The Cosmology of the Old Testament
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 жов 2024
- When we see the descriptions of a flat earth and a solid sky in the Bible, we say they are poetic descriptions or reveal divinely communicated science. Both options are incorrect. The biblical authors believed in a flat earth and a solid sky, as did the other pagan peoples. Their objective was not to communicate science, but a theological message. Check this out!
- Розваги
"For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace; the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands." Isaiah 55:12
I rather think the ancient Hebrews did use metaphor, or are we supposed to believe that they really thought trees clapped their hands and that the hills, like the Welsh, were in the habit of forming choirs.
I don't think he's denying that metaphor was very often employed. However, the trees were made to glorify God and their tossings in the wind clap their leaves. I've heard it before. It's beautiful. Don't really have an answer for the mountains.
The Bible tells me one thing, the Freemasons try to tell me another. Guess who's side I'm on🙈🙉🙊
Hi Danny. I was used by freemasons in ritual abuse. It runs deep in our family line. God is healing me. For His glory and to expand His kingdom and for the redemption of my family.. I'm thankful you are on YHWH's side!
The reality is the Bible is a geocentric FE book from cover to cover. In fact there is no heliocentric references anywhere in the Bible mainly because the theories of heliocentrism were still being debated amongst the Greeks and weren't fully accepted until about 500 year ago.
The Bible also does not mention planets, nebulas, black holes, or galaxies at all, which seems like a huge oversight for the Creators of the universe to just forget to mention talking 99.99% of the known universe.
The main issue that the shape of the Earth address is signifcance. If we are in an enclosed world, we are significant and created by someone for a purpose, if we randomly spawned on a little blue speck floating through space with trillion of other planets and stars and billions of galaxies, ...we are very much insignificant.
The theory of evolution and the big bang require long time periods of things to evolve and change and therefore cannot be separated from the long, random, and chaotic environment of heliocentrism. Without heliocentrism to explain the backdrop of evolution, it becomes instantly irrelevant. It like a boat without the ocean to sail on.
The Bible however does not have this problem. It is a supernatural origin from the start and does not require long time periods of chaotic randomness to explain this away.
Even if you don't believe in the Bible, the rabbit whole only goes even deeper with the modern deceptions of Scientism influence on N@$A, the Moon L@ndings, ISS bloopers, N@z1 project paper clip etc.
NASA isn't lying, you're just stupid. Watch the "Flatlined" documentary. It rips your pizza planet worldview to shreds ten thousand times over.
Flat earth? Really? I think you are reading back into the Bible modern conceptions of ancient views. Cf Isaiah 40:22: It is he [i.e. God] who sits above the circle of the earth. The word could be vault, rather than circle, suggesting volume. Hardly a flat earth.
@@dagwould 'circle' in Isa.40:22 does not mean 'sphere' or 'ball'... see: Isa_22:18 'He will surely violently turn and toss thee like a BALL into a large country: there shalt thou die, and there the chariots of thy glory shall be the shame of thy lord's house.'... that is the word for 'Sphere', didn't you know that a circle is not a sphere?
This comment section is wild 😂
That's what I came for🍿🤣
I'm always amazed these plain text fundamentalist Christians still exist.
@@keepclimbing2015 plain text fundamentalists? Lol so you disregard the scriptures if NASA shows you pictures? That sounds like a failed test of faith to me....
HeiserBros where y’all at
That old canard of the Bible not being about 'science' but about 'theology' misses the point of the Bible! Modern science is a modern invention that emerges from a particular theological and philosophical milieu--one influenced by the direct reading of Genesis 1, as it happens. Rather, the Bible presents an observer oriented realist view of a continuous ontology from the word of God. That is, God active in and doing the creation is part of the same reality as Adam naming the particular animals and the Israelites being able to craft significant portable and fixed structures. The physical markers we are given work in this observer oriented sense but are readable in terms of contemporary understandings. For instance 'light' is clearly able to encompass the entire electro-magnetic spectrum, and possibly the current concept of the strong and weak forces, and perhaps gravity, although that could well be inferred in subsequent moves. Thus the first word of creation is to the energy field that underlies all matter.
The point of Genesis 1 is not the retro-fitted anachronistic Heiserian cosmological structure, nor its largely nonsensical pagan garb, replete with the irrational causality that Genesis 1 eschews, but to provide the framework of our understanding of us, God and the creation, This is done in the concrete realist terms of a continuous ontology between God's word's effect in the material cosmos, our experience of life in that cosmos and the history that we play out within it: the history that God concretely participates in as founder and actor: thus the days show him active and present in the historical world. Near and not remote, personal and neither an organismic universe, nor an impersonal grounding and for fellowship, not indifference.
It has nothing to do with 'science' and is indifferent to it per se. It has lots to do with a fulsome, if abbreviated framing of realty upon which ultimately led to the close observation that we call modern science. This it does through historical/existential relationships in concrete realist terms distinct from pagan idealism, or organismic fantasies. It is the setting of Yahweh real in history with his people who people his creation.
From another comment.
Is the Raqia necessarily solid?
Here are some reasons why not:
1. The raqia is equated with the heavens in Genesis 1:8. The heavens (shamayim) refer to the regions where birds are in and where walls of cities touch. Therefore, the shamayim (and hence, raqia) is not solid.
2. In Genesis 1:20, birds are said to fly ‘al pane’ (literally “on the face of”) the raqia. This term is used a number of times in the Old Testament and seems to imply contact with some sort of boundary every time the term is used (whether vertical or horizontal). Since the birds do not touch the solid sky, the raqia here means something else.
3. It is believed by scholars that the tabernacle (later the temple) is meant to represent the cosmos. Therefore, Hulisani Ramantswana writes:
The Tabernacle was structured along graded holiness: Most Holy Place - Holy Place -Court. The Most Holy Place represented the invisible heavenly reality - the throne room of Yahweh (Pss 103:19; 123:1; Is 63:15; 66:1; cf. Is 14:13). The Holy Place represented the land - the locus of human habitation and land creatures. The Table of Presence on which was placed twelve loaves of show bread (Lv 24:5-6) represented the Lord‘s provision for his people Israel - the twelve tribes. The lampstand is often associated with the seven major lights: five planets, sun and moon (Walton 2001:148;Beale 2004:34-35; Poythres 1991:18-19). For others, the lampstand represented the tree of life, which symbolised God‘s provision (Sarna 1991:162-65; Stuart 2008:580). According to Meyers (2005:232), the lampstand - considering the iconographic context of the Mediterranean in the Late Bronze and Iron Ages - represented― the divine power that provides fertility of plant life. The Court where the wash-basin was set up represented the sea (Ex 30:18 - 20; 35:11-18; cf. 1 Ki 7:2 -26). Bloch-Smith (1994:20) notes that the bronze sea in Solomon‘s temple court was so huge that―no practical application is offered for the sea during the time of Solomon which is indicative of its symbolic value as representing the―cosmic waters or the waters of life. The wash-basin in the Tabernacle court and later the bronze sea in the temple court are better viewed as representing the third part of the cosmos - the sea. The pragmatic function of the wash-basin for the washing by priests should not detractfrom the significance of where it is located, the court, which within the graded holiness is the least holy space of the Tabernacle.
What divided the Most holy place from the Holy place was a veil, said to separate (using the same word found in Genesis 1 regarding the function of the raqia). This lines up with the raqia being the heavens that separate God from man in total and not in part. So, the raqia here is not solid.
4. Ezekiel 1 portrays the cosmos in the form of a chariot. Critically, it provides a distinction between the raqia which looks like ice (that is, white) and the throne looking like lapis lazuli ,which is blue and above the raqia (see Exodus 24:10) thus making a distinction between the blue sky and the raqia and placing the raqia beneath the blue sky.
5. Hebrews did not think about the world in a material sense like we do. They thought about the world in terms of what they did. Therefore, the idea that the word raqia refers to something necessarily solid is a non-starter.
6. There is no word in Ancient Hebrew that specifically refers to ‘hardness’. All words that could refer to hardness (e.g. chazaq, amats) are better understood with terms like ‘strong’ ‘powerful’ and ‘mighty’ since they can refer to wind, sound of a trumpet etc.
7. The word raqia itself is used in Psalm 150 to refer to power and in the Dead Sea Scrolls to refer to light. Neither of these things are solid and so the word itself does not necessarily refer to something solid.
8. The word raqia was translated into Greek as stereoma. This word need not refer to something solid (e.g. Col 2:5). It is used of part of an army in 1 Maccabees (all of an army is solid) and a ratification in Esther 9:29. Its verbal and adjective forms are used of famine, wounds, thunder and something smoke does. The Church father Basil rejects the interpretation that the stereoma is solid and instead understands it in terms of strength. The word was then translated into latin as ‘firmamentum’, a word that was previously used in rhetoric and has the meaning of support (in the political sense as well, see Tacitus). One other pre-Copernican translation is expansium, with no connotations of solidity.
9. In Bereshit Rabbah, one interpretation of “Let there be a firmament” is let the firmament gleam, not something associated with solidity, but associated with power.
10. In the Aramaic Targum to Song of Songs, Moses is said to be in the raqia to receive the 10 commandments. In Exodus 24, this refers to a cloud. Further evidence that clouds can be raqia is found in Deuteronomy, where the Hebrew has shachaq (a word normally translated cloud), the Greek has stereoma, commonly translated firmament.
11. Some medieval rabbis (Such as Ibn Ezra and Radak) believed the firmament (of Genesis 16) to be the air. Thus, the raqia here is not solid.
The word raqia literally means something solid. It's where we get the word rock from. The birds fly across the firmament, not in the firmament. It's a different word being used than when the stars are said to be in the firmament. Also, it has to be something solid in order to divide the waters above from the waters below and in order for God to walk on it and sit on it.
Thanks for the well researched counter points. Interesting stuff.
@@ABC123jd
Couple things
“The word raqia literally means something solid. It's where we get the word rock from.”
No, it is not. We get the word rock from Latin.
“The birds fly across the firmament, not in the firmament.”
The birds fly on the face of the firmament. The expression, “on the face of” in Hebrew (al pane) is used to indicate something is at the outward part of something (ie at an extremity, or more specifically, a surface of the thing in question). So we read:
Genesis 1:29
And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
Or Genesis 6:1
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
Or Exodus 16:14
And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground.
Or Isaiah 19:8
The fishers also shall mourn, and all they that cast angle into the brooks shall lament, and they that spread nets upon the waters shall languish.
The “upon” in Isaiah 19:8 is literally “on the face of.”
“It's a different word being used than when the stars are said to be in the firmament. “
Reference?
“Also, it has to be something solid in order to divide the waters above from the waters below”
This one is actually interesting. The so called “waters above the firmament” might actually be beside the firmament. The expression in Hebrew is meal le-raqia. The same grammatical expression is used in 1 Samuel 17:39 to refer to a sword that was girded to David’s armor. The Hebrew expression here is meal le-maddaw.
1 Samuel 17:39
And David girded his sword upon his armour, and he assayed to go; for he had not proved it. And David said unto Saul, I cannot go with these; for I have not proved them. And David put them off him.
Clearly, it is not above the armor but beside it!
It is also used in 2 Chronicles 26:19. Here, the KJV translates the expression “meal le-mizbah” as “from beside the altar.”
Then Uzziah was wroth, and had a censer in his hand to burn incense: and while he was wroth with the priests, the leprosy even rose up in his forehead before the priests in the house of the LORD, from beside the incense altar.
Another instance of this usage may be found in Malachi 1:5. Thus, the waters are actually beside the firmament rather than being above it.
“and in order for God to walk on it and sit on it.”
Finally, why restrict God in such a manner? Is it even said that God walks on the raqia?
@@quantumweirdness1710
"Rāqīaʿ means that which is firmly hammered, stamped (a word of the same root in Phoenecian means "tin dish"!). The meaning of the verb rqʿ concerns the hammering of the vault of heaven into firmness (Isa. 42.5; Ps.136.6). The Vulgate translates rāqīaʿ with firmamentum, and that remains the best rendering."
- Gerhard von Rad
Al can be translated as upon, across, toward, beside, etc. Just do a word search. The birds can be said to be on the outward part of the firmament if they are in fact flying below and across it. But not if they are flying inside of it. Bi is the word used in verse 14 to say that the lights are in the firmament. If the author wanted to say the birds are in the firmament in the same way, then he would've used that word too. But that wouldn't even make any sense if the lights are in outer space and the birds are in the atmosphere. Which one is the firmament and how is it firm?
How is the water beside the firmament in your view if the firmament is the atmosphere? All of the water would be below it. There are two different Hebrew words for above and below the firmament, so they can't both just mean the same thing. It also says that the firmament separates the waters, which indicates that it's something solid that can separate water. It also makes a lot more sense when we see later during the flood water came down when the windows of the firmament were opened.
Yes, it is said. He walks on it in Job 22:14 and he sits on it in Isaiah 40:22, and we also get references to God looking down from heaven like in Psalm 14:2. But none of that would make any sense if it's not a solid structure.
@bettyblowtorthing3950
"God is described as walking on it in the book of Job. Windows open and close in it"
It says that God walks on the circuit of heaven. Given that the parallel is "Thick clouds cover him that he does not see," It may not be referring to the sky at all, but rather some clouds (or a cloud). God is also said to ride on clouds.
"Windows open and close in it to release and restrain water during the Genesis flood."
The word for windows (arubbot) is almost never used for actual windows (except probably in Eccl 12:3). Given its corresponding verb meaning of "to lie in wait," often with the sense of restraining or impairing (as in an ambush), the best way to understand what this word means is "That which has been laid up to wait," primarily with the sense described above. Hence, the Greek and Latin translations referring to a "sluice gate," a gate that restrains water, but could also let it pass. This would then naturally refer to the clouds.
"The cast metal laver was solid,"
Why is this relevant?
"and the sky is described as hard as cast metal, also in Job."
In Job 37:18, the word translated hard is better understood as mighty or strong (it can refer to wind or to the sound of a trumpet). The word rendered skies is better rendered clouds. And the strength of the cast mirror is best understood as being the overwhelming brilliance of its reflection of light. In context, it appears that Elihu is referring to a theophany starting while his speech is going on. God begins to speak out of the whirlwind mere verses later.
"However, some scholars would note that, similar to Egyptian cosmology, the firmament can be both an empty space, and can simultaneously have a boundary that is solid. Like a balloon. Hence how it's debatable if birds fly inside it or along the face of its boundary."
Can you find any usage of al pane in the bible that refers to the sense of inside as opposed to at the boundary of?
" The Egyptian God "shu" would serve the function of the "solid expanse" with its "boundary" holding up the watery sky goddess Nut."
I remember reading about Shu. His name literally means emptiness. He was often considered the air. In the depictions of him, I never saw a solid layer of him on the sky (Nut). What I remember is that some said that Nut had a solid part.
"Solid above, solid below, heaven above (solid expanse that God walks on, this also happens in the book of Exodus when God has a pavement of sapphire stone beneath his feet), and solid below, the earth. It is indeed ANE cosmology."
Even if that is ANE cosmology, and ANE cosmology is very diverse, it need not be what is written in the bible.
"Also, some medieval rabbis also debated if the firmament was made of copper or iron, and talked about taking an auger and breaking it so that waters above might gush forth. See Ben Stanhopes video for more detail."
Finally, I did not dispute that some thought it was solid. Merely that it was necessarily solid.
Well, if any theological message contradicts in any way any part of reality; especially the most basic level: ie: science; then all of theology is heretical by definition- as is any belief in any kind of a god at all, forever.
We judge all dogmas by the evidence against them; if any part contradicts any bit of scientific reality that in and of itself is contra-god, the entire word of God falls into the realm of the occult automatically, as is any worship at all automatically spiritist idolatry and foolery, magickal at best; and thus forbidden for anyone at all to believe, or even to have heard!
The "far east" ("ends of the Earth") and "near east" were used by writers living in the "middle Earth" -- their world center. But the Light first shone and shines at the East. The Holy Presence enters through the Temple's eastern gate. Where will He then enter when He returns?
The eastern gate of Jerusalem
With what is being discovered at Oak island NS, it’s more than likely the old world had a lot more knowledge than we give them credit for. I don’t think they were too convinced about falling off the earth with ships and Christopher was probably not as special as we have been told.
Funny how many morons in these comments believe in a flat earth.
Agreed. I think we view much of the ancient world through this lens that they were somehow all incredibly dumb, and I think we are largely flawed in our view of the past because of this. The arrogance of our time will be viewed in a shameful way in the future.
They haven't found much to speak of, though. Not that the rest of what you say isn't so it's just that oak island really hasn't panned out to be much. Either whatever was there has already been taken or they're digging in the wrong spot.
Could it be?? 😂
The earth being a globe was a known thing since ancient greece
The reason the pagan authors also knew it was flat is because the cosmological idea descended through the ages from… probably from our first parents. “Did God talk to them too?” In a way, yeah. He talked to their grandparents. Either way, a pagan book can tell the truth without being inspired.
But since this idea of a flat, geocentric earth is exactly what the biblical authors describe, and since the Bible is the word of God, and since the word of God is true……….. then the earth is flat and geocentric. End of discussion.
Bingo!
The Bible is the truth, but to understand truth as a binary yes or no concept is incomplete, and considering that it's as simple as the bible is true, therefore the earth is flat is quite a jump in thinking IMO. For instance, the expression " the pen is mightier than the sword" is true in one sense, that is say like politcal policy or cultural influence, but not neccesarrily true in a hand to hand combat scenario. The expression itself doesnt intend to convey pens are better weapons than swords. Likewise, the Bible has intention and I would suggest its point is not to express how the cosmological nature of the world works, but who created it and why. The Bible is true in some aspects literally, relaying historical narratives, and some others are metaphorical, they convey truth about God's nature and His accomplishments without necessarily speaking to the literal.
The Bible uses cultural idioms, similies, etc... just like we do, which aren't literally true, but they are true in the message they are trying to convey. One error is to extrapolate the Bible as simultaneously true in all literary forms at all times which when one says the Bible is absolute true, on e might confuse the two. Obviously we don't do this and I don't think you are, but can you see where it's not exactly right to conclude the Bible is just 'true' without clarifying how language and literature express truth to varying degree.
You suggest the cosmological world view of the ANE comes from God and relayed to humans, and that knowledge was passed down, even to the humans outside the Biblical narrative, and this is how they knew about the nature of the world. But is it not feasible to say one can deduce such a cosmology from simple observation? I don't appear to be moving or spinning, the horizon is flat to my eye, and the luminaries appear to be moving in circular fashion around and above me. That doesn't require divine revelation to conclude, much less an assumption that God found it necessary to reveal the nature of the world to humanity.
@@joeyg1315 Well Heiser’s point was basically “If knowledge of the flat earth was derived from divine revelation, then how come the pagans knew it too? Therefore it isn’t divine revelation.” Well I gave a reasonable explanation as to where the pagans got the idea, if it was in fact divine revelation: the knowledge was passed down from our first parents.
Now you’re essentially saying “Well that idea could’ve just as easily come from our earthly perspective. We don’t experience movement and we see the celestial bodies moving around us, so it would’ve been a logical conclusion for them to draw.” Well are you therefore saying it wasn’t divine revelation? It was just our primitive observations? My counter to that idea is that the Bible confirms this flat/geocentric cosmological view. Basically: God’s word confirms it.
So either the view was given by God in the garden and we stuck with it: Divine revelation.
Or the view originated from our simple observations and was then confirmed by God: also divine revelation.
The only counter point would be to say “Well the Bible isn’t being literal.” I think that’s entirely unreasonable. It’s not written in some poetic way. It’s just stating “a firmament separating the waters above from the waters below.” I think we only take it figuratively because of our modern cosmological presuppositions. Either way, it’s undeniable that taking the flat earth conception literally is entirely reasonable; it’s a viable interpretation. And one with the most explanatory power and scope.
@@quickattackfilms7923
|"...My counter to that idea is that the Bible confirms this flat/geocentric cosmological view. Basically: God’s word confirms it."|
Not necessarily. It confirms that Biblical writers believed in the ANE cosmology and used that langauge to express God's attributes. It doesnt tell us if God Intended to teach ANE readers the nature of the Earth. I realize now that this conversation really comes down to our hermeneutic lens and our interpretation of what divine inspiration in the scriptures looks like. Heiser's idea of divine inspiration entails God providentially choosing the right people to write, they weren't channeling word for word scripture, like an oracle or spiritual posession. Biblical writers thought independently but were selected carefully by God who knew they would write what he intended. To think inspiration produces every word of scripture by careful selection makes the bible an easy target for criticism, especially in the field of manuscript data and text traditions where variance, contradictions, and omissions show up alot. It also doesn't allow for variance in the Biblical writer's personality, specific word choice, writing style, which are quite apparent in the field of textual criticism, like with Paul's letters, the Pslams, etc. This makes the Bible to be what it does not claim to be.
With that being said, The nature of the world wasn't a disputed idea in the ANE when the Bible was being written. Considering the cultural audience of the time, why would Biblical writers feel compelled to explain the cosmological world view if it was already well established knowledge. There was no counter movement to the ANE Cosmology. Why would there be? What theological importance is there to teaching or enforcing the shape of the world. Can you consider if this is truly the message the Bible is trying to convey, and if not why we insist it to be true anyways? What fundamental theology does the "how" of the creation account and the prophets convey to ANE readers? I would suggest none... One of heiser's main points of Biblical theology is reading with an Israelite worldview in mind. What are they getting out of this?
|"So either the view was given by God in the garden and we stuck with it: Divine revelation. "|
When are we allowed to fill in the gaps with theories outside of scriptural authority? What other ANE sources could suggest such things?
|"The only counter point would be to say “Well the Bible isn’t being literal.” I think that’s entirely unreasonable. It’s not written in some poetic way. It’s just stating “a firmament separating the waters above from the waters below.” I think we only take it figuratively because of our modern cosmological presuppositions. Either way, it’s undeniable that taking the flat earth conception literally is entirely reasonable; it’s a viable interpretation. And one with the most explanatory power and scope."|
Again Heiser points this out flat out. The Bible IS being literal. The Bibilical writers DO express their literal belief in the ANE cosmology. They weren't Heliocentric Globe Earthers but is that their point? To them it wasn't poetic or metaphorical, but we are back again to what I wrote earlier. Is God's point to teach Earth Science 101 to ANE readers who already believe in said concepts? I would suggest no, they already believed in said things, there was no counter-movement against the domed flat plain. Rather, inspiried Biblical writers used what they 'understood' of the world to convey truth's about what God did do, and His express attributes through them. That's at least Heiser's position in this matter.
@@joeyg1315 Do you agree with this?: “Yes, this is exactly what they believed. And therefore it is actually what the Bible authors are saying. But they are incorrect.”
I love Michael Heiser's matter-of-fact viewpoint. I wish more people could see things as he did.
Hi
I see your point
Tho as someone who is Nigerian and grew up in Nigeria with its culture
I see often enough that we unfortunately conflate our traditions and culture with the bibles context
Trust me, the value of teacher like Dr Heiser is that they remind us that we need to read the bible as God and the authors he chose intended
@@mrarcade2504
Hi 😊
That is my point. Well said 😊
May God always bless you.
Ahhh, my apologies
I meant to reply to a different comment. Apologies again for the slight confusion 😂
But I totally agree with you
Dr. Heiser was really God sent ❤️
@@mrarcade2504 That's ok. Thank you for clarifying 😊
Acts 17:11
I looked in to flat earth for a few years.
With a spattering of school science and perspective teaching from school art. It was plausible, very plausible. The experts from other professionals made nasa look like a children's programme designed to decieve. I caught them in a major perpetual lie from simple geography and 1 historical fact.
As far as Im concerned nasa is a money making money laundering machine.
At the culmination of my enthusiasm, which started as a prayer quest for truth. I asked God about clouds behind the moon, for 15 minutes driving home with a clear nights sky a perfect rectangle of clouds appeared with the moon at its centre.
On another occasion I was chit chatting to God as I was driving. Saying something like, this is your world, I bet you can see everything. In the miles of massive clouds ahead and above of me a perfect circular hole appeared above me to reveal the blue sky behind the cloud. Then from behind the cloud a triangula shaped door slowly shut till the hole was gone.
I will tell you this for a fact, it's a creation with an interactive creator. And no, I hadn't had alcohol or drugs. I had just prayed while walking the dog for a few hours.
Well idk what that door would mean, or even what clouds behind the moon means. But what I can say, is they are sure signs that God is hearing you, He's answering you to some extent, and you're at least onto something.
”The One who builds His upper chambers in the heavens
And has founded His vaulted dome over the earth,
He who calls for the waters of the sea And pours them out on the face of the earth, The Lord is His name.“
Amos 9:6
Actually there is a lot of spherical earth writing in Europe(and some other places) from the ancient Greeks onward.
If I'm not mistaken he didn't deny that he just claimed that it was still debated long after that
He's talking about pre-ancient Greek times. The ancient near east.
sad how you have to jump outside of the bible to get your answers for what God has clearly spoken the earth is flat
@@ThePreacherman9 You don't. Scripture uses spherical language for earth as well. Don't listen to unhinged teachers with no knowledge of original language or literary genre.
The Greeks were an exception. Most cultures believed the Earth to be flat. Eric Dubay has proven that.
It was NOT debated whether the Earth was round up until the 15th century (01:30). For AT LEAST 2500 years there's been an almost universal understanding that the earth is round; flat-earthers are a modern phenomenon.
@bettyblowtorthing3950 geocentric thought was common even hundreds of years ago (eg the RCC's persecution of Galleleo). But that's NOT the same as flat earthism. What sources did you have in mind?
Yep, common myth.
He says that there was a debate of Earth being a globe until 15 century around 1:20.
He is dead wrong. The idea that the earth was a sphere was not disputed in the Middle Ages.
@@zoookxsome ancient Greeks thought it was round based on observations.
@bettyblowtorthing3950 So? I was referring to his claim that there was a debate until 15th century whether Earth is a sphere.
Which is an urban myth.
Can you read?
@@NickVTA I know...
Thte bible says the earth is flat because it is flat
I miss him
Me too. Thank the LORD he left so much for us to learn from . What a blessing he was and still is to us all
@@melchis873 Agreed. GB
Heiser was a demon loved by the world because the world loves their own - his biblical ethnicity says it all "Malachi 1:2-4"
@@James1v1-pf6lo I rebuke you in the name of Yeshua.
@@oldcrowtj4937
Yeshua is truth - so attempting to rebuke truth in his name is both pointless as well as blasphemous - so like I said Heiser's biblical ethnicity says it all
"Romans 9:13" "Obadiah 1:9-10,18"
The globe was never debated until recently. Heiser is a clown, or should I say was a clown.
@bettyblowtorthing3950 Find one, just ONE, and I might consider believing you. Even if you do find one, who's to say it was an actual belief and not speculation just like you and your cult. Still, I don't believe you can find even one.
Maybe the pagans knew as well because its true
There's no difference between the old and new testaments - same God same chosen people - a flat or globe shaped earth doesn't effect God's plan of salvation for ethnic Israel
Actually the globe model HSS lead many to feel we are flying through purposeless space without a meaning,flat incased dome earth which the bible teaches would help people to realize we were created
@@ThePreacherman9
The topic of my comment was "salvation" for ethnic Israel only - not flat or globed earth - obviously ur reading comprehension needs to be worked on
@@James1v1-pf6lo I know that topic of your comment and to say it had nothing to with flat earth makes no sense when it was mentioned in your comment,as stated it does have to do with salvation in sense,I'm not saying you can't be saved if you don't believe in flat earth but what I am saying is if many unbelievers realised we were not on a spinning ball in an empty space but in a dome they would come to know God exist.
@@ThePreacherman9
Again My point is rather nonIsraelites believe in God flat or globed earth there is no salvation for them
"Luke 1:68-72" salvation
"Psalm 83:1-6" enemies
@@James1v1-pf6lo you still don't get my point at all just flying over your head while I've understood you,try actually listening and reading rather then allowing things to go over your head just so you can respond
The fact that there are so many Christians who unironically believe that the Earth is flat is alarming…
Earth is a topographical plane. It is measured flat, is navigated flat, and is functionally flat. The globe model is derived from angle measurements taken from a flat plane and wrapped into a sphere. I don't have a "belief" that the earth is a horizontal plane, it just is. It's axiomatic. The "beliefs" are held by those who dont understand this and "believe" they are stood atop a spinning water ball when in fact that very ball was created from angle measurements taken from a flat plane. Most Bible scripture is somewhat ambiguous though both sides like to use many scriptures as proof one way or the other.
@@AWAKEtheIRON you are functionally ignorant and ignore actual facts
@MrEmeralddog God bless you too brother.
@@AWAKEtheIRON I told you the facts, I had a good education but at 73 my schools were much better than what you were subjected to, sorry for you
@@MrEmeralddog OK. Have a good one.
I am not a flat earther, I believe the Bible! “Trust me you want to go there!”
Try to prove it's a globe and you will find yourself proving it's flat, just like the rest of us flat earthers did
@@heavymetalnewsdesk
Yes it is flat, I agree. The bible clearly defines where we live. I am a biblical cosmologist! ;)
@@heavymetalnewsdesk The earth is clearly not flat.
@@TacoTuesday4 Then prove with an experiment that water can curve, and that ships can stick to the bottom of a water sphere
Related note: Is there a chance that the "waters above" are literally the clouds and that when "the waters broke" it was a phrase that means rain? And that this whole seperation of waters is describing the water cycle?
no.
no
No because the Moon Sun
And Stars are in the Firmament.
There is only mention in the Bible
Of one Firmament.
Would we today regard the waters above: something that is part of the creation process, rather than post creation, as other than H2O? A plasma cloud perhaps essential in the energization of 'dark'? I think we read too much back into the terms from the point of view of adapted contemporary science. If you don't have enough words that work in a general observer vocab, you stick with the general...knowing that man, tasked as custodians, will sort out in due course so we can make linear accelerators and mobile phones, etc.
Isaiah 11:6: wolf and lamb or lion and lamb? What say you, doctor?
He passed away some time ago
my 1611 says "the wolf shall also dwell with the lamb and the leopard shall lay down with the kid(goat) and the calf and young loin and the fatling ALL together and the little child will lead them "
I think we get mixed up because we always put a lion and lamb together to symbolise Jesus' two sides
Wolf and lamb
I think the pagans living near the israelites probably heard their inspired sounded ideas from those israeli people they lived near. also God told no one the earth was flat, and it was mathematically proven to be round since Eratosthenes.
this man said God told not one the earth is flat then goes to quote fake math and fake science to prove his case without any biblical sourcing,wisdom of man vs the bible its clear you've listened to school rather then Gods word.When this topic is debated people can't go to the bible they run to fake science made by men(not all science is fake)
What is missing here is that ancients also had a felt sense of the heavens beeing where the unseen qualities of life are situatied. It is a constant communication or these worlds. In a sense, one must know that ancients relationship to the heavens is analogous to our relationship to our "inside". Where Disnay today makes Inside Out, and ancient would have created Heaven/Earth, or perhasp call it upside down to be a bit cute.
I believe this change in consciousness has everything to do with the incarnation, death and ressurection of Jesus Christ.
I think this change, while intended, is not complete. We need to develop a further awareness, that though the direction is now inside-out, instead of above-below (in the felt sense), the inside is made up of our communication, our souls ARE how we interact, and thus a deeper ground of our "inside" is our actual neighbour, and ultimately through eternity every human being.
All this in old and new testament was done by Jesus for Jesus to glorify Jehovah his Father. Philippians 2:9-11
If the Earth is a globe then there is no water under the earth it would have to be water in the earth. It seems to me that the Earth refers to the surface...
Scientists have discovered a massive amount of water underneath us. More water than all pur oceans.
The Holy word of God has two different expressions of the universe.
1. In Genesis, where man's responsibility on earth is the major theme, whether of fallen adam, or that of the world judged in deluge - the earth then becomes the centre of universal dealings. Genesis 1 presents earth as the centre.
2. In Exodus, where the theme is redemption from Egypt (the precursor figure of full redemption from sin and death for humanity through Christ i.e. the passover) - here the sanctuary (tabernacle) is revealed as the representation of the universe. In the sanctuary, there are three gates, the outer, the middle and the inner veil leading to the holy of holies. Each of the veils represent the heavens, where into the inner most veil, representing the highest heaven, Christ after the pattern of Aaron entered after His resurrection. Here, since the theme is redemptive grace - the source is heaven, the counsels of God. Therefore the representation of the universe is at once heaven at the centre (not the earth)
yra that's just a stretch just because its in the middle does not make it the center of everything its in between a heaven and earth does not mean its Gods center peace in he values most,the middle represent the dome firmament not space lies youve been taught and by no means is the firmament his focus except when he will roll it up like a scroll,the middle symbolism was meant to symbolically show us the gate that could not yet be passed and keeps up away from the holiest place,which in order to get through that firmamne thou must be covered by the holy and pervious blood
I'd be curious to know what denomination or who you follow?
Hydroplate Theory would be a great study for anyone watching this.
Walt Brown's theory is really interesting but I think Catastrophic Plate Tectonics is a better explanation. (lots of discussion on that on ICR's youtube channel)
Didn’t Hannibal and his army cross the Alps?
Through passes, not over the tip of mount blanc?”!
Heiser was great in many ways.... but although he flirted with recognizing the Earth is a circle (not a globe), he decided not to enter that issue. The argument that it’s not good to mingle our Scriptures with paganism, as an excuse to reject the Creation described in Genesis, is maybe the lowest point in Heiser ministry. Nowadays 95% or maybe more of christians believe what the rest of unbelievers believe: the globe and a “universe”. It’s s bad argument that allows bad theology to prevail.
@bettyblowtorthing3950 that’s the kind of things you say when you treat Scriptures like any other book. In any case, you need more faith to believe modern science than to believe Genesis.
The scripture with paganism argument seems a little weird for him specifically. 90% of Christians that I know would accuse him of mixing Bible and paganism for even suggesting that the entirety of the Elohim was involved in creation or that people become part of the Elohim when they die. Almost everything he taught sounds like paganism until you realize how biblical it truly is. Im not a flat earther or globe Earther (never cared enough until today), but I'm willing to see IF it's biblical without just dismissing it because "pagans believe that"......pagans also eat, sleep, and poop.
@@nokingbutChrist94 I am talking about Creation design and reality. If you search you might get to know the roots of modern cosmology. But besides that, there are empirical and circumstantial evidence to proof that the Genesis, Enoch and Jubilees account of Creation is correct. It’s not important for you? Ok. But you have to agree that false science is used by the enemies of Truth to doubt the Design and the Creator. It’s more important than you think, IMO.
@@cmorales5 I have yet to read Jubilees. I've read about half of 1 Enoch so far. I have read Genesis. Please share with me what in Genesis implies flat Earth? I've never looked at the Bible looking for this so I haven't considered it one way or another.
@@nokingbutChrist94 if you are really interested on the subject of what and how is the Creation, I would suggest the following sources: The God Culture, Rob Skiba, Dean Odle and Erik Dubay. Eric isn’t a “christian” but brings a lot of reliable information. I have spent thousands and thousands of hours on the subject because I am convinced that the truth of Creation is an important foundation for us to understand Scriptures. This subject cannot be explained in two sentences here, sorry.
Need link to this full lecture please and thank you.
@bettyblowtorthing3950 thank you
ua-cam.com/video/rN2Ppbrtf-Q/v-deo.htmlsi=38zybrI0qcgNr9Ap
How is it unique though?
Nope, you can't hold that Holy Scripture is divinely inspired and then make the case that the hebrew cosmology is outdated. Speaking of the Book of Job, the verse 38:7 always seems to say the angels were there at the Creation:
"When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" (Job 38:7)
Yes, you can, if you take the meaning as metaphorical.
Or, you can, if you realize that God was inspiring it, not directly writing it, and inspired it to get the *understanding* correct, not necessarily the physics, which *don't matter*!
@@acem82 Nay, if physics don't matter, then likewise biology don't matter; and we get chaos.
We cannot reasonably expect the ancients to have used modern scientific vocabulary, but there must not be glaringly falsifiable claims, eg. that the "firmament of heaven was a solid dome".
@@pj_ytmt-123 "Nay, if physics don't matter, then likewise biology don't matter; and we get chaos."
God said what he wanted you to know in the Scriptures. He didn't care about physics or biology. Knowing physics and biology *doesn't matter*, not ultimately.
"but there must not be glaringly falsifiable claims"
There aren't.
1. There are statements that can be taken metaphorically, or
2. There are statements that communicate what God wanted the people to know, the actual point of the statement. The point isn't Cosmological, it's Theological. Read it in context!
@@acem82 Of course there aren't any, the Bible is divinely-inspired and inerrant after all. 😄
I'm not so hung up with _pillars of heaven_ because the prophet Job clearly proclaimed it as a metaphor: "The pillars of heaven tremble and are astonished at his reproof." (Job 26:11) -- sentient columns? -He was referring to the powers that be.- (Disregard: "reproof" may refer to earthquakes)
However, I totally agree with Ken Ham that the six days of creation have to be taken to mean literal six days. ✌️
@@acem82 P.S The "solid dome" thing is not from the Bible but the VIDEO. Did you even watch it before commenting? 😂😂🤣🤣
Is the full lecture available?
ua-cam.com/video/rN2Ppbrtf-Q/v-deo.htmlsi=38zybrI0qcgNr9Ap
this is very close to Catholic thought
Would love to see the full version of this video!
check houseform apologetics. he has a lot of heisers full lectures
ua-cam.com/video/rN2Ppbrtf-Q/v-deo.htmlsi=38zybrI0qcgNr9Ap
search YT for Old Testament Cosmology Michael S Heiser NEW, it is over an hr long and he spends the first 30min. trying to explain why we should not take the teaching of Flat Earth in the Bible literal... I love Dr. Heiser but that 30min. was horrible... Lords Blessings!
so when God is being theological He doesn't have to be accurate? i fail to see what's theological in Gen 1:1-25 since there are no people yet and He seems to just describe how heavens and earth was created. so i guess Gen 1:12 didn't mean that grass grows out of the earth, or in 21 God didn't really create marine life, all just theological stuff, not really factually true. but dark matter and dark energy are factual; or somehow the moon traveling backwards 65k mph every orbit is also factual. how do you know that the Bible is actually accurate and instead the scientific cosmology is secular theology?
amen valid points
Does anyone has these slides?
Mad Flatters!
This video is stupid. We've known the Earth is round for 2500 years, since the Ancient Greeks. Not the 15th century. The only question then was geocentrism vs heliocentrism, not flat vs spherical.
@bettyblowtorthing3950 I'm aware that the ancient near eastern people who wrote the old testament believed the earth to be flat, and perhaps I was harsh in calling the whole video stupid just because he said Columbus was the one who discovered it was round. It just seems like any video on the flat earth subject should not be spreading that misinformation. If any one single person disproved the flat earth, it was Eratosthenes as you alluded to in your comment, not Columbus. On second thought the rest of the video was honestly not bad, but that just seemed like a fairly major mistake to make.
@bettyblowtorthing3950 Also I was oversimplistic in my comment as well, most Chinese scholars indeed believed in a flat earth way up until the 17th century. But the first humans probably got conclusive evidence of its rotundity around 330 BC, and it spread from there.
So what you're saying is that Noah and his family waited until the water was completely receded back to the original levels?
That flood was in Mesopotamia only - not the entire earth
@@davidmillward3108 Were you there?
@@davidmillward3108Then the Bible is wrong when it says that all the high hills under the heavens were covered and all flesh that moved on the earth died.
@ABC123jd it says " the earth" which is not necessarily the entire planet
Ohhhhhhh i never thought i would disagree with Dr Heiser.
From what I've learned the ancient Greeks new the earth was a globe. I think it was Erosthenes that got within 10% of the circumference of the earth. The Medievals knew the earth was round using trig & stars (moving north & south). And, the globe of the kings & queen's scepters was a representation of their divine rule on earth.
Maybe Dr. Heiser is right cuz I have mad (deep) respect for his intelligence & research.
Greek are not near as ancient as the other cultures mentioned in the Ancient Near East
Eratosthenes' math would have worked out the same if the sun were smaller and closer to the earth... I.e. flat earth....
In the beginning GOD created the universe and earth...nope, heavens and earth. The Bible tells us the earth was created before the sun, moon, and stars. Which are called lights and luminaries. The luminaries were created on the 4th day of creation. Modern science is in direct conflict with the word of GOD. The indoctrination we all are subject to from birth results in something called cognitive dissonance.
Just because God says he sees the earth as a circle doesn't mean it isn't round. The sun is a circle, as is the Moon, the Bottomless Pit is the earth's core because that's where gravity meets.
@@datprawn4850 according to modern cosmology, the sun and moon are spheres.
I'm confused why so many comment that the earth is flat.
What does that have to do with the Creator and kingdom of heaven?
At best is like describing humans as animals. It's an observation but has no impact on reality.
Were you created or not?
By whom and for what reason?
Are you fulfilling your duty to the Creator?
How does your observation of the planet impact your position on God? Are you smarter than God? DO YOU SEEK HIS COUNSEL?
Because the Bible says that it's flat. Your argument seems to be that it's not important whether it's flat or not so we can just disagree with the Bible in this regard. But it is important, not because the shape itself is super important, but believing God's word over the word of man is important. If you aren't willing to trust God about the way he created the heavens and the earth, then why would you be willing to trust him about Jesus' resurrection or about your future resurrection? These are much more extraordinary claims than the claim that the earth is flat with a solid firmament above it.
Science and theology Should go hand in hand cause God made both.
"Revelation" is no one's exclusive domain.
I believe you are confusing it with "discovery." Revelation is information given to the one(s) whom the revealer chooses to give it. Unless the revealer chooses to give the information to everyone, everywhere, at all times, then naturally it would belong to some and not others. That is, at least, until they in turn share it with everyone else.
Revelation, as in a revealed truth (or Truth), in whatever language time or culture it is spoken or individually intuited,
is not any one person or persons exclusive domain. Perhaps that's clearer.
Truth is Truth... It's fundamental, universal and ordered. It's also knowable relative to the level of development of the "knower." : ) @@rebbrown7140
not of private interpretation is another way t put it
Before the the video begins I just want to say the earth is (biblically) FLAT. I don’t even know what he’s about to say I hope he’s not deceived like so many.
Titus 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, ...
Good example of stringing words together and speaking slowly, without falling over
that is an undeniable thing bible really teachs flat earth
"the bible is a geography book". Yes, yes, of course.
@@CJFCarlsson what do you mean it does not have to be a scientific book to talk about scientific things there are multiple verses that show earth is flat
@@_lucifer6996 You did not claim to be a genius, did you?
@@CJFCarlsson nope
@@CJFCarlsson so the Bible is 100% accurate, inspired word of God, yeah?... But it's wrong about the shape of the earth? Make it make sense without unchristian like ad hominem....
I’d like to watch the full video. Where can I see it?
ua-cam.com/video/rN2Ppbrtf-Q/v-deo.htmlsi=1-y4Mi3POQyA8X4E
Genesis and the ancient near east Dr. Heiser. Look that up. It’s 5 hours long. It’s a lecture.
Thanks!!
Spinning globe in space, level and stationary earth, either way, the Heavens declare the Glory of the Lord. His creation displays His nature.
1:00
Please make note of my last name... and split it into the old Hebrew 'bookends of destiny'.
Musante
Musa & Etna
Etna means - Mountain of Fire
and Musa means - Moses.
No record of anybody scaling a mountain eh? I have a record of one of my relatives who scaled a mountain - a record that is 5,000 years old.
Hi.
The 'son of man' is a 'worm' - Job 25:6
Solid trees... ever build anything out of 'worm wood'? It's my understanding that it's not too 'solid' - unless the builder using it has faith.
Iron and clay cannot mix, but laws of iron can form it - and even break it. The 'laws' are as 'air' if there is no 'faith' in them.
Thus... the son of man is INSIDE of 'man' and OUTSIDE of 'man'. The son of man that is LACKING in faith serves the man, the son of man that HAS faith serves God.
I can teach you about a 'book'.
There are waters above - living - faith & those works. There are waters below - bitter - faithless & those works. All of the ground (earth) is the same - Adam is 'earth'. What grows dependa on what you water it with... there is only one kind of seed... and both are from the 'woman'. The woman is inside - when man is 'created' - male and female made them 'he'. When man is 'formed' - the woman is 'separated' from the man... and thus there are needs of 'rules'. There is only ONE RULE - that of the LORD, who does ALL THINGS (Isaiah 45:7).
Thus... to judge the seed - is to judge what God does.
"You speak like a foolish woman - shall we not accept both good and evil from God?"
...and in saying this - Job did NOT sin with his lips.
Joseph... the dreamer - knew that what is seen as evil can be used for good.
Guess who is here to rescue a bunch of slaves out of Egypt... again.
Ugh. Can we get started already?
Mount Sinai is only just over 7000'.. that's not exactly a big mountain.... Especially since you don't need oxygen supplementation at 7000 feet. Most climbers don't use oxygen until they reach well over 6500 meters....
Ok, ya are smart but not smart enough to recogize that flat earth and dome is true that you say explaing theological message but ya didn't explain enought, what is highest level that is water in connect to globe earth, you use planet, but it's a plane, as for below earth which is bottom heaven, so above is heaven, so that is three, yes, but two because two is same thing, so the actual three is water below earth, which heaven hold the water, heaven, and earth, so three, so for modern pov, the three would be earth, heaven, and gravity, but heaven and earth is gravity as well, since the mass produce gravity, so it is one whole one, so not three different three. So, you see in bible, in middle of water, is expanse to keep the water apart, so water, expanse, and earth, so three.
Are you saying that a part of the Bible is false? It seems to me very arrogant pushing the idea that God allowed something false or not true in His book. Sorry but I am pretty sure you are a bit too human to even understand what you are talking about in this video.
Is there a part 2🤷🏻♂️
It’s from a 5 hour long lecture. Look up Genesis and the ancient near east Dr. Heiser and you should find it.
I guess y’all think gasses and vapor will roll back like a scroll huh? And God don’t know what he inspired people to write, huh?
How arrogant if you bash those who believe flat earth. You lack faith or understanding in the word.
Somehow you’ve managed to miss the entire point.
@@lemnisgate8809 I think you think our ancestors were dumb.
You cannot claim to believe in the creation account and leave out day 2, 3 and 4.
It is very detailed and specific.
“For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”
Revelation 22:18-19 KJVAAE
You cannot read the word and make it mean what you want to believe.
The same guys coming with this demonically inspired information about creation that contradicts scripture. You believe when it come to an earth you haven’t seen any read photos of, but if they present evolution to you , you would reject that.
Geostationary satellites in the Old Testament
Please somebody tell me the name of the full lecture? So I can find it and watch all of it!
ua-cam.com/video/rN2Ppbrtf-Q/v-deo.htmlsi=1-y4Mi3POQyA8X4E
“Michael Heiser-Genesis and the ancient near east”
@@solidsnake497 Thank you!!
Theres another option... We're beinf lied to about space and rhe shape of earth.
It a flat circular world (like the UN logo) around the rim is Antarctica (South pole) where we are not allow to freely venture!! Why not!
@@kingston163 oh I agree. Modern cosmology is a joke.
@@Theggman83flerfers are a joke. They don't even believe their own eyes when watching a sunset. Instead they have to gaslight themselves into believing that the sun is moving away from them when in fact it never changes its angular size in the sky 😂.
@@MrSeedi76 lol, needing to resort to ad hominem is the classic play for a globe earther. Glad to see nothing changes.
Meanwhile, would you care to explain why the north star doesn't move, even though are solar system is constantly moving.... 🥱 Too easy...
Another option.... religious text is unverifiable nonsense.
Again? There was another video ("The Bible Was Never Intended to Be a Science Book") just a month ago trying to drive a wedge between science and scriptures. Like I said on that video: "Umm, the bible doesn’t teach the planet earth is flat...And people wonder why they don’t trust Heiser??"
Some of my other posts from threads on the other video:
""solid vaulted dome" is an interpretation, Isa 40.22 says God "stretches out the heavens like a curtain" -- you don't stretch a solid dome and a curtain is not a firm solid dome structure and Gen 1.8 says "raqia" is called heavens (plural) yet "raqia" is singular (not firmamentS) and we know there are at least 3 sections to heaven, one where the birds fly, one were the stars/planets move and the dimension where angels reside. The closest thing to some solid layer would be what Josephus described as a layer of ice crystal surrounding earth before Noah's flood -- there may be something to this as some planets still have ice surrounding them, like in the rings of Saturn for example. Other than that, it may just be describing the atmosphere, hence objects move through them, including meteorites and birds."
"i’ve studied all this in depth in the original languages and like I said elsewhere, it’s either a highly massaged rare translation that FE people/bots like to quote, or it’s using metaphorical language (usually in regards to the social order of the earth), and sometimes language from visionary or apocalyptic scenes which are not literal."
"simple to understand when you know the text, for instance pillars are used for mountains, which do indeed extend down into the foundations of the earth such as the 7 pillars/mountains Jerusalem sits on (temple allusions are often used in creation language as well); likewise the pillars of Hercules are the two promontories that flank the Straight of Gibraltar, this was common in ancient language."
""Firmament" in Genesis is something like an expanse since the text says birds fly in it (Gen 1.20); there may also be different sections similar to shamayim/heavens having at least 3 sections/3 heavens."
"I did a study years ago on those verses about the earth being immoveable, etc - either the translations were misleading or the context was about the social order or rule of the earth being firmly established vis a vis God’s rule. To be sure, other parts show God shakes the earth and overturns the land when man becomes wicked.
As a bonus, when Matthew describes the star of Bethlehem coming to a ‘stand’, we now know this is describing Jupiter (planets were also called stars or wandering stars), universally known as the king star/planet, in retrograde motion - a phenomenon that happens with the orbits (circular movement) of both the earth and planets."
"Science has caught up with scriptures in many ways and now we know the stomach is intimately connected to the nervous system and plays such an important role on the brain it is sometimes called the second brain or the enteric nervous system in scientific literature. Shame so many don’t give the Word of God more credit."
Edit: Re "four corners of the earth" as in Isa 11.12 or Rev 7.1, 20.8
The term for "earth" used in the Hebrew and Greek and Aramaic here can also be translated "land," in other words it's speaking of the land of Israel having four corners (lit. "wings" in Hebrew). This fits the context in light of Ezk 38.5-6 and Rev 20.8 which describes the nations around the four corners of the land - Israel - from the north/east/west/south, which includes Gomer, Persia, Ethiopia and Put - so we know it's not talking about the four corners of the 'earth' but the 'land' (Israel) unless you believe the earth ends around Persia and Ethiopia, etc.
Here are also examples of the earth/land being moved at times with Hebraic parallelisms comparing mountains to pillars (reaching into the sky):
_"It is God who removes the MOUNTAINS, they know not how, when He overturns them in His anger; Who shakes the earth/land out of its place, and its PILLARS tremble"_ (Job 9.5-6).
_"For thus says the Lord of hosts, 'Once more in a little while, I am going to shake the heavens and the earth/land, the sea also and the dry land."_ (Hag 2.6)
The following shows that the earth/land can indeed be moved, ie, not always "FIXED and IMMOVABLE," in this case it appears to be speaking about conditions after the flood:
_"The mountains rose; the valleys sank down to the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, so that they will not return to cover the earth/land."_ (Psa 104.8-9)
Other times it is stable and enduring for the age (עוֹלָ֥ם וָעֶֽד), and the mountains are as foundations (reaching under the earth's crust):
_"He established the earth/land upon its FOUNDATIONS, so that it will not totter ("mot") forever and ever. You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the MOUNTAINS."_ (Psa 104.5-6)
PS - Every lunar eclipse shows the earth's shadow revealing the shape of a globe to the naked eye, not a flat disc, especially during a total lunar eclipse. This is not rocket science.
From different threads:
>> "Not everything Hesier and other scholars, or pharisees said was false however."
It’s a pity he didn’t know. I think it would have delighted him.
@@stevezane68 Two assumptions don't make a truth.
From another old thread from the video "Were there Female Angels in the Bible?":
I'm not basing my caution only on this video but on a long pattern with many red flags over many years. There is so much falsehood and deception (usually by omission) in Heiser's videos I considered making a new channel just to address them, called "Reversing Heiser." He's usually subtle how he slips you the poison to eat away at and undermine faith a little here and little there while pretending to be "helpful."
Another big deception off the top of my head was how he declared a while back that we cannot use prophecy to know what to expect which is the opposite of what Peter said in 2Peter 1.19, and doesn't even make sense about warning about the abomination of desolation and to flee when it is set up as Christ warned. He's also condescending when it comes to the biblical creation narrative and essentially says the writers didn't understand science and were just trying to explain things as they understood them (hence they were wrong).
There are simply far too many things like this, but his fans don't seem to either care or notice which speaks to a lack of scriptural knowledge. The whole field is like this in different respects including Dr Brown, Dr James White and so many other ministries, each doing their part for the AC kingdom. It's clear the enemy has long conquered the leadership of Christianity and the academies and institutions -- not just the secular world and govts. Sadly most won't stand a chance when the more amazing deceptions of the false messiah and his false prophet happen. I'll have to leave the discussion there.
There *IS* a “solid dome,” we know it as the electromagnetic shield. It’s “solid” in the same way an electromagnetic “invisible fence” is for our dogs. The “currents” (wavelengths) above and the “currents” below.
Expand your minds. 🕊️ 🔥
The ancients did not know about wavelengths. These terms may best be described as constructs. To understand what the ancients thought it is best to keep modern science out of the discussion. Things were true to them because that is what they saw with their eyes. They thought the sun rose and went down. Not true, but to the unscientific mind it seemed correct.
True. And those fields are toroidal.
@@Tom-xg1kj God creates in fractals patterns. Everything follows this pattern (as above, so below).
@@Tom-xg1kj Explain to me what “solid dome” the ancients “saw.”
expanse (ra.qi.a - רָקִיעַ)
רָקִיעַ (ra.qi.a) 'expanse' (H7549)
This word occurs about 17 x
Meaning
1) extended surface (solid), expanse, firmament
1a) expanse (flat as base, support)
1b) firmament (of vault of heaven supporting waters above)
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:...
Besides if the earth was flat a cat would knock all the stuff off of it. 😅😅😅😅😅
You are confusing the four directions with flatness.
Circle doesn’t necessarily mean globe. You can have a plate that is a circle but not globe shape. I just remain open to the idea the earth could be “flat”. But at the end of the day, I don’t know. God bless
Basically, Israelite cosmology is probably more like a snow globe earth than anything else.
@@damachinen most people when they think “flat earth” it’s like the ridiculous drawings people make to discredit it. I would also think of it as more of a snow globe.
Circle doesn't mean sphere... The flat earth would also be a circle, with due north in the middle of the plate.
@@thekingstable4740yes. It's a hard issue because so much of the discussion is purely poisoning of the well, ad hominems and straw men.
The best thing for people to do is go and shoot long distance photography, calculate view distance and then calculate the earth curve rate and compare. At the very least, the earth is either much larger than is currently purported, or its flat.
The allegorical bunch are an allegory themselves. They're not poets but avatars.
Earth is flat
😂
Funny, there’s whistleblowers from airline pilots, astronauts, even NASA employees - saying the earth is flat and nobody’s been to the moon.
However, there’s no flat earth whistleblowers.
Like a square
😂😂😂
Yep, so is your cerebrum
Cheers to Rob Skiba and Dr. Heiser
Skiba died from his own ignorance. How many others were adversely affected by his "advice"? Why venerate an individual who was hopelessly wrong and spread his dangerous ignorance to others?
@@moggpiano8043 Rob Skiba isn't dead... 🤷
@@Theggman83yes he is unfortunately
@@dylangoldman2310 holy smokes, I totally didn't know he died. I don't follow his channel so I guess that's how I missed it... Died of "COVID" I see... Crazy.
@@Theggman83 Yup they got him :(
We don't call them ( less ons) for no reason. We reduce, plagiarize and correlate past knowledge just as the biblical account is doing.
Its literally our academic model of how to do it and be more precise about it.
Psalm104 beginning:
1Bless the LORD, O my soul!
O LORD my God, You are very great;
You are clothed with splendor and majesty.
2He wraps Himself in light as with a garment;
He stretches out the heavens like a tent,
3laying the beams of His chambers
in the waters above,
making the clouds His chariot,
walking on the wings of the wind.
4He makes the winds His messengers,
flames of fire His servants.a
5He set the earth on its foundations,
never to be moved.
6You covered it with the deep like a garment;
the waters stood above the mountains.
7At Your rebuke the waters fled;
at the sound of Your thunder they hurried away-
8the mountains rose and the valleys sank
to the place You assigned for them-
9You set a boundary they cannot cross,
that they may never again cover the earth.
Like Mike Heiser says this is not about the cosmos, it is about the creator and splendour of his work. Note the first two verses and then claim it is about the cosmos. And when the stupidity of that is pointed out pretend to be hurt.
Pagan scripture WAS inspired... just NOT by Yahweh....
Surprised he was a globe earther.
Cause he was intelligent genius!
@@MrEmeralddogNot in cosmology.
lol. Nice.
The flat earth is explained by him. The earth isn't flat. You people are so deceived. Heiser was brilliant.
@@dereknelson6601Obviously you prefer the CIA op started in the '90's by 2 atheists. There has been no one who can prove fe. At least it's not an issue of salvation.
Awesome 😎
Love Dr. Heiser. May all come to understand and learn.
Does he believe the earth is flat?
Humm🤔
I hope not.
I just ran across this guy, on my feed. Watched a few of his video's so far. Really liked this guy....
P.s.
He mentions the round, flat earth?
So, what does he believe?
Dr.Heiser never believed in a Flat Earth ( cognitive dissonance & pre-conceived notions of the world), but what I do respect about him is that he never once hid from what the text said. I on thee other hand can only say that the Bible says what it says, I don't understand sometimes the logic of ppl. You are not trying to make yourself sound crazy to who if you don't believe FL theory. Yet you do believe in a 6 day creation account, that a snake talked to our first parents to deceive them, Giants were created by Angel+human female offspring ( unless you adhere to the Sethite theory ) but even then you still believe in Giants because post flood they're still there I.E Goliath minimum 8ft people, Jacob wrestled an Angel/Jesus and Jacob won to become know as Israel, Moses did wonders via God and the staff including parting the Red Sea, Jonah being in the whales/Fish for 3 days and surviving, a talking donkey, that a man who we now base our faith in as non Hebrew gentiles via a new covenant say he defeated death + he went to heaven after his resurrection and he was God incarnate.
But yet you wouldn't believe this even if all evidence was thrown at you because Nasa and all of the space agencies and governments tell you it is round. I'm not saying it isn't but take out you pre conceived notions what you think the Bible says and just let it speak for itself. All i'm saying is most people who don't believe in God already deem you a fool for believing in a God to begin with, a lot of so called ''Christians'' already don't take Genesis as fact anymore because they want to fit in Evolution into the Bible. Let me ask you this...If we take out Genesis out of the Bible and Adam and Eve and thee whole creation account is just allegory or fiction...Then what was the point of Jesus coming down and dying on the cross?? , you start getting into a slippery slope from which you really cant come back from. I will accept God's word for what it says and if other ppl see me as a crazy person, then it is what it is.
I rather be crazy to this world and it's people who deny God, that to turn away from God and his word. When we choose to be Christians we accept Jesus and what he came to save us from, and that includes the Genesis book ppl try and say is just fiction. Because in Genesis we see the plan already being mention ed by God in Genesis 3 the seed of the serpent in emnity with the woman's seed, we get the shadow of Jesus being our savior in the recalled sacrifice to Abraham to test his loyalty and not sacrificing Isaac his son (His only true heir ). Shows us that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son for us John 3:16 and didn't withhold what was most precious to him in order to save us.
I know i will get heavily ridiculed for this comment but honestly I couldn't care less, I've looked into your question for years now and I still haven't found a reason to believe otherwise, I never wanted to think of this stuff but i know I will get ridiculed as part of believing this topic. But Biblically I don't see anything to disprove it, and I've seen enough video to not make me believe Nasa or Earthly Governments to tell me Cosmology. Like the good book says - Romans 3:4a : ''let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written''. At the end of the day, we have to ask ourselves, do we truly believe this book? or only bits and pieces, specially the parts were it doesn't fit into our world view as we see it now. I mean just think of what is going on with its twisting of the word by false leaders who affirm LGBTQ+ to fit their world view on how we should accept this into the church when scripture is clear on the matter.
At some point we either believe God's Holy inspired words or we don't. I pray you find the answers your looking for and please consider all arguments before casting them aside.Proverbs 18:13 - ''If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame.'' . Pray to God and ask for the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth to you. God bless.
He's just saying that the original audience and authors of the old testament lived in a pre-scientific era. They didn't know that earth was a sphere, hence why the Bible describes earth as a circle resting on pillars with a dome over it.
if he did that be a step up because the earth is flat and you've been lied to,you evidence doesnt come from s rupture rather it comes from fake science(not saying all science is fake) but this science just like evolution is boolonie
Its FLAT you are not alone 😎@@danperez3970
Earth is The Sheol
How is 'spreading' the sky the same as 'casting it hard'. Something is not right here. There are other ways to interpret Chazaq and Yatsaq to have it mean the same as the Firmament that birds fly in as we see in Genesis 1:20. "And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven." If birds fly in the Firmament, then the Firmament is not hard. Why interpret words to make God sound ignorant?
Check the NET bible's footnote of the verse in Job.
tn The verb means “to beat out; to flatten,” and the analogy in the next line will use molten metal. From this verb is derived the word for the “firmament” in Gen 1:6-8, that canopy-like pressure area separating water above and water below.
This is metaphoric language delineating God as the Master Smith hammering out the skies like casting "metal" or something like that in that regard.
@@treksta2009I came here to say just this. You are totally right.
The raqia is to spread out something solid by beating. Like spreading out a sword over an anville by a blacksmith. That's how you stretch something hard. You "raqa" it.
Hi,
is there a link to a video of this full lecture Dr. Heiser gave?
ua-cam.com/video/rN2Ppbrtf-Q/v-deo.htmlsi=1-y4Mi3POQyA8X4E
It's titled: Genesis and the ancient near east.
Where is Carl Baugh, Ken Ham, and Kent Hovind? These are some brilliant modern men that see the uncontestable value in the Bible's command of the the observable testable universe. Its explanatory power compared to any ancient religion is unquestionable. Which ancient manuscripts have presented a plausible description of this universe?
How does the moon speed up then slow down?
It doesn't.
@@ericb2409 sure it does, speeds up to go in front, slows down to go behind.
The speed of the moon is a constant. However its direction, being circular, is constantly changing. This means that although the speed of the moon is constant, the constant change in direction results in a change in velocity. Speed and velocity are two different things.
@@ericb2409 nope if it stayed the same speed it would crash.
He was an amazing man but to me, a student of Scripture for 50 years, he causes confusion over things that frankly are not always important.
It's funny, i actually think he clears up a lot of things that I found confusing. To each their own tho. Let God be glorified either way.
He seemed to dwell more in the alternative communities. He was strongly affiliated with the ancient aliens crowd, and the UFO crowd. His content seems more directed at those kinds of people, hence flat earth stuff. Pretty interesting that Heiser has the intellectual temerity to be honest about what the bible teaches about the cosmology of the earth. All credit to him, even if he was a glober.
So what exactly was the Biblical cosmology of the ancient Israelites?
That the sun, moon, stars rotated around a flat stationary earth.
It WAS OPPOSITE of what the the non believers ie those who invented the Heliocentric model of the earth and those who said we came from some “Big Bang” or animals or that those who say that Yeshua was just a prophet, lol but not funny.
Did you watch the video?😂
@@joeyg1315 yea, what’s your point? I’ve watched practically all his podcasts and vids. Enough to know he isn’t right on all things and neither am I or you or any other earthling. We know the TRUTH not based on another’s “scholarly” opinion or understanding but ONLY on Yahs revealed truth in the inner man through prayer , supplication and fasting. Would love to hear your knowledge of these virtues.
@billyd8084 My point is Heiser clearly articulates what ANE readers were thinking cosmologically, and we see glimpses of this in Biblical literature. It doesn't mean the Bible is wrong, it just makes us ask the question of what is the Bible trying to say. Is it trying to be a science book, or is it declaring the theological truths about who God is and what He has done for us.
No NO. NOO! Please God don't tell Michael Hiser is a flatearther!?!
No. He is explaining the biblical cosmology. He believes in science's cosmology, not the bible's. You can find online a blog article he wrote about flat earth a few years ago.
God is a flat earther, but Dr. Heiser was not.
He’s a realist not a theorist. ALL that Mike teaches is what the ancient Israelites believed and taught which IS a circular, stationary, flat earth. If the Word of Yah is inspired, those who Yah inspired to write it are CORRECT. YES indeed Mike was a “flat earther” although he appeased the liars in order to reach them and I can’t and won’t hold that against him.
@@billyd8084 that's a misrepresentation of MH's position - he made it repeatedly clear that he did not believe in the ancient cosmology of the Bible in a literal sense. He wasn't "appeasing" anybody when he affirmed today's scientific understanding of Earth and the Solar System - that was what he actually believed.
Why? Are you going to cry about it?
Are you going to stop listening to him because he holds positions that differ from yours or that you don't understand?
Sooo what are we supposed to take away from this? Maybe the video should be longer for more context cause this sounds like a flat earth lecture
Because the Bible is a flat earth book, alongside every other religion. Because the Earth is, indeed, flat. It is the universe. Not a pancake floating through space, but the entirety of the universe with the stars, great lights. and planets hovering around a central star (Polaris). This star never moves (disproving any notion of a seasonal globe “tilt”). The heavens are the barrier above which separates earth from the other realms (heaven and tartarus). Below the ground is Sheol (hades, the underworld, the grave).
If you want your Christian faith to *click* then it’s time to accept the way its authors truly depicted it.
If you use google, you’ll get results google wants you to see. So instead go and buy a telescope and point it at Polaris. According to the globe model earth needs to tilt 23.5 degrees between seasons . This means the entirety of the sky should shift just as much. Track it for 3-6 months. I can assure you it will not move (if you have the telescope pointed at the correct star).
Then consider that perhaps the god who created the universe knew what he was telling his authors about it (it’s flat with a round outer “dome”. Amos 9).
I have to agree.
Was he a flat earther or not?
@@AnthonyShaw-ty9pi he acknowledged that the bible said the earth was flat but (likely to keep his credibility) refuted that he actually believed that. I appreciate that the guy from the Bible project admit to the true nature.
Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time
The secred text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits
So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply
Best regards from a Muslim ( line of ismail )
Amazing! Yeshua kept the Passover, which means He ate lamb. There are how many times in scripture He eats and shares fish with others? Even at the wedding feast of the lamb, scripture teaches that there will be meat and wine.
This whole explanation of the cosmology is very interesting but people take it direct and literal when it is metaphorical as it is within the realm of comprehension that we can only understand with the minds eye, This is all within the realm of Metephysics and very well is accurate information if one considers the possibility that we as humans are not and cannot be God or god like so to even see reality and understand its structure is impossible, Science tries to understand all it can but it can only go so far. God is too awesome and immense for us to understand because God is all things and so God can understand all of existence and all the infinite realities thus to God the world is flat, Flat as a sheet of paper that you write a story down but to us the universe and existence is much more complex.
If you climb to the top of the tallest mountain the earth still looks flat (because it is). Fish eyed lenses are used to create the curvature
Bingo
Sure thing, Mr. Short School Bus.
On the dot!!
Are you people serious 😞
Based and true. Why won't people listen? Heliocentrism is (at least) centuries old plot to make the world stop trusting their own eyes.
It's sun worship, but most importantly, once a lie this damning becomes accepted as fact, making people believe other lie-based narrative becomes much easier.
People on the forefront of proving heliocentrism or theories to support it have all either been Freemasons, members of FM-adjacent orders and/or occultists.
The same New Age Gnostic BS which reemerged in the last century is only a culmination of these teachings.
Why do you have people like Michio Kaku raving about how the Kabbalah nails so much of how our cosmos is shaped? Because he's a practicing kabbalist. Like all the high priests of today are.
Follow the ruler and the square compass.
@blurrycreatures