THE GEOID & THE BIBLE - WordPress.com · THE GEOID & THE BIBLE: Does Scripture teach a flat Earth or a spherical Earth? by Shawn Brasseaux Grace Bible Teacher Master of Science, Geology

THE GEOID & THE BIBLE: Does Scripture teach a flat Earth or a spherical Earth?

by Shawn Brasseaux Grace Bible Teacher

Master of Science, Geology

arC Ministries [email protected]

“FOR WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURES?” SPECIAL-EDITION BIBLE Q&A ARTICLE #375

https://forwhatsaiththescriptures.wordpress.com

3 0 A P R I L 2 0 1 7 V E R S I O N 1 . 0

TheGeoid&TheBible ShawnBrasseaux,M.S.ii

TheGeoid&TheBible ShawnBrasseaux,M.S.iii

TableofContents

I.INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1A.MyCredentials........................................................................................................................1B.MyPurpose.............................................................................................................................1C.MyPaper’sLayout..................................................................................................................2

II.BIBLEPROOFTEXTSFORASPHERICALEARTH—THEONLYONE(?).......................3A.Isaiah40:22&“Thecircleoftheearth”...............................................................................3B.AdditionalRemarks...............................................................................................................3

III.BIBLEPROOFTEXTSFORAFLATEARTH—THEPRIMARYONE(INFREQUENTLY).3A.Isaiah40:22&“Thecircleoftheearth”...............................................................................3B.AdditionalRemarks...............................................................................................................4

IV.THE“CIRCLE”OFISAIAH40:22—WHATISIT?..........................................................4A.Could“Circle”ReallyBeDescriptiveofaFlatEarth?...........................................................4B.Could“Circle”ReallyBeDescriptiveofaSphericalEarth?..................................................5C.“FlatEarth”—PreciselyWhatDoesThisExpressionMean?...............................................6D.“Circle”—FlatEarthorSphericalEarth?..............................................................................7E.“Circle”andEnglishLexicographers....................................................................................8

V.FLAT-EARTHERARGUMENTS.......................................................................................9A.BriefOpeningComments......................................................................................................9B.Bible“ProofTexts”foraFlatEarth......................................................................................11

1.Revelation7:1&Isaiah11:12................................................................................................................112.Exodus17:12.......................................................................................................................................123.Joshua10:12-13...................................................................................................................................124.1Chronicles16:30..............................................................................................................................135.Psalm136:6-7.....................................................................................................................................136.Isaiah13:10&Jeremiah31:35-36.......................................................................................................147.Isaiah14:7..........................................................................................................................................158.Isaiahchapter29&Isaiah30:1..........................................................................................................159.Isaiah38:8-9......................................................................................................................................1510.Isaiah42:5........................................................................................................................................1511.Isaiah48:13......................................................................................................................................1612.Acts2:20..........................................................................................................................................1613.Matthew4:8...................................................................................................................................1614.Revelation1:7...................................................................................................................................1715.Isaiah66:1(Acts7:49)&Job26:10..................................................................................................18

TheGeoid&TheBible ShawnBrasseaux,M.S.iv

C.Extra-Biblical“Proofs”foraFlatEarth................................................................................181.Rambling,DesperateFlat-Earthers...................................................................................................182.“SatelliteImagesofEarthAreDoctored!”—“QuestionEverything!”.............................................193.“But,DoesNottheEarth‘Appear’FlatfromGod’sPerspective?”..................................................194.“Antarcticaisan‘IceWall,’aRingThatSurroundsEarthandDamsItsOceans”...........................205.“WeWantMoreVideoandPhotographicProofofaSphericalEarth!”...........................................216.“NoOneHasProvidedaPictureofAustralia’sSkylineUpside-Down!”...........................................217.“GoingAroundtheEarthDoesNotNecessarilyMeanaCircularEarth!”.........................................228.“EarthSpinsTooFasttoHearSoundsattheEquator!”..................................................................229.“NASA’SSatelliteImageryofPlanetEarthVariesOvertheDecades!”...........................................2210.“WaterisPerfectlyHorizontalinBodiesofWater!”.....................................................................2311.AwkwardNomenclatureintheFlat-EartherCamp.........................................................................2312.ContradictionsinandDangersoftheFlat-EartherCamp...............................................................24

VI.AMMUNITIONFORBIBLECRITICSTOUSE..............................................................26A.The(Unbelieving)ScienceProfessorSpeaks.....................................................................26B.TheCriticsSpeak(Again).....................................................................................................27C.TheChristiansSpeak............................................................................................................28

VII.CONCLUSION............................................................................................................29A.WhereIStandonScriptureandScience............................................................................29B.ASpecialNotetoMy“Flat-Earther”BrethreninChrist....................................................30C.ASpecialNotetoMy“Spherical-Earther”BrethreninChrist...........................................30D.WhyThisStudyMatters.......................................................................................................31E.TheConspiracyThatReallyMatters....................................................................................31F.FutureStudies......................................................................................................................33

TheGeoid&TheBible ShawnBrasseaux,M.S.1

I.INTRODUCTION

A.MyCredentialsMost importantly, I have been a Christian for 22 years. I have been a grace Bible

teacher for the past 11 years. Hence, I know a few things about the Holy Scriptures. Furthermore, I have an extensive scientific background. Having been trained for nine years at the college level, I received my Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in Geology (Earth Science) from the University of Louisiana at Lafayette. I was one course shy of a Minor in Geography; thus, I also know a thing or two about geography.

Indeed, I am a young person, so I still have a lot to learn in and about life.

Nevertheless, this is the spiritual and educational background that I must work with as I tarry in this temporary world. Before anyone accuses me of being ignorant of Scripture or science, I do politely remind them of this my training. This experience is provided advisedly, that no one flippantly dismiss me as “know-nothing” or “uniformed.” It is my hope and prayer that these opening statements enhance the information presented here in this paper.

B.MyPurposeLate last year, a dear Christian emailed me about the “Flat Earth versus

Spherical Earth” controversy. He wondered what the Bible taught about Earth’s shape—that is, whether it was flat or spherical. While I had not investigated the matter, it engaged me to study and I prepared a lengthy, written answer for him. He was grateful for that teaching. No one sent me any additional emails on the subject, so I did not bother to address it here on our Bible Q&A website.

Earlier this year, however, email questions resumed concerning the geoid (“shape

of Earth”). This issue, while centuries old, has seen a “recovery” in the last decade or so, largely due to the internet. Moreover, during the last several months, it has gained momentum on social networking websites. Various “grace believers” are even now sharing their thoughts on the subject. Sometimes, sadly, these forums have been less than profitable—nay, they have actually been damaging to the Scriptures and to the souls involved. Emails to me reflect this unfortunate fact.

Furthermore, people began asking me for my “scientific expertise” on the subject.

At that point, I decided to research this “shape of the Earth” matter even further, looking at Scripture and secular sources, to the intent that I would understand both sides. Hopefully, I would reach a satisfactory conclusion so that I could share it with our ministry audience. In the many months since I first (privately) wrote on this topic, I have come to a much greater awareness of how to approach it. Having carefully refined what I have stated in the past on the subject, I present to you my findings. Is Earth spherical (common view)? Or, is it flat (isolated view)? Does the Bible say?


Rest assured that I do not aim to attack anyone, especially other Bible believers. Friend, my goal is to share with you the discoveries that I have made in recent months, that you may be fully persuaded in your own mind. Above all, I sincerely hope and pray you will be very careful as to what you, the Bible believer, expose your soul to. If this paper causes you to better guard your soul, brother or sister, then the Lord Jesus Christ is glorified, and my goal is accomplished. This special-edition Bible Q&A article #375 is dedicated to the issue—“Does the Bible teach a flat Earth or a spherical Earth?”

C.MyPaper’sLayout For several weeks, I devised and studied how to best layout this article on a most convoluted topic. It was very time-consuming to imagine the easiest way for the material to flow in this study. On top of that, I wrestled with what emphases were to be placed where. Being a Christian, I determined it best to outline and discuss the Bible verses used in this controversy. Also, being a scientist, I decided to sketch and examine some of the scientific arguments mentioned in this issue. As this article began to take shape, however, the scientific material became complicated and lengthy. I reached a crossroads at that point—either keep the Bible passages discussion (which was extensive), or retain the science discussion (which was also colossal even in its unfinished form). The overriding factor helped me settle the dilemma.

As you know, friend, this is a Bible ministry and a Bible website. Our primary goal is to see what the Scriptures say. After all, the original question posed to me was, “What does the Bible say about the flat Earth and/or spherical Earth?” The question was not, “What does science say? What do people say?” Scientific principles are always open for debate/change and personal interpretation because science is a continuing process of devising, testing, refining, and disproving ideas. Science has its limitations because people have limitations. However, I must admit. As a scientist, I could not help but preserve some scientific statements in this study. Science is a very useful tool in understanding the natural world in which we live; nevertheless, the authority is the Bible. There can be disagreements about science—these are minor, though, in light of disagreements about Scripture. If we can establish some infallible facts using the Scriptures, then the lies will be easily manifested.

Now, with opening remarks out of the way, we proceed to the gist of the study!


II.BIBLEPROOFTEXTSFORASPHERICALEARTH—

THEONLYONE(?)

A.Isaiah40:22&“Thecircleoftheearth”The Prophet Isaiah wrote in Isaiah 40:22: “It is he that sitteth upon the circle of

the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:….” (The “he” here, according to verse 18, is the God of the Bible. Scripture says that God “sitteth upon the circle of the earth.”)

Friend, based on this verse, you have probably already concluded that Earth is round—or more precisely, spherical (ball-shaped). You are not alone in that deduction. Many people agree with you. Actually, years ago, when I first read Isaiah 40:22, my initial impression was that Scripture declared Earth was spherical. It never once occurred to me that Isaiah the Prophet implied something other than a sphere.

Of course, various and sundry ideas exist concerning the meaning of myriads of

Bible verses. A verse clear to one person, due to diverse reasons (religious tradition, no indwelling Holy Spirit, et cetera), may be unclear to another individual. Sometimes, people will use the same verse to argue antithetical points. Unfortunately, that is the case with Isaiah 40:22. Regarding the geoid (“shape of Earth”) issue, this verse is considered more cryptic than helpful. A minority of professing Christians contend that Isaiah 40:22 actually indicates Earth is flat. We will address their view in Part III, shortly.

B.AdditionalRemarks“Spherical-Earthers” appeal to Isaiah 40:22 to teach that the Earth is spherical

rather than flat. To my knowledge, they have no other Bible verses for support. Having one verse for support makes them look weak. Contrariwise, “Flat-Earthers” claim this verse, as well as other Scriptures, as proof of their idea. We will examine all of those so-called “flat Earth” verses in Part V. For now, we will dedicate some time to discussing Isaiah 40:22 as the “Flat-Earther” approaches it.

III.BIBLEPROOFTEXTSFORAFLATEARTH—THEPRIMARYONE(INFREQUENTLY)

A.Isaiah40:22&“Thecircleoftheearth”Read Isaiah 40:22 again: “It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the

inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:….” (Remember, the “he” is the God of the Bible—


verse 18. God “sitteth upon the circle of the earth.”) A “Flat-Earther” argues that the word “circle” in Isaiah 40:22 does not settle the

matter as to a spherical Earth. He or she says that “circle” could still be a true description if Earth were a disk or cigar-shaped. That disk seen from afar would be both flat, and yet, it would look like a circle too.

What I find interesting is that, while some “Flat-Earthers” say that Isaiah 40:22

definitively rules out sphere and only means circle, one “Flat-Earther” actually told me (and others online) that Isaiah 40:22 could be speaking of either a flat body or a spherical body. In other words, to complicate matters, the “Flat-Earthers” themselves are divided as to whether or not Isaiah 40:22 supports their position! (More on this later, in Part IV, Subsection C.) Let me point out here that I know of no “Spherical-Earther” who argues that Isaiah 40:22 is anything but a sphere. The “Flat-Earther” group seems to have a weakness now as well.

B.AdditionalRemarksThere is more unity in the “Spherical-Earther” camp than in the “Flat-Earther”

camp. Since “Flat-Earthers” are divided on Isaiah 40:22, they appeal to other Bible verses to restrict the meaning of Isaiah 40:22, thereby bolstering their position. As mentioned earlier, we will look at those other “flat Earth” verses in Part V. It should also be mentioned that “Flat-Earthers” are not exactly agreed upon as to what shape the Earth is. They are simply united in a globe/sphere being the wrong representation. More will be said about this shortly. Having surveyed the controversy surrounding the wording of Isaiah 40:22, we proceed to meticulously scrutinizing that verse and its “enigmatic” term “circle.”

IV.THE“CIRCLE”OFISAIAH40:22—WHATISIT?

A.Could“Circle”ReallyBeDescriptiveofaFlatEarth?Returning to Isaiah 40:22 once more: “It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the

earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:….”

“Circle” would indeed describe a disk, provided that you viewed it by looking

directly at its center and were able to see its diameter entirely (distance across). Imagine a round dinner plate or a tire. They have circular sides and they do in fact appear circular. However, from other angles, they seem to be rectangular. This would be especially noticeable on a tire, something much thicker than a dinner plate. If viewed from the side of the vehicle, its tires appear round or circular (see Figure 1, left). From the front or rear of the vehicle, however, the tires appear to be rectangles (Figure 1, right).


Figure 1. Left: “Circle” is true of a disk so long as you view it from a certain angle—perpendicular to its diameter, or distance across. Right: If you look at tires from the angle of their treads (the notched side that meets and rolls on the road), tires resemble crude rectangles (with somewhat rounded corners). This is an easy example of how looks can be deceiving. Just because something appears to be a certain shape, that does not mean that it is that shape!

Just because Earth may appear “circular,” that does not mean we can automatically rule out a sphere and demand a strict “circle” sense/definition/usage of the word.

If we follow the “Flat-Earther’s” strict/extreme methodology of handling Isaiah

40:22, we must be looking for a figure or shape circular and flat. At the bare minimum, that would be a disk. If Earth were disk-shaped, then it would not be circular from all angles. From some positions, it would appear rectangular. Again, recall the simple tire illustration. Strangely, while a “Flat-Earther” will argue that Earth appears “circular,” he or she must concede that a “flat circle” does not seem circular from all angles. It would be rather awkward for Isaiah 40:22 to call Earth a “circle” when “rectangle” or “square” would also be an accurate description of Earth’s shape! (As we will see later, some “Flat-Earthers” hold to a circular Earth built into a square base! Now, we can see why some “Flat-Earthers” are not convinced that Isaiah 40:22 is a good “proof text” for their concept!)

By the way, if Earth were a disk, then it would have two circles, plus a loop/strip

joining them at their edges. On which circle does God sit? Isaiah 40:22 says “he sitteth upon the circle of the earth,” meaning one and only one. No matter from what angle you look at a sphere, it is always circular—namely, the same circle. A “Flat-Earther” therefore has a much harder time explaining his or her perception of Earth’s shape.

B.Could“Circle”ReallyBeDescriptiveofaSphericalEarth?Read Isaiah 40:22 once again: “It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and

the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:….”

Could “circle” here really describe a spherical Earth? Obviously, yes! From

whatever angle you view a sphere, “circular” always describes that sphere. Hold up a ball and spin it, looking at it from every angle. Does it ever resemble anything other than a circle? Your eye is perhaps fooled into assuming it is 2D (two-dimensional), as in a plane/flat circle, yes. Nevertheless, your brain reasons it must be a sphere because, as you keep turning it, it has a constant smooth (or nearly smooth), curved surface. It must be a 3D (three-dimensional) circle—what we call a sphere, or a ball. Shadows and bright spots allow you to see that its surface is curved. Some parts of its surfaces are farther from your eye than others. It is not a flat object (2D) therefore you do not restrict your terminology to “circle.” You say “sphere.” See Figure 2.


Figure 2. A basketball (orange), soccer ball (white and black), and a

tennis ball (yellow). If viewed from one static angle (this view), they appear to be nothing more than circles. Yet, who would argue that these in the real world are actually circles instead of spheres? The very suggestion is absurd, yet Isaiah 40:22 is used in this way

in the “Flat-Earther” camp—“The Bible says ‘circular;’ therefore, it means ‘circular’ not ‘spherical.’ Earth is a ‘circle.’” They never complete the thought! (Yet, they do complete that thought concerning sports balls!) Considering what we know about the “Flat-Earther” and “Spherical-Earther”

views thus far, the former has the more complicated belief. A “Flat-Earther” has a much more difficult task in explaining and defending his or her position than a “Spherical-Earther.” The spherical-Earth view is easier to believe and teach to others. Which would most likely be true of the real Earth?

C.“FlatEarth”—PreciselyWhatDoesThisExpressionMean?As I began to approach this topic, I had difficulty grasping what exactly “Flat-

Earthers” were defending. When they say, “Earth is flat rather than spherical,” they are trading precise language for ambiguous terminology. If the Earth were flat rather than spherical, what exactly do they mean by “flat?” Would they mean something like a plane—a sheet of paper? Do they mean a block of some kind—a cube? What about a cone—it is both flat and circular, no? Or, perhaps a rhombus—a tilting rectangle? Maybe a donut, or a ring? What about a donut sitting inside of a square? See, there numerous possibilities. It is like arguing, “I would rather say, ‘I have a pet,’ than claim, ‘I own a dog.’” It is silly to prefer using general ideas when you can use specific ones. So, why do they do it?

They use general language—an umbrella term—to label themselves because the

“Flat-Earthers” come in all “shapes and sizes” (excuse the pun!). General ideas are harder to refute, since they do/can encompass innumerable ideas. The critic cannot possibly address all flaws. However, general ideas are also harder to defend since there are many “flavors”—sometimes, contradictory ones—in that camp! This is what makes the geoid issue cumbersome. What do they mean by “flat?” They are not agreed on what shape Earth is—they just agree a globe is wrong. Now you can see why preparation for this paper was quite challenging. I did my absolute best in communicating this matter to you just as simply as I could. I hope I have not lost you so far. If we are willing to approach the Bible in faith, the Holy Spirit will be present to illuminate!

Now, when I hear people speak of a “spherical Earth,” there is no doubt exactly

what they mean. A sphere is a ball, and nothing else. To use “flat Earth” rather than “spherical Earth” is to be quite general—“flat” requires interpretation (even complicated explanations) whereas “spherical” means just what it says. There is more unity in the “spherical-Earth” camp than in the “flat-Earth” group with respect to terminology. Let us look at this a little further.


D.“Circle”—FlatEarthorSphericalEarth?With the above background established, there are two possibilities—a

complicated, awkward one; and a simple, direct one. Notice the following two scenarios: 1. CIRCULAR, FLAT EARTH—DISK? DISK IN SQUARE BASE? The Earth

is a “circle” according to Isaiah 40:22—“circle” defined in the “flat Earth” camp as a “flat surface with rounded edges.” “Sphere” is shunned at all costs—along with “planet,” “globe,” et cetera. Their idea is summed up as: “Isaiah 40:22 says that Earth is a ‘circle,’ not a ‘sphere.’” In other words, Earth would be disk-shaped at the very minimum. However, this is faulty. Being as technical with the English language as a “Flat-Earther,” we would then be forced to say, “Earth is a circle but it does not always appear to be a circle.” If viewed from its skinny edge—remember our tire illustration?—a disk appears to be a crude rectangle. It would not be precise to call Earth a “circle” if it were a disk. A disk would be a circle as well as a rectangle; it is not exclusively circular. Or, if the “Flat-Earther” argues a circular Earth founded in a square base, the square base (also considered “Earth”) would negate the “circle” Earth. The Bible would have to say, “Circle Earth in a square foundation.” See, as stated earlier, “Flat-Earthers” have very much to overcome when using the English language. If “circle” means “circle not sphere,” then “circle not sphere” is also faulty. A disk does not always appear circular! A circle sitting in a square, and considered one unit, would be both circular and square, so it is not “circular” all the time either! Isaiah 40:22 does not help the “Flat-Earther’s” position.

2. CIRCULAR, SPHERICAL EARTH—BALL? Here in the “spherical Earth”

camp, Isaiah 40:22 is still true. Earth is a “circle.” Now, if the Bible applied the word “circle” to a sphere, there would never be a problem. “Circle” applies to a sphere regardless of the vantage point. In other words, “circle” is always true of a spherical Earth. “Circle” would not always be true of a disk-shaped Earth, or even a disk-shaped Earth with a square/cubic base. Remember, a disk has a larger surface that appears circular but a thinner surface that appears rectangular. Notice the simplicity in the “spherical Earth” camp. Notice the unity here. There is no “funny business” or “monkeying around” with the English language or with the Bible.

Beloved, which of these two situations makes more sense? A disk (or a disk in

square)—sometimes appearing circular and sometimes appearing square—being labeled a “circle?” Or, a sphere—always appearing circular—being labeled a “circle?” It is so ridiculously easy to see the absurdity of one and the plausibility of the other. However, we will stop and consult some English dictionaries. Authorities of the English language will assist us in trying to sort through the confusion.


E.“Circle”andEnglishLexicographersThe Oxford English Dictionary (OED), considered to be the authority of the

English language, has the following as its main definition of “circle:” “a round plane figure whose boundary (the circumference) consists of points equidistant from a fixed point.” Please take special care to see the “round plane figure” clause. “Plane” here, as also defined by OED, is: “a flat surface on which a straight line joining any two points on it would wholly lie.” Notice, if someone wants to argue a “circular” Earth (to agree with Isaiah 40:22), but also wants to maintain a flat Earth, the OED would restrict this to be a “plane.” The OED defines “disc” as “a flat, thin circular object.” According to his or her own terminology—“circular and flat”—a “Flat-Earther” is actually arguing for a disk-shaped Earth at the very minimum! (Refer back to Subsection D, Scenario Number 1—our brief comments on a disk-shaped Earth.) Dictionary.com has the following definition for “circle:” “16. a sphere or orb: the circle of the earth.” Horror of horrors! It is fascinating here that the lexicographers at Dictionary.com actually chose to quote Isaiah 40:22 to provide an example of how to use “circle!” They understood Isaiah 40:22 to be talking about, not a disk or any other flat figure, but rather a “sphere or orb.” That is, according to these English lexicographers, “circle” in Isaiah 40:22 could in fact mean a sphere. In other words, the “Flat-Earthers” are wrong in demanding “circle” not be used for a sphere. Their mantra—“‘circle’ not ‘sphere,’ flat not spherical”—is thrown into question. While they claim to be using the Bible literally in Isaiah 40:22, they are perhaps using the wrong literal definition for the word! If that were the case, they are unjustly criticizing the “Spherical-Earthers” who say, “‘Circle’ and ‘sphere’ are interchangeable in Isaiah 40:22.” Returning to the OED, we read the origin of our English word “circle:” “Old English, from Old French cercle, from Latin circulus ‘small ring’, diminutive of circus ‘ring’.” If this etymological information were true, and if we must conclude “circle” is “circle not a sphere” (as “Flat-Earthers” encourage us), then who is to say that the Earth is not actually ring-shaped? Remember, the “Flat-Earther” often argues that “circle” in Isaiah does not mean “sphere.” By using the etymology of that very word “circle,” we could go ahead and lose all sense of reason. We could say that Earth is donut-shaped—oh, wait, as we will see, some “Flat-Earthers” actually believe that!

We could say that “circle” does not mean a flat plane circle (as some “Flat-Earthers” claim) but rather a ring (like a band or strip looped at its two ends)! After all, a ring is merely a disk with its inner portion scooped out. A ring is also flat and circular (remember, we are handling the term as a “Flat-Earther” would use “circle.”). We would also ignore the fact that a ring does not always appear circular. It too would be like a tire—circular from one angle but rectangular from another. Notice Figure 3 below.

Figure 3. If we are to accept a “Flat-Earther’s” logic (“‘circle’ not ‘sphere’”), that same reasoning can be used to argue that Earth is ring-shaped. Could Isaiah 40:22’s term “circle”—if it is to be taken as “circle is a flat circle not a sphere”—suggest a ring-shaped Earth? A ring is both circular and flat, as we can see on the right. What if Earth’s continents and oceans were on the outside of the ring?


Again, the “Spherical-Earther” has a much easier time proving his or her view than a “Flat-Earther.” Any English dictionary will show this to be so. Since Isaiah 40:22 is not as clear a verse as some “Flat-Earthers” would like, they appeal to other Bible passages to curtail the implications of Isaiah 40:22 as they see it. We will look at these verses now.

V.FLAT-EARTHERARGUMENTS

A.BriefOpeningCommentsFriend, we begin this section by delineating the Bible verses that “Flat-Earthers”

use to defend their position. Be advised in advance. The logic is sometimes difficult to follow—yea, sometimes absent entirely. To make it as simple as I can, I will provide a few introductory graphics that represent two common “Flat-Earther” conceptualizations. First up is Orlando Ferguson’s “Map of the Square and Stationary Earth” (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Orlando Ferguson (left), a South Dakota real estate developer, drew this map in 1893. He attempted to use the Bible to discredit a spherical or globe-shaped Earth. Notice the “four corners,” the “ice wall” of Antarctica (white lip or edge of bowl), and the Sun and Moon hovering overhead. It may be hard to infer it here, but Ferguson did not actually believe in a disk-shaped Earth. Looking closely, the “bowl” is actually donut-shaped. That bulge in the middle depicts Earth as ring-shaped, sitting inside a square base. Ferguson titled it “Square and Stationary Earth,” meaning he considered the square base as part of Earth. This is just one idea in the Flat-Earther camp. Ferguson boasted at the top of poster— “Four Hundred Passages in the Bible that Condemn the Globe Theory, or the Flying Earth, and None Sustain It. This Map is the Bible Map of the World” (bold emphasis mine). At the bottom, he provided


the “Scripture that condemns the globe theory.” While not quite “400,” we will address those Scriptures shortly.

The following is the text at the bottom of Ferguson’s 1893 poster: “SCRIPTURE THAT CONDEMNS THE GLOBE THEORY. “And his hands were steady until the going down of the sun.—Ex. 17:12. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed.—Joshua 10:12-13. The world also shall be stable that it be not moved.—Chron. 16:30. To him that stretched out the earth, and made great lights (not worlds).—Ps. 136:6-7. The sun shall be darkened in his going forth.—Isaiah 12:10. The four corners of the earth.—Isaiah 11:12. The whole earth is at rest.—Isaiah 14:7. The prophecy concern the globe theory.—Isaiah: 29th chapter. Woe to the rebellious children, sayeth the Lord, that take counsel, but not of me.—Isaiah 30:1. So the sun returned ten degrees.—Isaiah 38:8-9. It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth.—Isaiah 40:22. He that spread forth the earth.—Isaiah 52:5. That spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.—Isaiah 54:24. My hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth.—Isaiah 58:13. Thus sayeth the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the moon and stars for a light by night (not worlds).—Jer. 31:35-36. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood.—Acts 2:20. We will discuss these “Flat-Earth” Scriptures, and others, shortly. It should be

pointed out here that Ferguson has four typographical errors—“Chron. 16:30” should be “1 Chr. 16:30;” “Isaiah 12:10” should be “Isaiah 13:10;” “Isaiah 52:5” should be “Isaiah 42:5;” “Isaiah 58:13” should be “Isaiah 54:13.”

Now, we look at another “Flat-Earth” model.

Figure 5. Here is a second common “Flat-Earther” concept of Earth. Notice there is no “donut” aspect as the “Flat-Earther” graphic pictured in Figure 4. The white ring is Antarctica, acting as the edge of the bowl in which Earth’s oceans and continents fit. Here, there is no “South Pole” as we know it. This graphic is roughly the way the Earth looks from above (North Pole) as a sphere, without the white edges, of course. The red ring is the “orbit” of the Sun (yellow) and Moon (gray) above the Earth—yes, they believe the Earth is stationary and that only the Sun and Moon move! Frankly, this is a very simplistic concept; it borderlines how a small child would imagine the natural world

operating. These two graphics in our memory, we can refer back to them and they will help

us better understand how “Flat-Earthers” approach the following Bible verses.


B.Bible“ProofTexts”foraFlatEarthI will now cite and comment on the various verses that often appear in the “Flat-

Earther’s” arguments. Many of them were found on Ferguson’s map (Figure 4). Do “Flat-Earthers” have a valid case by appealing to all of the Scriptures? Let us investigate for ourselves.

1.Revelation7:1&Isaiah11:12“And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree” (Revelation 7:1). “And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth” (Isaiah 11:12).

Notice what one “Flat-Earther” alleged when he commented on Revelation 7:1: “The earth is a circle not a globe and it also has boundaries which would be the ice wall that holds the water in, surrounding the circle earth. This would be the four corners of the earth.” You will find such rambling, run-on sentences through “Flat-Earth” literature and speeches. Do you best to follow them, friend.

Exactly what he meant by “ice wall that holds the water in, surrounding the circle

earth,” you will recall the continent of Antarctica as it appeared in Figure 4 (Ferguson’s map). (This particular “Flat-Earther” did, however, yank out an unrelated verse from the Book of Job to prove his point—we will examine it later.) The man was well aware of the Bible mentioning “the four corners of the earth.” Is he correct in appealing to the Bible for his belief, or is this an extreme view?

I feel somewhat silly writing the following lines, but I must do so for sake of

argument and to expose folly. When Scripture talks about “the four corners of the earth,” why would it be so difficult to imagine that the Bible expression would carry the same meaning as when we would say “the four points of a compass?” A compass is round, but it has corners in the sense of pointing in four cardinal, or primary, directions—North, South, West, and East. Those four directions divide Earth into quarters (see Figure 6). Imagine a region split into four quadrants.

Figure 6. Notice a compass has four “points”—the red arrows—indicating the four primary directions (North, West, South, and East). A compass is round, so the needle can spin about its axis and align with Earth’s magnetic field. Just as we would refer to “the four points on a compass,” and yet not mean a square compass, so the Bible refers to the “four corners of the earth” as the four cardinal directions—North, West, South, and East.


If one were to take the adamant position that “four corners of the earth” means a square Earth of some kind, then who is to say that he or she is not talking about a square compass when referring to “the four points of a compass?” I know of “spherical-Earthers” who talk about “the ends of the earth.” They certainly do not believe in a “flat Earth.” Why would it be so wrong to assume the Bible authors were using the phrase the same way we do today in everyday language? See, friend, this just adds to the pre-existing confusion. The Bible is not being made clear; it is being complicated. Furthermore, the English language becomes burdensome, especially for people whose first language is something other than English.

As an interesting aside, the Lord Jesus says in Matthew 24:31: “And he shall send

his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” If we force “four corners of the earth” of Revelation 7:1 and Isaiah 11:12 to talk about four literal corners of Earth, then, according to Matthew 24:31, there must be only four winds of heaven as well! No, see, this is not describing the precise number of winds but rather the four primary directions out of which they come—North, South, West, and East! Moreover, according to Matthew 24:31, heaven has two ends or extremes—what shape would heaven be then? A rectangle would have four extremes. A sphere would have none. A circle would have an infinite number. I would love to hear how the “Flat-Earther” overcomes the conundrum in which he or she has placed themselves.

Before moving to the next proof text, let us look at Isaiah 11:12 again: “And he

shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.” If we are going to take “the four corners of the earth” as literal corners of a square base in which a circular or ring-shaped Earth sits, then we must admit that God is going to gather the Jews who were scattered beyond Antarctica into outer space! Refer back to Figures 4 and 5—two standard models of the “flat Earth.”

2.Exodus17:12“But Moses’ hands were heavy; and they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat thereon: and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun.”

As you can probably guess, the “Flat-Earther” hones in on “the going down of the sun.” It is argued that the Sun moves rather than the Earth. Still, the “Flat-Earther” is in yet another dilemma. According to Figures 4 and 5, the Sun moves above Earth. Thus, there could be no “going down” of the Sun in the “Flat-Earth” model. The Sun, as the “Flat-Earther” sees it, merely rotates to be above a different part of Earth’s surface! The “Flat-Earther” either has to: (1) hold a strict reading of this verse, or (2) keep his or her system. He or she cannot do both here. As we proceed in this study, notice how it will only get worse for the “Flat-Earther” arguments.

3.Joshua10:12-13“[12] Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the


Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. [13] And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.”

Again, the “Flat-Earther” enjoys pointing out “the Sun stood still” and “the Moon

stood still.” Remember, although the Holy Spirit wrote the Bible, he used holy men to pen it (2 Peter 1:19-21). These men, like us, observed the Sun and Moon moving in the sky above. Just as we would say, “sunrise” or “sunset,” of course the Bible could use such terminology without demanding a strict meaning. When a meteorologist says “sunrise” or “sunset,” would he or she be talking about the Sun orbiting the Earth? Of course not! So, why is it so hard to believe that the Bible would not use the same phrase in a loose manner to indicate that the Sun appears to move because Earth is rotating about a fixed axis? The Bible is not indicating a moving Sun anymore than a meteorologist is when employing the terms “sunrise” and “sunset!”

4.1Chronicles16:30“Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.”

Notice the wording of the verse. It did not say “the world is still and it cannot be

moved.” A “Flat-Earther” forces the verse to read that way. Moreover, the verse did not say “the Earth is stationary and does not move.” A “Flat-Earther” twists the verse to read in that manner. The verse uses a future tense—“the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.” We need not force any meaning on this verse unless our philosophy is more valuable to us than God’s precious words. We take the verse normally—when Jesus Christ comes to set up His literal earthly kingdom, the righteous world system will endure forever, to never pass away or be threatened by evil. There is nothing here about a fixed circle of Earth; the “Flat-Earther” is perverting the Bible, inserting his or her own opinions, to reinforce an already complicated, cumbersome, flawed system. Yet again, it will not work!

5.Psalm136:6-7“[6] To him that stretched out the earth above the waters: for his mercy endureth for ever. [7] To him that made great lights: for his mercy endureth for ever:”

The “Flat-Earther” contends that the term “stretched” means Earth is flat. Is that

a valid assumption? Try this simple experiment. Take a ball and wrap a piece of paper around it. Did you not “stretch” the paper around a sphere? Does the word “stretch” deny that you use a sphere in your procedure? No? Likewise, it is possible for God to “stretch” land across a globe covered in water (Genesis 1:9-10)! There is nothing here in Psalm 136 that conclusively demands a flat Earth! It is merely an imagination of the “Flat-Earther,” wearing a pair of eyeglasses that will only allow circles to be seen.


6.Isaiah13:10&Jeremiah31:35-36“For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine” (Isaiah 13:10). “[35] Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts is his name: [36] If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever” (Jeremiah 31:5-6).

“Flat-Earthers” grab Isaiah 13:10 and have a “field day” with it. If you think you

have heard enough of their wild ideas, no, you are just getting started, friend! They see the Sun here as “going forth,” moving around a stationary (immovable) Earth. They will say that the Moon does not reflect the Sun’s light but rather the Moon produces its own light (Jeremiah 31:5 is supplemental to this belief). This is so ridiculous for two reasons.

Firstly, Jeremiah 31:5 says that the Moon and the Stars produce “a light”—not

plural. Are we going to say that the Moon and the Stars one single light? Are not the Moon and Stars separate entities, producing thousands of lights in the night sky? If the “Flat-Earther” can take an extreme here, how far should that extreme go? See, the “Flat-Earther” argument becomes so difficult for even them to defend now.

Secondly, the Moon produced its own light, why is the Moon not full (completely

lit) every single night? How can the Moon’s surface, if a source of light itself, be shrouded in shadow—phases exhibiting crescents, quarters, gibbouses, et cetera? The “New Moon” phase does not allow the Moon to be seen at all, unless during a solar eclipse when light reflected from Earth shines on the Moon. The various phases of the Moon can be explained by a sphere (Moon) being illuminated by another sphere (Sun). A sphere cannot be completely illuminated by one light source—this is always a dark side on the sphere. This also proves the Moon, contrary to the “Flat-Earther’s” claim, is spherical. A flat (or disc) Moon could not partially illuminate as depicted in Figure 7.

Figure 7. If the Moon generated its own light as “Flat-Earthers” claim, then observances of these Moon phases would be impossible. The center phase (full Moon) would be constantly viewed at all times of year. Yet, throughout the month, we can go outside and see these various phases in the night sky. We do not have to rely on photographs alone to prove this. Furthermore, if Earth were flat, all nations everywhere would always see a full Moon at night. This is not the case either. Why?


7.Isaiah14:7“The whole earth is at rest, and is quiet: they break forth into singing.”

It is downright laughable that Ferguson and others use this as a proof text for a “flat Earth that does not rotate or revolve.” “The whole earth” being “at rest” is explained further as, “and is quiet.” “At rest” is be taken as in “peaceful,” and “quiet,” of course, means “silent.” Then, the verse says, those on Earth break out into song. After a time of stillness, the noise of song is heard. What a tragedy that the “Flat-Earther” makes such a mockery of this beautiful verse!

8.Isaiahchapter29&Isaiah30:1Read Isaiah chapter 29 in your Bible—24 verses. “Woe to the rebellious children, saith the LORD, that take counsel, but not of me;

and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin:” (Isaiah 30:1).

In Figure 4, Ferguson argued that Isaiah chapter 29, and Isaiah 30:1, “predicted”

and “condemned” people who believed in a spherical Earth. Friend, you can read those verses for the rest of your life, and you will never encounter one word of admonition about Earth’s shape. This should not surprise us. In case you have not noticed, dear reader, “Flat-Earthers”—like any cult members—simply grab whatever they can in the Bible, and twist the verses to teach their beliefs. If I wanted to be silly about it as they are, I could argue that Satan tempted Eve to rebel against God by making a declaration that Earth was spherical instead of flat! See, I can pull out verses and “prove” anything as well! We could go ahead and take it to the utmost extreme—belief in a flat Earth is necessary for salvation into heaven too!

9.Isaiah38:8-9“[8] Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down. [9] The writing of Hezekiah king of Judah, when he had been sick, and was recovered of his sickness:”

The “Flat-Earther” butchers verse 8. They quote “the sun returned ten degrees,” “it

was gone down,” and say the Sun moved. See our earlier comments on Joshua 10:12-13—Proof Text #3.

10.Isaiah42:5“Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:” As noted in Psalm 136:6-7, Proof Text #5, “spread forth” appeals to “Flat-Earthers” because they imagine the language restricts the object to something flat (a circle). If that


were true, then the heavens are flat too! The verse says God “stretched out” the heavens, after all. Oh wait, there is another problem! There can be no Sun and Moon above the Earth—even in the Flat-Earth model. The Sun and Moon—in both spherical and flat Earth camps—are not stacked on Earth. The Sun and Moon would have to be flat against the Earth if the heavens were truly “flat.” Will the “Flat-Earther” take it this far? Of course not! He or she will only take it as far as that system allows. Friend, are you beginning to see the futility, the absurdity, of the Flat-Earth model? Any Bible verse anywhere is seized upon, without any compunction or respect for the context. And “Flat-Earthers” have the audacity to constantly complain that scientists deceive the public!

11.Isaiah48:13“Mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth, and my right hand hath spanned the heavens: when I call unto them, they stand up together.”

In Figure 4, Ferguson cited this as proof of a “flat Earth,” but there is nothing here to support that view. Perhaps he was trying to say that Earth had a square foundation and that it could not be moved. I do not know what his intention was in mentioning this. More than anything, considering what verses he has quoted and handled thus far, it was probably another distortion of the Bible text.

12.Acts2:20“The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come:”

Exactly what this proves to a “Flat-Earther,” I can only imagine. I would respond

by saying this actually disproves the “Flat-Earth” model. If the Sun is darkened, and it is in Acts 2:20, then the Moon’s lighting is impacted (and it is). Contrary to the “Flat-Earth” model, the Moon’s illumination depends on the Sun. If we were as reckless with the Bible as the “Flat-Earther,” then who is to say that Acts 2:20 actually teaches the Moon will literally turn into blood as well?!

13.Matthew4:8“Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;”

To quote one Flat-Earther who commented on Matthew 4:8: “Obviously, this would be possible only if the earth were flat.”

Several difficulties arise if we use Matthew 4:8 as a proof text for a “flat Earth.”

Firstly, Scripture says Jesus and Satan stood on “an exceeding high mountain.” Technically, they did not stand on the highest mountain in the world! Even if the Earth were flat, and they stood on a high mountaintop, they still could not literally see all points on Earth’s surface. For example, much higher mountains around them would obscure their view to some degree in all directions. Additionally, vegetation (forests) would serve as a barrier. The Bible does not even say Jesus and Satan stood on the very


tip-top peak of the mountain, either. While they would have had a wide view, to say that they had a complete, unobstructed, 360-degree (all-direction) view of all of Earth’s kingdoms is downright preposterous.

When Matthew 4:8 says “all the kingdoms of the world,” does it mean that Jesus

literally saw every last kingdom? Think about the phrase, “I saw all the stars in the night sky.” Does that mean that I literally looked at every last star? Of course not! Not all stars are visible from the same place on Earth year-round anyway (disproving the “Flat-Earth” model)! In addition, some stars are dimmer than others—you cannot “see” them in the truest sense of the world. Cloud cover reduces your visibility as well. However, when people tell us that they looked at “all the stars in the sky,” we employ a little common sense and know what they mean. They are being general, as in looking at all the stars collectively. To see many stars could, although imprecisely, be considered looking at “all” of them. With the nonsense aside, let us see what beautiful Bible truth the “Flat-Earther” skims over in Matthew 4:8.

Read Matthew 4:8-10: “[8] Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high

mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; [9] And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. [10] Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.”

The point of Matthew 4:8 is not that Jesus literally and physically looked at every

last kingdom on Earth. What we must extract from this is that Satan controlled all of those kingdoms. There was not a kingdom that Jesus saw that the Devil was not exercising authority over. Hence, Satan offered to give Jesus those kingdoms if He (Jesus) would bow down and worship him (Satan). Jesus never argued with Satan; He never gave in to Satan either. The emphasis here is not so much on the kingdoms but rather the evil power that held them. When we start grabbing verses out of context to prove our point, we miss their real point! This happens time and time again in the “Flat-Earther” camp.

14.Revelation1:7“Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.”

A “Flat-Earther” says that this situation too is only possible if Earth were flat. For “every eye” to see Christ Jesus at His Second Coming, the Earth could not be spherical. They say that those living on the opposite side of the sphere could not see Him coming. While appearing to be clever, it is actually ludicrous. If we are going to be so mindlessly fixated on “every eye,” taking such an extreme position, then that itself will become a lie. Why? Not every eye can see! Some eyes are blind! How could the Bible say that “every eye” will see Christ when some human eyes do not work?! Some people, due to birth defects, are born without eyes. Will they see Him too? Oh, well, then we have to toss out Revelation 1:7!


See, friend, again, the “Flat-Earther” is getting lost in the details when he or she should be paying attention to the main idea of the verse. The Second Coming of Christ is no secret event. It will not be visible to a select few. Again, we need to be honest with the Bible text. Handling the Bible most carelessly is going to do unspeakable damage to it and our souls. We had better be more prudent in what we do with the Bible text, friend! The “Flat-Earth” camp has now built a track record of gross Bible-verse perversion.

15.Isaiah66:1(Acts7:49)&Job26:10“Thus saith the LORD, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?” (Isaiah 66:1). “Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest?” (Acts 7:49) “He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end” (Job 26:10).

The following was written by the same “Flat-Earther” who commented on Revelation 7:1 earlier: “The bible [sic] says the earth is God’s footstool, a foot stool [sic] has a flat surface with four pillars for legs.” “The earth is a circle not a globe and it also has boundaries which would be the ice wall that holds the water in, surrounding the circle earth. This would be the four corners of the earth.” (We first mentioned this “ice wall” in Subsection A at the beginning of this Part. More will be said about it in Subsection C.)

What a shame that we have such ignorant people quoting the Bible yet

again! He completely butchered the three Bible verses cited above! To say that a “footstool” can have only four legs is absurd—some stools have three legs! The reason why he chose the number “four” is because he wanted to force it together with Revelation 7:1 and Isaiah 11:12!

If we are going to demand Earth be a literal footstool with four actual legs,

then we must conclude that heaven is a literal throne, too. Is heaven shaped like a literal throne? No? But, does not the LORD say in Isaiah 66:1 and Acts 7:49—“Heaven is my throne?” We could argue that He did not say, “Heaven is the location of my throne!” That must mean heaven is shaped like a literal throne, just like Earth is shaped like a literal footstool! See, beloved, we just get more and more ridiculous. It has been said before and it will be said again. The “Flat-Earther” camp is relentless and shameless in finding any source to validate their preconceived ideas. We will stop sharing the verses they quote. I am nauseous just writing thus far. As an aside, we move on to some of their extra-Biblical (outside of Scripture) proofs.

C.Extra-Biblical“Proofs”foraFlatEarth

1.Rambling,DesperateFlat-EarthersAt this point, having seen how “Flat-Earthers” handle Bible verses, you can see

how convoluted their thinking is. In researching for this paper, I poured through much


“Flat-Earther” material. There were many headaches in trying to sort through those intricately-worded arguments; much prayer and thought went into addressing them in as logical of a manner as possible. I have no reservations in confessing that their video montages and rambling statements (verbal and written) made me woozy. That people could claim to be such experts, advertise their “wisdom,” and yet be so ridiculous (their simplistic thinking, childish arguments, and so on). One “Flat-Earther” video montage I watched was actually bits and pieces of cartoons, photos, and interviews with scientists! You will forgive me for reposting these “Flat-Earth” ramblings (anonymously, of course). It is important that you be exposed to these ideas yourself, so you can understand their position even better.

2.“SatelliteImagesofEarthAreDoctored!”—“QuestionEverything!”“Flat-Earthers” often dismiss scientific data—namely, satellite photography and

videography of Earth—as “doctored” or “forged.” They argue that these media may have been tampered with in some way so as to disprove the alleged “flat Earth” position of Scripture. Strangely, I have seen “Flat-Earthers” offer images/videos to prove a flat Earth! They will show in their presentations what they say is “the Earth,” “the Moon,” “the Sun,” et cetera, and they expect their audience (me) to take them at their word. By their own admission, though, pictures and videos can be fabricated. If I am not to believe the spherical satellite images of Earth, how do I know that they are not using computer-generated imagery to prove a flat Earth? I mean, if we were to question everything as they encourage us, to be “free thinkers,” then we are indeed to question the “facts” they offer us. What if they are trying to deceive us? We cannot say!

If I am to believe the “Flat-Earthers” when they say that the spherical Earth

images are forged, how am I to believe their images or videos of a flat Earth? What if they manipulated their “proof?” (See, friends, they call into question their own position.) Since they so mishandle the Bible verses we listed earlier, do you think they would be honest when providing us with objective, scientific data to support their position? Again, if “Flat-Earthers” lie about the most important Book we have—the Holy Bible—we need not concern ourselves much with the less important sources of information—pictures, video, written objections—they offer us! I provide the following arguments just to show you that they will not only misuse the Bible to maintain their position. They will also throw out all common sense.

3.“But,DoesNottheEarth‘Appear’FlatfromGod’sPerspective?”A “Flat-Earther” argues, most simplistically, that Earth “must be flat” because it

“appears” flat to God. (Even some Christians use this as a line of argument!) While sincere, he or she is not really thinking about what is being said. It is actually borderline madness. I have to be very careful in saying this, but I need to call it what it is. It is childish thinking! No mature adult should be entertaining such foolishness! We would expect this from very young and inexperienced children, but not from grown men and women who supposedly have common sense... and, allegedly, the Holy Spirit!

Let us go back to our earlier analogy. If I hold up a ball before you while telling

you, “This is a circle, not a sphere,” you would experience contradicting senses. While your


ears would hear the words “circle not sphere,” your eyes would see a circle, and your brain would “connect the dots” and conclude it is a sphere. I would be describing that ball the same way a “Flat-Earther” is having us handle Isaiah 40:22. “Earth must be flat because it appears flat” is no different from arguing, “This ball is not actually spherical because it appears flat.” I wonder what “Flat-Earther” would ever want to demonstrate this “logic” in public! Refer to Figure 8. Or, what if I said, “This person appears to be your child?” Would that automatically make the person your child? That child merely bore a resemblance to your child, but was not your child. Would you still argue that that was your child? Come on, friends, we need to use our brains before spouting out whatever we want!

Figure 8. The edge of the blue circle (left) appears flat when a tangential (straight) red line is drawn against it for comparison (inset at right). The arc’s slope (inset, right) is so gradual that it appears to be a straight line. A “Flat-Earther” argues, since Earth appears “flat” when seen up-close, it must be flat. However, this is misleading and specious. This circle could easily be representative of a sphere seen from a distance. By the “Flat-Earther’s” own logic, a sphere would be flat as well. (Yet, as we know, they do not like to equate the words “flat” and “sphere;” they prefer to say “flat” and “circular.”) You could take a ball, and place a sheet of paper so that it just barely rested on the ball. Would the “Flat-Earther” argue a ball is flat? Of course not!

4.“Antarcticaisan‘IceWall,’aRingThatSurroundsEarthandDamsItsOceans”“Flat-Earthers” argue that Antarctica is some type of ring, the so-called “ice wall”

that forms a tub in which the rest of the continents and world oceans fit. Some appeal to Job 26:10: “He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end.” This certainly does not identify Antarctica as the “bounds” or “wall.” They are reading that into the verse! (Surprised?)

If the coast of Antarctica really did form a barrier, then a ring has another coast.

Think of the gap on either side of a strip or ring. There is the inner hole, and then there is the space on the outside of the ring. In other words, if you were to walk on Antarctica, eventually you would still fall off. Making Antarctica a ring to form the ice wall does not help the “Flat-Earther’s” case. A ring has inside and outside edges, and while the inside


edge would be a dam or bathtub to hold Earth’s ocean water, there would be a cliff on Antarctic on its farthest edges (Figure 9—the black region). What is beyond those edges? Oh, well, “Flat-Earthers” themselves do not know. (Maybe they could fabricate some explanation, find some more Bible verses to prove their point, and then tell us what they have discovered?)

Figure 9. A common “Flat-Earther” concept of Earth—Figure 5 repeated. Again, the white edge is Antarctica, the “edge” of the bowl in which Earth’s oceans and continents fit. The red ring is the “orbit” of the Sun (yellow) and Moon (gray) around the Earth. What is beyond that ice wall? “Flat-Earthers” profess to know nothing on that subject!

Furthermore, if Antarctica is an ice wall, a ring, then a ring does not have four corners (remember the “Flat-Earther” appealing to Revelation 7:1 earlier, Part V, Subsection A). Either Earth has four corners, or it is a ring. Figure 4 has it as a ring inside a square. Figure 9 above has it as a circle. See, “Flat-Earthers” are divided once again. Some believe in the four corners of an ice wall, making them four pillars upon which earth rests (go back to Part V, Proof Text #15). Others believe that Antarctica is a ring (Figure 9). If so, then we cannot appeal to the “four corners of the earth” verses. Still, other “Flat-Earthers” hold to some type of donut—there are no such pillars holding up Earth in that view. There is nothing but confusion, confusion, confusion—hopeless confusion—among the “Flat-Earthers!”

5.“WeWantMoreVideoandPhotographicProofofaSphericalEarth!”The “Flat-Earther” irrationally demands more pictures or video before accepting a

spherical Earth as possible. Meanwhile, the “Flat-Earther” already openly rejects the current “spherical Earth” pictures and videos as forgeries. If they now question the proof that a group has provided, why do they demand that same group provide more proof? The “Flat-Earther,” in order to maintain that position, will continue to be difficult and persist in denying—“Those are doctored satellite images, forged videos, et cetera!” Most assuredly, a “Flat-Earther” is engaged in an endless cycle of demanding this and demanding that, and yet, never being satisfied. All the while, they will share with us endless pictures and videos of a “flat Earth.” Awful, downright awful, friends!

6.“NoOneHasProvidedaPictureofAustralia’sSkylineUpside-Down!”In one “Flat-Earther” video I watched, the individual demanded that “Spherical-

Earthers” provide a picture of Australia skyline upside-down. Yes, imagine that! Friends, just like with the Bible, they will grab at anything that even remotely appears to be “flat Earth proof.” Again, if they carelessly use the most important book, the Bible (refer back to Part V, Subsection B), then I am not the least bit surprised that did they distort and botch other data. They are not honestly seeking answers. All that they are


doing is generating question after question after question. There are no real answers in the “Flat-Earther” camp. It has demonstrated itself to be nothing but a divided, contradictory system, filled with people endlessly speculating and believing general ideas, professing to be wise but demonstrating unfathomable ignorance. They are forced to be general because there is no real consensus as to what they exactly believe. All they can agree on is that Earth is flat and not spherical. When you hear them talk, they will boast themselves as being “free-thinking,” “questioning everything.” Indeed! No wonder they get nowhere with their mental gymnastics!

Now, to answer the objection involving Australia.... What if we held upside-down

a picture of Australia’s skyline, arguing the skyline was captured upside-down? Or, better yet, how would the “Flat-Earther” be able to distinguish a picture flipped digitally from one flipped naturally? (Remember, they like to dismiss all contrary videos and pictures as “forgeries,” so they could never tell the factors that contributed to the picture’s orientation anyway.) All the foolishness aside, friends, we need to get beyond such triviality. We need to act our age, and come up with better arguments than this. As with the Bible verses, now with the extra-Biblical proofs, the “Flat-Earther” system is collapsing!

7.“GoingAroundtheEarthDoesNotNecessarilyMeanaCircularEarth!”One man’s “Flat-Earth” argument was that ships and planes circumnavigating

(going around) the Earth is not conclusive proof that Earth is a globe. “After all,” he asked, “Does going around your neighborhood prove that your neighborhood is round?” This is downright preposterous, but I feel compelled to answer in kind. “People circumnavigating the Earth proves it is a flat circle just as ‘going around’ your neighborhood proves it is a flat circle!”

8.“EarthSpinsTooFasttoHearSoundsattheEquator!”To show you again just how specious a “Flat-Earther” can be, think of this

argument I read: “Earth is supposedly spinning at 1000 miles per hour at the Equator. The speed of sound is less than that; therefore, you could not hear a person standing next to you if you were at the Equator.” Oh, but you see, if you and the person or next to one another, and the Earth is spinning under both of you, you are not spinning away from each other. You are both rotating at the same speed. Of course you could hear each other. If you were moving away from the other person, that would be something else entirely. The “Flat-Earther” again demonstrates his or her ignorance about basic scientific facts. The speed of sound depends on air temperature, altitude, and medium composition, among other things.

9.“NASA’SSatelliteImageryofPlanetEarthVariesOvertheDecades!”Another “Flat Earth” video questioned the various NASA satellite images of Earth

captured over the years. One image was taken in the 1970s, and another was taken just a few years ago. Earth’s water was a different color; its land was a different color. The “Flat-Earther” argued that this is proof that such images were faked. Of course, it is reasonable to conclude that technology has improved over the last several years. What was grainy


and discolored 50 years ago in one photograph is surely clearer and bolder in one captured a few years ago. I would be skeptical of NASA if it would release roughly the same images over that 50-year period. Because they do not, I believe those images are genuine.

Amounts of sunlight, contrast of the picture, different times of year, vegetation

growth or death, presence of algae in water, atmospheric gases, cloud cover (types and thicknesses), et cetera, could all account for the differences in satellite images of Earth over the last half-century. However, the “Flat-Earther” is not willing to give the benefit of the doubt to those of a different persuasion. He or she has already made up the mind to disprove whatever is offered to contradict the “flat Earth” model.

10.“WaterisPerfectlyHorizontalinBodiesofWater!”“Flat-Earthers” say that canals, ponds, et cetera have “flat water.” This, they

claim, is proof of a flat Earth. One video poster used a video of a ship passing through a canal, arguing that completely flat water was seen in front of the ship at all times. I mean, this is so ridiculous, absolutely stupid, friends. There were no waves or ripples in the water?! Did the moving ship not produce a wake/disturbance in the water? (And, again, he used a video to prove his point—he discourages spherical Earthers from using any video or photography as proof.)

That same individual posted another graphic in that video: “The curvature of the

Earth had to be taken into account when designing the verrazano-narrows [sic] bridge [sic]. does [sic] the water curve with the bridge or is it flat? LOL.” Notice all the spelling mistakes. Friend, it does not help your cause if you write English like a first-grader. Again, with waves and ripples in the river, how could we see the curvature of the water in the channel? Even if we could get eye level with the water, wave disturbances would disrupt over view!

11.AwkwardNomenclatureintheFlat-EartherCampIn one Flat Earth video, the editor used the following defense as one point in his

argument: “Hemi, means ‘half of a sphere’ = Dome/firmament. The Earth is flat.” That was one of his graphics! That was the best he could do! Madness—utter madness, friends!

If we were to adopt the “Flat-Earther’s” mantra—“circle not sphere”—then we

would also have to get rid of another common word. We could not say “atmosphere.” The very name (atmos meaning “vapor,” and sphaira meaning “globe, ball”) implies that the envelope of air surrounding us is a “sphere.” It would be quite difficult to imagine a disk-shaped Earth sitting inside of a sphere—oh, wait, some “Fat-Earther’s” believe that too. A “dome” or “hemisphere” would be more precise in describing the air above Earth if Earth were really flat. Other “Flat-Earthers,” perhaps recognizing that fact, demand a dome (half-sphere) atmosphere. While arguing against a “spherical Earth,” some “Flat-Earthers” continue to use the word “atmosphere.” In my understanding, that is incongruous. Some “Flat-Earthers” would disagree because they do not represent a spherical atmosphere in their drawings. Do you see any sphere (atmosphere) in Figure 4?


12.ContradictionsinandDangersoftheFlat-EartherCamp“The Flat Earth Society” website actually says about itself: “This is the home of

the world-famous Flat Earth Society, a place for free thinkers and the intellectual exchange of ideas.” They admit to being “free thinkers.” What is a “free thinker?” The Oxford English Dictionary tells us: “a person who rejects accepted opinions, especially those concerning religious belief.” They are opposed to group thinking—oh, wait, they are united as a group in declaring that Earth is not a globe!

It is highly important that you see there is a religious connotation to the Flat-

Earth camp. (Remember, they do quote the Bible, giving an appearance of truth.) Friends, we need to be very careful in religion, especially when dealing with groups (cults) that twist Bible verses to fit their views. Those who refuse the issues of divine inspiration and preservation of the Scripture and deny dispensational Bible study, are to be particularly eschewed.

It cannot be denied that the Flat-Earther will grab anything and everything in

the Bible that even remotely supports that view. It does not matter how much violence is to done to a passage of God’s precious words. The important thing is to maintain the system, no matter the cost! The “Flat-Earther” can accuse the “Spherical-Earther” of distorting Isaiah 40:22. However, the “Spherical-Earther” can accuse the “Flat-Earther” of wresting/distorting numerous verses (we listed over a dozen of these in Part V, Subsection B). It is very difficult to follow the “Flat-Earther’s” arguments, and I believe they are worded in such a way so as to keep people from questioning or disproving them. However, their deception is quite easy to spot when we look at how they handle the Bible!

Freethinking individuals do not accept group belief. That means that, if they are

strict “freethinkers,” they will even question the Bible! Could that be why they are so adamant in casting doubt on Isaiah 40:22’s “circle” being a globe or sphere? If they have a track record of mishandling Bible verses (and they do according to Part V of our study), do you think “Flat-Earthers” would approach Isaiah 40:22 with any credibility or spiritual stability?

The “Flat Earth” system raises too many questions and provides us with no

answers. In fact, as pointed out, they themselves are divided as to what shape Earth actually is—they can only say what shape Earth is not! Now, understand, there is nothing wrong with asking questions. Inquiring is a great way of learning. In science, we ask questions all the time in order to form hypotheses (“temporary explanations”) and conduct experiments. As more questions are asked, more experiments can be carried out, and as more experiments are conducted, new questions arise about the data gathered. Hypotheses are either disregarded/changed (because experiments disproved a hypothesis) or elevated to theories (because numerous experiments supported the hypothesis). Questions are not discouraged; endless, pointless questions are!

Let me also say this about questions. A major part of my ministry is answering

people’s Bible questions. However, some individuals with whom I have dealt over the years are known for their unending questions. They never really got anywhere because


they always had another question to ask. They never actually studied the Bible—if they did, it was very little study. Instead, they appealed to books, videos, preachers, et cetera. Their souls were unstable because they did not approach the Bible God’s way (rightly divided; 2 Timothy 2:15). They did not follow the edification design laid out in the rightly divided Scriptures, so they got no profit out of the Bible (think of the “Flat-Earther” quoting verses). Longing to gain something, they think asking the same question constantly, or asking the same series of questions over and over again, can give them the answer. That is wrong. “But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes” (2 Timothy 2:23). In ministry, you will encounter some of the dumbest questions and issues ever raised—religious deception is Satan’s favorite tool! Those questions will generate endless arguments (remember the contentiousness of the “Flat-Earther”).

It would do us well for me to repeat what I wrote earlier. “Longing to gain

something, they think asking the same question constantly, or asking the same series of questions over and over again, can give them the answer.” This is the “Flat-Earther”— continually questioning data but never getting anywhere, never benefiting their audience or themselves. The Bible talks about people, especially women, trapped in false religion: “Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” (2 Timothy 3:7). This too is the “Flat-Earther.” He or she will study secular data, and immediately attempt to “disprove” it with whatever he or she can find (misquoted verses, simplistic arguments, et cetera). This is the spiritual ignorance Satan generates! We need to avoid it.

Sad to say, but the “Flat-Earth” model is just another tool of Satan to openly mock

the Bible—of course, he uses so called “Bible believers” to do it! Satan’s ultimate goal is to eliminate the authority of the Bible. If the Bible can be discredited one verse at a time, the Devil is satisfied. Think of the dozen-plus verses that “Flat-Earthers” use to prove their point. They have done such violence to Scripture—no science textbook has handled the Bible so shoddily! This is most offensive to me, as a Christian and a Bible believer.

What also makes the “flat Earth” position offensive is that its proponents

continually warn that people are deceived. They claim that they alone have the answer, despite the fact that there are errors and schisms in their own camp (some “Flat-Earthers” believe in a disk, others a square or rectangular plane, still others various combinations of figures). They tell us not to let scientific video footage and photography deceive us, yet they support and defend their own conclusions by relying on and appealing to videos and photography! Their language is sloppy. Their grammar is poor. Their system is absolutely cumbersome, riddled with holes and inconsistencies. Their Bible interpretations are erroneous. They will grab at anything in order to object to everything contradictory to their system. They are prideful. Like so many people in religion, and even in science, they are too steeped in their superstitions to relinquish them. Again, the “flat Earth” camp embraces a hopelessly confused system! The Bible critics are watching this all, and they are delighted.


VI.AMMUNITIONFORBIBLECRITICSTOUSE

A.The(Unbelieving)ScienceProfessorSpeaksMany years ago, I had an interesting encounter with one of my favorite science

professors at the University. In the past, with obvious sarcasm, the Doctor had complained, “If there is an intelligent Creator, then why does my back always hurt?” He chuckled. The dear Doctor had been exposed to creation science many years before I was even born. In fact, he told me that he personally knew Dr. Henry Morris (1918–2006), the famed “father of modern creation science.” (Dr. Morris actually taught at our University many decades ago.)

My professor’s wife and children were church members, professing “Christians.” He, however, was a Bible skeptic. In fact, he told me in a private discussion that he did not believe the Lord Jesus Christ literally resurrected. He argued, “It must have been some kind of a swooning, or fainting spell, since we scientists cannot explain resurrection” (his words, not mine). He never revealed to me whether he was an agnostic (did not know if God’s existence was proven or could ever be proven) or atheist (did not believe God existed at all). Nevertheless, I do know that he made it very clear that he was NOT a Bible believer.

When Isaiah 40:22 popped up in one of our discussions, that science professor laughed. He criticized Scripture for saying “circle” instead of “sphere.” “Of course, we all know that the scientific consensus is that Earth is a sphere and not a ‘circle’ like the Bible says.” Now, friends, bear in mind what I told you about him. The Doctor was not interested in defending the Bible. He wanted to make the Bible an object of ridicule, so he did with Isaiah 40:22 precisely what “Flat-Earthers” do with it! Most shocking, huh? By trying to make the Bible writers appear foolish, that professor showed his ignorance of the English language. “Circle,” as we already saw in Part IV, can be used in the sense of “sphere or orb.”

Strangely, the “Flat-Earthers” will say they are “defending” the Bible from “the

lies of science!” No, they are not. They are setting themselves up for failure in the argument, and they are preparing you, friend, for failure in the argument if you agree with their flawed premise, “Isaiah 40:22 says ‘circle’ not ‘sphere.’” Friend, when you say “Isaiah says ‘circle’ not ‘sphere’ Isaiah 40:22,” in a room full of Bible skeptics, you will discredit yourself. I promise you. You will sound like a total fool. You will make people hate the Bible beyond your wildest dreams. You will bring unspeakable shame to the name of Jesus Christ!

If Bible truth means nothing to you, my friend, then you go right on ahead and

argue “circle, not sphere” when commenting on Isaiah 40:22. You just remember that unbelieving science professor of mine—who used the same reasoning to mock Isaiah 40:22 and all of Scripture. When you start using the Bible critic’s complaints, no one will want to listen to you when you claim to be a “Bible believer.” No one will take you seriously. You will learn exactly why they think so poorly of Scripture and Christians.


Never, my friend, will you be able to say that you were not warned. This study was a gentle reminder for you to be careful in that regard. If you do not heed these warnings, that is your choice, and you proceed at your own peril.

B.TheCriticsSpeak(Again)Whenever people approach the Bible concerning any topic, they tend to complicate

it. Religious tradition has baffled and corrupted them. Unbelief (and/or lack of the indwelling Holy Spirit) makes the Bible impossible for them to grasp. Sadly, there are people speaking about the Bible who should not be talking at all. They should be studying instead! They could not teach the Bible’s truths if their lives depended on it! (Recall the “Flat-Earthers” we cited in this study.) For those who do read the Bible, they could exercise so much more caution before commenting on it and/or trying to teach it to others. In my 10-plus years of ministry, I have seen it time and time again. People were usually better off saying nothing about the Bible instead of recklessly remarking on its teachings.

Notice the following comments people have stated about Christians and Bible-

quoting in general:

• “Here come the closed minded Bible thumpers who are a

Documents

THE GEOID & THE BIBLE - WordPress.com · THE GEOID & THE BIBLE: Does Scripture teach a flat Earth or a spherical Earth? by Shawn Brasseaux Grace Bible Teacher Master of Science, Geology