So, I took a minute to examine the alleged Santiago to Melbourne flight.  I say alleged because FEs have tried to book the flight but they get cancelled every time they've tried where they've either had their money refunded or were switched to a 1-stop flight days before the flight.

Let's assume that the Gleason Map is 100% accurate.  It's an Azimuthal projection of what they believe to be a globe, so based on that, the Southern Hemisphere is going to be somewhat elongated.  But assuming for now that Gleason is 100% accurate, running the geometry, the distance between the two would be roughly 14,000 miles on the Gleason's map.  I can show the math but it's pretty simple, since both Melbourne and Santiago are at both between 33 and 35 degrees south latitude, which would put each one around 8,500 miles from the north pole ... given the alleged distance of about 12,000 miles from pole to pole.  That would put it at 17,000 miles if one flew from Santiago to the North Pole and then from the North Pole to Melbourne.  But the route wouldn't go over the North Pole, but would instead cut across the side a bit.  On the Gleasons map, there's about 20 degrees cut off from the 180 degrees hemisphere dividing line, creating a triangle in relation to the North Pole, allowing the calculation on the Gleason's map of about 14,000 miles (vs. the 17,000).

As I said, the Gleason's map is a projection of an assumed globe, is probably closer to reality (for reasons I'll explain later) than other projections, but may be off.  To me, South America is tilted a bit too far to the East beneath North America.  If it were straightened out a bit, and Australia shifted a bit East, that would significantly cut down the mileage even from he 14,000 calculated there.

Here's Gleason's for visual reference ...


If South America were tilted and straightened a bit more under North America (instead of being "crooked" as depicted in Gleason's), and the size of the Pacific reduced a little bit (as it seems to be stretched out), the distance could easily be closer to 10,000 rather than 14,000 miles.

Standard Airbus planes have an advertised cruising speed of just under 700 MPH.  That would allow them to traverse the 10,000 - 11,000 miles in about 14 hours, which is the stated flight time.  Meanwhile, the distance between Santiago and Melbourne alleged on a globe is a little over 7,000 miles.  That would mean that the Airbus is travelling roughly at 500 MPH (vs. it having a cruising speed of nearly 700).  Not sure why they would travel nearly 200 MPH below the plane's advertised cruising speed when they could cut the 14-hour flight down to 10 by taking advantage of the plane's capabilities ... and that would be a huge selling point for the flight.

So, just the difference between the 500MPH and the 700MPH is nearly sufficient to account for the difference between 7,000 miles and, say, 11,000 miles (given a relatively small margin of error on the Gleason's map).  Not to mention that it's common for planes to take advantage of jet streams in order to give them up to an extra 100-200 MPH.  And, of course, the 700 max cruising speed is just what's "listed" by Airbus, and the plane can probably do more than that.  We had the Concorde jet in service for a while that could do double that, close to 1400MPH.

As has been pointed out, nearly all "Southern Hemisphere" to "Southern Hemisphere" flights make an inexplicable stop in the Northern Hemisphere on route to their destination, inexplicable if the earth is a globe.

But let's have another look at the Azimuthal Equidistant map.  Here's the thing about those.  As you get farther from the central point of the azimuthal projection, everything gets distended and warped, elongated.

So here's an Azimuthal projection map from the South "Pole".


You'll notice how things north of about the Equator are badly distorted to the point that they're almost unrecognizable and are far larger and wider than they appear on something like a standard Mercator map (the one we all know from school).

But now let's take a look at an Azimuthal projection from the North pole.



Hmmm.  Strange.  Everything apart from Antarctica is very recognizable.  You would expect the Southern half of Africa to be as fat/wide as the Northern, the Southern part of South America to be almost as fat/wide as the Northern, but both continents retain their familiar shape.

Ah, but you say, Africa and South America are much bigger than they should be?  Apart from the fact that their shapes should be distorted, are they really too big?  That perception is due to everyone being acquainted with Mercator.  Later, there was a projection called Gall-Peters developed that claimed that the Northern Hemisphere continents were way too big and the Southern way too small ... on the typical Mercator map, and so they developed a projection where they claim that the Southern Hemisphere continents have their true relative size.



In terms of size, this seems very close to the North Pole Azimuthal projection above.

So why is it that the South Pole Azimuthal distorts the Northern Hemisphere badly (to the point of making it unrecognizable) while the North Pole Azimuthal retains the shapes, the outlines, and even the relative sizes of the continents (when taking the Gall-Peters "correction" into account)?  North Pole Azimuthal should have the Southern parts of both Africa and South America getting wider and wider until the shapes of those continents would look almost like a square.

What this mean is that the North Pole Azimuthal projection is a close reflection of reality, that the Gleason's map is "closer" to actual reality.

In any case, there are dozens upon dozens of different map "projections" out there, and they vary wildly.  So the best we can say is that Gleason's or Azimuthal North Pole projections are "closer" to reality than the flat square maps.  But since they're projections off of an assumed globe, they're not going to be 100% accurate.  We don't actually know the true distance between Santiago and Melbourne.  But, as I pointed out, given the capabilities of those Airbus planes (even without modification) and some inaccuracy on Gleason's, it's entirely doable.

There's all kinds of funny-business going on with cartography.  Here's a presentation from Herve Riboni about how even at smaller scales, there's clear distortion on many maps.  Herve participated in competitions to sail around the world, and he did sail around the world, and is expert at navigation, maps, etc.  He's done a number of presentations on the various distortions being used to hide a Flat Earth and he's become a Flat Earther himself.  Here's one presentation about how maps are distorted even on smaller scales, much less for maps of the entire world, which are all distorted due to various "projections".

I don't even believe the eart is flat and I thought that Greg was way out of line to post that.  I noticed that one person in the thread called him out for being a coward for posting it to SD rather than Cathinfo.  His excuse was that he got banned from CI so he could not post it here.  But he made another account here after his ban, Tallin Trad, that he used for years.  Greg has no problem with ignoring his ban and posting here when he wants to.

He had the hypocrisy to claim that he was opposing Flat Earth because it makes trads look bad.  He should consider all the ways that he makes Trads look bad, instead of virtue signalling for his buddies on SD.

That's funny, I constantly find historical proof that Christendom knew the earth was flat.  From Enoch, to St. Augustine to St. Hildegard of Bingen, plus dozens of saints and Fathers of the Church, not to mention the digression on the subject by greats like Robert Bellarmine against heliocentrism 

Enoch was not accepted into the canon of Scripture. It is not relevant.  St. Augustine is considered by most scholars to have believed the earth is a globe, but there is some controversy.  For St. Hildegard and St. Robert, there is no controversy that I have heard of.  They believed the earth is a globe.  Why do you think they believed it was flat?  

Can you actually name a dozen Saints who believed the earth is flat and give quotes to back up your claim?  I would be very surprised, given how widespread belief in globe earth was in Catholic history.  

Can you actually name a dozen Saints who believed the earth is flat and give quotes to back up your claim?  I would be very surprised, given how widespread belief in globe earth was in Catholic history. 

Given Tradman's response to this, I take it the answer is no.

Catching up with what has already discussed here on CI at length, to include the saints who so eloquently expounded on the typology of Scriptural flat earth, might help you understand the argument and even provide the list of names you're looking for. After you study the flat earth pages and find the information you seek and become better informed, we can all carry on discussing the subject. 

I have been following discussions of Flat Earth on Cathinfo for many years, longer than this childboard has existed for the topic. I remember when it was created around six years ago. I have also read through the articles on the Flat Earth Trads website.  Nowhere in these sources has anyone produced quotes from dozens (or even one dozen) of Saints supporting the idea that the earth is flat. 

While I do not know enough about science to participate in that aspect of the discussion, I have a good understanding of Catholic history.  There have been virtually no Catholics, Saints or otherwise, who wrote in support of flat earth since St. Bede wrote that the earth is globe in 725.  This recent flat earth movement among Catholics is a novelty.

Here is a quote from St. Bede: ‘The reason why the same days are of unequal length is the roundness of the Earth, for not without reason is it called ‘‘the orb of the world’’ on the pages of Holy Scripture and of ordinary literature. It is, in fact, a sphere set in the middle of the whole universe. It is not merely circular like a shield [or] spread out like a wheel, but resembles more a ball, being equally round in all directions ...’ (Bede, The Reckoning of Time, translated by Faith Wallis (Liverpool University Press, 1999), p. 91).

The last time I checked the Flat Earth Trads site, they could only produce a handful of quotes from the Church Fathers in support of flat earth.  St. John Damascene (himself a Church Father) summarized the views of the Fathers by saying that they disagreed on the shape of the earth but it was not a question of spiritual significance.

After the Patristic period there was over a thousand years of virtual unanimity among Catholics that the earth is a globe, although this has consistently been seen as a matter of science and not faith.  Since it is a matter of science, we are free to discuss whether science supports flat earth.  We are not free to make up things about the history of Christendom that never happened.

Not a good look Tradman. You expected to get away with claiming dozens of saints support FE without providing proof?

I'd love to see the quotes, I'm sure you have some from the Fathers, but I really doubt there is anything from later saints besides some visionaries and mystics.

Not a good look Tradman. You expected to get away with claiming dozens of saints support FE without providing proof?

I'd love to see the quotes, I'm sure you have some from the Fathers, but I really doubt there is anything from later saints besides some visionaries and mystics.

Just for you Marulus Fidelis, in case you haven't read the flat earth stuff here on CI

A fraction of quotes from saints and popes, from various sources on all aspects of the subject:

Theophilus of Antioch in the second century, Clement of Alexandria in the third, based on the seventh verse of the first chapter of Genesis, both taught that spread over the earth was a solid vault, "a firmament," and they added the passage from Isaiah in which it is declared that the heavens are stretched out "like a curtain," and again "like a tent to dwell in." From Moses, Enoch, Clement and Theophilus and many others, Cosmas also reiterates, that earth is like a house: the earth is its ground floor, the firmament its ceiling, under which the Almighty hangs out the sun to rule the day, and the moon and stars to rule the night. This ceiling is also the floor of the apartment above, and in this is a cistern, shaped, as one of the authorities says, "like a bathing-tank," and containing "the waters which are above the firmament."

Besides those above, there are Methodius, Severian, bishop of Gabbala, St. John Chrysostom, Eusebius, see the Proep. Ev., xv, 61. St. Basil, see the Hexaemeron, Hom. ix. For Lactantius, see his Inst. Div., lib. iii, cap.

3; also citations in Whewell , Hist. Induct. Sciences, London, 1857, vol.

i, p. 194, St. Martin, Histoire de la Geographie, pp. 216, 217.

St. Basil: "In the midst of the covering and veil, where the priests were allowed to enter, was situated the altar of incense, the symbol of the earth placed in the middle of this universe; and from it came the fumes of incense." (The Mystic Meaning of the Tabernacle, Bk V, Ch VI; Clement of Rome, Stromata, Bk V)

Cosmas of Indiocopleustes expands on this subject of the tabernacle being a form of the earth (according to Moses) and the firmament is the 'veil'. Cosmas' book Christian Topography describes earth like a two story house with heaven above and the flat earth/hell below.



"1605-1621 - Reign of Pope Paul V, who issued a 1616 decree condemning Copernicanism.
1623-1644 - Reign of Urban VIII, who issued a 2nd decree [1633] condemning Copernicanism.
1655-1657 - Reign of Pope Alexander VII, who issued a Bull [1644] reinforcing that Copernicanism was heretical...." (p.1 of O’Hanlon’s 4 page intro.)


(Paul VI's) Notification of 14 June 1966 does not mention the words "abrogate" or "abolish" in relation to the Index of Forbidden Books. Rather, it states that the Index retains "its moral force" (suum vigorem moralem)

The Fathers were unanimous that earth is at the center of creation. The early Church Fathers such as Augustine and Origen argued against the heliocentrism of the pagan Greeks well before Copernicus' time.  Wiki (2007)  


From The Dolorous Passion of Anne Catherine Emmerich: 

"I learned also that the prophet having related what had happened to him, the spot received the name of Calvary. Finally, I saw that the Cross of Jesus was placed vertically over the skull of Adam. I was informed that this spot was the exact centre of the earth; and at the same time I was shown the numbers and measures proper to every country, but I have forgotten them, individually as well as in general. Yet I have seen this centre from above, and as it were from a bird's-eye view. In that way a person sees far more clearly than on a map all the different countries, mountains, deserts, seas, rivers, towns, and even the smallest places, whether distant or near at hand."    http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/pjc/pjc68.htm     

*St. Jerome, the greatest authority of the early Church upon the Bible, declared, on the strength of this utterance of the prophet, that Jerusalem could be nowhere but at the earth's center; in the ninth century Archbishop Rabanus Maurus reiterated the same argument; in the eleventh century Hugh of St. Victor gave to the doctrine another scriptural demonstration; and Pope Urban, in his great sermon at Clermont urging the Franks to the crusade, declared, "Jerusalem is the middle point of the earth"

•The great authority of Augustine, and the cogency of his scriptural argument, held the Church firmly against the doctrine of the antipodes; all schools of interpretation were now agreed--the followers of the allegorical tendencies of Alexandria, the strictly literals exegetes of Syria, the more eclectic theologians of the West. For over a thousand years it was held in the Church, "always, everywhere, and by all," that there could not be human beings on the opposite sides of the earth, even if the earth had opposite sides; and, when attacked by gainsayers the great mass of true believers, from the fourth century to the fifteenth, simply used that opiate which had so soothing an effect on John Henry Newman in the nineteenth century--securus judicat orbis terrarum. 

•pg 104 War Between Science and Theology…White

Pope Urban VIII said the false Pythagorean doctrine (heliocentrism) was "the most perverse subject matter that one could ever handle"
Because it involved pedophilia, orgies, sodomy, and ritual child sacrifice.
The cult of Pythagoras was the continuation of the demonic mystery religions he learned in Egypt: the Kabbalah. 

The following is from Wiki lists flat earth Fathers who agreed with Cosmas that earth is shaped like the OT Tabernacle, the Ark, and the Temple:
*Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Methodius, Ephrem Syrus, Gregory of Nyssa, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Cyril of Alexandria, Theodoret of Cyrus, and Procopius of Gaza all offered an intriguing exegesis of the Tabernacle.  (the same as Cosmas' exegesis on the flat earth in his book Christian Topography)

Wiki continues:
Examining the Apostolic Constitutions, Book VII, Chapters 33-37, and Book Viii, Chapter 12, we find its further influence on Constantine's (and Cosmas') method.  The verses quoted in both the Apostolic Constitutions and Christian Topography to describe the structure of the universe are taken from the books of Psalms, Isaiah, and Job rather than from the account of Creation in Genesis giving them a homiletic application to articulate and illustrate a specific physical shape of the cosmos.  

More from Wiki
The created universe is portrayed in both words and pictures as a vaulted rectangle.  The Tabernacle, the Temple and the Ark were all depicted in the same way, since they were made "according to the pattern shown to thee in the mount" EX 25:40

The sanctuary and its vessels are symbolic representations of the Creation. 

The Ark represents the earth and the part of the "Holy" in the Tabernacle, while the upper, vaulted, section represents both heaven and the most sacred area, the "Holy of Holies".  With the angels spreading their wings to cover the Ark.    

The interpretation of scripture by the Church fathers is asserted by the geocentrists to be unanimously in favor of a geocentrist position^{[citation needed]}. The early Church Fathers such as Augustine and Origen argued against the heliocentrism of the pagan Greeks well before Copernicus' time. Modern geocentrists often quote these works which seem to admonish that scriptural references about geocentrism not be interpreted as allegorical or phenomenological since such an interpretation could lead to the appearance that the Holy Spirit (the inspirer of the Scriptures) might be lying.


St. John Chrysostom: For He not only made it, but provided also that when it was made, it should carry on its operations; not permitting it to be all immoveable, nor commanding it to be all in a state of motion. The heaven, for instance, hath remained immoveable, according as the prophet says, "He placed the heaven as a vault, and stretched it out as a tent over the earth." But, on the other hand, the sun with the rest of the stars, runs on his course through every day. And again, the earth is fixed, but the waters are continually in motion; and not the waters only, but the clouds, and the frequent and successive showers, which return at their proper season. (Homilies to Antioch, Homily XII)


•St. John Chrysostom (considered a “doctor of the Church”, bishop of Antioch, archbishop of Constantinople in 398) –opposed the earth’s sphericity based on Scripture.  Regularly refers to the Earth having four corners as the Bible does in his sermons.  For example, the following quotations come from Homilies Against the Jews: “every corner of the earth”, “her action is known in every corner of the earth”, “every corner of the earth seen by the sun” [27]  Exerted his influence against a spherical earth. [2]  He is quoted by Kosmas (Cosmas) as stating “Where are those who say that the heaven is in motion?  Where are those who think it is spherical?  For both these opinions are here swept away.”(in commenting on Hebrews 8:1.)Knew that truly ending the ‘heretical’ study of the Greeks meant wiping out Greek writings –  happily declared, “Every trace of the old philosophy and literature of the ancient world has vanished from the face of the earth.”

•In his“Homily 2, Trinity, Sophists, Philosophers”, Para 5, he takes pleasure in the fact that the Church is successfully silencing the Greeks – “And as for the writings of the Greeks, (who promoted the spherical earth model) they are all put out and vanished, but this man’s shine brighter day by day.  …since then the (doctrines) of Pythagoras and of Plato, which seemed before to prevail, have ceased to be spoken of, and most men do not know them even by name.”   [77], [78]  He continues to claim, “Pythagoras… practiced there ten thousand kinds of sorcery…. but by his magic tricks he deceived the foolish.  And neglecting to teach men anything useful.”  He then calls Pythagoras a “barbarian”!

St. Chrysostom was “definitely a strong fundamentalist if not an absolute Biblical literalist and he believed the earth was flat.  Like Tertullian, he was skeptical of any ‘pagan’ knowledge which seemed to cast doubt on any aspect of the Bible.


•"Greek gýros turns up in its transliterated form gyrus--present in Roman literature as early as Lucretius (mid-first century BC)--in the Latin versions of the Bible as well.27 St. Jerome (c. 340-420), the early Latin Church's master linguist and Bible translator, began his work on the Old Testament by creating a standard version from the several unreliable Old Latin recensions then in existence, using as a valuable aid Origen's fair copy of the Hexapla which he consulted in the library at Caesarea around 386 AD.28 The Old Latin recensions were based on the LXX and commonly rendered this same portion of Isa. 40:22a as "qui tenet gyrum terrae."29 Later, when he prepared a new version from the Hebrew that would become part of the Vulgate, he kept the Old Latin reading, changing only the verb tenet, "dwells," to sedet, "sits."30 And in his Commentary on Isaiah, Jerome, who is regarded by critics today as a competent and careful scholar,31 specifically rejected the notion that in this verse the prophet is referring to a spherical earth." 32

Another pope.
Pope St. Boniface accused Vergilius of teaching a doctrine in regard to the rotundity of the earth, which was "contrary to the Scriptures". Pope Zachary's decision in this case was that "if it be proved that he held the said doctrine, a council be held, and Vergilius expelled from the Church and deprived of his priestly dignity" (Jaffe, "Biblioth. rerum germ.", III, 191

Virgil of course, recanted and became a bishop of the Church. 




From the 6th century Cosmas of Indiocopleustes, Catholic monk:

The Christian Topography is a production of which It may be truly said τὸ πάρεργου κρει̃ττου του̃ ἔργου. It is essentially controversial, its professed design being to refute, from Scripture and common sense, the impious Pagan cosmography, according to which the earth is a sphere; and the centre around which the heaven, which is also a sphere, revolves with all its luminaries.

Cosmas states and re-states with the most wearisome pertinacity, and holding them to be most vital verities, sanctioned alike by common sense and the paramount authority of divine Scripture, denounces again and again "those reprobate Christians who, instead of accepting them, prefer, through their perverse folly or downright wickedness, to adopt the miserable Pagan belief |xx that earth and heaven are spherical, and that there are Antipodes on whom the rain must fall up.


•Moses, likewise, in describing the table in the Tabernacle, which is an image of the earth, ordered its length to be of two cubits, and its breadth of one cubit. So then in the same way as Isaiah spoke, so do we also speak of the figure of the first heaven made on the first day, made along with the earth, and comprising along with the earth the universe, and say that its figure is vaultlike… and God [130] having then stretched it out extended it throughout the whole space in the direction of its breadth, like an intermediate roof, and bound together the firmament with the highest heaven, separating and disparting the remainder of the waters, leaving some above the firmament, and others on the earth below the firmament, as the divine Moses explains to us, and so makes the one area or house two houses----an upper and a lower story.

And just as it is said in Job that the heaven has been welded to the earth, so do we again also say the same. Having learned, moreover, from Moses that the earth has been extended in length more than in breadth, we again admit this, knowing that the scriptures, which are truly divine, ought to be believed. But further, when God had produced the waters and angels and other things simultaneously with the earth and the highest heaven itself, he on the second day exposed to their vision this second heaven visible to our eyes, which, as if putting to use the creations of his own hands, he formed from the waters as his material. In appearance it is like the highest heaven, but not in figure, and it lies midway between that heaven and the earth; 



•Be this then the book which we have entitled Christian Topography, embracing the whole world and deriving its proofs from the truly divine scriptures, regarding which a Christian is not at liberty to doubt.

•[128] Since then the heaven and the earth comprise the universe, we assert that the earth has been founded on its own stability by the Creator, according once more to the divine scripture, and that it does not rest upon any body; for in the Book of Job it is written: He hangeth the earth upon nothing; and again (xxxviii, 4, 5, 6): Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? etc. And in like manner in David (Psalm cii, 5) it is said: He who laid the foundations of the earth upon its own stability. By the power, therefore, of the Deity who created the universe, we say that it was founded and is supported by him. Upholding all things, as the Apostle saith, by the word of his power.


• For, saith the Prophet Isaiah (xlix, 22): He who established heaven as a vault. With regard, moreover, to the glueing together of the heaven and the earth, we find this written in Job: He has inclined heaven to earth, and it has been poured out as the dust of the earth. I have welded it as a square block of stone.16 Do not the expressions about inclining it to the earth and welding it thereto clearly show that the heaven standing as a vault has its extremities bound together with the extremities of the earth? The fact of its inclination to the earth, and its being welded with it, makes it totally inconceivable that it is a sphere.17 

Then when he had come down from the Mountain he was ordered by God to make the Tabernacle, which was a representation of what he had seen in the Mountain, namely an impress ¹⁷ of the whole world. For see, said He, that thou make all things according to the pattern shown thee in the Mount.¹⁸ Now the blessed Apostle Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews has declared that the first Tabernacle was a pattern of this world, for he says: For the first had also ordinances of divine service and a worldly sanctuary; for there was a tabernacle made; the first wherein was the candlestick, and the table and the shew-bread, which is called the Sanctuary.¹⁹ In calling it worldly [197] he indicated that it was, so to speak, a pattern of the world, wherein was also the candlestick, by this meaning the luminaries of heaven, and the table, that is, the earth, and the shew-bread, by this meaning the fruits which it |146 produces annually: which, he says, is called the Sanctuary, by this meaning the first Tabernacle. Afterwards he speaks of the second in these terms: We have such an high priest who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man;²⁰ and again: But Christ being come a high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us;²¹ and again: for Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us.²² In this last passage he says that heaven is the true tabernacle, while the things which were prepared by Moses are antitypes. He therefore calls the things of Moses things made by hands, but the real things not made with hands. Having then been commanded to make the Tabernacle he made it according to the pattern which had been shown to him, and also its appurtenances according to their pattern, the Ark of testimony, and the Mercy-seat above, and the two Cherubim stretching out their wings, and overshadowing the Mercy-seat above, and in like manner the veil and the table and the candlestick, and the hangings of the Tabernacle (namely the first coverings) and curtains made of goats' hair (that is stypta ²³) and these again were the second coverings of the Tabernacle. In like manner also the third coverings made of skins dyed red and sky-blue, that is, of what is |147 called leather, and all things cunningly worked and wonderful. We have depicted the Tabernacle thus.
Here Moses, after he had been privileged to witness the terrible scenes on the Mount, is commanded by God to make the Tabernacle according to the pattern which he had seen in the Mount, this being a pattern of the whole world. For see, saith He, that |150 thou make all things according to the pattern which was shown thee in the Mount.³² Since therefore it had been shown him how God made the heaven and the earth, and how on the second day he made the firmament in the middle between them, and thus made the one place into two places, so he, in like manner in accordance with the pattern which he had seen, made the Tabernacle and placed the veil in the middle, and by this division made the one Tabernacle into two, an inner and an outer. The Apostle therefore declared the outer to be a pattern of this world, saying thus:For the first Tabernacle had ordinances of divine service and a worldly sanctuary. For there was a Tabernacle prepared, the first, wherein were the candlestick and the table and the shew-bread [200] which is called the Holy place,³³ as if he said, it exhibits a pattern of the world, in which are the earth, and the monthly fruits and the luminaries (of heaven). And then when explaining the second Tabernacle he speaks thus: But Christ having come a high priest of the good things to come, through the greater and more perfect Tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation, nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered in once for all into the Holy place having obtained eternal redemption;³⁴ as if he said: Just as the high priest once a year enters into the inner Tabernacle through the blood of goats and calves, making propitiation for the people, so also Christ entered into the Tabernacle not made with hands, that is, into heaven, having once for all procured eternal redemption. And again: For Christ is not entered into the Holy place made with hands which is an image of the true, but into heaven itself; and again he says: For the law had a shadow of good things to come;³⁵ for, as in an outline, by the inner Tabernacle he has signified the ascension of Christ after the flesh, and the entrance into it of just men. Wherefore he again admonishes us in these words: Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the Holy place by the blood of Jesus, by the way which he dedicated for us, a new and living way through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; and having a great high-priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart;³⁶ and again in declaring that Christ is in heaven he says: Whom God set forth to be a propitiation by his blood;³⁷ since the |151 Propitiatory (Mercy-seat) was placed within the second Tabernacle. And many other such references are contained in the Epistles of the Apostle, and throughout divine scripture.

(Cosmas' works) flourished at the time when Christianity perhaps most entirely and exclusively controlled a major area of the civilized world; and he seems conscious, not of a feeble and barbarized mind, but rather of having all knowledge for his province. He was not without profane science, but he now saw it (and saw through it) in the light of theology, the crown of sciences. REFERENCES:*Beazley, C., The Dawn of Modem Geography, volume I, pp. 273-303.*Brown, L.A., The Story of Maps, pp. 91-102.*Harley, J.B., The History of Cartography, Volume One, pp. 261-63, 319, 348, Figures 15.1, 15.2.*McCrindle, J.W., The Christian Topography of Cosmas, an Egyptian monk, Hakluyt Society, Series I, vol . 98, 1897.