I thought I was over the debate, but, well, here I am again. I'll just share these two once more to get the point across that Scripture does not at all talk of the earth as NASA and the Masons say it is.

The Earth is certainly a globe. A snow-globe, in a sense. We are to take the literal word of Scripture before moving to the other senses, and well, a lot of FE-advocates are pushing back and showing that the literal words are true.

Are there any good responses to these photos? The first one I always found the ascend and descend bit confusing on a globe earth, same with Jesus appearing visible to all physically in the sky made no sense on a globe earth.

I don't know about you, but I don't think I could see more than just a few kingdoms from a mountain, let alone all their glory, even on a flat Earth. Is it possible that some sort of magical power was exercised by the devil to not only transport the mind or enhance the eyes to see these things, but also to demonstrate that it would appear he has power such that he could give those kingdoms to Jesus? Couldn't God allow such an event to take place? The devil cannot tempt unless allowed to do so by God.

I would prefer to see the explanations put forth by the various doctors and saints throughout church history, because who are we to pick and choose what is and is not literal in scripture? It is my understanding that metaphors and symbolism are used in some places, and literal meaning in others. Then there is the complication of translation into our own language without losing the meaning as intended when it was written.


As for the tower of Babel, I don't think A or B makes any more sense. My understanding of it was that the building of the tower was all for human pride, not the honor of God, and a huge waste of effort that could be better spent on other things. If allowed to continue, they likely would have had issues with the tower sinking under its own weight, or suffocating at high altitudes, or does the air not get thin at high altitudes on a flat Earth? I would think the edge of where the breathable air extends to could, in either model of the Earth, be considered Heaven above that point.

The bottomless pit: can you say there is a bottom to a sphere? A center, yes, but a bottom? Could bottomless be just an expression? Is it a region in a spiritual existence, or physically under the Earth, which would be a huge place on the globe Earth model. Do demons need a physical hole in the ground to travel through?

The flood:
Do people ever say the clouds are in heaven? Gen. 1:8  "God called the firmament heaven" Could it be that the waters above are the clouds, and below are the oceans? I admit that the way it is written makes it difficult to tell where the water above is, and how much there is, unless you play it safe and say the waters above are above even the stars. The globe model can be said to be deep, but the water would not extend anywhere near the center.

Meteors and comets could look like stars falling to earth. Who could tell the difference? They look like small specs of light until they get larger and fall towards the ground. Without a powerful telescope, who can know what a star really looks like to be able to imagine what a falling star would really look like. Modern affordable optics show us that planets and their rings and moons do exist. I don't think the flat Earth model of the starts and universe does the greatness of God any Justice. He put such a wide variety of beautiful life even on the bottom of the ocean, why not an uncountable number of different galaxies extending out in every direction as far as the greatest of modern technology can see?

Perhaps all souls will be gathered together when Jesus comes again, or by some miracle all will be able to see him. I'm sure the whole world didn't see him ascend. But to those who saw him ascend, he would have been moving in their relative up direction according to their location on a globe earth. It should not be a difficult concept to grasp. That's the neat thing about spheres; their universal symmetry makes the whole surface its face, with any direction away being up, and any direction toward being down. Of course, no matter what shape is being talked about, up and down and any direction need to be defined first relative to a point of view.