“Our trust is in God; and in the faithfulness of his Word, in all its teachings from Genesis to Revelation. …. If Genesis is not to be relied upon, in its description of Creation, how shall we trust Exodus? If the Old Testament is not true, what will become of the New? If the Creator, through his servants, the prophets. has not correctly described his Works, how can we trust him for our salvation?”
Earth Review, January Edition, 18931
“ The two beliefs (Modern Astronomy and the Bible) cannot be held together in the same mind : he who thinks he believes both has thought very little of either.”
Thomas Paine, “The Age of Reason”
There is a growing body of Christians and Biblical literalists who have rejected the proposition of modern Astronomical science, that is, that the earth is a sphere, spinning on its axis at 1000 mph, orbiting around a sun that is 93 million miles from us, in favor of it being a flat, stationary disk, encapsulated by what is described in the Genesis creation narrative as “the firmament.” I’ve recently come to embrace the latter. The following is the metamorphosis I went through to arrive at this conclusion.
I grew up in a church denomination, and after graduating from college, decided to leave it and join another. In order to become a member of this new denomination, one had to attend what they called an “inquirers” class, in which the basic tenets and beliefs of the denomination were presented. I remember very distinctly the first thing that came out of the instructor’s mouth: “concerning the Old Testament part of the Bible,Genesis through Malachi,” he said, “we believe the entire thing is an allegory, that is, a collection of myths.” In other words, nothing in that part of the Bible was to be taken literally–especially the creation narrative in Genesis chapter 1.
He didn’t really have to say another thing to get me into the fold, because I was an avowed Darwinist at the time, who had swallowed Darwin’s theory of evolution, hook, line and sinker, so this was music to my ears. As far as I was concerned, no one but delusional goofs took the Genesis narrative of creation literally.
That was in 1970. Fast forward fifteen years, to June 1985, to the most monumental event of my life: the salvation of my soul. On the first Monday night in June of that year, I trusted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, and everything changed in my life from that point on. One of the more important things that changed was my view of the Bible–all of it–as the literal word of God to mankind.
Of course this would include the creation story in Genesis chapter one, which stands in diametric opposition to the evolutionist model of creation I had theretofore embraced. Try as some Christian theologies have to conflate the two narratives, it simply cannot be done–not without doing all kinds of twisting and contorting. Moreover, both narratives must be taken as an article of faith, because no living being has ever observed either one; the literal six day creation presented in Genesis, or the “big bang” theory of it presented by evolutionists.
Now fast forward to the present, and a question for those of you who, like myself, take the Genesis narrative of creation literally: Considering what it says in chapter one, verses 1-17 (KJB), explain to me and others reading this how this supports the heliocentric model of the earth as a ball (a “spec of dust,” according to cosmologist Neil degrasse Tyson), suspended in a vast cosmos of infinite proportion, spinning on it’s axis at 1000 mph in an orbit around the sun, which we are told is 93 million miles away. (This model is, by the way, integral to the Darwinist evolutionary model.)
Up until recently I was what you might call “on the fence” about this issue,. but not any more. As they say, “fences are not made to straddle,” and I realized that, controversial as this issue is, I could no longer claim that what you believe about it doesn’t matter, because it does matter. I had to admit that the only reason I was remaining on the fence was, because to get off it, onto the side of the FE model, would cause a lot of people to disassociate themselves from me–best to just leave well enough alone. So I simply refused to give serious consideration to the alternative flat earth model.
Some have said that what one believes about the earth and its shape has no bearing on one’s salvation. I agree with this. Salvation is based on simple trust in Jesus Christ, that he died for your sins and was raised again the third day for your justification (Ref. 1 Cor. 15:1-4; Romans 4:25; Eph. 1:12-14), and whatever you believe about the earth’s shape has no bearing on this. But to say there is no point in addressing it just because it creates divisions among us is dead wrong. There are all kinds of things throughout scripture–Genesis to the Revelation–over which Christians are divided, including the means and process of salvation. So to embrace a “don’t talk about anything in scripture that divides us” position, is to say we must exclude discussions about practically everything in scripture. And isn’t this exactly what Satan would have us to do? Think about it.
All Scripture references are from the King James Bible.
For some historical perspective on this issue, please visit the follow site: