G
I agree. But the day Jesus died isn't the Day of the Lord. The sun will darken yet again, and the moon turn to blood, "before the great and terrible day of the Lord". Just as I believe this refers to a literal sun and moon, the same passages refer to literal stars falling from the sky.
I believe the Earth is flat. It started when I read about Joshua commanding the sun to stand still, and scripture recording that the sun indeed did stop still. God knows all things. If He made a heliocentric universe, He would readily have recorded He stopped the Earth spinning, not that the sun and moon stood still. Also note in Genesis He doesn't record anything about putting the Earth in motion. This would have been kind of a big step to miss, if Heliocentricity were true.
At that point, I started to become a geocentrist. The more I read scripture, the more I realised there was no support in scripture for a ball-Earth - if anything, scripture implied a flat Earth. I simultaneously started looking into the science behind heliocentrism, and checked the calculations to demonstrate that lighthouses can be seen on the ocean from further away than the horizon would allow on a ball-Earth. Water is necessary for proving Earth is flat, as land is not necessarily flat, but water will always find it's own level, so most valid tests for Earth's curvature are done over water.
The more I've looked into heliocentricity, the more I realise it is an imposed theory - no science requires it. It's like Evolution's closet-bound cousin. My observation is that Earth is flat, so logic and science direct that this should be my default position, unless it can be proven otherwise.
Gary already posted the scriptural evidence describing the stars falling to Earth. But even if they didn't fall to Earth (and they fell somewhere else), if they are millions of light-years away, how are we even going to see it unless we are waiting around for millions of years? Heliocentricity doesn't add up.
I believe the Earth is flat. It started when I read about Joshua commanding the sun to stand still, and scripture recording that the sun indeed did stop still. God knows all things. If He made a heliocentric universe, He would readily have recorded He stopped the Earth spinning, not that the sun and moon stood still. Also note in Genesis He doesn't record anything about putting the Earth in motion. This would have been kind of a big step to miss, if Heliocentricity were true.
At that point, I started to become a geocentrist. The more I read scripture, the more I realised there was no support in scripture for a ball-Earth - if anything, scripture implied a flat Earth. I simultaneously started looking into the science behind heliocentrism, and checked the calculations to demonstrate that lighthouses can be seen on the ocean from further away than the horizon would allow on a ball-Earth. Water is necessary for proving Earth is flat, as land is not necessarily flat, but water will always find it's own level, so most valid tests for Earth's curvature are done over water.
The more I've looked into heliocentricity, the more I realise it is an imposed theory - no science requires it. It's like Evolution's closet-bound cousin. My observation is that Earth is flat, so logic and science direct that this should be my default position, unless it can be proven otherwise.
Gary already posted the scriptural evidence describing the stars falling to Earth. But even if they didn't fall to Earth (and they fell somewhere else), if they are millions of light-years away, how are we even going to see it unless we are waiting around for millions of years? Heliocentricity doesn't add up.
But, these threads are always good for a laugh.