- This topic has 6,414 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 3 weeks, 2 days ago by
.
- Posts
Mike, the clouds are above the space that the sea is below.
Clouds ↓
Space / Expanse / Atmosphere / Raqia
↑ Sea
Simple enough I would have thought.
In the second heaven there is also space or outer space/ expanse / raqia. Here is the realm of stars and other worlds.
Third heaven is the dwelling of the throne of God.
Saying above, below, fox, pizza, just means you do not have the capacity to understand that there can be an expanse between the waters and an expanse where the stars are.
No big deal for us who can grasp science and who also believe the bible.
A message from a physicist
I am a physicist and it comes naturally to me that all planets are spheres mainly because of gravity.
The gravity of a planet is directly proportional to the planet’s mass and inversely proportional to the planet’s radius.
Gravity can be calculated 6.67*10^-11(planet mass/planet radius^2).
This also means that, according to Newton, the earth’s rotation does not have a particularly large effect on gravity.
The sun has the greatest gravitational force in our solar system, approx. 247N/kg or 247 m/s^2, which means that if you fall one meter on the sun, you will hit the “ground” with a speed of 247 m/s. Similarly, 1 kg on the Sun will be 247N, while on Earth 1 kg will only be 9.81N.
We have formulas to calculate the curvature of the earth, and these are very accurate.
Why do some people think the earth is flat? When all scientific findings indicate that all planets are spheres?
All scientific sources on the shape of the plates are available to anyone. Flat earth documentation is not available, logically enough because it doesn’t exist. As a physicist, I must be able to explain observations and natural phenomena through mathematics and scientific models. This is exactly what makes physics so exciting!A model must be able to explain all phenomena and observations, you can do that on a sphere. On a flat earth it is not possible, so above all one does not use false values.
The globe rotates 360 degrees/24 hours. Our solar system is moving at 600,000m/s towards the center of the Milky Way where there is a gigantic hole with an enormous gravitational force. Since the acceleration is constant, we do not notice any of this, so Newton’s second law is fulfilled.
If, on the other hand, the earth’s rotation increased or decreased, we would notice it because Newton’s second law will no longer be fulfilled.
I love my subject and am happy to answer questions, but do not respond to sarcasm.
– Sondre Physicist
A message from a flat Earther
The earth is flat because I rolled a marble on a table and it disappeared bottom up. Although when I moved my head up a little to be level with the table, it didn’t do that for some reason.
I brought a small boat back into view that was too small to see, although I can’t bring the sun back for some reason.
The bible teaches the world is flat, although I cannot find one verse that teaches this.
The flat earth map is accurate and explains observation, although it doubles and triples distances in the southern hemisphere for some reason. But the southern hemisphere kind of doesn’t matter.
The globe earth conspiracy means millions are in on the secret, yet not one person has leaked the truth despite the anonymity of Wikileaks etc for some strange reason,
The flat earth is hidden from the populace because it proves that God exists. Although the scientific view proves an eternal God because the cosmos is so finely tuned for our existence, that the odds of it being random are greater than 1 in a number bigger than all the atoms of the universe. Further it does demonstrate the eternal nature of God, but it is just too big to give God the glory if you have a simple mind. The pizza model and dome on top which BTW to keeps the pizza warm and contained makes it easier to see that there is a God, although not a very impressive one.
– Foolish Flattie
Physicist
I am a physicist and it comes naturally to me that all planets are spheres mainly because of gravity.
The gravity of a planet is directly proportional to the planet’s mass and inversely proportional to the planet’s radius.
Gravity can be calculated 6.67*10^-11(planet mass/planet radius^2).
This also means that, according to Newton, the earth’s rotation does not have a particularly large effect on gravity.
The sun has the greatest gravitational force in our solar system, approx. 247N/kg or 247 m/s^2, which means that if you fall one meter on the sun, you will hit the “ground” with a speed of 247 m/s. Similarly, 1 kg on the Sun will be 247N, while on Earth 1 kg will only be 9.81N.
We have formulas to calculate the curvature of the earth, and these are very accurate.
Why do some people think the earth is flat? When all scientific findings indicate that all planets are spheres?All scientific sources on the shape of the plates are available to anyone. Flat earth documentation is not available, logically enough because it doesn’t exist. As a physicist, I must be able to explain observations and natural phenomena through mathematics and scientific models. This is exactly what makes physics so exciting!
A model must be able to explain all phenomena and observations, you can do that on a sphere. On a flat earth it is not possible, so above all one does not use false values.
The globe rotates 360 degrees/24 hours. Our solar system is moving at 600,000m/s towards the center of the Milky Way where there is a gigantic hole with an enormous gravitational force. Since the acceleration is constant, we do not notice any of this, so Newton’s second law is fulfilled.
If, on the other hand, the earth’s rotation increased or decreased, we would notice it because Newton’s second law will no longer be fulfilled.
I love my subject and am happy to answer questions, but do not respond to sarcasm.
– PhysicistFlat Earther
The earth is flat because I rolled a marble on a table and it disappeared bottom up. Although when I moved my head up a little to be level with the table, it didn’t do that for some reason.
I brought a small boat back into view that was too small to see, although I can’t bring the sun back for some reason.
The bible teaches the world is flat, although I cannot find one verse that teaches this.
The flat earth map is accurate and explains observation, although it doubles and triples distances in the southern hemisphere for some reason. But the southern hemisphere kind of doesn’t matter.
The globe earth conspiracy means millions are in on the secret, yet not one person has leaked the truth despite the anonymity of Wikileaks etc for some strange reason,
The flat earth is hidden from the populace because it proves that God exists. Although the scientific view proves an eternal God because the cosmos is so finely tuned for our existence, that the odds of it being random are greater than 1 in a number bigger than all the atoms of the universe. Further it does demonstrate the eternal nature of God, but it is just too big to give God the glory if you have a simple mind. The pizza model and dome on top which BTW to keeps the pizza warm and contained makes it easier to see that there is a God, although not a very impressive one.
– Flat EartherA message from a physicist and a message from a flat earther
Pretender: Mike, the clouds are above the space that the sea is below.
Clouds ↓
Space / Expanse / Atmosphere / Raqia
↑ Sea
Simple enough I would have thought.
Now you only need to place the sun, moon and stars IN that Space/Expanse/Raqia that is between the clouds and the sea. Can you do that?
Pretender: In the second heaven there is also space or outer space/ expanse / raqia. Here is the realm of stars and other worlds.
There is no second raqia. Read the words carefully…
Genesis 1… 6And God said, Let there be A firmament (raqia) in the midst of the waters, and let IT divide the waters from the waters. 7And God made THE firmament, and divided the waters which were under THE firmament from the waters which were above THE firmament: and it was so.
1) So far there is a SINGLE raqia with waters below it and above it.
1. Do you agree that my comment is the clear scriptural teaching according to the verses above? YES or NO?
Now pay close attention…
Genesis 1… 14And God said, Let there be lights in THE firmament of heaven…
2) Now there are the sun, moon and stars IN the one and ONLY raqia OF heaven.
2. Do you agree that my comment is the clear scriptural teaching according to the verses above? YES or NO?
Now, if you and Gene were to be HONEST for just a second and answer those two questions HONESTLY, then there would be nothing more to it because we’d all agree that – ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE ITSELF – there is only ONE raqia, with luminaries IN it and waters ABOVE it.
We’ve all known for months what you and Gene have been arguing, Pretender. At first, you were arguing that “waters ABOVE the raqia” referred to “waters that are IN the raqia, but above the waters below the raqia”. But I showed you from scripture that the waters are above the entire raqia itself.
So then you tried to argue that if the waters are above the raqia itself, they must also be above God – as if God was homeless and so created the raqia for His own dwelling place or something.
And now you’re arguing that God made at least TWO raqias, one of which has clouds as the waters above it, and the second of which has luminaries in it, but no waters above it.
So yeah… we all understand very clearly WHAT you’ve been arguing. We’ve merely been trying to dumb it down, put it into baby steps, draw cartoons, and do anything else we could think of to show you that what YOU’RE arguing is contrary to what the scriptures actually TEACH.
Your HONEST answers to those two questions above will go a long way towards helping you two align your understanding with what the Bible actually teaches.
How many raqias are there? ONE.
Are the luminaries IN, or ABOVE that one and only raqia? They are IN it.
Are the waters up high IN that one raqia – or above the entire raqia itself? They are above the entire raqia itself.
If the waters are above the entire thing that contains the sun, moon and stars, then must the waters also be above the sun, moon and stars? Of course they must.
And does God live in the raqia? Of course not. God dwells outside of our physical world – just as He did before He created our physical world.
Pretender: Saying above, below, fox, pizza, just means you do not have the capacity to understand…
Actually it was yet another kindergarten-level attempt to help YOU GUYS understand the simple concepts of above, below, and in – and the differences between them.
If the fox is IN the pizza, and Gene is ABOVE the pizza, then Gene absolutely positively MUST also be ABOVE the fox, since the fox is IN the very thing that Gene is ABOVE.
See? Kindergarten-level stuff that you guys can’t seem to grasp.
Pretender: …there can be an expanse between the waters and an expanse where the stars are.
Sure there could be… if the Bible said that God created TWO or more raqias. But the Bible is very clear that there is only ONE raqia, and it is even called THE raqia OF heaven. And now that you KNOW this Biblical FACT, there should be no more excuses for why you can’t just be an honest and honorable man for a split second and acknowledge that what we’ve painstakingly tried and tried to show you for months was actually the Biblical truth all along, right?
Pretender: No big deal for us to understand some science and believe the bible.
No big deal at all. I understand a ton of science, and it all aligns perfectly with the Bible. But the trick is to see and verify what the Bible is saying first, and then, if Scientism tells you something different, you can know for a fact that what they’re telling you isn’t actually science at all.
You guys have been doing things backwards. You guys first check what Scientism says, and then, if the Bible tells you something different, you attempt to twist the scriptures into nonsense to force them to fit into what Scientism said.
Your results have been the same as the results of the Trinitarians and the non-preexisters. They have been so dismal that you’ve been forced to make yourselves into blabbering idiots just to try to keep your sinking ship afloat.
Consider Kathi trying to tell you with a straight face that the Son OF God can BE the very God that he is the Son OF.
Consider Gene trying to tell you with a straight face that when Jesus says he had glory alongside God before the world began, he meant that “the thought of him in God’s mind” had glory with God before the world began.
See, you and I easily recognize this as pure blathering idiocy by people so indoctrinated into their current understanding that they can’t see straight, and we correctly call them out when they do it. That’s all I’m doing to you here, Pretender. Because YOU are doing the same thing in this topic as they do on those other topics. You are making yourself into a blathering idiot that can’t even understand the difference between “the heavens” and “the raqia OF heaven” – or the difference between above, in, and below.
It’s been painfully sad to watch.
Anyway, put your faith in God’s written word, and answer those two questions above HONESTLY, and according to what the scriptures right above the questions actually say. Maybe then you’ll be able to slowly redeem yourself and earn back a shred of credibility and dignity. Because you are 100% depleted in those categories right now.
This is a photo I took of the moon during the day. Notice that its brightness matches the white of the clouds…
This is a photo I took of the moon and a security light in the dark. Notice that the brightness of one matches the other…
Here’s another I snapped while driving, showing the moon as compared to various street lights…
Now consider the Inverse Square Law of light. It isn’t a theory, but a Scientific LAW. It says that the brightness of an illuminated object QUADRUPLES every time you halve the distance. For example…
If a light 10 miles away from you is hitting you with one lumen, then that same light will hit you with 4 lumens from only 5 miles away. And then with 16 lumens at only 2.5 miles away. And so on.
So the moon is allegedly 240,000 miles away from us. If we went half way to the moon, it wouldn’t be twice as bright, but 4 TIMES as bright as we see it from earth. And that’s still 120,000 miles away from it. So let’s cut the distance in half again. At 60,000 miles away from the moon, it would be 16 times as bright as we see it from earth.
And if we keep halving the distance, we end up on a moon surface that is something like a quadrillion times brighter than the sun is from the earth.
But let’s just forget about this Scientific LAW for a minute, and just look at my photos. As you look at them, try to imagine – even if there was no Inverse Square Law – how bright it would be if we landed somebody on the white of those clouds – or on any of those lights.
And then ask yourself if it would look anything like this…
If you think it would, then you are an idiot.
Not me. When SpaceX started doing these stunts, I honestly and seriously wondered if it was a test to see just how far a gullible public could be detached from their God-given common sense. I still think that is exactly the case. If they can get gullible people to believe this nonsense, then they can get them to believe that you can catch a virus walking through the restaurant, but not while you’re sitting down at your table. Or that a mask with holes larger than a virus offers protection from that virus. Or that a demented man who couldn’t gather 15 people to a rally got the most votes in American history.
But they’ve been telling us lies for centuries, meticulously working towards the very times that we live in today – where half the world believes in utter nonsense because someone told it to them.
There is no second raqia. Read the words carefully…
But God called the raqia – heaven and there are at least three heavens and we call what we see in the sky and beyond – space.
Genesis 1… 6And God said, Let there be A firmament (raqia) in the midst of the waters, and let IT divide the waters from the waters. 7And God made THE firmament, and divided the waters which were under THE firmament from the waters which were above THE firmament: and it was so.
So God created A space / expanse to divide the waters. Thus one was below that space / expanse and the other above that space. Easy!
And in the beginning God created the heaven and earth which is what we call space or outer space. Thus, in that outer space / expanse are the stars, planets, moons, etc.
But you just think that there is one space and that muddles you up. But you should even know that the cosmos was already in existence before God created that space to divide the waters.
In English, when I say space, I could be talking about the space in my wardrobe. But you would have to place the stars in my wardrobe because there is A space there. Lol.
Just a pinch of common sense Mike can go a long way. And science is for people who can comprehend it Mike.
Are the stars in my wardrobe. Remember Mike, there is A space in there. And when I talk about the space in my wardrobe, in English I would say THE space because I am now being specific.
Your welcome!
Not me. When SpaceX started doing these stunts, I honestly and seriously wondered if it was a test to see just how far a gullible public could be detached from their God-given common sense.
If God meant us to fly he would have created us with wings right Mike?
But I bet you would miss technology if the earth was run by flat earthers. There would be no Internet for a start.
Now you only need to place the sun, moon and stars IN that Space/Expanse/Raqia that is between the clouds and the sea. Can you do that?
I created some space in my garage. So the stars are there now.
Proclaimer: But God called the raqia – heaven and there are at least three heavens…
How many raqias are there?
Mike you said……”And does God live in the raqia? “OF COURSE NOT”. God dwells outside of our physical world – just as He did before He created our physical world”.
But you see God does live in the heaven, if you believe what Jesus said, (not me). “Pray this way….“our Father who “IS” “IN” heaven”, and again , “your Father who “IS” “IN” Heaven, knows you have need of these things”. ON and on it goes , your destortions of truth has no end, it seems. So tell us again how God does not live “IN”, “the”, “heavens”, or ‘raqia” as you call it Mike?
O and while your at it please answer the proof of a round earth by the, ISS , which is proving you wrong every second of every day, 365 day a year? Any simpleton can see it for himself. MIKE IF YOU “truly” BELIEVE THIS “EARTH IS FLAT” , YOU are beyond a doubt, a very DELUISIONAL, Person, IMO. Mike time to repent, of your deceptions, if you can.
Peace and love to you and yours…………gene
THE RAQYIA OF GENESIS 1 IS UNIQUE.
IN THIS RAQYIA ARE THE SUN, THE MOON AND THE STARS….(Second Heaven)
Birds ALSO FLY THERE (First Sky)AND ABOVE THE RAQUYIA ARE “THE WATERS” SAY THE WATERS FROM ABOVE.
IT’S DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND ALL THIS…..?If you insist on a single unique raqia,
then you also need to insist that this single unique raqia is called heavenHow many raqias are there?
Don’t know. God called the raqia – heaven, and there are at least three heavens that I know of.
The raqyia of Genesis 1 is unique.
In this raqyia are the sun, the moon and the stars….(second heaven)
Birds also fly there (first sky)And above the raquyia are “the waters” say the waters from above.
It’s difficult to understand all this…..?If one examines the Hebrew word raqia and discards mistranslations, prejudices, and misconceptions, raqia simply means ‘expanse’. This is well understood. Believing that the raqia / sky / expanse is made of a solid object that forms a dome is simply a mistranslation coupled with a pagan understanding of the universe.
So how many expanses or spaces are there? As many as it takes when describing something. Today we can use the word space to talk about the room in my garage to space where the stars and planets are found. So it is context that determines what space or expanse you are talking about. So the space between the waters is one context and the space where the stars are is another.
Another word that raqia is translated to is ‘sky’. So it is perfectly acceptable to say that the sun and planets are in the sky. As this is how it is from our perspective on earth. We look into the sky and see these celestial objects. We also see birds fly in the sky too. So if there was a dense layer of water around a watery earth, and God decided to separate the sea from the watery atmosphere to clear that atmosphere and place clouds above, then it would be correct to say that he created an expanse or layer of sky between those waters. So the waters above the raqia are spoken of in THIS context. And the planets in the raqia are spoken of in THAT context. Further, the space in my garage is the context of my garage only. One would not expect to see the stars in the space inside my garage.
Your insistence that it has to be one raqia – sky seems strange, but even if we run with that idea, the sky has many layers just as heaven does too of which this one raqia you insist on is called. So if the single raqia is called heaven, then we know there are three heavens. No matter which you cut it, one raqia, three, unlimited depending on context, it is called heaven and heaven has at least three layers to it.
To insist on one raqia means that whatever that means to you, that raqia is called heaven and we then must acknowledge three heavens in your definition of raqia.
For me it is simple. It just means expanse, sky, or space and God separate water, so that there was sky between the waters.
But even if we ignore all this and simply want to believe that there is water above the stars, well guess what, there is the river of life, the water of life, and a sea of glass.
So no matter which way you cut this, it is not evidence for a flat earth. Simple as that.
You can argue it anyway you like, but none of it can be used in the flat earth model because outside the cosmos is the dwelling of God and there we find the water of life.
So any further arguing of this will not prove the flat earth no matter the view you have. The cosmos that we understand due to the increase of knowledge caters for all views.
Thank you.
But even if we ignore all this and simply want to believe that there is water above the stars, well guess what, there is the river of life, the water of life, and a sea of glass.
Me
The river of life IS NOT THE WATERS FROM ABOVE OF Genesis 1
Let’s not mix everything.
Also know that I’m not trying to prove a flat earth or anything. I content myself with the biblical text.But you are trying to prove that there is liquid water above the stars and below God. Besides having no real scriptural proof apart from using Genesis that can be read in multiple ways that contradict this, show me the proof of this water if it is there and is reality? And making such an argument then means you need a solid structure as the pagan’s taught and the Septuagint mistranslated that stops the force of downity from forcing the water onto the earth.
Honestly, this is how stupid this argument has become. You have been shown multiple ways that Genesis can be read that doesn’t debunk itself, but some of you insist on believing the debunked interpretation which doesn’t match observation and reality. Thus, perfect fodder for Atheists and the like to disprove the Bible. Why become a tool for Atheists.
Genesis is simple. God created the heavens and the earth. Then he terraformed the earth so that life could appear on the planet. That is it. Not controversial at all and God gets the glory for a cosmos that appears to have no end. A perfect demonstration of God’s eternal nature when we look up. Why try and ruin a good thing and use it as a stumbling block to unbelievers. That doesn’t make any sense to me.
The river of life IS NOT THE WATERS FROM ABOVE OF Genesis 1
I am not saying it is definately so either.
But that it is water (the real water) and it is above.
And down here on earth, we have access to this water that is above.
Jesus said:
Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.’”
Mike: How many raqias are there?
Proclaimer: Don’t know. God called the raqia – heaven, and there are at least three heavens that I know of.
Psalm 19:1… {To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.} The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows his handiwork.
The heavens (shamayim)… Plural.
The firmament (raqia)… Singular.
The firmament (raqia)… Preceded by the definite article, ie: THE raqia.
Shamayim and Raqia… Separated by the conjunction “and”, showing they are different things, ie: the heavens and THE raqia OF heaven.
Proclaimer, how many raqias are there?
Proclaimer: And making such an argument then means you need a solid structure as the pagan’s taught and the Septuagint mistranslated…
Job 37:18… Can you, with Him, stamp out the skies, strong as a cast metal mirror?
Scripture teaches that the firmament IS a solid structure that supports the waters above it. It even has floodgates in it that God opened to let the waters above flood the earth.
And yes, all of the nations of the world knew that this was how the world was – just like all of them knew about the flood, and all of them knew about Yahweh and what He did for His chosen people. So should we say that Yahweh is fake just because the pagans also knew about Him and His reputation for being a mighty God of war? And the flood was fake just because pagan cultures also knew about it? Your “pagan” argument is moot, since what they believed about Yahweh, the flood, and the firmament are all also in the Holy Scriptures.
As for the LXX… the word can’t possibly be rightly translated as “expanse”. That is a later addition by translators who, like you, tried to align the scriptures with this new “ball earth” that Scientism was promoting.
The root word “raqa” refers to the act of stamping/beating something into another form… usually metal. Here is that word in some scriptures…
Exodus 39:3… And they did beat the gold into plating…
Numbers 16:39… the bronze censers… were hammered out as a covering…
Jeremiah 10:9… Silver beaten into plates…
Do any of the above objects end up as an “open expanse”? Or do they all end up as SOLID objects?
The 70 Hebrew AND Greek scholars who produced the LXX during a time when BOTH languages were commonly spoken knew a LOT more about translating Hebrew into Greek than we do today. These were JEWISH SCHOLARS who knew the OT inside and out, backwards and forward. They were EXPERTS in the Hebrew scriptures, and fully understood that the raqia was a SOLID object. THAT’S why they INTENTIONALLY translated it into the Greek “stereoma”. And from that we ended up with the ACCURATE translation “firmament”.
Dude, the source you quoted that spouted all that nonsense about how the LXX got it wrong gave a REASON for that, remember? His REASON was that they lived during a time when people just didn’t understand how our world “really is”, and EVERYONE thought there WAS a solid dome over the earth. Do you remember him saying that?
So your source is nothing but a cheerleader. He can’t possibly fault the LXX scholars for their translation into “stereoma”, and so he just up and claims that they just didn’t know about the world like we do today.
Do you see the flaw there? It’s like he’s saying that Moses used “raqia” to indicate an “open expanse” because Moses knew about outer space or whatever, and then later, these EXPERTS IN THE OT took it upon themselves to say, “Well fellas, Moses wrote that God created an ‘open expanse’, but since in these LATTER days we’ve come to know that there’s a dome over us, let’s just translate his word that means ‘open expanse’ with a Greek word that means a ‘solid object’!”
Do you see how utterly irrational that is? Moses wrote “open expanse” because the people BEFORE the LXX were as smart as us – but then 1700 years LATER, the people were dumber and thought the earth was covered by a solid dome. It’s idiocy in the highest!
You know what DOES make sense? That Moses used a word that meant a SOLID object that was beaten out like metal is beaten out, and the LXX scholars simply used a Greek word that meant the SAME THING.
Any way…
Gene and Pretender: According to David in Psalm 19:1, how many raqias are there?
Mike…….Quit “yaking”, about how many raqias are there, and answere my question, does the ISS “international space station”, that anyone can see for themselves, with a cheap pair of benoclours going around our earth, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, brodcasting images to us from space , prove the earth is round and not a dome as you falsely say, or not?
Deveting around to different subjects is only your way of dodging the obvious truths about things. IT, (DEVERTING AROUND), to throw subject matter off, is your “modus operandi”. Your way of jumping out when pressed by the truth.
Simply put your a BS, artist, Or just plain “STUPID”. Don’t know which, but certanly one of those two things or pehaps both , you have not proven any of your Flat Earth “BS” right so far, but have and continue to reject solid proofs, Bad form Mike!
By the way Jodi has blasted you to pieces on you privite form with her, but your so ignorant you can’t even bring yourself to accept the truth she has “clearly”, presented for you there either.
Peace and love to you and yours………gene
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
