[Dither]

I'm not clear how you think any of those experiments show that the idea of a globe earth may be wrong.

Thanks AATW
The experiments also prove that the earth is stationary, this is consistent with the many scriptures which state in no uncertain terms that the world is fixed and immovable. We are not living on a sphere flying through endless space. There is an up (heaven) and there is a down (hell) Heliocentricity is a neat way of denying God through nihilistic abstraction.

[inquisitive]

I'm not clear how you think any of those experiments show that the idea of a globe earth may be wrong.

Thanks AATW
The experiments also prove that the earth is stationary, this is consistent with the many scriptures which state in no uncertain terms that the world is fixed and immovable. We are not living on a sphere flying through endless space. There is an up (heaven) and there is a down (hell) Heliocentricity is a neat way of denying God through nihilistic abstraction.

We are clearly living on a sphere as all measurements and observations show.

[Dither]

We are clearly living on a sphere as all measurements and observations show.

In a Geocentric motionless globe earth model, Hell is elevated to the centre of God's known universe.
Not an option for a Biblical Christian worldview, which shows a clear distinction between Heaven and Hell.
Also, as I already stated, observations and experiments have proved stationary earth.

[StinkyOne]

The experiments also prove that the earth is stationary, this is consistent with the many scriptures which state in no uncertain terms that the world is fixed and immovable. We are not living on a sphere flying through endless space. There is an up (heaven) and there is a down (hell) Heliocentricity is a neat way of denying God through nihilistic abstraction.

No, those experiments do not prove the Earth is stationary.

I'm sorry that a sphere flying through space is more than you can believe, but you (and the tiny minority of Christians that believe in FEH) are wrong. It has been proven beyond any doubt. At this point you're just lying to yourself. Ask yourself this - is believing in FEH relevant to salvation? If you're allowing it to come between you and fellowship with others, maybe it isn't really all that important? I know you've been as to leave churches over this. Seems to not be worth it, to me.

[Dither]

I'm sorry that a sphere flying through space is more than you can believe

And I'm sorry I just don't have enough faith to believe in your science fiction which you treat as fact.

[inquisitive]

I'm sorry that a sphere flying through space is more than you can believe

And I'm sorry I just don't have enough faith to believe in your science fiction which you treat as fact.

And the source of yours is tested?

[AATW]

The experiments also prove that the earth is stationary

No, they don't. The experiments were based on the idea that light has to move through a medium, this was called the "aether" and these experiments were designed to test that.
It was the results of these experiments which led to the theory of the aether being rejected. That is how science works.
And the Mickleson-Morley result was later explained by Relativity which showed that the speed of light is absolute.
There is plenty of proof that we live on a spinning globe - The Coriolis effect and Foucault pendulums to name just two.

This is where you really need to do a bit of research on Confirmation Bias. It's something we are all prone to but I see a lot of it on here and your post is an example of it.

this is consistent with the many scriptures which state in no uncertain terms that the world is fixed and immovable. We are not living on a sphere flying through endless space.

You know, I actually agree that Scripture can be read this way. And were we having this conversation a few hundred years ago I might well agree with your interpretation.
But we're not, so I don't. Our understanding of the world has moved on. So either
1) All modern science is wrong and you're right.
2) Our understanding of Scripture has to change.

I choose 2. As does most of the modern church. As I've said I've never been in a church which teaches a flat earth, you say you were thrown out of a church for your beliefs about it.
I do think the minister acted in a very unchristian way but it does rather demonstrate you are somewhat isolated in this interpretation, what makes you think you know better that most Christians?

I don't understand why you think this is so important. Why do you think that Scripture should be read literally and treated like a scientific text?
Do you actually think the important message in Scripture is the shape and age of the earth?
For me there are deeper, more important truths.

Genesis tells me I am a creation, it tells me who I was created by and what I was created for.
It tells me about our rebellion and the consequences of it which created the need for us to be redeemed.
The rest of the Bible is basically the rescue plan which culminates in the events of Easter.
These are the deeper truths. Compared to that why does the age or shape of the earth matter?

[Dither]

1) All modern science is wrong and you're right.
2) Our understanding of Scripture has to change.

1) God's word is truth, and believing in FET doesn't rule out all of modern science.
2) I agree, we should look at the scriptures as being truth.

I may have asked you this before, but in your opinion, what is the approximate age of the earth?

[StinkyOne]

I'm sorry that a sphere flying through space is more than you can believe

And I'm sorry I just don't have enough faith to believe in your science fiction which you treat as fact.

Oh no, I don't believe in science fiction. I believe in verifiable science fact that can be reproduced and tested. Do you not see the irony in posting a message implying science is fake from a device that required centuries of scientific discoveries to be built.

[AATW]

1) All modern science is wrong and you're right.
2) Our understanding of Scripture has to change.

1) God's word is truth, and believing in FET doesn't rule out all of modern science.
2) I agree, we should look at the scriptures as being truth.

I may have asked you this before, but in your opinion, what is the approximate age of the earth?

God's word IS the truth but as I've said I don't believe it should be regarded as an accurate scientific text. As I said there are deeper, more important truths. And while not ALL modern science is concerned with the shape or age of the earth or a heliocentric model, enough of it is to make it hard to just dismiss. That being so, modern science is indicating that the earth is billions of years old. There is very good evidence that it is not thousands of years old. Again, I don't believe Genesis is to be read like a scientific text, it contains deeper truths than that.
I don't believe the message of the Bible, best summed up by John 3:16, changes one bit if the earth is older than young earth creationists suppose.