrin seem to deny that he went to the moon. That is a lie. You can find a video where he punched Bart Sibrel, who called him a liar. Aldrin was 72 at the time. Sibrel still maintains his idiotic conspiracy theory. Sibrel may be legally insane:

insanity. n. mental illness of such a severe nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy from reality............
You keep saying the video is edited, but I showed you in the version that you yourself admitted was the original, that the video was not edited - the quotations from the little girl and Buzz Aldrin, where Buzz admitted it didn't happen, are accurate. So are you now claiming that you erred when you stated the video you posted was the original? I hold that you just cannot handle the uncomfortable truth, that Buzz, in a moment of weakness or honesty, or whatever you want to call it, admitted the truth about the Moon Landing Hoax.
 

Ted01

Well-known member
May 14, 2022
1,055
448
83
Well - okay - I stand corrected on this one particular point. My apologies to everyone.

We have every reason to believe that the manuscripts were not necessarily THE original manuscripts; however, we also have every reason to believe that God saw fit that they were very carefully copied so that error was not introduced into the new manuscript copies. (They were extraordinarily excruciatingly careful when they made copies back in those times.)

This is what I really meant. The point was that there were not multiple translations involved.
As I understand Erasmus' view of creating the TR, he begun from a "corrupted" vision of improving the more
common form of Latin to a "higher" form that was used by the intelligentsia of the day.

"It is only fair that Paul should address the Romans in somewhat better Latin."

A quote, that to me, seems rather snobbish and un-Christ-like.

Also, Erasmus did indeed draw from additional sources, including commentary notes of others...

"My mind is so excited at the thought of emending Jerome’s text, with notes, that I seem to myself inspired by some god. I have already almost finished emending him by collating a large number of ancient manuscripts, and this I am doing at enormous personal expense."

(Ya' gotta wonder at his wording "...some god." LoL)
 
Sep 15, 2019
9,989
5,540
113
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.
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? The Word of God should not be a profit-making venture, and those who would make it into one should not be trusted.
 

kinda

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2013
3,946
1,507
113
This is a topic that will continue, until the Lord returns, so I was thinking, what about summary, so we can understand each other better.

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.

Who would like to begin?


Given a sufficiently powerful telescope, it should, in FE fairyland, be able to see Iceland from the Northern part of Scotland.

How much naval warfare would be different if that were possible.

Ships would be visible hundreds of miles away by simple optics instead of hugely complex and expensive radar.

Navigation would be easier and safer. You could see land from far further than is possible in reality.

Mariners who got lost pre radar and radio days would have been able to find land with no trouble. And there's the rub.

The curvature of the earth prevents anyone seeing more than a few kilometres.

The curve of the earth is about 160 mm per kilometre.

So the viewing distance depends on the height of the viewing point.



The earth mover's points.

Seems like the post is knocking flat earth, due to lack of evidence by the way of the sea.

Heliocentric believer has listed telescopes, naval war, radars, navigation, and distance to show flat earth incorrect, and a sun centered universe to be the winner. No points were given to conclude the Concave Hollow Earth is incorrect. Does this mean Cellular Cosmology is above question?

The earth mover's failure.

No scripture was used in Gideon's post to prove Heliocentric model right, or Flat Earth and Concave Hollow Earth wrong. Is this recognition that the globalist lack Biblical support?

Post stated, "curvature of earth is about 160mm per kilometer". This might be the first time that millimeters and kilometers were used to determine the earth's curvature. Let's break this down a little, so it's easier to imagine. 160mm equals 16cm, and 16cm equals 6.2 inches.

The American Standard for the earth's curvature is 8 inches per mile. 1km equals equals .62 miles, so for every km the earth has about 5 inches of curvature. How many millimeters in 5 inches? 127mm

I believe Gideon's estimation on curvature of the earth is about 20% off, which is about how much the Heliocentric Model just makes stuff up, when observation has completely pointed to the opposite of what globalist believe.

Next up.....

It's now time for the pizza makers to prove Flat Earth correct, and prove the other models in error.

The floor is yours Flat Earthers.

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.
 
Last edited:

lonelysummer

Active member
Nov 30, 2022
127
27
28
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? The Word of God should not be a profit-making venture, and those who would make it into one should not be trusted.
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.