Search This Blog

Friday, 9 December 2016


If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame. (Proverbs 18:13) 

  .....test everything; hold fast what is good (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

Like many other people, the flat earth model is something I have never previously thought much about or taken seriously. However, having done some research into the subject, and to my own astonishment, I find that I am unable to debunk it. I believe it is worth investigating this subject despite its detractors and the stigma attached to it. Most people's reaction will be to dismiss the flat-earth view out of hand, but perhaps we should not be too hasty in forming an opinion after all.

The heliocentric system of worship forms the basis of Roman Catholicism and its Luciferian system, sun worship having been merged with Christianity through the Emperor Constantine and the bishops of Rome in the fourth century.
The Roman Catholic view of the sun as the centre of the cosmos was accepted about five hundred years ago, after the Jesuit Order was founded in 1540 during the Counter Reformation. The astronomical  model which proposed that the earth and planets revolve around the sun at the centre of the solar system was revived from Greek philosophy and presented by Renaissance mathematician, astronomer and Roman Catholic cleric Nicolaus Copernicus in 1543. (Colossians 2:8).{1} It was under the auspices of the RC Church that Copernicus made his theories known and proposed the new heliocentric model of the universe which gained a hold at a time when many people were uneducated and therefore unequipped to challenge it. Amazingly the heliocentric theory was taught as "fact" universally without direct proof until scientific proof was supposedly provided by Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel's trigonometric parallax method in 1838.{2}

Heliocentrism was strongly opposed by Reformers Martin Luther and John Calvin who upheld the traditional geocentric model which placed a flat, enclosed earth at the centre of the cosmos:

"Luther took the days of creation as literal 24-hour days, with the sun and other heavenly bodies created on day 4 and that he believed all this took place less than 6,000 years before." {3}

Luther: "There is talk of a new astrologer who wants to prove that the earth moves and goes around instead of the sky, the sun, the moon, just as if somebody were moving in a carriage or ship might hold that he was sitting still and at rest while the earth and the trees walked and moved. But that is how things are nowadays: when a man wishes to be clever he must needs invent something special, and the way he does it must needs be the best! The fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside-down. However, as Holy Scripture tells us, so did Joshua bid the sun to stand still and not the earth." {4} 

"Some years after the publication of De Revolutionibus John Calvin preached a sermon in which he denounced those who "pervert the order of nature" by saying that "the sun does not move and that it is the earth that revolves and that it turns." {5} 

Is the notion of a globe-shaped world orbiting the sun a myth?

Interestingly the NATO logo is a flat earth surrounded by laurel leaves. Laurel is the symbol of Apollo aka Apollyon/Destroyer/Abaddon/Lucifer. (Revelation 9:11)

"If you set a bearing due South from anywhere on Earth, inevitably at or before 78 degrees Southern latitude, you will find yourself face-to-face with an enormous ice-wall towering 100-200 feet in the air extending to the East and West the entire circumference of the world!"

"Captain Cook and crew sailed a total of 60,000 miles along the Antarctic coastline never once finding an inlet or path through or beyond the massive glacial wall!  Captain Cook wrote: 'The ice extended east and west far beyond the reach of our sight, while the southern half of the horizon was illuminated by rays of light which were reflected from the ice to a considerable height.  It was indeed my opinion that this ice extends quite to the pole, or perhaps joins some land to which it has been fixed since creation.'"

"On October 5th, 1839 another explorer, James Clark Ross began a series of Antarctic voyages lasting a total of 4 years and 5 months.  Ross and his crew sailed two heavily armored warships thousands of miles, losing many men from hurricanes and icebergs, looking for an entry point beyond the southern glacial wall.  Upon first confronting the massive barrier Captain Ross wrote of the wall, “extending from its eastern extreme point as far as the eye could discern to the eastward.  It presented an extraordinary appearance, gradually increasing in height, as we got nearer to it, and proving at length to be a perpendicular cliff of ice, between one hundred and fifty feet and two hundred feet above the level of the sea, perfectly flat and level at the top, and without any fissures or promontories on its even seaward face.  We might with equal chance of success try to sail through the cliffs of Dover, as to penetrate such a mass.” 

"'The British Ship Challenger recently completed the circuit of the Southern region - indirectly, to be sure - but she was three years about it, and traversed nearly 69,000 miles - a stretch long enough to have taken her six times round on the globular hypothesis.'  -William Carpenter" {6}

The first supposed flight over Antarctica was made by Lincoln Ellsworth on his third attempt with Herbert Hollick-Kenyon. However, they were forced to abort the attempt several times, and because their sextant was faulty they could not achieve accurate readings. There is no footage of their expedition.{7}

Houston, we have a problem..

NASA is the main organisation to disseminate information about the universe and how it functions. However, it takes very little research to establish that NASA is a very dishonest organisation. To name just a few of NASA's many inconsistencies:

* The alleged moon landing in 1969 is now widely doubted and throws up a number of questions as demonstrated in the video by Ralph René A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon.{8}
* The nervous press conference of Apollo 11 astronauts Neil Armstrong and his two colleagues following the supposed "moon landing" very strongly suggests that something is not right.{9}
* NASA announced that the original telemetry tapes which captured the first moonwalk videos were "lost".{10}
* Neil Armstrong was unduly reticent and subdued about the moon landing for the rest of his life and refused to give interviews for years. Armstrong was said to be a committed Christian, but actually he was a "Deist" which is not the same thing. Buzz Aldrin suffered a nervous breakdown and became an alcoholic following the mission.
* NASA openly admits that the photographs of the earth from space are photoshopped. {11}
* The tragic "deaths" of the Challenger astronauts are an outrageous sham! By all accounts they are still alive and kicking, two of them are explained away by the very rare phenomenon of identical twins.{12}
* There is strong evidence to suggest that the Mars mission was fake.{13}
I could give many more examples, but needless to say that the circus they call NASA hardly engenders public confidence in their ability to tell the truth! NASA's 2016 black hole budget of $19.3 billion is truly astronomical!

Armstrong displays Masonic Apron on "the moon"
NASA is literally crawling with Freemasons. C. Fred Kleinknecht, head of NASA at the time of the Apollo Space Program, is now the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Council of the 33rd Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry of the Southern Jurisdiction. {14}
A  bewildering list of NASA's Masonic astronauts can be found on the following link: http://freemasoninformation.com/masonic-education/famous/masonic-astronauts/

In common with NASA, many of the world's space programmes share the Vector or V symbolism in their logo: "It is, in fact, a sign of Satan, of malediction, of the horned God, Pan, and worse." {15}

For a little further insight into this symbol watch the short video below: 

Too may sixes? The scientists? tell us that the earths axial tilt is 66.6 degrees in a 90 degree quadrant. The earths orbital speed around the sun is 66,600 miles an hour and the earths curvature drop in one mile is 0.666ft.
This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666. (Revelation 13:17-18 cf. Revelation 15:2).
Jacob Prasch Moriel Ministries

A disturbing development has recently transpired, in that the faithful remnant church are being persuaded by some leaders to discard the geocentric model on their say so alone, without undertaking a critical analysis of the facts. (Proverbs 18:2). Jacob Prasch concerns me. He has denounced and derided all flat-earth considerations, telling his followers not to pay any attention to them and calling those Christians who take them seriously "ignorant". He takes quite a bit of time at the beginning of this video naming and discrediting Robert Sungenis who challenges the heliocentric view. Is this a red herring? It seems highly unlikely that genuine born-again Christians would be looking to Sungenis in any capacity, spiritual or otherwise, since he claims to be an apologist for the RC Church.{16}

Prasch promotes himself as some sort of spiritual guru in his "questions" series on Moriel TV (also aired on YouTube). I would advise his supporters to be extremely wary of taking everything Prasch says as "gospel". His intra-seal theory is full of holes {17} and his endorsement of certain ecumenicals is enough for us to question his true loyalties.{18} Anyone who endorses NASA has either not done their research or they are part of the problem! If Prasch is right in rejecting the flat earth model, he should be able to debunk it biblically and scientifically, without deviating into all sorts of irrelevant subjects as he did in this particular video. I have viewed many websites and links, and I have never heard any Christian teacher or leader say that the flat-earth view must be accepted by faith alone as Prasch claims. In fact there are a growing number of non-Christians who take the flat earth view seriously. The secular websites I have viewed have produced their own evidence for a flat-earth, and they have debunked (or claimed to debunk) the heliocentric model without taking faith considerations into account.

Despite the Bible primarily being a "theological book" as Prasch says, we should not be guilty of spiritualizing the factual information it conveys because it is at odds with so called "science". Are we not encouraged to take the Bible literally unless it states otherwise? The information given in the scriptures does not support the heliocentric model, and this should be a concern given its dubious history and the lies of NASA and other agencies. Born again Christians take literally the truth concerning the person of Jesus Christ i.e. the virgin birth and His resurrection from the dead etc. without any reliance on scientific proof. We rely on faith of course, but it is not blind faith given that the Word of God, and in particular biblical prophecies concerning Christ are very specific. Similarly, I do not think that blind faith is involved in accepting the biblical model of creation. There would be no reason for God to give us such a detailed account of creation in the Book of Genesis if He were not wanting to tell us something. (2 Timothy 2:15).

The sun and moon were created on the fourth day, after the creation of the earth:

And God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars..... And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day. (Genesis 1:14-19) 

In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth. (Genesis 1:1; cf. Genesis 2:4; Psalm 148:13; Zechariah 5:9). The heaven (sky or aerial firmament) is referred to as an expanse - "From raqa'; properly, an expanse, i.e. The firmament or (apparently) visible arch of the sky -- firmament." {19} The lights (sun moon and stars) were set inside the expanse (Genesis 1:14-17).

Nothing in the scriptures or the extra-biblical texts indicate that the moon reflects the light of the sun. The scriptures describe the sun and the moon as two great lights (luminaries), the moon being the lesser light. (Genesis 1:16). Jesus prophesied .....and the moon shall not give its light. (Matthew 24.29). The sun and moon were created for the benefit the earth i.e. to separate the day from the night, for signs and for seasons, for days and years and to give light upon the earth. (Genesis 1:14). 

I do not claim that the Book of Enoch is canonical, but its astronomical formulas are remarkably accurate. Enoch Chapter 72 describes the moon also as a "luminary" in its own right.{20} and further explains the various positions of the sun and the moon which rise and set from six portals. Enoch also tells us that the sun and the moon are the same size, and that the sun shines seven times brighter than the moon. {21}The greater and lesser lights of Genesis 1:16 refer to comparative luminosity rather than size if we take Enoch's account to be accurate. A minority of translations have, in my view, wrongly translated greater and lesser lights to larger and smaller lights.{22}

The age of the earth is also related to this topic. According to Wikpedia, the age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years (4.54 × 109 years ± 1%) "This dating is based on evidence from readiometric age dating of meteorite material and is consistent with the radiometric ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples." {23} Many Christians now believe that the earth is approximately six thousand years old choosing not to accept the phantom "evidences" provided by science.

Is the biblical description of the moon as a luminary just a question of semantics? Stars have been observed through the dark parts moon, suggesting that it is translucent and not a solid spherical object.{24} There are also videos of the moon in front of the clouds which are difficult to explain away as so called "anomalies".

I have added some links at the bottom of this post with some very interesting information about the complexities involved in determining the true nature of the moon and its effects upon the earth.

The Sixth Seal of Revelation:  

When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. The sky vanished like a scroll that is being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place.and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. (Revelation 6:12-14 cf. Isaiah 34:4; Matthew 24:29; Mark 14:25).

The flat earth model is depicted as a circle inside a square. The scriptures refer to the earth not as a ball, but as a circle and also as having four corners.

It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in; (Isaiah 40:22 cf. Proverbs 8:27). Can we force a globe upon the text here? The Hebrew word for "circle" is "chug" {25} as against the Hebrew word for "ball" "dur" as in Isaiah 22:18. {26}  

After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth..... (Revelation 7:1)

The devil took Jesus to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory in order to tempt him. (Matthew 4:8). Why would the devil take Jesus to a very high mountain if this is metaphoric?

The long day of Joshua: It is repeated no less than five times in the Book of Joshua that the sun stopped : And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped..... (Joshua 10:12-13 cf. Habakkuk 3:11). These events were recorded in the missing Book of Jasher or the Book of the Upright which is referred to more than once in the scriptures. (2 Corinthians 13:1). Furthermore Psalms 93 and 104:9 and Ecclesiastes 1:5 also speak of celestial motion and terrestrial stability.

There are no less than sixty seven Bible references which tell us that the sun and not the earth moves {27}

Can Jacob Prasch explain why we should we believe the Jesuits, the Roman Catholics, the Freemasons, Skull and Bones and NASA's lies and photoshopped images! Can he explain why we should not research the geocentric model without the biases imposed upon us by the world, and why we should not study the scriptures, the relevant extra biblical material and seek the Lord? (2 Peter 1:5). I do not expect Prasch to answer these questions by the way!

IF the geocentric model is taken as a true representation of reality, it is a game changer to a significant degree. Critically, this model completely debunks UFO's and extra terrestrials, something which is accepted as a possibility by many, including the Vatican. One possible end time scenario is the deception that our "creators" were spiritual beings from a distant galaxy and have now returned to help us out. If the geocentric model is the truth and accepted as such, it would have the benefit of protecting those who believe it from this particular deception, if in fact this is the way the enemy plays it. (Matthew 24:24).

This is a huge subject which has many twists and turns. It is not practical to go into all the complexities of geocentrism in this post, but there are many websites which give good information. I have listed just a few points and some of my own thoughts below.

Satellites? Many flat earth advocates dismiss satellites as a hoax. Satellites are alleged to be on a low earth orbit (LEO). For instance, the International Space Station is said to be on an LEO of about 250 miles above the earth's surface. Flat-earth proponents vary in their calculations, but 3000 miles seems to be a ballpark figure that many of them use as the distance of the sun from the earth. IF 3000 miles is correct, it does not preclude the existence of satellites at 250 miles or less, though according to the geocentric model they would would somehow be circling a flat earth rather than orbiting a spherical earth. We are told that geocentric satellites are placed at an altitude of approximately 22,300 miles directly over the equator, revolving in the same direction the earth rotates (west to east). In other words they appear stationary as seen from the earth ... hmm interesting!  

Why did the Roman church condemn Galileo (1564-1642) for promoting the heliocentric model when they had previously encouraged Copernicus to publicise the model one hundred years earlier?
The Jesuits employ devious tactics and often play both sides in order to achieve their ultimate nefarious ends. They may have seemed to reject Galileo's theory due to a longer term plan of ultimately accepting it, hence they employed the Hegelian Dialectic: "Hegelian dialectic, usually presented in a threefold manner..... as comprising three dialectical stages of development: a thesis, giving rise to its reaction, an antithesis, which contradicts or negates the thesis, and the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis."{28} 

What about circumnavigation?
The United Nations logo demonstrates the flat earth model with the north pole at the centre and Antarctica around the outer edge. The continents are spread around the north pole. On a compass, east and west are always at right angles to the north. Therefore to travel in an easterly direction is in fact a circular journey around the north pole.

Do meteorites have a cosmic origin?   
The word  "meteor" comes from the Greek word for "atmospheric. Prior to the nineteenth century there were differing views on the source of meteorites, but a widely held view was that meteors were formed in the atmosphere. According to Oliver C. Farrington in his paper 'The Pre-Terrestrial History of Meteorites' (1901):  "Meteorites have been declared to be (I) terrestrial matter discharged into space by the volcanoes of the earth and returned to it again (Sir Robert Ball); (2) matter discharged from the volcanoes of the moon (La Place, J. Lawrence Smith); (3) matter ejected from the sun (Sorby); (4) portions of shattered stars (Meunier); (5) portions of a shattered planet (Boisse); (6) portions of comets (Newton); (7) clouds of gas or dust cemented and solidified by the action of the earth's atmosphere (Brezina). All of these hypotheses have been urged by men of eminence, each urging strong reasons for his views." {29} 

The cosmic origin of meteors was established by Yale University Professor, Benjamin Silliman based on his analysis of the Connecticut Weston meteorite in 1807. Silliman's analysis subsequently formed the foundation of modern scientific research, and his views are now taken as a given. However his deduction was not without its detractors: "President Thomas Jefferson (who had studied natural sciences) made a memorable statement. 'I would sooner believe that two Yankee professors would lie than that stones would fall from heaven!'"{30} Silliman is recorded as being a Skull and Bones member in 1837.{31} It seems to me that Silliman's analysis, just like the views of the other "eminent" men mentioned above, is hypothetical. Just because Silliman's extraterrestrial analysis fits into the current worldview, should we blindly accept it?

Is Copernicanism the foundation that is holding up ALL evolutionary science?
Marshall Hall (1931-2013) author of The Earth Is Not Moving: "The Copernican Model of a rotating, orbiting Earth is a fact-less, observation-denying deception that is the keystone which is holding up all of modern man's false 'science' and 'knowledge'". {32}

Marshall Hall argued that there has been an incremental progression from the physical sciences of astronomy and physics to the natural sciences. The heliocentric view of the earth makes us inconsequential on a universal level, whereas Darwinism degrades human beings into evolved animals. I would agree that we are being taken apart piecemeal as human beings made in the image of God. (Genesis 1:27). Many people now accept as the norm the secularisation of society which has led to the evils of political correctness, abortion and its devaluation of human life and sexual deviance. The Five Categories of Knowledge according to Marshall are: "Physical Sciences; Natural Sciences; Social [and Behavioral] Sciences; Arts & Humanities; Religion." {32} It is clear that humanity is undergoing the final stages of the satanically orchestrated deception to completely destroy man's relationship with his creator.

Freemasonry is not only a dominant feature within NASA, it also played a very big part in the exploration of the Antarctic. The early explorers including Scott, Amundsen and Shackleton were Freemasons. Antarctic explorer Admiral Byrd was a 33rd degree Freemason. Byrd established First Antarctic Lodge No. 777 of New Zealand constitution on February 5, 1935. Many anomalies surround Byrd's expedition to Antarctica in 1946-7, Operation Highjump, which ended abruptly six months early. We might speculate, but frankly there is no way of ascertaining what actually happened during Operation Highjump since the data immediately became top secret classified information on the return of the navy.

Antarctica became a scientific preserve in 1959. The international Antarctic Treaty System ensures that no one can get anywhere near the area apart from authorised personnel. There are no commercial flights over Antarctica, despite it being the shortest direct route between South Africa/Australia/South America.

The IceCube Neutrino Observatory is built 8000ft beneath the Antarctic ice to investigate neutrinos.{33} Coincidentally, neutrino's are what CERN are involved with in their "dark matter" experiments! 

There can be no doubt that the people at the very top of governments and the sciences are Luciferians and are being directed by the spirit of Antichrist. Whatever is going on with NASA, NATO and in the Antarctic .....the whole world lies in the power of the evil one. (1 John 5:19 cf. John 8:44). The enemy is at work in many different ways. There are men like Prasch who pour derision on the credibility of the geocentric model in order to make it and its proponents look ridiculous. There are also bogus flat-earth theorists out there who deliberately disseminate false information which can easily be discredited, again making the model look ridiculous. Believers should at least be prepared to prayerfully consider the possibility that this subject could be a critical part of the spiritual battle going on between good and evil. (Genesis 3:1; 2 Corinthians 11:3).

I have not formed a definitive conclusion about a flat-earth at this time, but my view of reality has been challenged. The more I look into the flat earth model, the more I am wondering whether the populace may have been subject to a mass cosmological deception as part of the Roman Catholic Counter-Reformation strategy which has its tentacles spread throughout governments and science. 

{1}   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism
{2}   http://science.jrank.org/pages/3276/Heliocentric-Theory-triumph-heliocentric-theory.html
{3}   https://answersingenesis.org/hermeneutics/biblical-interpretation/
{4}   http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast161/Unit3/response.html 
{5}   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism 
{6}   http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/06/south-pole-does-not-exist.html 
{7}   http://www.royalaviationmuseum.com/2596/first-flight-over-antarctica/ 
{8}   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4
{9}   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tjCP3myofE
{10} http://www.reuters.com/article/us-nasa-tapes-idUSTRE56F5MK20090716
{11} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFBAznZwqVg 
{12} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4t4fjYkWc8   
{13} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5_Il2tAT7U
{14} https://aplanetruth.info/space-travelers-and-freemasons/ 
{15} http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/codex_magica/codex_magica25.htm 
{16} http://www.robertsungenis.org/  
{17} http://bewareofthewolves.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/jacob-prasch-rapture-holy-spirit-and.html  
{18} http://bewareofthewolves.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/jacob-prasch-moriel-ministries-further.html
{19} http://biblehub.com/hebrew/7549.htm
{20} http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/boe076.htm 
{21} http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/boe077.htm 
{22} http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-16.htm
{23} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth 
{24} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-8XKCYg1vY 
{25} http://biblehub.com/hebrew/2329.htm 
{29} https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/30058802.pdf
{30} https://www.sott.net/article/238325-Science-Debunked-Meteorites
{31} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Skull_and_Bones_members
{32} http://www.fixedearth.com/fact-less-copernican-model.html
{33} http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/10465749/Telescope-buried-in-Antarctic-ice-detects-elusive-neutrinos.html

Further Links: 


I do not necessarily endorse the above links or vouch for their validity.


colin said...

An absolutely absorbing read! I have now kicked my globe right out of the back door like a football!

I have been troubled with this 'conundrum' for quite some time. 'Funny' what we would really believe if we adhered to God's word ALONE, rather than man's "Science falsely so-called" 1 Timothy 6.20? We can clearly see where Roman Catholic teaching has led so many astray, even up to this 'enlightened' and 'civilised' age that we now find ourselves in? Most will think we should be sent off to the funny farm for questioning the "wisdom of this world" 1 Corinthians 1.20?

God's word said "Sun, stand thou still" Joshua 10.12. So is the earth rotating around the sun? apparently NOT! On a clear day, early in the morning, I see the sun rise every morning from the east, and set every evening in the west! Whether the sun goes under the earth, I know not (Deuteronomy 29.29), but I believe the earth, terra firma is in the centre of the known universe. The belief of a biblical flat earth therefore gives greater weight to the abyss (bottomless pit), does it not-Rev 9.1, 9.2, 9.11, 11.7, 17.8, 20.1, 20.3? It wouldn't be "bottomless" if Australia/Antarctica were down under, now would it?

I must confess that I didn't know commercial airlines couldn't fly across Antarctica, I think the furthest south I have been is the middle east! But, all this makes perfect sense.

I was born in 1960, and I well remember the knowledge of science in those days: I used to crank cars over with a starting handle up to the mid 70s. Can you imagine getting up to the moon and back in 1969 with such antiquated technology? The mind boggles! There has been much debate over the multi directional shadows in certain moon landing photographs, among many other things. Maybe it was all filmed in Hollywood?

Most certainly, your last paragraph contains much wisdom, but, once upon a time, I used to believe in the Big Bang theory!

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

Thank you for your insight as usual Colin. Many things do seem to fit much better with the geocentric model. Your point about the bottomless pit is a good one. I would like to get a better grasp of scientific arguments before I throw my globe away, and this may take some time. I have been thinking that if geocentrism is right, then a staggering deception has taken place. It is rather difficult to get my head around it at the moment. God bless.

Michael said...

Treena I have a problem... Normally I find your articles incisive and well researched but you are well off the mark with the statement "The alleged moon landing in 1969 is now widely doubted". That is not true, the moon landing deniers are frankly a very small collection of folk who are driven to undermine one of the greatest and bravest events ever to happen. Charlie Duke who visited the Moon on Apollo 16 and also communicated with the Apollo 11 crew during the landing descent, happens to be a well known christian and has given interviews airing his frustration and irritation about the deniers, whilst Buzz Aldrin (the 2nd man to walk on the Moon) punched one of them after being harressed and accused of being a coward. Neil Armstrong was known for his reticence (perhaps with good reason) but other Astronauts are thankfully open and candid about the their experiences.

Treena Gisborn said...

It is a very controversial subject Michael and I am sorry that you are offended.

The figures do vary, but the Telegraph reported that 1 in 4 people in the UK are reported not believe Apollo 11 moon landing: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/5851435/Apollo-11-hoax-one-in-four-people-do-not-believe-in-moon-landing.html
The mail reported 52% Brits: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3698971/More-half-Brits-think-moon-landings-FAKED-two-thirds-don-t-believe-dinosaurs-existed.html

Again the figures vary for the US but 27% of Americans between 18 and 24 years old expressed doubts that NASA went to the Moon, according to pollster Mary Lynne Dittmar. The question does persist I am afraid and I do not agree that it is a very small minority.

I wonder if Charlie Duke has given up Freemasonry? He is involved with Billy Graham who is ecumenical and in my view a false teacher. Certainly Buzz Aldrin is still a Freemason. Sorry for being a cynic, but I really do not think we can say that NASA is an honest organisation! Think about it, it would be very difficult for any astronaut to admit the moon landings were faked after the event... I think they would literally kill you for it..

If you look at Neil Armstrong's interviews before the moon landing, he is a completely different person and not so reticent. Why would he deprive the public of his unique experience?

Anyway thank you for your comment.

God bless.

colin said...

I empathise with Michael up to a point, some have almost hero worshipped the Apollo moon landing astronauts for their "To boldly go where no-man has gone before" 'achievement'. (I am not suggesting this is the case with Michael), or at least have held them with high esteem. For such, it cannot be welcomed when these 'heroic' acts are now debunked by many? It almost pulls the rug from under one's feet and the ground on which he walks becomes as shifting sand; you end up beginning not to know who, or what to believe. For Christians, as ever, the plumb line is God's written word.

I have spent little time, if any, in researching a lot of these perplexing things, but I do know that God's word says "Let God be true, but EVERY man a liar." Romans 3.4 (Christians included!). There is much we can't explain, nor indeed need to! It was wise of you not to "endorse the above links..." as no doubt, there may be much wild speculation among them written as fact?

I find Wikipedia useful for checking up 'facts', and some important information from one of your links wasn't mentioned there. But, can we trust Wikipedia not to lead us astray? I think not! Where can we establish what 'facts' are true today? Every source seems contaminated, apart from One!

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

The links are interesting to a point Colin, but with a subject like this there is some wild speculation out there. I have tried to stick to the facts as best as I can. As you aptly point out, there is only ONE source we can rely on 100% = the SCRIPTURES, and they do not support the heliocentric model.
I have been trying to imagine what it would be like for men like Neil Armstrong, condemned to live out the lie your whole life.. He did not look a happy man.
I do suspect that evil things are going on in Antarctica but I don't want to get into that too much. Interesting that Buzz Aldrin has just been there though.
Like you, I think it is important to stick to the Bible. In the end God is Sovereign.
Isaiah 40:23 “.....who brings princes to nothing, and makes the rulers of the earth as emptiness.”
God bless.

Michael said...

I’m not offended just concerned the article gives some oxygen to the nutters in the conspiracy lobby and on reflection that this might sow seeds of doubt especially amongst younger people. I am both sad and dumb founded that it is even necessary to defend the moon landings happened; it is a fact the size of Mount Everest. I do not know if Charlie Duke is or was a freemason but it makes no difference to modern history, what I do know is that some years ago during a BBC TV programme he said something along the lines that the power of the Saturn V rocket is as nothing in comparison to the power of the Holy Spirit which indicates he has had an encounter with the risen Christ. The survey results you have produced (which I am shocked to read) show a high level of ignorance amongst the public and rather worryingly an unfounded mistrust of primary information from official sources. No doubt there also exists on the internet survey data about the resurrection of Christ, some have doubts and others don’t believe but it does not make it less true. Neil Armstrong himself said that he was not concerned about the conspiracy theories - he left his camera on the lunar surface which if it is ever recovered shall prove men walked on the moon. For more proof of the moon landings you can view on the internet authentic photographs taken by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter of the landing sites showing tracks, lunar rover, equipment and the LEM (minus the Ascent stage) or is this also fabricated ?
There is also exists an interesting rare interview with Neil Armstrong plus footage of the actual landing (it being perfectly aligned to Google mapping of the moon) including his commentary about the landing approach.

Treena Gisborn said...

There are some interesting questions being brought up though. For instance, we are told that the earth is an oblate spheroid, and yet the pics from the moon show the earth as perfectly round? NASA admits that they cannot get through the Van Allen radiation belts... why was this not a problem in the original moon landing? Why are there no visible stars from the moon? Why are NASA's pics photoshopped? There are many more questions like this... they have answers for everything of course.
I think we would be rather naive to believe "primary information through official sources" without question - these people are Luciferians Michael!
We will not readily agree on this I think.
God bless.

colin said...

Thank the Lord for our dictionaries/online and written! Have we been (brainwashed?) by all these wonderful looking images from NASA? "Oblate spheriod" as the name suggests, depicts the earth could be a hundred times (or more?) longer than it is high? I haven't previously heard of "Van Allen belts", simple soul that I am!

Discussing this controversial subject with my 21 year old daughter, she said "But, dad, didn't God hang the earth on nothing"? Job 26.7 (trying very hard to defend the globular position) To which I replied "didn't God create EVERYTHING out of nothing? (Ex nihilo) Genesis 1.1...?

If God says the "Abyss" is "bottomless" then, how can it be? if we humans can 'prove' God to be very wrong by saying that the distance between the north and south poles is about 11,000 miles, (depending on who you believe).

As for "primary information through official sources", I agree; weigh up EVERY thing these "official sources" say against God's word, then, if it doesn't agree-reject it. Plain and simple. As you say, the NASA publicity machine will have all the 'answers'!
God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

I have managed to locate Bill Kaysing's book on PDF: "We Never Went To The Moon". Kaysing is said to be the initiator of the doubts cast upon the moon landings. He was head of technical publications at Rocketdyne (a division of North American Aviation and later of Rockwell International) where Saturn V rocket engines were built. I think you will find Kaysing's information very interesting Colin.. and maybe Michael?
This is the link:
Also William Cooper has some interesting videos up on YouTube. I have his book "Behold a Pale Horse".
Thank you Colin.
God bless

colin said...

Just looked up Bill Kaysing (never previously heard of him) on Wikipedia, and it certainly looks to make very interesting reading. Kaysing believed, as I do that the technology didn't then exist, more so, does it even today? Jeremiah 31.37 tells us that the heaven above can't be measured, and also that the foundations of the earth can't be searched out beneath. If man has flown underneath the South Pole, then, hasn't he "searched out the foundations"?

Genesis 1.14-16:
And God said let there be Lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years: and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made the two great LIGHTS ; the greater lIGHT to rule the day, and the lesser lIGHT to rule the night: He made the stars also.

The "stars also" are almost made to seem to be inconsequential. As though their purpose of existence is of significantly lesser importance to the sun and the moon, and don't our daily observations confirm this to be so?

No doubt "the stars SHALL fall from heaven." Matthew 24.29, Mark 13.25. Revelation 6.13: directly down on our earth.

I have heavily emphasized the word "LIGHT" for very good reason: Is the "lesser light" (that is the moon) made of a similar substance to the sun? Most would tell us that the sun is something of a fireball; no rocks anywhere to be seen: therefore, is the moon made of rock as most would have us believe? I don't necessarily believe it to be so; if it has similar luminous (but far less so) qualities to the "greater LIGHT" which it is compared with? The moon WAS very bright last night!

Certainly, if, the moon landing didn't happen, I cannot imagine what it would be like to live and die with such a lie.
God bless.

Truth said...

Thank you! Yes, the Earth is flat. There are so many bibleverses about that.
And also: Be sceptic to Jacob Prasch!

Treena Gisborn said...

Jacob Prasch has broken his own rules AGAIN! The dangers of allegorization of the text are well known, the only exception is when the Bible itself uses allegory.

Many NASA scientists and astronauts have died under suspicious circumstances. Ten dead astronauts between 1964-1967. Gus Grissom (supposedly an outspoken critic of the Space Program), Ed White and Roger Chaffee died in the Apollo 1 fire in January 1967. Others died while flying jets either in practice or while traveling for NASA to training sites -

Buzz Alrdin had a nervous breakdown and he became an acoholic after Apollo 11 and Neil Armstrong's reticence is well known.

Thank you Colin and "Truth".
God bless

colin said...

Surveying this mornings news, as indeed one does, I came across a very interesting article on the BBC World News website under the heading "Antarctic'pole of ignorance' addressed". (It is well worth a read!)

Prof Rene Forsberg from the National Space Institute of Denmark (DTU-Space):

"Known as Polar Gap, the project was largely funded by the European Space Agency (ESA) to gather measurements over an area of Earth that its satellites CANNOT SEE (my emphasis), as they generally only fly up to about 83 degrees in latitude....

He goes on: "In this image....the giant circle is the "hole" that satellites CANNOT SEE (again, my emphasis).....

But! wait a minute professor! If the earth is truly a GLOBE, excuse me for being so 'ignorant', but why can't our satellites SEE? after all man 'HAS' been to the moon and back!

"The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: The testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple." Psalm 19.7.

"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise...Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?" 1 Corinthians 1.19-20.

Have you any idea of the money these 'wise' men spend on this false science?

I haven't yet commented on Mr Prasch, but last night I thought I had better watch that You Tube video, truly the man is a rambler. I would respectfully suggest that he starts reading his Bible again!

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

An interesting read Colin thank you for the link.
Entitled: "Antarctic 'Pole of Ignorance' Finally Addressed"
Their pseudo science is a financial black hole, or should a say a "PolarGAP"!
I have learned something new today! Some satellites are "geostationary" i.e. they move at the same speed as the earth and appear not to move.. hmmm interesting. We are told that these geostationary satellites are far higher than the LEO satellites ".....35,786 kilometres (22,236 mi) above the Earth's equator and following the direction of the Earth's rotation."
I am wondering why these geostationary satellites cannot see the entirety of antarctica?
Is Jacob Prasch's waffling deliberate? He can be very clear when he wants to be. Quite frankly I am wondering if he is batting for the other side.
God bless

Treena Gisborn said...

NASA are very good at losing things - they "lost" the 1960s Nimbus satellite images and then found them again forty years later. It appears that satellites CAN view Antarctica after all.. that is if we believe NASA's Lunar orbiter images:
Just saying..

colin said...

I think his "waffling" is the result of trying to defend positions that cannot be defended from Scripture? Most certainly I believe Prasch to be dishonest, as well as deceived.

Until you put this topic up for discussion, I am sure I would still be a "globalist" (wrong term, I think?!) I am still trying to get my head around this geostationary thing, not easy when you realise that you have been "sold a pup", all your life, as it were?
The fact that all these space agencies have so many exploration bases 'down' there in the Antarctic begs a great many questions, as you know; especially if the world was so easily observed to be a globe?
I got a thinking! If, as professing Christians, we are all agreed on "in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Genesis 1.1, then why would He "hallow His House (the temple in Jerusalem) "which thou hast built; TO PUT MY NAME THERE FOREVER; AND MINE EYES AND MINE HEART SHALL BE THERE PERPETUALLY" 1 Kings 9.3, in some insignificant far flung planet, in the middle of absolutely nowhere? No! the heliocentric doctrine is unbiblical, and therefore a lie. The Great Sea, aka the Mediterranean Sea is so-called because it IS in the MIDDLE of the earth! And guess what little land is an inch to the east???

Also, if you start adopting, and teaching these 'cranky' theories, then wouldn't they put you at variance with those who hold widely cherished and 'normal' beliefs? A geocentric earth is NOT the norm. Prasch, and the great many others HAVE to 'fit in' with popular norms in order to keep those invites coming in? This geocentric awakening has given me much needed light on many scriptures! A quick glance in Matthew Henry's Commentary, reveals that he also swallowed the Copernicus/Galileo deception, as many good men have. But, can you imagine that if this heliocentric teaching never came to be; then we wouldn't hear so much the oft repeated mantra "modern science has disproved the Bible"? How many souls have been lost through THIS deception?

It makes you wonder what will be questioned next?
God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

I agree with you Colin. Jacob Prasch used to be a very good teacher, but these days he has nothing new to say, and he is just recycling the same old stuff... as in his recent "When Godly men disagree" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5puCQDzgjM
I do think about what went wrong with him. Satan usually tries temptation first, and then resorts to threats and ultimately persecution - I wonder which one it is. I believe that something went wrong around the time he wrote 'Shadows of the Beast' and he introduced the intra-seal error... did he want to make a name for himself I wonder?

As you say, Prasch and others fit in with popular norms, otherwise the risk is that they will be regarded as cranks or conspiracy theorists. Nevertheless we are called to speak the truth without thinking of the cost.(Luke 14:27-28). I thought Prasch had some courage.. but no-one is immune-any one of us can fall. (1 Corinthians 10:12).

I have been looking at the verses which refer to the things "under the earth" which seem to confirm geocentrism:
"..so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, (Philippians 2:10)
Also Proverbs 9:19 15:24 Sheol is "beneath".
Tartarus .. "cast them down to hell.." 2 Peter 2:4 KJV
"..who went down to Sheol" (Ezekiel 32:27) 31:16-17 Isaiah 14:9

I am slowly coming to terms with the idea that the heliocentric view is probably not correct, but like you, it is not an easy transition.

God bless

Anonymous said...

Before coming to a set conclusion, please may I recommend reading Answers in Genesis's online article "Is The Earth Flat?" by Danny R Faulkner. Also Creation Ministries International at creation.com have one "Refuting Flat Earth". This second page also includes an interesting video discussing this.

colin said...

It is good to have your input, Anonymous, and I thank God for Ken Ham, it was through his presentation on God TV that convinced me of a literal world wide Noah's flood. This set me on a course that the Bible CAN be trusted.

AIG are ecumenical, and their teaching ministry which mainly consists of state university professors of science (of which I believe Dr Faulkner is one) believe their 'knowledge' can convince us simpletons of 'truths' that are are taught, or indeed not taught in Scripture!

But, what does God's word say on this? The chapter 9 of Job and the latter chapters, from 38 onwards have much to say about God's creation.

Speaking of God's awesome power, he says "Which doeth great things PAST FINDING OUT: Yea, marvellous things without number." Job 9.10 (RV). But apparently, Dr Faulkner, and his like CAN find out!
I prefer to throw my lot in with Luther and Calvin on this! And, from my own observations following certain news channels, scientists are making many unguarded comments which are contradicting the very hypothesis they are trying to uphold!

Where does the sun 'go' when it falls? I have answered with the above verse! Deuteronomy 29.29 also confirms there is much we simply cannot know!
God bless.

colin said...

Thought it would be the appropriate place to ask your opinion!

I have got into a bit of a debate regarding the literal meaning of Genesis 11.4 "And they said, Go to, let us build a city and a tower, whose top MAY REACH unto heaven..."
In the KJV "MAY REACH" is in italics as these words were added by the translators. Many orthodox reformed theologians believe and teach that the tower builders were NOT literally trying to get to heaven. Matthew Henry said it MAY have been their intention, yet strangely enough he was heliocentric! But I believe even without those added words the sense is that it WAS their intention to get up to God's throne room. Clearly from a geocentric position it would seem a real possibility? According to extra biblical writings including Jubilees, the height of the tower was between 1.6 to 8 miles high, which is a rather serious height!
I think not to believe the literal sense is to 'spiritualise' God's word.

Any thoughts?
God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

erm... I need a bit of time to pray and think about this Colin..
God bless

colin said...

Thank you, I am in no rush, and may God bless your studies; please put your "research" skills to the test!
God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

Having done a little research Colin, I do believe that Babel was a literal tower... literal bricks and mortar were used Genesis 11:3. I think it was a ziggurat structure that reached into the "heavens" i.e. the sky. I do not think they could have literally reached God's throne room because it is so heavily protected and nothing unholy could enter...
At the same time as the physical building there were I believe unprecedented occult practices i.e. the mystery religion.
There is a "Babel" account in Sumerian mythology - Etemenanki located in ancient Babylon... the narrative has some interesting parallels with Genesis, though obviously unbiblical having a pantheistic slant.
The phrase "nothing will be impossible for them" 11:6 reminds me of the danger of Adam and Eve taking the fruit of the tree of life after eating the forbidden fruit... Genesis 3:22-24.
There is only one way to reach God i.e. through Jesus Christ.. God will not allow man to enter any other way despite his best efforts!
Hope this helps??
God bless

colin said...

I certainly agree that they could NEVER have reached God's throne room, that is an absolute given!

But, here we are talking about unbelievers, that is satanically inspired men, a bit like NASA? The Bible (in my opinion, at least) makes it clear that it WAS their intention to get to heaven. I see the similarity with NASA and their parallel (more advanced?) agenda.
So, in your opinion, does Genesis 11.4 allow that it COULD well have been the tower builders intention to pierce the vault, or rather get to heaven (as daft as the attempt seems to us)? This IS the crux of the matter!
I believe that this so-called 'burn-up' when rockets 're-enter' the atmosphere, is nothing other than them breaking apart when hitting the roof of the firmament trying to fly out!

Some say the tower builders could never have built a building the heights mentioned in my last post, because of breathing difficulties at such altitudes, but how do we know what the atmosphere was like back then? Also, men could have been FAR physically stronger in those days! I think, if the tower builders were heliocentric, they would never have embarked on such a mad scheme!

It seems to me that nothing NASA, ESA and any other space agency can be relied on for true information, it is ever their agenda to keep us in the dark!
God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

It certainly COULD have been their intention to pierce the vault Colin, I agree with you. Perhaps they believed that they could take over heaven/God's throne room - but this is purely speculation. I know you will probably reject this, but the Nephilim giants WERE very tall and very strong.. with advanced technology.. they could have been involved? Nimrod was not a Nephilim, but he could have been working with them at Shinar. Much to think about. God bless.

colin said...

I thank you for that.
As you know, I totally reject the nephilim theory. "Much to think about" Certainly!
Indeed, you are correct, there is MUCH speculation here, I certainly grant you that, but at ALL times I make every effort to contain this 'speculation' within the boundaries of God's written word.
Many Bible expositors down the years have said that every verse in Scripture should be taken literally, unless of course the plain sense makes no sense (an example being Psalm 91.4, where if taken literally, God would be a bird!?).

Today, (or for that matter, any day in the past!), would not man be God, if he could?

A little while back, I found a most profound statement from a little known Christian flat earth theologian by the name of William Carpenter 1830-1896.

"Are the Copernican diagrams, mathematical 'proofs', the schoolroom globe and maps of a turnip shaped earth; the technical terms, such as parallactic motion, spheroid, terrestrial axis, plane, orbit, equator, poles &c, anything else than the tricks of a disguised atheism now misleading multitudes?"
I can remember as an unbeliever; and the same mantra is ever repeated today; "Modern science has disproved the Bible!" A very 'true' statement if we believe the wretched lie!?

I believe that left to God's word ALONE, we could only ever know that the earth is flat (or not a globe). I just cannot trust anything that the NASA/ESA media puts out-for "the whole world lieth in wickedness."

God bless you.

Treena Gisborn said...

I agree that NASA/modern science/the media etc. are not giving us the truth Colin. We may not have all the answers, but we do know the one who is the TRUTH (John 14:6; John 8:320).
BTW you might find this interesting!