By Mondo Gonzales
If you haven’t seen or read my previous article in the February 2023 magazine entitled, “Psalm 19 Project: Addressing Flat Earth Claims” please go to our website at https://prophecywatchers.com/psalm-19-project-addressing-flat-earth-claims/. Let me reiterate the value of addressing some of these topics. First and foremost, our attitudes should always be loving and kind when we disagree with one another. It does not honor Jesus to fight amongst ourselves or to call other brothers and sisters names. We all believe that Jesus is the only Savior for mankind and that is the most important issue (Ephesians 4:3, 32). At the same time, the topic of whether we live on a flat earth or globe has major ramifications for evangelism. There are godly people on both sides of the issue and have as their goal to find truth and to try and reach people with the accurate understanding of Scripture.
Additionally, we believe it is important to continue to get people hard facts and data so they can avoid getting caught up into what see as the erroneous thinking of the flat earth model. I have become convinced that for the most part, if someone has become persuaded that the earth is flat, it is highly unlikely they will ever change their mind. However, for those that are being inundated from friends and family to watch a certain video or to look at someone’s images, our goal is to provide not just biblical theology, but also our own astrophotography that cannot just be labeled as fabricated or lies. This is often the case with those proposing a flat earth. If you show them a picture of galaxy or deep sky object, they often simply claim it is fabricated by NASA. We are already blunting that accusation by taking our own photographs.
I addressed two main methodologies in the last article, and it will be that foundation which will occur throughout all of the Psalm 19 project research. What does the Bible accurately say (hermeneutics) and how can we confirm this through observational analysis (true science). We have been blessed by God in that several generous donors have come forward to abundantly provide for this project with highly advanced scientific equipment. You can see pictures of our new observatory here: https://prophecywatchers.com/the-psalm-19-project/. We are excited in that our setup would be similar or even more advanced to what you might find at a private university or community college (if they have an observatory at all).
For this article, we want to address what the Bible says about the expanse or firmament and also how each interpretation compares with what we actually observe in the night sky. We believe that all genuine verified truths (facts) are from God and should correspond to a proper interpretation of the Bible. Let me address a common criticism right up front so that we can get to the main point. We are not King James only here at the ministry. What I mean by that is many people build their doctrine only on certain English versions. Let me explain this carefully. English versions throughout history are obviously translations. We must never forget this. Anyone who is multilingual or studied Bible translations recognizes that there are always “gaps” in understanding in translating from one language to another. These gaps are not necessarily large, and I am not saying that all translations are worthless. Not at all. It is just important to recognize that deep and nuanced theological doctrine should not be based primarily on any translation, but instead should go back to the original languages of the Bible (Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek).
Many (not all) in the Flat Earth camp are King James only and if you don’t use the exact English word as found in the KJV, they accuse you of being a heretic and a follower of new age translations. The King James version is/was a fine translation for 1611. It was not even the first good English translation. John Wycliffe was the first major English translation in the 14th century, but his was a translation from the Latin Vulgate. It wasn’t until Tyndale produced his translation in the 15th century that we had an English translation directly from the Greek/Hebrew. The Geneva Bible of 1560 was another decent English translation. No English translation is perfect. In fact, it is impossible that any translation from one language to another be perfect. It is the very nature of linguistics. However, English translations are sufficient in getting the gospel to the reader. That is the most important aspect of any translation, and the gospel is rarely (if ever) lost in a translation from the Greek/Hebrew to the target language.
For this discussion, I am going to avoid, as best as possible, using any English equivalent when discussing what we read as the “expanse” or the “firmament” in English versions. The Hebrew word for these is RAQIA. For example, many try to build truth off of the English translation “firmament” as found in some of the older English versions. However, the origination of this English word (etymology) is from the Latin “firmamentum” and not directly from the Hebrew raqia. In trying to understand what raqia actually means, too often people will base it on the word firmament instead of the Hebrew raqia. Let me give some history. The early English versions based their translation off of the Latin which came from Jerome’s 4th century Latin Vulgate. Why did he choose firmamentum for his translation? He got it from the Greek Septuagint version (stereoma) which was translated around 275 BC. Does this solve the problem? Case closed? For some it does, but in reality, it does not and should not.
This should not be the final conclusion in how you do hermeneutics (interpret the Bible). These methods at looking at the history of words are secondary or tertiary approaches. They are not the foundation. If this is as far as people go in their interpretations and building doctrine, they are missing the most important aspect which is context in the ancient Hebrew texts. This is the most important linguistic methodology of discovering the meaning of any word (context, context, context).
Let me add an additional layer of how to find a meaning of a non-English word in literary sources, especially as it relates to the Bible. Hebrew (among other languages like Greek) has a long history. This means that words often change meaning over centuries. So, when we see the word raqia as written by Moses in the book of Genesis, we must take into consideration that his use of the word might be somewhat different than the Psalmist or Ezekiel’s use of the word over 600-800 years later. This is quite common in linguistics and even in English in modern memory. When I was younger, I would watch the Flintstones cartoon. In the introduction of the cartoon, they would sing, “When you’re with the Flintstones, Have a yabba dabba doo time. A dabba doo time. We’ll have a gay old time.” Oh, how words have changed in just one generation!
In addition to the context of when a specific text was written, we must also take into consideration the genre of a literary text. Is it poetry? Narrative? Apocalyptic? Idiomatic? If we fail to recognize these literary devices, we will end up with a wrong interpretation and will build incorrect theology based on this erroneous interpretation. The word raqia appears only 17 times (in 15 verses) in the entire Hebrew Bible. Here is a list of all fifteen verses. Instead of getting caught up and distracted by the English “expanse” or “firmament,” let’s skip this and just use the original Hebrew word raqia. In the Psalms passages (known for strophe symmetry), I have underlined the two words showing the clear parallelism that we often see in Psalms, Proverbs, and other Wisdom literature.
- Genesis 1:6 And God said, “Let there be a raqia in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.”
- Genesis 1:7 And God made the raqia and separated the waters that were under the raqia from the waters that were above the raqia. And it was so.
- Genesis. 1:8 And God called the raqia Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.
- Genesis 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the raqia of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years,
- Genesis 1:15 and let them be lights in the raqia of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so.
- Genesis 1:17 And God set them in the raqia of the heavens to give light on the earth,
- Genesis 1:20 And God said, “Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the raqia of the heavens.”
- Psalm 19:1 To the choirmaster. A Psalm of David. The heavens declare the glory of God, and the raqia above proclaims his handiwork.
- Psalm 150:1 Praise the LORD! Praise God in his sanctuary; praise him in his mighty raqia!
- Ezekiel 1:22 Over the heads of the living creatures there was the likeness of a raqia, shining like awe-inspiring crystal, spread out above their heads.
- Ezekiel 1:23 And under the raqia their wings were stretched out straight, one toward another. And each creature had two wings covering its body.
- Ezekiel 1:25 And there came a voice from above the raqia over their heads. When they stood still, they let down their wings.
- Ezekiel 1:26 And above the raqia over their heads there was the likeness of a throne, in appearance like sapphire; and seated above the likeness of a throne was a likeness with a human appearance.
- Ezekiel 10:1 Then I looked, and behold, on the raqia that was over the heads of the cherubim there appeared above them something like a sapphire, in appearance like a throne.
- Daniel 12:3 And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the raqia above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.
Before we examine the biblical data, I want to point you to some additional resources that will do a far more thorough job than I can do in this short magazine article. The first is a book by Robert C. Newman entitled, “The Biblical Firmament: Vault or Vapor?” You can get the kindle version for $2.99 and I highly recommend it. He is an excellent candidate to discuss this topic. He has a PhD in theoretical astrophysics from Cornell University and two advanced graduate degrees in Old Testament and biblical hermeneutics. The other is a journal article entitled, “The Myth of the Solid Heavenly Dome: Another Look at the Hebrew Raqia” by Randall W. Younker and Richard M Davidson. It was published in 2011 in Andrew University Seminar Studies, No 1, pp. 125-147. Much of the direction of my article will come from these two excellent sources.
If you are researching the various aspects and looking for truth about the errors of flat earth teaching, do not limit yourself to my introductory articles. They are cursory and not meant to give an exhaustive treatment. I strongly recommend the above two resources as well as the book, Falling Flat by Dr. Danny Faulkner.
Let me move on and summarize the differences concerning the meaning of raqia. Those in the flat earth camp believe the raqia is a hardened dome that exists above the earth (picture a snow globe which you might see at Christmas time). They do not claim to know exactly how high this hardened dome is above the surface. Unfortunately, they have not done any scientific investigation themselves to prove this dome exists or its exact height. They will often make criticisms of NASA pictures or videos of rockets or satellites being lifted into “space” by Elon Musk and other foreign governments. They do not believe these rockets are actually going into “outer space” because for them there is no such thing. It is believed that the hardened dome exists around 10,000 miles up, but this is simply a guess by them. Therefore, rockets that do fly up cannot pass through the hardened dome, but only transverse the high earthly atmosphere underneath the dome.
In addition, they posit that the Sun and Moon orbit in various concentric circular orbits at only a few thousand miles up, but below the hardened dome (raqia). For them, there is no such thing as a genuine satellite orbiting the earth. Most (not all) images of deep space objects are fabricated. If there are genuine objects (like a galaxy or nebula or stars or planets), they are simply points of light pasted on the underside of the hardened dome. It is difficult at times to get a consensus from those in the various flat earth groups. One person described the stars as similar to a sticker being stuck on the underside of the hardened dome which gives the appearance of outer space. They say there is no depth to outer space because these stars are simply points of light on the dome. I had one follower tell me that I am deceived in discussing the “alleged” details seen on the surface of planet Mars. For her, it was a NASA lie to see a standard picture of Mars with its red surface and polar ice regions. She said Mars is simply a point of light on the raqia (dome) and nothing more. However, even the naked eye (no binoculars or telescope) at a dark sky site can show the deep red color of Mars which we know from images of the red dust on Mars. I asked her if she had ever looked through a large aperture telescope at Mars. She was unwilling to engage any further. This saddens me, because somewhere in her journey, she became close minded to facts and firsthand research.
The non-flat earth viewpoint recognizes the various aspects and descriptions of the raqia as found in the text of Scripture. Ultimately, the raqia (depending on biblical context) can refer to the atmospheric heavens where the birds fly, but also to outer space where the planets orbit the sun in addition to deep space objects where we find other astronomical objects. These include the innumerable galaxies, nebulae, star clusters, etc. Again, the goal is to do our best to understand the various nuances of the word raqia, but also to compare our interpretations with what we can observe in the real world. A true interpretation of inspired Scripture will never contradict what God allows us to observe in His created world. We might not have all the answers, but truth by definition does not contradict. The Bible is not a scientific textbook, but when it does speak of scientific matters, it is accurate. What we can see is that the Bible does indeed describe a spherical globe called earth that is surrounded by billions of beautiful objects which point to the majesty of God’s glory as Psalm 19:1 and other passages proclaim. Our Psalm 19 project equipment is already producing stunning results showing beautiful nebulae, gigantic galaxies (with millions or billions of individual stars), a spherical 3D moon surface and more to come!
It is common when seeking the definition of words to compare their various forms. For example, in English we have the noun, song, but also realize that the root letters (S-N-G) can form the various other words simply by using different vowels. We get the verbs sing, sang, and sung. We also observe the participle singing. One of the ways in which people seek to find the meaning of the Hebrew noun raqia is to look at its root raqa. This can be helpful, but Hebrew scholars know that this cannot always be definitive. They do not want to be guilty of committing what is known as the “exegetical root fallacy.” This fallacious conclusion assumes that a noun’s root as found in the verb always shows dependence. It does not.
Raqa as a verb in the Hebrew Bible is often used to refer beating or pounding on metal in order to spread it out into thin sheets. Therefore, for flat earth proponents, the word raqia clearly is connected to the root raqa. Since raqa is connected to the idea of something solid being thinned out, the noun raqia should obviously refer to something solid. In this case a hardened dome above. For them, the case is closed, and much of the rest of their thinking is based on this connection. We will return to the root connection after briefly examining the 15 verses where raqia appears in the Hebrew Bible.
Newman lists out several conclusions which can be learned from examining the biblical data except Ezekiel and Psalm 150:1 which he addresses later in the book.
1) The raqia was created by God Himself and first appears in Genesis 1:6-7.
2) It separates two undefined quantities of water. This is why many translations use the word expanse instead of firmament. Because of Genesis 1:7 they see the raqia as the air atmosphere. We know that the water under the raqia are the earth’s oceans. It does not specify that the amount of water above the raqia is equal to the amount of water below the raqia. The water which is above or near the top of the raqia (the preposition used is also used for “near the top”) is likely a reference to clouds and water vapor according to Newman. Most flat earthers object to this interpretation of seeing the waters above the raqia as being clouds or water vapor. They object by appealing to Psalm 148:4 which reads, “Praise Him, you heavens of heavens, And you waters above the heavens!” They see these waters as existing above the hard dome somewhere “out there.” In chapter 7, Newman shows how this is not the most credible interpretation.
3) The raqia is called (in some sense) heaven (Gen 1:8). The word heaven is multi-faceted and refers to the place where birds fly (Gen 1:20), where the sun, moon, and stars are located (Gen 1:14-16), and to God’s eternal dwelling place. Newman spends chapter 3 demonstrating these conclusions which is consistent with the concept of 3 heavens mentioned by Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:2.
4) Psalm 19:1 uses parallelism to describe the raqia as heaven and the place where the Sun abides along with the rest of the heavenly host.
5) Daniel 12:3 uses parallelism to equate the brightness of the raqia with the shining of the stars.
As we examine Psalm 150:1, we see a parallelism with God’s sanctuary and the mighty raqia (which can include the stellar heavens where the stars and sun are located as in Genesis 1:14-16). This fits perfectly with the description as found in Isaiah 66:1 where God says, “The Heavens are My throne, And earth is My footstool.” Even though God is often described as dwelling in the heaven of heavens outside of the universe in other locations, He describes the majestic starry heavens as His throne and sanctuary with the earth as His footstool. God’s point is that as large and great as the heavens and earth are, it should become obvious that mankind cannot build a house for God to dwell in (2 Chronicles 6:18).
When it comes to the several occurrences of raqia in Ezekiel 1 and 10, it is obvious that we clearly are in the genre of a vision as 1:1 says. This immediately should rule out making any absolute conclusions about physical objects. Visions by definition are outside of the ordinary use of language. In fact, the word raqia in the context of the vision is introduced by the Hebrew word demut which is used to highlight a simile and not the actual referent (Ezekiel 1:22). This is a key marker which helps guide the rest of the section. If I hold up an apple in my hand, I do not say this is “like an apple.” I say… “I am holding an apple in my hand.” The Hebrew marker is clearly telling us that what the author is describing is not the raqia, but instead similar in some sense to the raqia. However, it does not reveal what sense this is in the text.
We know that God dwells in what we might call a spiritual non-physical dimension. This is why the Bible says He is invisible (Colossians 1:15; 1 Timothy 1:17). It would be unwise to build a theology of raqia as a physical hard dome from visionary texts introduced by grammatical markers denoting similes.
Let’s return briefly to those that want to force the noun raqia to be tied to the verb raqa. The Hebrew raqa is not limited to thinning out hard metal into sheets by hammering. In Psalm 136:6 its context clearly refers to the thinning out (raqa) of the earth’s landmass which was above the primordial waters as found in Genesis 1:9-10. Without going into all the various detail, Newman in his book, responds to this Hebrew root assertion. He says, after examining all the data, “Notice, however, that this ‘spreading out’ is applied to objects other than thin sheets (e.g., the earth in Psalm 136:6). I know of no ancient view in which the earth was thought to be thin nor spread out by beating. In any case, the view that the raqia is the atmosphere [instead of a hard thinned out dome] encounters no difficulty here with regard to shape. Relative to its lateral extent, our atmosphere is indeed very thin.”
Newman says the noun raqia does not necessarily connect to the root raqa. But are there not some reputable Hebrew scholars who note a possible connection between the noun raqia and the verb raqa? Yes, there are. Yet even for those that do think raqia could be connected to raqa, they still do not embrace the flat earth hard dome concept.
Hebrew scholars Keil and F Delitzsch provide a succinct summary regarding the meaning of the term raqia with reference to the sky in Genesis and elsewhere in the OT:
“Raqia from raqa, to stretch, spread out, then beat or tread out, means expansium, the spreading out of the air, which surrounds the earth as an atmosphere. The “waters above” means: ‘The waters under the firmament are the waters upon the globe itself, those above are not the ethereal waters beyond the limits of the terrestrial atmosphere, but the waters which float in the atmosphere, and are separated by it from those upon the earth, the waters which accumulate in clouds, and then bursting these their bottles, pour down as rain upon the earth.”
They wrote this in the late 1800s which gives credence that their interpretation is not part of a worldwide conspiracy to obfuscate biblical truths through secular scientific chicanery. They rejected a hard dome interpretation for the raqia because this was what the Hebrew text intends.
If we summarize all the data (which is complex) we are left with the conclusion that there is absolutely zero requirement based on the text of the Bible to say that the raqia is a hard dome. If you simply insert “hard dome” in the various texts, it becomes contradictory. Those in the flat earth camp will respond and ask, “But what about Job 37:18?” This is a great question and provides another opportunity to discuss some basics of biblical hermeneutics. We read in Job, “Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?” (KJV). For many flat earth proponents, this is the smoking gun. Case closed. For them, the Bible says clearly that God spread out the skies and that they as hard a cast metal mirror (“looking glass”).
Newman addresses this fully in chapter 2. He writes,
“The word translated ‘strong’ (chazaq) can also be rendered ‘mighty’ and the word translated ‘molten’ has the more general meaning ‘poured out.’ Thus, an alternative translation for our passage is, ‘Can you, with Him, spread out the mighty clouds, with an appearance of being poured out?’ Consider the relative merits of these alternatives… ‘mirror’ has no objective lexical foundation, whereas ‘appearance’ is supported by the Septuagint. Which translation fits the context better? The theme of the first alternative is the original creation: ‘Did you, with God, spread out the sky?’ The second refers to the on-going weather phenomena: ‘Can you, with God, spread out the clouds?’ Is Job 37, then a creation context or a weather context? I think that verses 2-5 (thunder and lightning), verse 6 (rain), verses 9-10 (wind, cold, frost), verses 11-13 (rain and clouds), verses 15-16 (clouds), verse 17 (warmth, south wind), and verses 21-22 (clouds, wind, fair weather) decisively settle the issue! But with this solution, constructed on lexical and contextual grounds, the whole force of this verse in supporting the dome view of the firmament evaporates. As a spin-off from our analysis, we also gain an example of a non-solid object (clouds) being spread out with the use of the verb raqa” (emphasis mine).
We can see that Newman has a solid grasp of how to interpret the Bible (hermeneutics). He is using the lexical definitions of words as well as the context to determine meaning. Even if this was not enough, there is another aspect of hermeneutics that he did not mention. Before I explain it, let me demonstrate it. What if I came and told you that the Bible actually says, “You will be as gods!” (Genesis 3:5). It also says, “Search and look, for no prophet has arisen out of Galilee” (John 7:52). And from the actual book of Job itself, the Bible says, “When disaster brings sudden death, He (God) mocks as the calamity of the innocent… God gives the earth into hand of the wicked; He covers the faces of its judges” (Job 9:23-24). And the Bible say that God “takes away justice” (Job 27:2).
All these statements I just made are erroneous, but they are in the Bible. It might seem obvious, but you would respond and say… “Hey, wait a minute. Satan is the one quoted as saying that we will become as gods.” You would be correct. Whenever a quote is made from the Bible, one of the first questions of interpretation is, “Who said it?” Newman above has already shown that the translation of the Job 37:18 in the KJV is not the most accurate translation based on the Hebrew lexical connections and the context. However, for the sake of argument, let us say that the KJV has a perfect translation from the Hebrew.
It was not God who made this claim about the sky being equated with being hard like glass. This was Elihu, not God who is quoted. It is the opinion of Elihu, not God. This is similar to the above examples I gave. The first quote was Satan. Secondly, the Pharisees made the claim that no prophet has arisen out of Galilee (John 7:52). This was clearly incorrect as we know that at least Jonah was from Galilee and possibly a few more. We can also see that the other quotes in the book of Job were out of Job’s lips and are clearly incorrect. Does God mock the calamity of the innocent? Does He cover the faces of judges or take justice? Obviously not.
In the same way, we do not build true theology off of quotes from people in the Bible unless they are specifically a prophet and speaking for God. Therefore, even though there are problems with the KJV translation (and others) stating that the sky is as strong as a metal glass, all these English renditions show us is the opinion of Elihu. This is basic hermeneutics and reveals that those who are trying to build a hard dome sky from this verse are very misguided.
Even more, a correct interpretation of the biblical text should also comport with the reality of the physical world which can be measured, tested, and examined. The book, Falling Flat, by Dr. Danny Faulkner gives dozens of scientific experiments, formulas, and equations which show the bankruptcy of the flat earth model.
I gave some examples in my previous article how the current non-flat earth models with an expansive outer space universe are absolutely testable and are shown to be reliable. The formulas and laws of physics as developed by Kepler and Newton are proven to the point of perfect certainty. For example, concerning the discovery of the planet Neptune, we can read an excellent summary from flatearth.ws/Neptune:
“Unlike other planets that were found by empirical observation, Neptune was found by mathematical prediction involving Newton’s law of universal gravitation.
In 1821, Alexis Bouvard calculated future Uranus’ orbital position using Newton’s law of motion and gravitation. But according to actual observation, the orbit was slightly different from the expected position, leading Bouvard to predict the existence of an unknown celestial body perturbing Uranus’ orbit.
In 1845-1846, Urbain Le Verrier and John Couch Adams independently calculated the position, mass and orbit of the perturbing body.
On September 24, 1846, Johann Gottfried Galle searched the sky to find this hypothesized planet. Neptune was found only in an hour of search and within 1° from Le Verrier’s prediction.
On Francois Arago’s word, Le Verrier had discovered a planet with the point of his pen.
The discovery of Neptune dramatically confirmed the validity of the law of universal
As you can see, current understanding of the laws of physics makes predictions which can be tested and verified. Let me give you a current example. In late January and early February 2023, I was out observing the latest comet called C/2022 E3 (ZTF). It is known as the Green comet due to its beautiful green coma and tail. It was discovered in March 2022. After several months of fine tuning its predicted orbital trajectory, astronomers began to describe its path and closest approach to earth and the sun. They made forecasts months in advance to where and when would be the best time to observe and photograph the comet. These predictions are all based on the non-flat earth model of our solar system. These take into consideration Newtonian laws and are put out there for anyone to take up the challenge to confirm.
What did I find when I took up the challenge? I read the published predictions that the comet could be found near the north star Polaris. I took out my 20×80 binoculars, put them on a tripod and scanned the heavens. Lo and behold, I found the comet in the exact location and time that was predicted. I did this without a computerized telescope mount. Were there any predictions made by those promoting the flat earth model? None that I ever saw. I am open minded, but instead of simply being a movement based primarily on criticizing others, it would help itself by showing itself to be a movement known for its excellent research methods and formulations.
In following up on this, I spent some time on several flat earth society forums looking for how they account for comets or asteroids. They cannot. It does not fit within their paradigm. The reason why is that they have a hard time accounting for the origin of comets or non-periodic astronomical objects (like planets with predictable and repeatable orbits). With a hard dome (raqia) only thousands of miles above the earth, there should be no way that comets could get into our closed system. One flat earther claimed that Halley’s comet with a predicted orbital period of 75-79 years was a complete lie even though the historical evidence and records are reasonably shown to be true. Comets and their occasional extreme eccentric orbits cause major issues for the flat earth model. For them, they can try and explain away the orbital predictability of the planets, but not so with comets.
In the summer of July 2020, I was able to view and photograph the beautiful and bright comet called NEOWISE C/2020 F3 over Lake Tahoe. It was a stunning sight, even to the naked eye. Once again, the orbital information predicted well in advance of its arrival involved a very detailed understanding of the gravitational effects on the comet as it came and left our inner solar system. Look at the following published predictive orbital map involving retrograde motions (according to appearance). Further, these orbital predictions are not simple and easy circular or elliptical orbits of an average comet. To put this crazy looking predictive map out to the public is bold and would be foolish unless you knew that it was true and could be verified by anyone.
Again, why don’t flat earth researchers make predictions about comets that can be verified by anyone? Their models do not and cannot work. It does not match scientific investigation. They believe they have discovered a biblical paradigm of a hard dome flat earth model, but this certainly cannot be a true interpretation because it does correspond to the true reality which we can all measure with our own eyes. God has given His creation for us to test, explore and give Him glory. When true results of a scientific investigation show their biblical interpretations as being incorrect, they need to go back to see how they have interpreted the Bible incorrectly. Otherwise, the flat earth will commit the same error of the Catholic church in regard to Galileo.
I cannot help but share one more amazing discovery which I look forward to testing over and over with our new equipment. The flat earth paradigm says there is no outer space. No real depth to our universe. There is no gigantic milky way galaxy that actually exists as a 3-dimensional structure. Most of the time, they claim these images are fake, but even if they do admit they are real, they will claim they are simply points of light on the underside of the hard dome raqia. As I mentioned in my previous article, one high profile flat earther says they are light projections made by some unknown group. He did not know whether they were from below the hard dome or from the other side. This is pure speculation.
Just recently, a collection of thousands of astrophotgraphs were put together into one seamless image. The main website says, “The DECaPS2 survey, which took two years to complete and produced more than 10 terabytes of data from 21,400 individual exposures, identified approximately 3.32 billion objects in the plane of the Milky Way galaxy. The survey now covers 6.5% of the night sky and spans a staggering 130 degrees in length. While it might sound modest, this equates to 13,000 times the angular area of the full Moon.”
You can search online and download the gigantic and detailed image. What is amazing is that they put the data out there for anyone to confirm. This means that I can zoom in on their image, find the celestial coordinates, put those into my software and point our telescope to anywhere on this map to confirm. That is true science.
Where are these 3.32 billion objects? Are they just points of light on the underside of a hard dome? Are they simply projections of light as the flat earth community would have us believe? Or are they, instead, actual real objects that are part of the expansive and gigantic Milky Way galaxy which God created to show off His handiwork? As we realize that these 3.32 billion objects are a drop in the bucket of all that God has made in His unfathomable universe, I hope the thrill of discovery blows your mind and that the God we worship, who loves us, and provides for us salvation, is even greater than our puny minds can imagine. “The heavens declare the glory of God and the skies show forth His handiwork” (Psalm 19:1). Amen!
Articles in the Psalm 19 Project series:
Part 1- What is the Psalm 19 Project
Part 2- Addressing Flat Earth Claims
Part 3- What is the Expanse/Firmament (Raqia)?