Precise Biblical language is crucial. Consider the poor monks who, after many years of loneliness and frustration, discovered that their ERRANT copies of scripture misread CELIBATE instead of CELIBRATE!

When one's computer asks for a passcode to proceed, one will relentlessly remain in Frustration Hell if one types in a euphemism or synonym INSTEAD of what the passcode PRECISELY is. Should we expect any LESS perfection of "the Word of the Lord which abides forever" relating to the Bible's original autographic Hebrew Old-Testament and Greek New-Testament Received Text wording (and we're NOT even referring to the usually-accurate English King James Version!).

Job 26:7b literally says:

He hung (Strong's Word# 8518) the earth (Strong's Word# 776) on nothing (Word# 1099)

Isaiah 40:22 =...He who sits (Word# 3427) over the circle of (#2329) the earth (Word# 776)...

The circle of the Earth? WHAT does THAT infer? A flat Earth upon which from the highest mountain Satan could show Christ all the kingdoms of the world?

How that relates to the four CORNERS of the earth mentioned in Revelation 7:1 and 20:8 is beyond me. [The Greek word for corners used in Rev. 7:1 is g(o)nias with the (o) standing for the Greek letter omega, not omicron.

The Greek word for corners used in Rev. 20:8 is g(o)niais. However, the Hebrew word used for four WINGS of the earth in Isaiah 11:12 is Strong's Word# 3671 for wings . Should FOUR CORNERS be instead translated: FOUR DIRECTIONS? Check me out to see if your Bible verifies that!]

Whether the King James Version English words of translation are used, the Revised Standard Version English words of translation used, or the English words of some other translation from the inerrant Masoretic Old-Testament Hebrew and Scrivener/Trinitarian New-Testament Greek Texts, there is frequently a question in the minds of non-gullible educated thinking people WHAT English translation words should be taken literally contrasted with those English translation words which should be taken figuratively as metaphors.

Certainly, no fair-minded, honest, and non-prejudiced SCIENTIST would want to base PRESUMPTIONS on allegorical lingo NOT intended to be taken literally, and build some ridiculous case on THAT!

With that in mind, when Scripture mentions that the SUN did this or that, does the ORIGINAL autograph-accurate, infallible, Spirit-inspired, Hebrew Old-Testament or Greek New-Testament Text LITERALLY mean the Sun - or instead SUNLIGHT from the sun?

Or a figurative way of saying the EARTH ITSELF was ROTATING? Why did not the Holy Spirit of Information disclose that the Earth itself was rotating (IF it was)?

Were the Divinely-inspired Hebrew Bible authors so STUPID linguistically that they did not have different and unique words for SUN vs. SUNLIGHT? We do in English....which is not the most efficient and advanced language in the world. I doubt if the Holy Spirit was an incompetent moron by mis-inspiring Scripture authors to be inaccurate, deceptive, or vague about what precise words for the Bible were written down.

Of course, the same principle applies to whether autograph authors meant Earth ITSELF, or instead Earth's ORBITAL POSITIONING when stating that the Earth cannot be moved!

At this point, let's review some assumptions of present science, namely:

1. There is an obvious celestial-mechanics difference between ROTATION contrasted to REVOLUTION, in that ROTATION involves an object (typically a planet) turning around on its own axis...whereas REVOLUTION involves that object travelling in orbit around another object, or another object travelling in orbit around the original object.

In the case of Earth, an overwhelming of modern analysts CLAIM that our planet [SEEMS TO BE] both rotating [on its own axis) AND revolving around the Sun, with the Sun's tremendous gravitational force the proverbial string tied to this terrestial ball which prevents Earth from flying out in space as it zooms along in orbit around the Sun.

It is, of course, reasonable to conclude that before God created the Sun on the 4TH Day of Creation Week, Earth was either motionless OR in motion headed in whatever direction.....until the Sun was created, then promptly existed the orbital regularity now appearing of which we are now familiar with?

2. As we recall, the Divinely-inspired (i.e. Holy-Spirit-inspired) book of REVELATION contains some not ALL, symbolic descriptions of REAL things and phenomena. Similarly, the first 12 verses of Ecclesiastes says the earth abides FOREVER [which it will NOT, but instead will be DESTROYED SOMEDAY according to the 2nd Epistle of Saint Peter]; that there is NOTHING NEW under the sun [and what about post-1800s inventions of light bulbs, airplanes, automobiles, vacuum tubes, jet engines, x-ray machines, transistors, radar sets, plastics, and MUCH more?]; and later on in Ecclesiastes: It is good for the eyes to behold the sun [and be a damned FOOL for GOING BLIND STARING INTO THE SUN ALL DAY]?

Can we apply this type of metaphorical language to the sun ITSELF standing still? Please do NOT misrepresent, revile, and blaspheme the Creator of Scripture as being some kind of mentally-deficient devious Master of Tricky Deceptive Terminology!

Pertaining to the sun's shadow (not the spherical Sun ITSELF!) on the sundial of Ahaz returning back 10 degrees as recorded in Isaiah 38:8, one rather literal English rendition of the ben Asher's Masoretic Old-Testament Hebrew Text (with Strong's Word numbers in parentheses) reads:

Get this: I (2009) bring back (7725) the shadow (6738) of the steps (4609) which (834) has gone down ((3381) in the steps of (4609) Ahaz (271) with the sun (8121) backward (322) ten (6235) steps (4609). So went back (7725) the sun (1821) ten (6235) steps 4609) by the steps (4609) which (834) it had gone down (3381).

By a precise literal rendition of the translated-as-exactly-as-possible Hebrew words used above, IS it obvious that the SHADOW on the sundial (steps) declined backwards because the SUN ITSELF declined backwards in the sky? Was light-bending refraction a viable explanation for what happened, which bizarre event (as with the next one mentioned) has been engrained (to varying inaccuracies) into the folklore of both primative and more advanced cultures on every part of this terrestial globe? Or did the Earth gradually or suddenly come to an abrupt standstill and then temporarily start rotating backwards?

We refer again to that HISTORICAL Biblical record of whether or not sun or instead sunlight in the sky (or Earth rotation?) was THE interpretation INTENDED is Joshua 10:12-14 where even the Bible describes that unusually long day (during which the Text states that Joshua commanded the sun and moon to stay STATIONARY, and such ACTUALLY occurred) as unique both anytime previous to that phenomenal event and anytime thereafter in the future. The Hebrew words describing such (using Strong's word numbers) are:

And (1826) the sun (8121) and the moon (3394) stood still (5975) .....And STOOD STILL (5975) the sun (8121) in the middle of (2677) the heavens (8064) and not (3808) did hasten (213) to go down (935) for a day (3117) full (8549). Again, WASwas it that Earth stopped or slowed rotating on its axis, which affected the sunlight positioning in Earth's sky as seen from Earth's surface?

Numerous instances throughout the Bible contain explicit and exact wording pertaining to THE SUN (itself) - not merely SUN-LIGHT from the sun - rising, such as:

Genesis 19:23, Exodus 22:03, Judges 5:31, Psalm 50:1, Psalm 113:3, Ecclesiastes 1:5, Isaiah 13:10, Isaiah 45:6, Isaiah 59:19, Malachi 1:11, Nahum 3:17, James 1:11 (Greek word used = (e)lios with (e) representing the Greek letter eta and not epsilon) and Revelation 7:2.

What EXACTLY is in Earth's night skies? It is important to re-emphasize that what are seen by humans in especially night skies from Earth are not the ACTUAL MASS of the celestial bodies themselves visible up there, but instead LIGHT from those objects WAY out in space FAR beyond Earth's "firmament" (called such in Genesis chapter one verses 6 and 7). We magi types are not looking at starlike images from some on-the-floor projector displaying images on some planetarium ceiling, but instead see astronomically-distant real spherical dots of light which are ACTUALLY huge and massive planets, stars, nebula, and galaxies in the vacuum of outer space.

[Incidently, the NASA space probes have NOT detected any "ether" filling the vacuum of outer space]!

Pertaining to the positioning and orbital movement of distant celestial objects as seen from Earth's surface, the entity of "firmament" needs to be expounded upon.

In Genesis chapter one verses 6 and 7, Moses (inspired by God through His Holy Spirit) back-prophesied origin history which occurred way before Moses was ever born, and in which the LORD has revealed to us that Earth's firmament was created by Himself and then thus existed (probably consisting of at least a 10,000-foot-elevation troposphere, and possibly including a stratosphere and ionosphere).

This NEAR-Earth space (certainly NOT extending to the moon!) called "heaven" (in the Genesis 1:8 English renditions of some English-worded translations) apparently separated Earth's surface oceans and underground water reservoirs from the assumed pre-Noah-Flood Water Canopy surrounding Earth (now filled with cumulus, cirrus, and other types of water-vapor clouds). In that sense, Earth's firmament CONTINUES to separate "waters beneath it" from "waters above it." The clear air of the firmament, though moving over Earth's surface which we experience as WINDS does not RADICALLY move starlight coming to us OUT of PLACE.

There is an account recorded in Biblical history described in Genesis 37 verse 9 in which longcoat Joseph told his family a dream in which he dreamed that the sun, moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to him. [Sounds geocentric!]...and maybe there is yet another planet in the "solar" system (or should such be re-named the GEO-system?) to account for eleven "star" planets? Is the Bible in error for (mis?-calling) PLANETS "stars?" What EXACTLY does THE PRECISE HEBREW Text STATE, and MEAN?

The idea of a geocentric universe vs. a heliocentric one (which is to say: an EARTH-centered planetary system rather than a SUN-centered planetary system) was assumed by many scientists and theologians before the 16th century. Even Fred Hoyle, prominent astronomical observer and author, is said to have said:

"We know that the difference between a heliocentric theory and a geocentric theory is one of relative motion only, and that such a difference has no physical significance."

It DOES, however, have significance pertaining to REALITY, and both PROPER and CORRECT assessment of precisely how things actually ARE and in truth OPERATE!

It is well known that Albert Einstein thought much about relativistic perspectives as to differing frames of reference by both stationary and moving objects.

It has been said that [rebellious or brave and persecuted?] "science" reformers Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo enlightened people of their time who had been "blinded" and "repressed" with the "non-scientific" maryolatrous pope-deity apocryaphal catholic-church "superstition" of geocentric "absurdity." This webauthor - from grade school on - has of course been brainwashed [or "educated" - depending upon your point of view] with HELIOCENTRIC "solar" system "knowledge" and "fact"...as have many of you who are reading what you are now reading.

In a geocentric universe, one in which ALL celestial objects revolve around a TILTED-axis Earth (hence causing SEASONS), questions arise pertaining to actual observable celestial mechanics of a geocentric cosmos.

First, it is PHENOMENAL that the Lord placed a lot of importance of the Earth in the Bible (which Earth PSEUDO-"scientists" have PRESUMED is merely an INSIGNIFICANT EVOLUTIONARY speck revolving around an INSIGNIFICANT average star TWO-thirds out on the spiral edge of one of the MYRIAD typical galaxies positioned WHEREVER in the vast space of the universe).

But does He not also place importance on the Sun - especially in comparing such to the Son of God Who is The Head of all things? DOES the opening verse of Genesis state that "In the beginning, God created the heavens and THE EARTH?" WHY such EMPHASIS placed on THE EARTH on which the Almighty Himself became incarnated in human form, died for the sins of all humanity for all time, and has eternal destinies for all of them? WHY not INSTEAD state that in WHATEVER "beginning" "God" created the Big Bang, the Orion Nebula, the Andromeda Galaxy, or whatever else?

Indeed, if one HAD to worship either "Mother Earth"....or the Sun (and one must NEVER worship any such CREATED objects of potential idolatry)....WHICH one would be PREFERABLE? The Sun (in contrast to Earth):

1) gives people ultraviolet sunburns
2) has non-regulated light compared to candles, flashlights, light bulbs, mercury-vapor lamps, lasers, etc.
3) goes away at dusk and stays away all night until dawn
4) is too bright to look directly at most of the day
5) does not have the variety of colors and shapes compared to myriad-variety entities found on Earth
6) is at times lethally hot and not comfortably cool like Earth
7) cannot be breathed on, walked on, run on or slept on - contrasted with Earth

There are two overwhelming problems evolutionists encounter in their presumptions about origins source and the extent of time relating to lifeform development.

The first obstacle involves the necessary SOURCE (or SOURCES) of BEGINNING for all lifeform (and other) entities - no matter how simple OR complex.

The second obstacle involves the necessity of the state of COMPLETENESS of entities with ALL their DETAILED INTRICATE PARTS PRESENT and FUNCTIONING for lifeform existence - even BEFORE they REPRODUCE and VARIATE WITHIN LIKE KINDS thereafter.

Evolutionists in general do NOT like to speculate on the Entity (of WHATEVER nature and type) WHO (not "what") was or were VITAL in the INITIAL EVENT of the START of lifeform existence. It is logical to assume (not "presume") that the Creator of such lifeforms was (clearly Himself not mortal) certainly is MORE than equal to, and logically superior to, the lifeforms [He] created.

It is not possible, for example, for a human to create an entity which entity cannot be controlled, repaired, shut down, and restarted by himself; it is also not be possible for a rock to create a living insect, nor a bird to create a human being.

So "God" (and we will call Him that with the male-gender reference) of necessity HAS to be superior to both humans and angels He created.

I, myself, cannot even create a living dog or cat, virus, ameba, or even SO-CALLED "simple" cell!

Many evolutionists mindlessly and non-scientifically blatter that they have "faith" that "scientists" will "someday discover" who created what. Obviously, they - unlike TRUE scientists who take EVERYTHING into consideration - ignore the historical record of trustworthy believable men who wrote time-tested DIVINELY-inspired Scripture who LOGICALLY deduced and declared that "the LORD" created and thus began all entities we humans are able to perceive with our GIVEN senses. Biblical authors ELABORATED on the IDENTITY of that Creator as being "Jesus Christ."

Regarding the second obstacle, applicable examples will be given.

A human body (with all its cellular and molecular parts) cannot function WHATSOEVER without those CERTAIN and MANY parts simultaneously present and functioning.

Is it NON-REALISTIC to presume that all those intricate parts (including liver, stomach, intestines, lungs, muscles, brain, eyes and ears, and much more with all their precise myriad DNA and RNA components) "evolved" all of a sudden (even from VASTLY different APES or whatever which might SEEM closest to humankind) so as to be both PRESENT and FUNCTIONING for the new lifeform to exist. And WHAT closes the gap between PRESUMED "transitional" kinds?

WHERE are the FOSSILS as proof of ONLY PARTS of vital organs MERELY PARTIALLY developed in supposedly transitional lifeforms?

Does a car run on half-developed spark plugs with the insulators yet not present? How about an electrical alternator without the contact brushes not there yet? Brakes fully developed but without brake lines containing brake fluid yet? Can a human body operate with a brain but no legs present yet? Or without teeth for eating yet? Without lungs for breathing yet?

Hence we have the ancient but valid record of first-human Adam and Eve being created as FULLY-FUNCTIONAL ADULT beings - rather than not only NOT being born from someone or something else as infants, but also NOT evolved [by mutations or whatever] from lower lifeforms.

The same modus operandi applies to FULLY-formed stars, galaxies, nebula, etc. plus enroute-to-Earth starlight from such created during Creation Week -- ALL being brought into being ALL AT ONCE by "the Lord" on Day FOUR of Creation Week.

Again, to repeat, the same principle holds true with vehicles. Of necessity there MUST be [BOTH present AND functioning ] an ignition system (including spark plugs, rotor, cap, points, ignition coil....or equivalent with electronic ignition), oil, various crucial engine parts, and gas for the vehicle to even start. It almost goes without saying that each of those parts did NOT "evolve" (thus neither SIMULTANEOUSLY "evolved") individually nor as a group in some factory. [Remember the well-taken ridiculous scenario of a set of encyclopedias coming into existence from an explosion in a printing shop, or a set of chimps randomly typing up all the volumes in the Library of Congress over zillions of years]!

Though there are SOME similarities between monkeys and mankind (as there are between Volkswagens and Mack trucks), one CANNOT HONESTLY nor LOGICALLY say that they both RANDOMLY "evolved" with OR without intelligent designers. Where is the alphabet language with written and spoken words among apes? Where are the numbers handwritten by them and manipulated mathematically? Where is the attempt to be dressed and attired modestly among apes? Where is the ability to play complex music on a piano or organ, flute or trumpet of apes? Are not the sideways-protruding thumbs of apes useless for picking up intricate objects? Looking into the eyes of an ape, which do wander around and temporarily fixate on various stimuli, it seems as if one is looking at a lifeform which has had a lobotomy.

If one chooses to debate and nitpick, one can of course haggle over dictionary definitions of "design" and "intelligent" without blaspheming nor reviling Deity who Created it all, whether submitted to prejudiced or non-prejudiced peer view of whoever one defines as a "scientist" functioning "scientifically" in "scientific methods."

Both VWs and Mack trucks have tires, a steering wheel, brakes, and so on...but NEITHER are EXACTLY IDENTICAL with each other. How much LESS apes which cannot communicate either verbally or in writing to each other nor humans - which (NOT "who") like dogs can be trained to do limited tricks but in the eyesight of which there is no moral nor immoral scentience nor recognition.

To repeat, there are PROFOUND differences between apes and humans pertaining to SPEECH and LANGUAGE, plus COGNITION CAPACITY involving KNOWLEDGE PERCEPTION and ACQUISITION - especially in the area of ethics. [Ever gaze into a gorilla's MINDLESS passing gaze at you]? Moreover, it HAS ALWAYS BEEN that way, and STILL is.

Though school students in satanic dis-education centers are coerced through arm-twisting-like extortion of passing grades to profess the heresy of "evolution" by non-thinking biased-against-truth educrats, without ANY REASONABLE rationalizations to base "evolution" upon, perpetuating a continuing "belief" in "evolution" and its LAUGHABLE LENGTHY TIME PERIODS is NOT intellectual HONESTY, but instead a NON-SCIENTIFIC blind gullibility, and oftentimes proud-snot STUPIDITY and BELLIGERENCE against the Creator's plain-to-see phenomena of nature, easy-to-comprehend physical laws governing such, and DIVINE record of HISTORY in His HOLY BIBLE pertaining (among other things) to the VERY LIMITED NARROW time frame in which lifeforms first came into being: approximately 7000 years ago.

To drive one final lethal everything-reproduces-according-to-its-own-kind stake into the vampire heart of "evolution," savor some perceptive and needed searing sarcasm from Job 11:12 =