Scripture Based Flat Earth Proposition

The Hebrew word translated "heaven" in Genesis 1:1 is plural, meaning "heavens", as in three or more.
Paul stated in 2 Corinthians 12:2 that he was "caught up to the third heaven" and in verse 4, "caught up into paradise". I would conclude, therefore, that the third heaven is the highest.

If God created all three Heavens in Genesis 1:1, then we have severe contradictions. I do not believe in contradictions in the Bible.

Example:
Genesis 1:8
"And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."

A plural interpretation of Genesis 1:1 would teach that God created the same Heaven twice. Once on Day 1 and once on Day 2. That is a contradiction.


The Third Heaven is Abraham's Bosom, i.e., Paradise. Note that a bosom is 'within'...

Luke 17:21
"Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you."

Thus, the Third Heaven is 'Within' while the Second Heaven is 'Without'...

Luke 11:40
"Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without make that which is within also?"

Microcosm vs. Macrocosm.

Paul literally spills the beans here...

2 Corinthians 12:3-4
"And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth). How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter."

In the body (Within/Third Heaven) vs. out of the body (Without/Second Heaven). It is a type of pun or word play.

There are no contradictions. If we cannot harmonize Scripture then the problem is ours. We need to keep studying, because we don't have the answers yet.
There's nothing said about God creating any heaven or firmament on day 1. Just Day and Night.
Before the cross, Paradise was in the heart of the earth (down below). Now it is in heaven where Paul was caught up to.
One cannot make a vald argument from continual use of different contexts and suppositions.

Has anyone demonstrated the [earth science] model explained on post #14? Done the math? Reasoned how inconsistant it is with Scripture? Anyone?

Next thought:

Psalm 104:1-5
Bless the Lord, O my soul. O Lord my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind: Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire: Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.

I would propose that these waters are the waters above the firmament, and that His chambers would be above the waters.

That’s quite a stretch.

Say, what’s math in your neck of the woods?

You know, that stuff you do with numbers (and sometimes equations).

I build a foundation for the proposal on it, but it seems to fit in with the already sound foundation.

That should have read, "I wouldn't build a foundation for the proposal on it, but it seems to fit in with the already sound foundation."

For your consideration:
Matthew 24:29
"Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:"

Revelation 6:13
"And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind."

Revelation 12:4
"And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born."

Question: How far will those stars fall from heaven to earth?

Not to mention - the size of every star is considered (by the BE model) to be so much larger than the earth - how is that going to work?

I have done the math and reasoned how inconsistant it is with scripture.

It would surely be nice if others who have also done so would be willing to give their voice to this issue.

Anyone else?

I love skience.

Is that the watered-down version?

(think: snow/water 'ski')

It's the downhill version.

So, it is the snow[flake] version?

Yes. And their greeting is slalom.

And, it has many twists and turns...

(rather than being steady-and-straight)

Slalom brother.