The Earth is Flat

I understand from the rules of the debate that I must keep this round to counter-refutations (i. e. response to Pro's R3 refutation of my R2 offering). That's a bit of a shame as there's lots else I'd like to say, and Pro's R3 refutation wasn't, shall we say, too weighty; ah well, perhaps that will work in my favour! First, Pro proposes a system of light and dark created by spotlight effects for Sun and Moon. I think that two things are obvious from the GIF that she included: the sun and the moon would be always visible from all points on Earth; the North Pole would have a completely constant level of day/night that would not change. Both of these objections completely flaw the objection to my 3d theory of the shape of the Earth. Then Pro falls into a trap that I had hoped she would; she starts by quoting me:"And there is only really one three dimensional shape that has the properties necessary to satisfy all of the scriptures: a sphere. ". .. or a cylider [stet]. .. . or an upside down cone. But she did miss the vital point that I was making:Isaiah 40 [3]22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the Earth and its people are like grasshoppers. This tells us that from His place above the Earth, from a God's-eye-view, the Earth is like a circle. And there is only really one three dimensional shape that has the properties necessary to satisfy all of the scriptures: a sphere. What this verse is telling us is how the Earth seems to God; now, I wonder what Pro's vision of God's location is. .. I know that I have read my scripture and from it I know that God is, of course, everywhere! Let's take a look at some of the reasons that I know God is simultaneously everywhere:Jeremiah 23 [1]24 "Who can hide in secret places so that I cannot see them? " declares the Lord. "Do not I fill heaven and earth? " declares the Lord. Proverbs 15 [2]3 The eyes of the Lord are everywhere, keeping watch on the wicked and the good. So, in the light of the fact that God's eyes are everywhere and that God fills heaven and the Earth. .. let's have another look at what I wrote in Round 2:Isaiah 40 [3]22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the Earth and its people are like grasshoppers. This tells us that from His place above the Earth, from a God's-eye-view, the Earth is like a circle. And there is only really one three dimensional shape that has the properties necessary to satisfy all of the scriptures: a sphere. I'll leave it for the gentle reader to decide whether a cylinder or an upside-down cone could, as Pro suggests, produce the impression of the Earth being a circle to an omnipresent being; I say that to suggest that it could is to ignore scripture and to rather demean the size, power and quality of the Lord. I will happily drop my argument for the Earth being an oblate spheroid; it was, as I said, only a personal theory. To be honest, if I'd known that I was going to be required to argue merely from scripture (a trick that I feel would have been more honestly declared before my acceptance! ), I would have limited my case to a spherical Earth; I only offered the extra steps to get to an oblate spheroid to live up to the claim that I said I'd be happy to defend in R1. .. in R2, Pro removed all of my scientific basis and I was left with, I admit, a weak case - weak, that is, in justifying the oblate spheroid - but I rest in the confident knowledge that I have demonstrated, by scripture alone, why there can only really be one shape of the Earth: a sphere. It seems to me that this is sufficient to reject the motion of a flat Earth. Final note (sorry if this doesn't strictly count as a counter-refutation, but I think it only fair that I may bring this up, since Pro has not played strictly by her own rules): I'll leave it to the gentle voter to decide whether it was fair for Pro to lay out rules in R1 that included specifically that R1 was for rules and R2 for constructive case ONLY. .. and then deliberately (and with forethought) open R2 with an extra rule that should have been in R1! Still, I don't think that it crippled my case and I hope that the gentle voter might find favour in the way that I generously played by all of Pro's rules, even the ones she introduced after the laying-out-the-rules-round! Vote Con! [1] . https://www.biblegateway.com...[2] . https://www.biblegateway.com...[3] . https://www.biblegateway.com...