Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, PeaceSign said:


Your in the right place. FEB (flat earth british) youtube channel has an amazing archive of pics from all kinds of crazy things, but a good portion of it is giants and Tartaria and The Mudflood, and the older Cathedrals being used as magnetic healing centers, he loves frequencies too! 


The Mudflood is interesting, shows all these taller doors and windows, he like talking about all the American Expositions from the 1800s and shows how they are for Giants, Also he talks about the 1800s as a great reset (not the WEFs current "great reset) ...hes a cool dude...


and Deveils tower is the bottom of a tree!!!


Thanks PS.

WellAware of all of those and other groups i,m a  member of several of them.

Although i have been banned from pretty much EVERY social MeDieA Site lol.

Had to occupy myself these last 17 years hahahhaaa.



  • Thanks 1
  • Pow! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giants in the Bible

by Tim Chaffey on February 22, 2012
Featured in Answers in Depth

Introduction: Giants in the Bible

The Bible describes many individuals as giants, and it also mentions several giant people groups. Interpreters have speculated about the size of these people with guesses ranging anywhere from 6 feet to more than 30 feet in height. Also, a great deal of misinformation about giants in the Bible has been proliferated on the Internet along with some fake pictures of supposed giants. So did these giants really exist? If so, how big were they?


This article surveys all of the individuals and people groups described as giants in Scripture. Next, some ancient records and archaeological data that corroborate some of the biblical data will be examined. The article concludes with a study of how big these people could have been based on what we currently understand about genetics and biology.

Old Testament Giants

One of the earliest mentions of giants in the Bible is found in Genesis 14.

In the fourteenth year Chedorlaomer and the kings that were with him came and attacked the Rephaim in Ashteroth Karnaim, the Zuzim in Ham, the Emim in Shaveh Kiriathaim, and the Horites in their mountain of Seir . . . . Then they turned back and came to En Mishpat (that is, Kadesh), and attacked all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites who dwelt in Hazezon Tamar (Genesis 14:5–7, emphasis added).

Genesis 14 does not reveal that the Rephaim, Zuzim, Emim, or Amorites were giants, but this information can be found in other places.

The Amorites

The Amorites are mentioned more than 80 times in Scripture, and early on, some were allied with Abraham (Genesis 14:13). They were descendants of Noah’s grandson Canaan (Genesis 10:15–16). Although the Bible does not provide this information, the Jewish general-turned-historian Josephus gives the name of their ancestor as Amorreus.1 While the Amorites are mentioned in the same contexts as other giants a few times, they are specifically described as giants in the Minor Prophets.

Yet it was I who destroyed the Amorite before them, whose height was like the height of the cedars, and he was as strong as the oaks; yet I destroyed his fruit above and his roots beneath. Also it was I who brought you up from the land of Egypt, and led you forty years through the wilderness, to possess the land of the Amorite (Amos 2:9–10).

Through Amos, God clearly stated that the Amorites were generally very tall and strong. Some may downplay the description of the Amorites in this passage, since these verses employ figurative language, but there are some good reasons to take this passage in a straightforward manner.2

The idea that the Amorites were giants is supported by the report of the spies whom Moses sent through the land of Canaan. The Amorites were one of the people groups they saw (Numbers 13:29), and they claimed that “all the people whom we saw in it are men of great stature” (Numbers 13:32). It is telling that in their response, Joshua and Caleb did not challenge the size of the land’s inhabitants (Numbers 14:6–9).3

The Emim

Deuteronomy 2 reveals that the Emim, which likely means “terrors,” were giants:

The Emim had dwelt there in times past, a people as great and numerous and tall as the Anakim. They were also regarded as giants [Hebrew rephaim], like the Anakim, but the Moabites call them Emim (Deuteronomy 2:10–11).

Moses told the people that the Emim used to live in the territory that God had given to the descendants of Lot’s son Moab (Genesis 19:37).

The Zuzim (Zamzummim)

The Zamzummim (almost certainly the same as Zuzim in Genesis 14:5) were also called giants and listed in the same chapter as the Emim:

[The land of Ammon] was also regarded as a land of giants [Hebrew rephaim]; giants [rephaim] formerly dwelt there. But the Ammonites call them Zamzummim, a people as great and numerous and tall as the Anakim. But the Lord destroyed them before them, and they dispossessed them and dwelt in their place (Deuteronomy 2:20–21).

These verses explain that a group of giants known as Zamzummim had lived in the land of Ammon, “a land of giants.” God destroyed the Zamzummim so that the descendants of Lot’s son Ben-Ammi (the Ammonites) could live in the land (Genesis 19:38).4

According to Genesis 14:5, the Zuzim were in the land of Ham. This may be in reference to Noah’s son, Ham, since they descended from him. But it is more likely a reference to the Hamathites, who were descendants of Canaan, Ham’s son. While the Zuzim and Zamzummim may have been different people groups, there are enough similarities in name, description, and geographical location to infer that they were variant names for the same group.


The most common term used to describe giants in the Bible is rephaim (e.g., Deuteronomy 3:11, 13). It may refer to a certain people group,5 or it may be a term that simply means giants. The singular form, raphah, also appears several times (e.g., 2 Samuel 21:16, 18, 20).6

The third chapter of Deuteronomy contains an interesting account of the victory of the Israelites over Sihon, the king of the Amorites, and Og, the king of Bashan.7 It is here that we learn an intriguing detail about Og:

For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of the giants [rephaim]. Indeed his bedstead was an iron bedstead. (Is it not in Rabbah of the people of Ammon?) Nine cubits is its length and four cubits its width, according to the standard cubit (Deuteronomy 3:11).

Some translations use the word sarcophagus (NEB) or coffin (TEV, CEV) in place of bedstead, for the Hebrew word עֶרֶשׂ (eres). The majority of English Bibles render this term as bed or bedstead, which makes sense since eres means couch, divan, bed, or bedstead. Also, it would be indeed strange to translate it as sarcophagus since these were made of stone or marble, and Og’s “bedstead” was made of iron.8

Whether Moses referred to Og’s bed or coffin is not particularly relevant to the discussion at hand. However, the size of this object is noteworthy. We are told that it was nine cubits long and four cubits in width “according to the standard cubit.” Since the standard cubit is approximately 18 inches long, then Og’s bed or coffin was about 13.5 feet long and 6 feet wide. To put this in perspective, if stood up on end, the height of this bed would have been exactly twice as tall as a person who is 6 foot 9 inches tall. Of course, he may not have been as large as his bed. Some authors have attempted to downplay the significance of these dimensions, but the Bible clearly identifies Og as a giant.

The Nephilim

The earliest mention in giants in the Bible is just prior to the Flood account.

There were giants [nephilim] on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown (Genesis 6:4).9

The word translated as “giants” in this verse is the Hebrew word nephilim, and many Bible versions simply transliterate it as such. There has been much debate over the meaning of this word. Some believe it comes from the Hebrew verb naphal, while others claim that it is from the Aramaic noun naphil.10 These individuals are described in Hebrew as gibborim (“mighty men”).11

The nephilim were mentioned again when the spies returned from their exploratory mission of the land of Canaan. These men reported that Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai (descendants of Anak, progenitor of the Anakim) dwelt in Hebron. They also stated, “the people who dwell in the land are strong; the cities are fortified and very large; moreover we saw the descendants of Anak there” (Numbers 13:28). The chapter concludes with ten of the spies giving “a bad report” trying to convince the Israelites that they could not conquer the land:

The land through which we have gone, in spying it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants; and all the people whom we saw in it are men of great size. There also we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak are part of the Nephilim); and we became like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight” (Numbers 13:32—33, NASB).12

The Anakim

The Anakim were mentioned in several of these passages. They were perhaps the best known of the giants dwelling in the land of Canaan at the time of the Exodus. As stated in the verse above, they were part of the nephilim. If nephilim simply refers to giants in general, then the Anakim are just said to be giants in Numbers 13:33, which is consistent with their description in this passage. So the Amorites and other giant people would also be nephilim. If nephilim refers to a particular giant tribe, then the Anakim were part of this line.

Numbers 13:22 states that Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai were descendants of Anak, who was obviously the namesake of the Anakim. Both the Emim and Zamzummim were compared to the Anakim, as they were both “a people as great and numerous and tall as the Anakim” (Deuteronomy 2:10, 21; 9:2).

Anak was the son of Arba (Joshua 15:13). Little is known about Arba, and his ancestry is not provided. However, he was apparently somewhat legendary as indicated by the parenthetical statements in the text when his name appears. The city of Hebron, where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob settled and were buried was also called Kiriath Arba.13 We are told that “Arba was the greatest man among the Anakim” (Joshua 14:15), and “the father of Anak” (Joshua 15:13; 21:11).14 Kirjath Arba was also called “Mamre” in Genesis 35:27. Mamre was an Amorite, who was an ally of Abram (Genesis 14:13). This man owned some trees by which Abram settled, and at some point, part of Hebron became synonymous with his name.

Joshua fought several battles with the Anakim and the Amorites. Eventually, he “cut off the Anakim from the mountains: from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, from all the mountains of Judah, and from all the mountains of Israel; Joshua utterly destroyed them with their cities. None of the Anakim were left in the land of the children of Israel; they remained only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod” (Joshua 11:21–22). These actions set the stage for the famous account of Goliath in 1 Samuel.


Of course, the most renowned giant was the mighty Philistine slain by David. Here is how he is described in Scripture.

And a champion went out from the camp of the Philistines, named Goliath, from Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span. He had a bronze helmet on his head, and he was armed with a coat of mail, and the weight of the coat was five thousand shekels of bronze. And he had bronze armor on his legs and a bronze javelin between his shoulders. Now the staff of his spear was like a weaver’s beam, and his iron spearhead weighed six hundred shekels; and a shield-bearer went before him (1 Samuel 17:4–7).

Notice that Goliath was from Gath, which happened to be one of the three places where Anakim remained, according to Joshua 11:21–22. So although he is not called one in 1 Samuel 17, it is possible that Goliath was a descendant of the Anakim who mixed with the Philistine population in that area.15

There is some debate about Goliath’s height due to the textual variants in ancient manuscripts. Most English translations follow the Masoretic text in listing his height at “six cubits and a span” (approximately 9’9”). However, the NET Bible puts Goliath at “close to seven feet tall.” The reason for the discrepancy is that the Masoretic Text differs from some ancient texts, including the Septuagint and an ancient manuscript found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, labeled 4QSama, which list Goliath’s height as four cubits and a span (approximately 6’9”).

Many modern scholars believe there is stronger textual support for the shorter Goliath.16 But while he is not specifically called a giant in this passage, 2 Samuel 21:15–22 seems to identify Goliath as the “giant” (raphah) from Gath. There are other details provided that make the “six cubits and a span” the more likely figure. For example, the sheer weight of his armaments required that he must have been of enormous size and strength. His coat of mail weighed about 125 pounds and just the tip of his spear was 15 pounds. This does not even take into account his helmet, armor on his legs, javelin, or sword.17 Also, I personally find it hard to believe that every member of Israel’s army would have been terrified of someone who was my height (6’9”).18

There are many other details about the account of David and Goliath that are often overlooked. Most people assume David was a short young man when he fought against the giant, but the Bible is very clear that David was considered “a mighty man of valor, [and] a man of war” (1 Samuel 16:18) prior to fighting Goliath.

Other Giants in the Bible

The Bible mentions four more Philistine giants, who were relatives of Goliath from the region of Gath. 2 Samuel 21:15–22 provides a more detailed account of these giants than the record of 1 Chronicles 20:4–8, but the latter passage does provide some extra information that helps us make sense of the passage. The additional details from 1 Chronicles are provided in brackets.

When the Philistines were at war again with Israel, David and his servants with him went down and fought against the Philistines; and David grew faint. Then Ishbi-Benob, who was one of the sons of the giant, the weight of whose bronze spear was three hundred shekels, who was bearing a new sword, thought he could kill David. But Abishai the son of Zeruiah came to his aid, and struck the Philistine and killed him. Then the men of David swore to him, saying, “You shall go out no more with us to battle, lest you quench the lamp of Israel.”

Now it happened afterward that there was again a battle with the Philistines at Gob [or “Gezer”].19 Then Sibbechai the Hushathite killed Saph [or “Sippai”], who was one of the sons of the giant. Again there was war at Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaare-Oregim [or “Jair”] the Bethlehemite killed [“Lahmi”] the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.

Yet again there was war at Gath, where there was a man of great stature, who had six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in number; and he also was born to the giant. So when he defied Israel, Jonathan the son of Shimea, David’s brother, killed him.

These four were born to the giant in Gath, and fell by the hand of David and by the hand of his servants (2 Samuel 21:15–22).

David’s mighty men killed giants named Ishbi-Benob, Saph (Sippai), and Lahmi, as well as an unnamed giant with six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot.20 Each of these men could have descended from the remnant of Anakim that survived in the region of Gath, Gaza, and Ashdod (Joshua 11:22).

An Egyptian Giant?

One of David’s mighty men, Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, defeated a large Egyptian man:

And he killed an Egyptian, a man of great height, five cubits tall. In the Egyptian’s hand there was a spear like a weaver’s beam; and he went down to him with a staff, wrested the spear out of the Egyptian’s hand, and killed him with his own spear (1 Chronicles 11:23, italics in original).

Although he is often considered a giant, the Bible does not specifically identify this man as one, nor does it place this account with the exploits of David’s other men who slayed giants, but it does provide his height as being “five cubits” (approximately 7’ 6”). The KJV, NKJV, NASB, ESV, and others insert the word “great” before “height” or “stature,” but “great” does not appear in the Hebrew. This may have been done for stylistic and readability purposes or because his height is provided later in the verse. Young’s Literal Translation renders this verse in an almost perfect word-for-word match of the Hebrew: “And he hath smitten the man, the Egyptian—a man of measure, five by the cubit—and in the hand of the Egyptian is a spear like a beam of weavers” (1 Chronicles 11:23, italics in original).

In the parallel account given in 2 Samuel 23:21 the Egyptian is called “a spectacular man” in the NKJV and “an impressive man” in the NASB. While modern man may think of a 7’6” man as a giant, it is intriguing that the Bible does not identify him as such. Perhaps this is a clue that those who are identified as giants were larger than the Egyptian slain by Benaiah. Another explanation for this omission is that many of the giants were called by their particular tribes (Anakim, Emim, etc.), but the tall Egyptian is not said to belong to any of these giant groups. If that is the case, it is curious why the biblical writers would not simply use a generic term for “giant,” such as rapha.

Following these accounts in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles, the giants fade from the pages of Scripture (other than the retrospective mention of the Amorites as giants in Amos 2:9).

Extra-biblical References to Giants

Scores of giant skeletons have been allegedly unearthed in the past couple of centuries. These claims were especially popular in the nineteenth century. So far, no concrete evidence of these claims has been brought forth. Although some claim the evidence was ignored, destroyed, or hidden by places like the Smithsonian, it seems more likely that the vast majority of these reports were hoaxes created for various reasons.

So far, no concrete evidence of these claims has been brought forth.

Several websites display pictures of people standing next to or holding a giant human femur, but these bones are sculptures, allegedly replicas of a real bone found in Turkey or Greece. Once again, there are fantastic claims, but little or no hard evidence to support them.

As far as I know, no one has discovered fossil evidence of giant humans. But then again, human fossils are quite rare altogether, since humans are more capable of avoiding rapid burial in sediment and other conditions that could lead to fossilization of their remains. What is indeed significant is that many giant versions of other creatures existed in the past or still exist today. To name just a few, these include the following:

  1. spiders (e.g., the bird-eating spider, up to 12-inch leg span)
  2. moths (e.g., the Atlas moth, with a wing span of 11 inches)
  3. centipedes (up to 13 inches long)
  4. snails (e.g., the African giant snail, up to 15½ inches long)
  5. frogs (e.g. Beelzebufo, 16 inches high)
  6. dragonflies (e.g., Meganeura, with a wing span of more than 2½ feet)
  7. rats (e.g., Josephoartigasia, with a conservatively estimated body mass of 750 pounds)
  8. beavers (e.g., Trogontherium, about 7½ feet long)
  9. scorpions (e.g., the sea scorpion Jaekelopterus, estimated at more than 8 feet long)
  10. crabs (e.g., the giant spider crab, with a claw span more than 12 feet)
  11. armadillos (e.g., Glyptodon, up to 13 feet long)
  12. turtles (e.g., Archelon, up to 16 feet long)
  13. fish (e.g., Xiphactinus, 19 feet long)
  14. sloths (e.g., Megatherium, which stood about 20 feet)
  15. worms (e.g., the giant earthworm, up to 22 feet long)
  16. sea cows (e.g., Hydrodamalis, 25 feet or more in length)
  17. crocodiles (e.g., Sarcosuchus, up to 40 feet long)
  18. snakes (e.g., Titanoboa, over 42 feet long)
  19. crustaceans (e.g., supergiant amphipods 10 times larger than those previously discovered)
  20. squid (e.g., Mesonychoteuthis, 50 feet or more in length)
  21. sharks (e.g., Rhincodon, up to 65 feet long)
  22. octopuses with 100 foot long tentacles.21

The fact that scientists have discovered animals with body sizes far greater than those observed today suggests, at least in theory, the possibility of there having also been giant humans in the past, as recorded in the Bible.

Many modern scholars scoff at the idea that there could have been giant warriors in excess of seven and a half feet tall. Consequently, the biblical dimensions of these people have often been downplayed or ignored. However, the biblical data about these people can be trusted because it is in the Word of God. Furthermore, other ancient sources describe giants, and the Anakim are even mentioned as dwelling in the land of Canaan.


During the twelfth dynasty of ancient Egypt, traditionally dated from the twentieth to nineteenth centuries B.C.,22 the Egyptians practiced something akin to the modern use of voodoo dolls. A potter would make a clay figurine of an enemy they feared. The figurine had its arms behind its back and the name of the group or its leaders would be written upon it. Sometimes a bowl or block of clay was used for listing the enemies. The figurine or bowl was then smashed in a symbolic way of cursing the enemies so that they could be defeated.

Archaeologists have reconstructed many of these Execration texts (also called Proscription Lists), and some very interesting details have been found concerning the Anakim. This is an example of a text which mentions them:

The Ruler of Iy’anaq, Erum, and all the retainers who are with him; the Ruler of Iy’anaq, Abi-yamimu and all the retainers who are with him; the Ruler of Iy’anaq ‘Akirum and the retainers who are with him (emphasis added).23

It should be noted that anaq (i.e., with a q in place of the k) is a common transliteration of the Hebrew word for Anak, עְַנָק (Numbers 13:33).

Another Execration text places the Anakim in the land of Canaan and even mentions the city of Jerusalem.24 The ancient Egyptians also called the inhabitants of the land of Canaan “Shasu.” A later text entitled The Craft of the Scribe (c. 1250 BC), which was used to train Egyptian scribes, discusses a Canaanite mountain pass during a past battle.

The face of the pass is dangerous with Shasu, hidden under the bushes. Some of them are 4 or 5 cubits, nose to foot, with wild faces.25

Egyptian cubits were longer than the Hebrew common cubit. At 20.65 inches per Egyptian cubit, the Shasu mentioned in this letter would have measured between 6’10” and 8’7.” This description shows that the traditional measurement of Goliath is not as outlandish as many critics believe.

Other Ancient Reports

Nearly every place around the world has legends of giants dwelling in the land. Certainly, one must exercise caution when reading these stories on the Internet since so much of the information online is contrary to the Word of God. For example, a few years ago, pictures of giant skeletons started to appear on websites, but they were clearly doctored (apparently part of a graphic design contest).

Greek and Roman mythology mentions the Titans, Kyklopes (Cyclops), and several other giants.26 Norse mythology contains stories of the Frost giants of Jötunheim. But these records are not limited to European mythologies or only to the ancient past. African and Asian peoples also have legends of giants, as do Native Americans.

For example, in his autobiography, “Buffalo” Bill Cody wrote the following words about a legend recounted to him by members of the Sioux tribe.

It was taught by the wise men of this tribe that the earth was originally peopled by giants, who were fully three times the size of modern men. They were so swift and powerful that they could run alongside a buffalo, take the animal under one arm, and tear off a leg, and eat it as they ran. So vainglorious were they because of their own size and strength that they denied the existence of a Creator. When it lighted, they proclaimed their superiority to the lightning; when it thundered, they laughed.

This displeased the Great Spirit, and to rebuke their arrogance he sent a great rain upon the earth. The valleys filled with water, and the giants retreated to the hills. The water crept up the hills, and the giants sought safety on the highest mountains. Still the rain continued, the waters rose, and the giants, having no other refuge, were drowned.27

Undoubtedly, many of these stories contain exaggerations of the giants’ prodigious height and strength. But is it reasonable to automatically reject every one of these traditions, or, like tales of dragons, is there possibly some truth behind the legends, as is often the case? It is interesting that much of giant lore includes descriptions of a flood sent by God (or the gods) to destroy these wicked people. Could it be that while the Bible contains the true history of our past, these groups are simply repeating their own distorted versions of world history prior to and perhaps after the dispersion at Babel?28

Modern Giants

So were all of these giants just people who developed gigantism? Although gigantism may account for some of the ancient giants, this proposed solution falls short of explaining many of the biblical accounts.

Modern gigantism is often caused by abnormalities that lead to excessive production of growth hormone.29 It is highly unlikely that Goliath, the nephilim, Anakim, or most of the other Old Testament giants suffered from such a condition since they were often described as warriors or “mighty men,” while modern “giants” are usually awkward, uncoordinated, and endure several physical ailments. There have been some rare cases where the person could accurately be described as a “mighty man.”30

Furthermore, modern gigantism is not hereditary, whereas the Bible often describes giants as being the offspring of other giants (e.g., Deuteronomy 9:21 Chronicles 20:6). So the groups known as giants were not simply made up of individuals with the modern form of gigantism.

Giants In The Bible: How Tall Were They?

So just how tall were the various groups of giants in the Bible? Given the discrepancy in the ancient texts about Goliath’s height, it is difficult to base our estimate on his dimensions. The Egyptian killed by Benaiah was at least 7’6” (perhaps taller if the common cubit was not being used), but he is not called a giant. The Egyptian document, The Craft of the Scribe, placed the Shasu (Anakim?) between 6’10” and 8’7”. They had to be large enough for the Israelites to claim that they looked like grasshoppers in the sight of the giants and for God to compare the height of the Amorites to cedars.

There are two main lines of thought on this subject. One idea looks at the modern understanding of human growth. Our stature is primarily affected by our DNA with some influence from environmental factors, but we seem to be limited by the “square-cube” law.31 For example, let’s use my dimensions to see what would happen if I was scaled up to twice my height. This will give us a good example since I am 6’9”, and some have argued that King Og of Bashan was as tall as his bed was long (13’6”), which is exactly twice my height. So if we were to double my height, then we would also need to increase my width and depth proportionally to compensate.

This means that, along with my height, both my width and depth would double, so we would need to multiply my weight (about 250 pounds) by a factor of eight. So a person of my proportions at 13’6” would weigh 2000 pounds! Not only is it difficult for us to imagine a person so large, but also when considering the compressive strength of bone,32 we would conclude that Og’s skeletal system would be under tremendous stress, and he would be much more likely to suffer broken bones than a normal-sized person, not to mention the dangerous stress placed on his body’s other systems.33

meganeuraThe second view is based on three points mentioned above. First, would a 5’6” individual really feel like a “grasshopper” compared to someone who is 7–8 feet tall? Admittedly, this is somewhat subjective, but the contrast seems to require a taller giant. Next, as pointed out in the second footnote, there is a strong comparison of the height and strength of the Amorites to the cedar and oak trees in Amos 2:9. Third, the evidence of other creatures in the fossil record that are far greater than twice the size of their modern counterparts provides support to the idea that the limits imposed by the square-cube law may not be as strict as we imagine them to be. For example, the meganeura is an extinct dragonfly, whose wingspan was greater than 30 inches. The Wikipedia entry (Wikimedia Commons image, right) on this creature states the following:

Controversy has prevailed as to how insects of the Carboniferous period were able to grow so large. The way oxygen is diffused through the insect's body via its tracheal breathing system puts an upper limit on body size, which prehistoric insects seem to have well exceeded.34

While I don’t believe in “prehistoric” creatures (since man has been on earth since Day Six, and God has revealed what happened during the first five days in a historical account), the meganeura shows that the size limits of living organisms may be greater than expected. Those holding the second view do not have a problem with the biblical giants exceeding nine feet in height.

Furthermore, it should be pointed out that the square-cube law is accurate when applied to building materials, but it doesn’t seem to perfectly relate to biological organisms, although it probably provides some “ballpark” limits. For example, the average house cat is about 30 inches long (head to tail), 9–10 inches tall, and weighs about 11 pounds, while tigers reach 12 feet in length (head to tail), 3 feet in height, and weighs about 500 pounds.35 If we were going to estimate the weight of a 10-foot long, 3-foot tall cat using the square-cube law, based on the dimensions of the average house cat, then the numbers would not match what we see in reality. According to this rule, when we quadruple the length (2.5 feet to 10 feet), then we would need to multiply the weight by 64 (4 x 4 x 4), which means we would expect the weight to be approximately 700 pounds. This is significantly higher than the weight of a tiger of this size.36

This example shows that tigers and house cats do not share the exact same proportions, but this is exactly the point. Both animals belong to the created cat “kind,” and the much larger varieties (lions, tigers, etc.) are not perfectly “scaled up” compared to the smaller varieties. If this were the case with giant humans, then perhaps a 13’6” Og isn’t out of the realm of possibility, but the notion that some biblical giants were 20–30 feet tall or greater is probably a “stretch.”


So which view is accurate? I honestly do not know, but the square-cube law seems to provide some upper limits, so it is unlikely that they reached 20–30 feet or more. However, I do know the Bible clearly teaches that giants existed in the past. Many of them lived in and around the land of Canaan, and Joshua was involved in several battles with them. David and his mighty men killed some Philistine giants. The Egyptians knew about the Anakim and feared them. Finally, cultures from around the world have legends that are often remarkably similar to biblical accounts, including the existence of giants.

The accounts of giants in the Bible are more than just “tall” tales. These enormous people truly existed, and no amount of scoffing or rationalizing by skeptics will change that fact.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Slave2Spartacus said:




Just going off of the question posted on the video, that would depend on whether you believe the earth is 6000 years old or 1,000,000. If 6000 then no one lived on the earth 100,000 years ago. And I would question the other unless you find a skeleton and could accurately date it. And no, I could never date a giant.  😆

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Slave2Spartacus said:

Now that The Flat Earth Debate seems to have been pushed IN front of LGD's Initial Topic.

I  will add WE are also underwater.!!!


I thought, if he can't discuss the issue of God's Footstool without getting upset there's no way I am going to explain that the biggest ocean in the world is above him :lol:


And by all means join the conversation, I would love to learn from your experiences. :tiphat:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, PeaceSign said:


I don't understand.  So you do believe we are enclosed?


The comment was made on man made environments in space to illustrate a vacuum doesn't pull all materials apart. On Earth, the Earth's gravity holds the nominal nitrogen/oxygen atmosphere layer for life to exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Synopsis said:

The Earth being SPHERICAL (geoidal) in shape is REALITY NOT THE LIE OF THE Earth BEING FLAT.










20 hours ago, Synopsis said:

So, again, the question THAT remains unanswered is, "WHY, pray tell, the LIES of a Flat Earth???!!!"




20 hours ago, Synopsis said:

NO mention is made regarding the RIDICULOUS Badgering Rhetoric of Flat Earth STUPIDITY CLEARLY EVIDENT THIS WHOLE THREAD.


THERE IS NO DEBATE ABOUT FACTS. Flat Earth "proofs" ARE RIDICULOUS Badgering Rhetoric.





@Slave2Spartacus is a Red Rubymeister AND Gave Me A Red Ruby Citation As A Badge Of Honor For ME For "Display Of Intellectual Speed And Power" for noting the Earth IS SPHERICAL (geoidal) IN SHAPE!!!


THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU @Slave2Spartacus for confirming how STUPID Flat Earth "beliefs" AND "postulations" are AND THE Earth REALLY IS SPHERICAL (geoidal) IN SHAPE!!!


:bravo:   :bravo:   :bravo:


14 hours ago, Slave2Spartacus said:






What is the speed of light in 1 second?

Speed of light, speed at which light waves propagate through different materials. In particular, the value for the speed of light in a vacuum is now defined as exactly 299,792,458 metres per second.


standard acceleration of gravity

Numerical value9.806 65 m s-2


299,792,458 m/s / 9.80665 m/s^2 / 60 s/min / 60 min/hr / 24 hr/day =


353.823 days OR eleven (11) months AND twenty (20) days.


SO, a Flat Earth can NOT travel "up" at a rate of one (1) g to "give" A "false" "impression" OF Gravity. OTHERWISE WE WOULD BE TRAVELING ASTRONOMICALLY FASTER THAN THEE SPEED OF LIGHT AND INCREASING IN SPEED.



THIS IS REALLY STUPID Flat Earth "fantasy" "modeling":








As noted earlier:


In Summary For The Flat Earthers:

  1. The Earth is FLAT NOT ACUTALLY BEING SPHERICAL (geoidal) in shape.
  2. Gravity does NOT exist.
  3. An ACTUAL SPHERICAL (geoidal) shaped Earth rotating at four (4) minutes of time per degree of 360 degree of rotation would fling objects off the Equator at nominally 1,037.54 miles per hour.
  4. Planes travel much faster from East to West on an ACTUAL SPHERICAL (geoidal) Earth since the Earth spins in a counter clockwise direction viewed from the North Pole.
  5. Global Positioning System Satellites DO NOT EXIST FOR A FLAT EARTH.
  6. The Sun AND Moon are ALWAYS above the plane of the Flat Earth AND EACH shine like a flash light to specific regions of the Earth WHILE NEVER SETTING OR RISING.
  7. The FALSE Doctrine of the Bible noting the Earth is Flat.



However, STUPID Flat Earth "proofs" DENY:

  • Light direction transitions at the interface of differing media with differing indexes of refraction.
  • Gravity is real.
  • Constant angular and/or translational velocity is the basis for NOT experiencing calculable seemingly astronomical projections (acceleration or deceleration).
  • Planes fly in a generally upright position and always have an upright position in normal flight no matter what position in the sky above the SPHERICAL (geoidal) Earth since gravity is oriented to the center of the SPHERICAL (geoidal) Earth.
  • There are NO Global Positioning System Satellites orbiting the SPHERICAL (geoidal) Earth in regular AND predictable orbital positions relative to the SPHERICAL (geoidal) Earth.
  • Satellites are able to orbit the SPHERICAL (geoidal) Earth in regular AND predictable orbital positions relative to the SPHERICAL (geoidal) Earth without the constant expulsion of fuel.
  • The sun rises or sets.
  • Amature astronomers are able to observe celestial bodies to note their shapes (SPHERICAL) and their trajectory in space. Additionally, software is available to predict the position of these celestial bodies whether it be planets AROUND the sun AND/OR moons around the planet. The software ALSO projects the position of the celestial bodies AND the view from ANY point on the SPHERICAL (geoidal) Earth AT ANY DATE OR TIME.
  • Flat Earth philosophies are a REAL practice to dumb people down to get more Liberal "thinkers" AND OTHER "useful" "idiots".
  • Flat Earthers are LIARS AND concoct THEIR FALSE "evidence" in an attempt to dumb others down and to join their "woke" ranks.


NOTHING I have posted HERE is a LIE.


So, again, the question THAT remains unanswered is, "WHY, pray tell, the LIES of a Flat Earth???!!!"









AS A Flat Earth "believer" YOU ARE "perched" (STUCK, REALLY) ON Mt. STUPID:


3x4 Tips To Deal With The Dunning Kruger Effect | Dunning–kruger effect,  Dunning, Words

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Pow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flat earth discussions.

The system of the Universe, as taught by Modern
Astronomers, being founded entirely on theory, for the
truth of which they are unable to advance one single
real proof, they have entrenched themselves in a con-
spiracy of silence, and decline to answer any objections
which may be made to their hypotheses. Such a method
of defence appears to me to be neither wise nor effectual,
for Truth is great, and must ultimately prevail. It rather resembles the tactics of the ostrich, which, in order to elude his pursuers, hides his head in the sand,
thus leaving the greater part of his body exposed to view.
Lord Beaconsfield wisely said—" A subject or system
that will not bear discussion is doomed." Both
Copernicus himself, who revived the theory of the
heathen philosopher Pythagoras, and his great exponent
Sir Isaac Newton, confessed that their system of a
revolving Earth was only a possibility, and could not be
proved by facts. It is only their followers who have
decorated it with the name of an " exact science," yea, according to them, " the most exact of all the sciences."
Yet one Astronomer Royal for England once said, speaking of the motion of the whole Solar system

" The matter is left in a most delightful state of uncer-
tainty, and I shall be very glad if any one can help me
out of it." What a very sad position for an " exact
science " to be in is this ! Nothing certain but the
uncertain—nothing known but the unknown. Their cal- culations on celestial things are so preposterous and vague that "no fella" can understand them; just look
at the following ***-bits of Modern Astronomic Science

The Sun's distance from the Earth is reckoned to
be about 92,000,000 miles. The Sun is larger than the Earth 1,240,000 times. 58,000 Suns would be required to equal the cubic
contents of the Star Vega.
Struve tells us that light from Stars of the ninth
magnitude, travelling with the velocity of 12,000,000
miles per minute, would require to travel space for 586
years before reaching this world of ours
The late Mr. Proctor said—" I think a moderate
estimate of the age of the Earth would be 500,000,000
years.The weight of the Earth, according to the same
authority, is 6,000,000,000,000,000,000 tons
And so on ad nauseam.
Now what confidence can any man place in a science
which gives promissory notes of such extravagance as
these? They are simply bankrupt bills, not worth the
paper on which they are written. And yet, strange to
say, many foolish people endorse them as if they were
good, the reason being that they are toO' lazy to think
for themselves, and, to their own sad cost, accept the
bogus notes as if they had been issued by a Rothschild.
" True 'tis a pity—pity 'tis 'tis true." • What a sad illustration is given by the above state- ments as to the utter worthlessness of Modem Astronomy
in the closing days of this boastful Nineteenth Century!
Copernicus wrote—" It is not necessary that hypotheses be
true or even probable ; it is sufficient that they lead to results of
calculation which agree with calculation. . . . Neither let any one, as far as hypotheses are concerned, expect anything certain from Astronomy, since that science can afford nothing of the
kind, lest in case he should adopt for truth things feigned for
another purpose, he should leave the science more foolish than
when he came. . . . The hypothesis of the terrestrial motion
was nothing but an hypothesis, valuable only so far as it explained
phenomena not considered with reference to absolute truth or
If such was the conviction of Copernicus, the reviver
of the old Pagan system of Pythagoras, and of Newton,
its chief expounder, what right have Modem Astronomers
to assert that a theory, which was given only as a
possibility, is a fact, especially when they differ so much
among themselves even as regards the very first elements
of the problem—the distance of the Sun from the Earth ? Copernicus computed it as being only three millions, while Meyer enlarged it to one hundred and four millions
of miles, and there are many estimates between these
two extremes. In my young days it was reckoned to be
ninety-five, but in my old it has been reduced to about
ninety-two millions of miles. Such discrepancies remind
me of the confusion which attended those who in olden
days attempted to build the Tower of Babel, when their language was confounded, and their labour brought to
nought. But no wonder is it that their calculations are
all wrong, seeing they proceed from a wrong basis. They
assumed the world to be a Planet, with a circumference
of 25,000 miles, and took their measurements from its supposed centre, and from supposed spherical angles of
measurement on the surface. Again, how could such
measurements possibly be correct while, as we are told, the Earth was whirling around the Sun faster than cannon ball, at the rate of eighteen miles per second,
a force more than sufficient to kill every man, woman,
and child on its surface in less than a minute? Then,
the Earth is supposed to have various other motions,
into the discussion of which I need not enter here, and
will only notice that of its supposed rotation round its imaginary axis at the rate, at the Equator, of a thousand
miles per hour, with an inclination of 23^^ degrees.
Let me, however, remind our Astronomers of a pertinent
remark itiade by Captain R. I. Morrison, late Compiler
of Zadkiel's Almanac, who, from the position he held,
ought to be considered a good authority on such

" We declare that this motion is all mere ' bosh,' and that the arguments which uphold it are, when examined by an eye that seeks Truth, mere nonsense and childish absurdity."* How contrary are all these fancied motions to the
plain teaching of the Scriptures, that the Earth " is founded upon the seas, and established upon the floods"' —Psa. xxiv. 2. Yea that God's own hand " hath laid
the foundations of the Earth "

Isa. xlviii. 13. Pythagoras of Samos, a heathen philosopher, who
lived, it is thought, about 500 years B.C., is the first who taught that the Sun is the stationary centre of the
Universe, and that the Earth revolved around it as one
of its satellites. But his opinion did not make much
headway. In the second century A.D., Claudius Ptolemy
of Alexandria, a man reported among the Greeks to be
of vast learning and wisdom, restored the ancient. Cosmogony, that the Earth is in the centre of the Universe, is immovable, and that the Sun, Moon, and
Stars revolved around it, as instruments to give it light.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flat earth Discussions.

Please someone clarify the flat earth satellite thing for me. As far as I have seen, they deny the existence of satellites. I don't know the shape of the earth, I don't care, I just don't want the damn synopsis of the flat earth satellite belief. Thank you.
 Quoting: •Ice C• 

Here is what I think. 

Satellites are indeed up there. Simply put, a satellite will stay put where ever you place it at that height (35,786 Kms or so) above earth. They are said to be orbiting around the earth at the earth's speed, but are not powered to do so. That means that its merely an assumption that they are orbiting ... for if the earth is thought to be orbiting and the satellites are staying at the same place regardless, one can only assume that they too are orbiting by some magic. The reality probably is, neither the earth or the satellites are orbiting; both are stationary. 

By the way, earth's atmosphere is only about 12 kms high. So the question one needs to ask is, how are these satellites orbiting the earth in orbits way, way about the earth's atmosphere (36,000 kms and 780 kms) and matching the earth's orbit speed of 1670 kms/hour, when they have absolutely no provision for (motor or fuel) for such motion? (No, not their solar panels: they only produce enough electricity to power their communication equipments.) 

Conclusion: We can have satellites on a flat earth. Why it floats up there on Flat Earth is the same reason it floats on the sphere or pear or whatever shaped model earth. And that science is really quite simple. Anything will float above the earth's surface (spherical/flat) beyond a certain height.


Lockheed Martin has built more than 8,000 lighter-than-air platforms which is a pretty significant number for that fact alone. They also have a nifty brochure about LTA’s. Lighter Than Air Brochure.

LTA’s are said to reach altitudes of 70,000 ft, but 100,000 ft and higher have been attained. They can stay aloft for months if not years, unmanned and controlled by ground based operators akin to drones. LTA’s also have the capability to maintain a geosynchronous position that satellites purport to do also.

Light-Than-Air-Vehicles (LAV), High Altitude Airships (HAA) and High Altitude Platforms (HAP) can take all shapes and certainly can be mis-perceived as satellites by the public. Besides High Altitude Airshsips there are HALE (High Altitude Long Endurance) stations or SPR (Stratospheric Platform Radios). In reality they can be providing all the capabilities that satellites allegedly provide and we’ve had no idea. Below are more proofs that the skies are more than likely crawling with these platforms.

High Altitude Long Operation (HALO) is the name of network based on the piloted Proteus airplane.

Sky Station is the name of a solar-powered aerostatic HAP system planned by Sky Station International.

StratSat is a solar-powered aerostatic HAP system planned by Advanced Technology Group for civilian and military applications.

The Airborne Relay Communication (ARC) system is an aerostatic platform planned by Platforms Wireless International.

SkyTower is a solar-powered radio-controlled aerodyne platform planned by SkyTower Telecommunications.

HeliPlat is the name of an unmanned solar-powered stratospheric platform developed in the framework of a European project.

The Japanese project aims at an aerostat platform that will offer classic mobile, fixed, and broadcasting services and new terrestrial wireless interactive multimedia applications.

Smaller specialized companies like ILC Dover work with NASA and DARPA on various platforms and support their development. 

ILC Dover has been involved in the design and development of high-altitude airships since the early 1980s supporting development programs for the Navy and NASA. The subsequent growth of the cellular phone market generated renewed interest in the use of high-altitude airships as a means of providing economical coverage in developing countries.

Also companies like Near Space Corporation have other technologies such as (HASS) High Altitude Shuttle Systems, (SBS) Small Balloon Systems and (NBS) Nano Balloon Systems. HASS can reach altitudes of 100,000 ft and carry the HASS Shuttle as a payload.

If that’s not enough to cast doubt on the existence of satellites check out Project Loon by Google. Their motto is “Balloon Powered Internet For Everyone”.

“Project Loon balloons float in the stratosphere, twice as high as airplanes and the weather. In the stratosphere, there are many layers of wind, and each layer of wind varies in direction and speed. Loon balloons go where they’re needed by rising or descending into a layer of wind blowing in the desired direction of travel. By partnering with Telecommunications companies to share cellular spectrum we’ve enabled people to connect to the balloon network directly from their phones and other LTE-enabled devices. The signal is then passed across the balloon network and back down to the global Internet on Earth”.


1. How Do Satellites Survive 4,000F + Degree Heat in Space? There are only seven elements on the periodic table that could withstand this heat and none have been used for satellites. Satellites allegedly mainly reside in the thermosphere where temperatures can soar to 4,000F + Degrees. Not plausible.

2. Estimates seem to vary on the number of satellites in supposed orbit. The latest number to date is 1265 functioning satellites with as many as 370,000 pieces of space-junk whizzing around at speeds of up to 22,000 mph. I find it odd that they report 22,000 objects can travel up to 22,000 mph. The odds those numbers are identical by chance is as likely as the sun being exactly 400 times larger and 400 times farther away to create the illusion it’s the identical size of the moon. 22 is considered an occult signature event number. Not Plausible.

3. No “Real Pictures or Video” exists proving satellites are whizzing around the globe, not one! Think how preposterous it is that one of the other 1,264 satellites couldn’t snap a simple picture or shoot a few frames of video? has posted How To Spot Satellites but conversely Universe Today says: “If we could see these satellites from Earth’s surface, they would appear to hang motionless in the sky. The fact that they remain over the geographic same area means they provide the perfect platform for telecommunications, broadcast or weather observations” So which is it, can you see them or not? Not plausible.

4. If the Van Allen Belts are so lethal (1,000 km to 60,000 km) how are the “Solar cells, integrated circuits, and sensors not damaged by radiation? Geomagnetic storms occasionally damage electronic components on spacecraft. Miniaturization and digitization of electronics and logic circuits have made satellites more vulnerable to radiation”.
Not plausible.


Below is a list of at least 18 platforms that can be used independently, in tandem or groups to provide all the services that satellites provide. All 18 platforms mentioned are substantially more cost-efficient than satellites and inherently more reliable. It makes no sense to continually risk hurling satellites into space if more cost-efficient, reliable and readily maintainable terrestrial systems already exist, which they do.The dubious existence of satellites is even more definitive since NASA cannot furnish a single actual photo or video footage of real satellites.

1. Land-based technologies. Loran (long range navigation)

2. GPS uses Cel-tower triangulation not Satellites

3. High Altitude Airships (HAA)

4. High Altitude Platforms (HAP)

5. Lighter-than-air vehicles (LAV)

6. High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE)

7. High Altitude Long Operation (HALO)

8. StratSat

9. Airborne Relay Communication (ARC)

10. HeliPlat which connects to the HeliNet System

11. High Altitude Shuttle System (HASS)

12. Small Balloon Systems (SBS)

13. Nano Balloon Systems (NBS)

14. Google Loon System

15. Stratospheric Platform Systems (SPS)

16. High Altitude Long Endurance Demonstrator (HALE-D)

17. Undersea Cable

18. DARPA Integrated Sensor is Structure or ISIS

So that leaves with a perplex situation. Why would NASA, and more importantly privately owned companies, waste money on a more expensive, less reliable system when more cost efficient methods are readily available?

Occam's razor is the problem-solving principle that the simplest solution tends to be the correct one. If we apply that principle to the satellite dilemma it becomes clear that satellites are just another fraud NASA and other agencies use to extort tax payers. 

Flat Earth or Not, The Likelihood is Very High We've Been Duped on Satellites.


  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Slave2Spartacus said:

Forgot too Add.

 The Word Satellite's created by Arthur C Clark contains these little nuggets.


It Is All Lies. Tall Tales. Sells Latest Lies. Tell Lies .  Neat Huh..

Near Earth

The average temperature of outer space around the Earth is a balmy 283.32 kelvins (10.17 degrees Celsius or 50.3 degrees Fahrenheit). This is obviously a far cry from more distant space's 3 kelvins above absolute zero. But this relatively mild average masks unbelievably extreme temperature swings. Just past Earth's upper atmosphere, the number of gas molecules drops precipitously to nearly zero, as does pressure. This means there is almost no matter to transfer energy -- but also no matter to buffer direct radiation streaming from the sun. This solar radiation heats the space near Earth to 393.15 kelvins (120 degrees Celsius or 248 degrees Fahrenheit) or higher, while shaded objects plummet to temperatures lower than 173.5 kelvins (minus 100 degrees Celsius or minus 148 degrees Fahrenheit).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be your master and have authority over you.
Do you know thyself?
Are you a Citizen?” Asked the soulless.
“No not I”, said the soul. “I am substantive, not constructive.”
“Aren’t you a part of the country of your birth?”
“No not I”, said the soul. “I’m upon the Earth inherently; no constructed fictions, no State Corporation, no religious trust, and no implied or inferred contract, could ever bind me.”
“But you’re a person?”
“No not I”, said the soul. “I’m anima not persona.”
“A man?”
“No not I”, said the soul. “I’m at peace, so would defend no masters villainy.”
“A slave?”
“No not I”, said the soul, “knowledge renders me unfit, and truth unwilling.”
“Who then is your master?”
“Reason is my master, truth my guide and love my destination.”
“Then what is your status?” The soulless cried.
“Anarchic!” Replied the soul.
“Who then is your Lord?”
“No bandit owns my labours, no tyrant shares my heritage.”
“But you must have title, are you master?”
“No not I”, said the soul, “No professed superior can grant what’s inherent. No Earthly hierarchy can exist substantively above me.”
“What is your given name soul?”
“My name is myriad, neither given nor granted, authored or claimed. I am.”
“How would you then ‘contract’ soul?”
“No soul could contract, souls can only bond.”
“But how would you sign to bond?”
“No soul could sign a symbol upon another’s seal, a soul gives a seal; an imprint of their substantive pattern.”
“Are you not bonded to a religion?”
“No not I”, said the soul. “Religions bind and stagnate to external fantasy. All creation flows within me, as a drop of water within an infinite ocean.”
“Do you not understand?”
“No not I”, said the soul. “I inner-stand.”
“What use then in service of the soulless?”
“None”, said the soul. “I serve all souls, as we are one.”

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Slave2Spartacus said:

I would be your master and have authority over you.
Do you know thyself?
Are you a Citizen?” Asked the soulless.
“No not I”, said the soul. “I am substantive, not constructive.”
“Aren’t you a part of the country of your birth?”
“No not I”, said the soul. “I’m upon the Earth inherently; no constructed fictions, no State Corporation, no religious trust, and no implied or inferred contract, could ever bind me.”
“But you’re a person?”
“No not I”, said the soul. “I’m anima not persona.”
“A man?”
“No not I”, said the soul. “I’m at peace, so would defend no masters villainy.”
“A slave?”
“No not I”, said the soul, “knowledge renders me unfit, and truth unwilling.”
“Who then is your master?”
“Reason is my master, truth my guide and love my destination.”
“Then what is your status?” The soulless cried.
“Anarchic!” Replied the soul.
“Who then is your Lord?”
“No bandit owns my labours, no tyrant shares my heritage.”
“But you must have title, are you master?”
“No not I”, said the soul, “No professed superior can grant what’s inherent. No Earthly hierarchy can exist substantively above me.”
“What is your given name soul?”
“My name is myriad, neither given nor granted, authored or claimed. I am.”
“How would you then ‘contract’ soul?”
“No soul could contract, souls can only bond.”
“But how would you sign to bond?”
“No soul could sign a symbol upon another’s seal, a soul gives a seal; an imprint of their substantive pattern.”
“Are you not bonded to a religion?”
“No not I”, said the soul. “Religions bind and stagnate to external fantasy. All creation flows within me, as a drop of water within an infinite ocean.”
“Do you not understand?”
“No not I”, said the soul. “I inner-stand.”
“What use then in service of the soulless?”
“None”, said the soul. “I serve all souls, as we are one.”

Funny not one mention of God the Creator. 

I, I, I. 

Just an observation.



  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, nstoolman1 said:

Funny not one mention of God the Creator. 

I, I, I. 

Just an observation.



But God works through the Soul via filling it up with Spirit so that it doesn't see attachment in worldly fair. If God in us who can be against us...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/22/2021 at 3:56 PM, Synopsis said:

It takes GRAVITY for an item of GREATER density to pass through the item of LOWER density,

If 9.8 meters per second squared is strong enough to hold trillions of gallons of water to a twirling, spinning earth how can a baby gnat fly off the ground?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bigwave said:

If 9.8 meters per second squared is strong enough to hold trillions of gallons of water to a twirling, spinning earth how can a baby gnat fly off the ground?

You are assuming gravity is a attraction force. Gravity only works with the weight of an object. 

Trillion gallons of water weighs = 8.34E15 lbs.  Allot.

Gnat = about 2 mgs. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, PeaceSign said:

But God works through the Soul via filling it up with Spirit so that it doesn't see attachment in worldly fair. If God in us who can be against us...

Don't see how that has anything to do with my comment. 

I, I, I  attitude is how Lucifer got himself in trouble with God. 

The quote is" If God is for us, who can be against us"

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

  • Live Exchange Rate

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.