Author Topic: % Confidence in Earth's Shape (Read 89679 times)

DigitalLogos · « **Reply #25 on:** August 03, 2022, 04:48:42 PM »

Quote from: Nadir on August 03, 2022, 04:37:43 PM

My apologies for interrupting the fascinating topic with this rhetorical question which demands a new topic (but I am sure it has been done to death over the years here on CI: Why on earth would you accept the falsehood that all of Scripture ... came from the Jєωs and that Jesus of Nazareth was a Jєω?

Jєω, as in Judean or of the tribe of Judah; not Jєω, as in тαℓмυdic or Khazar, as we see today. A blanket term.

Matthew · « **Reply #26 on:** August 03, 2022, 04:52:40 PM »

Quote from: DigitalLogos on August 03, 2022, 04:29:44 PM

I have Sugenis's book on FE, but have yet to read it since it is around 800 pages in length. I'm happy that someone has taken FE seriously in that regard and attempted to respond to the claims. I know after reading Protestant Edward Hendrie's book that he notes Sugenis' tends to be dismissive of arguments against refraction and the evidence offered by long-distance photography. So I'll have to dig into Sugenis' book to see why he was so dismissive.

I have to interject --
I haven't read this Sungenis "contra Flat Earth" book either, but I'll say this -- it doesn't look good if it needs to be 800 pages long.

I'm not saying everything is simple, or easy to explain.
But in my (short) life experience, truth isn't THAT complicated. Just look at the encyclicals and writings of Modernist popes and theologians, and then the writings of the Saints or popes who weren't flaming Modernists. St. Thomas was quite brilliant and hit on all the nuances of theological questions, but he was also succinct considering the subject matter. He got right to the point of each "question" in the Summa. Was each quaestio a 200 page dissertation, or was it relatively succinct? The answer is the latter.

Let's put it this way. You know the old adage, "The Left can't Meme!" It's true. It's because they are objectively insane, and don't have truth on their side. Their "memes" are notorious for being long-winded, a real word salad, as they spin their contradictions, nuances and psychobabble. The conservatives/believers in objective reality, on the other hand, can make a meme quite succinct sometimes with only pictures. Because truth is on their side, and it's quite self-evident.

So the fact that this book, supposedly contra Flat Earth, is 800 pages, is a bad sign. It's inaccessible to the majority of people, which makes it near useless.

bodeens · « **Reply #27 on:** August 03, 2022, 05:05:39 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on August 03, 2022, 04:52:40 PM

Let's put it this way. You know the old adage, "The Left can't Meme!" It's true. It's because they are objectively insane, and don't have truth on their side. Their "memes" are notorious for being long-winded, a real word salad, as they spin their contradictions, nuances and psychobabble. The conservatives/believers in objective reality, on the other hand, can make a meme quite succinct sometimes with only pictures. Because truth is on their side, and it's quite self-evident.

Too bad most right wing memes are made by Facebook boomers, they generally aren't funny unless parsed with irony

Tradman · « **Reply #28 on:** August 03, 2022, 05:09:11 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on August 03, 2022, 03:41:29 PM

True, although some Fathers did think it was a globe, and that their conception was not irreconcilable with Sacred Scripture. Nevertheless, I do believe that further study is warranted in terms of what they meant. It's easy to take a sentence out of context.

I think it was St. Hildegard who described the earth as a globe. Someone cited a passage. OK, fine. But then if you look later, she elaborates and what she actually meant was more along the lines of those pictures that DL has posted (along with others). She said nobody can live on the antipodes (underside of said globe) because that's where "the deep" is and also the entrance to Sheol.

Yea, it's kind of hard to decipher what some of the saints thought because of the way they write. St. Hildegard remains a little iffy on the subject but, we just don't have enough of her writings translated into English to know what she really thought except for the antipodes opinion. She definitely could have been describing the universe as a snow globe. Thomas Aquinas took a lot of time to consider the globe model. Probably because higher education institutes put a lot of pressure on the learned. Still, his treatise on the shape of earth was based on Aristotle and pagan Greeks and not on scripture. He went back and forth for pages and pages trying to reason it all out but never actually concluded either way. Maybe that's why the brilliant Thomas considered his writings as straw.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #29 on:** August 03, 2022, 05:20:39 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on August 03, 2022, 04:52:40 PM

I have to interject --
I haven't read this Sungenis "contra Flat Earth" book either, but I'll say this -- it doesn't look good if it needs to be 800 pages long.

He said it took him that much to "refute" FE because he admitted that FE had a lot of good arguments. So I hold this to be a testimony to the fact that FE cannot be dismissed lightly and has some real substance behind it. If it were merely a laughable kook theory, it certainly wouldn't require 800 pages to deal with.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: % Confidence in Earth's Shape (Read 89679 times)

DigitalLogos

Re: % Confidence in Earth's Shape

Matthew

Re: % Confidence in Earth's Shape

bodeens

Re: % Confidence in Earth's Shape

Tradman

Re: % Confidence in Earth's Shape

Ladislaus

Re: % Confidence in Earth's Shape