ARTICLE ARCHIVES
Untwisting Scripture: Refuting Flat Earth Falsehoods – Part 5
In this series of articles, we’ve been addressing the most common prooftexts that FSIPs (Flat/Stationary Interpretation Proponents) cite to justify their allegation that the Bible depicts, indicates, or implies a flat and/or stationary earth. Genesis 1 is a passage...
Untwisting Scripture: Refuting Flat Earth Falsehoods – Part 4
In this fourth installment of our series on refuting the so-called flat/stationary-earth prooftexts in the Bible, we’ll address the “high altitude perspective” passages that FSIPs (Flat Stationary Interpretation Proponents) frequently cite: Daniel 4, Matthew 4, and Revelation 1. As we examine these passages within their contexts, we’ll once again find that the FSIPs’ interpretations are unwarranted and their claims unjustified.
Untwisting Scripture: Refuting Flat Earth Falsehoods – Part 3
In this third installment of our series about the so-called flat/stationary-earth prooftexts in the Bible, we’ll examine another passage that FSIPs (Flat Stationary Interpretation Proponents) frequently cite: Joshua 10. Known as “Joshua’s long day,” this passage is the record of one of the most unique and miraculous days in human history. As Joshua writes, “There has been no day like it before or since” (Josh 10:14 ESV).
Untwisting Scripture: Refuting Flat Earth Falsehoods – Part 2
Previously, we began a series of articles about the so-called flat/stationary-earth prooftexts in the Bible. There is an abundance of vocal flat/stationary proponents (FSIPs) that go around citing a handful of biblical verses, alleging that these verses are proof that the Bible depicts, indicates, or implies a flat and/or stationary world. In the previous article I explained how these FSIPs are failing to read the text carefully, removing these verses from their immediate literary context, and distorting the intended meaning of passages in order to seemingly validate their claims.
Untwisting Scripture: Refuting Flat Earth Falsehoods – Part 1
Have you ever interacted with someone who believes that the Bible depicts a flat, stationary earth? Or perhaps encountered a meme asserting that “the Bible contains 200+ flat-earth verses”? Or have you seen someone on social media quote verses like Job 38:14, Psalm 96:10, or Joshua 10:12-13 as “proof” that the Bible indicates a flat, unmoving earth? If you have, you’re not alone. These allegations proliferate online and in myriad other digital formats, coming not only from skeptics and critics of the Bible but also from numerous professing Christians who claim allegiance to it. But do these verses mean what they think they mean?
New James Webb Space Telescope Observations Challenge the Big Bang
New observations of the angular sizes of distant galaxies challenge one of the essential underlying assumptions of the big bang – that the “fabric” of space is expanding as galaxies recede. Without an expanding space, a big bang is impossible. These observations support a new creation-based model of cosmology – the Doppler model – which makes specific quantitative predictions about future observations.
A Refutation of Phillip Dennis’s Claims Regarding Alleged Inconsistencies in ASC
Did Phillip Dennis actually disprove the conventionality thesis (Dennis 2024)? Did he really prove at long last what physicists over the last century have been unable to do – to establish that the one-way speed of light in any given direction must be the same as the round-trip speed of light? Did he find any genuine inconsistency with the Anisotropic Synchrony Convention (ASC) and the young universe model upon which it is based? Well, no to all of the above…. We show below that when the full synchrony-independent equations are used, they do not support Dennis’s conclusion but rather the opposite. Furthermore, we will demonstrate several critical errors in Dennis’s analysis and show that several of his claims are incompatible with the physics of relativity.
Stellar Astronomy: Part 8 – Stellar Clusters and Populations
Stars often exist as binary pairs – two or more stars that orbit their common center of mass. However, even larger numbers of stars can exist in close proximity to each other – a star cluster – which can consist of hundreds to hundreds of thousands of stars. Single stars, binaries, and star clusters exist as part of a much larger structure – a galaxy – which can contain millions to trillions of stars. Furthermore, the composition of stars varies slightly in a way that depends on where they are found.
Stellar Astronomy: Part 7 – Black Holes
In the previous article, we examined white dwarfs and neutron stars, objects with the mass of a star compressed into a very small volume. Some of these objects could be what remains of a star that has collapsed in on itself. But what happens when mass is compressed into an even smaller volume?
Stellar Astronomy: Part 6 – White Dwarfs and Neutron Stars
In a star, the outward flow of energy generated by nuclear fusion in the core balances the inward pull of gravity. Without such fusion, a star would collapse into a very small volume. And indeed, the universe contains objects with a mass comparable to that of a star, but with a size comparable to the Earth. These are called white dwarfs.
Stellar Astronomy: Part 5 – Variable Stars
How do stars change over time? In parts 3 and 4, we discussed some of the scenarios secular astronomers have proposed for stellar evolution. These included the now-discredited idea that stars evolve along the main sequence from blue to red, along with modern ideas of giants and supergiants being aged stars. Unfortunately, such long-term changes cannot be observed and therefore are beyond the scope of operational science. Nonetheless, some stars change in ways that have been observed in history, and some types of changes are even observable in the present. In particular, stars can change in luminosity, appearing either brighter or fainter over time. These are called variable stars.
Stellar Astronomy: Part 4 – Of Dwarfs and Supergiants
It is rather amazing what we can know about stars simply by analyzing their light and with rigorous application of logic and mathematics. We can measure the distance to any nearby star using parallax. And by multiplying a star’s apparent brightness by the square of its distance, we can determine its actual luminosity. Furthermore, we can know both the composition and the surface temperature of a star by analyzing the absorption lines of its starlight using a spectroscope. This led to the field of stellar classification and the discovery of the main sequence. But why does this sequence exist? Why are blue main sequence stars so much brighter than red main sequence stars?
Stellar Astronomy: Part 3 – Classes and the Main Sequence
With the technology available in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, astronomers made a number of wonderful discoveries about the nature of stars. These included knowledge of the true luminosity of stars as well as their chemical composition and temperature. Although all stars have a similar chemical composition, they come in a wide variety of luminosities and temperatures. As more stars were catalogued, astronomers began to notice a pattern. Secular, evolutionary thinking led to some false interpretations about the cause of this pattern. This lesson in history is an important one for us today.
Stellar Astronomy: Part 2 – The Composition of Stars
In part 1, we examined how to measure the distance to relatively nearby stars using parallax. We then showed how astronomers compute the luminosity of a star by comparing its apparent brightness with its distance. This shows that stars are comparable in brightness to the sun. But how do we know that stars have the same composition as the sun? For that matter, how do we know what the sun is made of?
Stellar Astronomy: Part 1 – Distance and Brightness
You can look up just about any star on the internet and find all kinds of fascinating information based on good science: its size, composition, luminosity, distance, coordinates, and so on. But you will also read information that is not accurate because it is based on antibiblical assumptions, such as the star’s estimated age and stage of evolution. Therefore, it is very useful to know something about the history of stellar astronomy to see how we know what we know, and to discern what we really know from what is merely claimed.