u/dem0n0cracy

Oh, the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima—October 13, 1917. That glorious day when 30,000–100,000 rain-soaked Portuguese peasants stood in a muddy field, stared directly at the sun like absolute fucking geniuses, and swore the thing started doing the cha-cha, spinning like a pissed-off dreidel, shooting rainbow lasers, and plummeting toward Earth like it was late for happy hour. All because three snot-nosed shepherd kids (Lucia, Francisco, Jacinta—ages 10, 9, and 7) claimed the Virgin Mary had RSVP’d for a celestial light show after six months of “secret” apparitions that somehow only they could see.
Let’s roast this holy shitshow properly.
First off: Three illiterate farm kids in bumfuck Portugal during World War I get visited by a glowing lady in white who tells them to pray, eat grass, and predict the sun will tango. The lady also drops “secrets” so earth-shattering they had to be sealed in envelopes and hidden for decades. (Spoiler: they were the usual vague end-times fanfic—wars, Russia, penance, blah blah.) The Church, smelling a PR goldmine after the war had everyone feeling extra apocalyptic, hyped the October 13 date like it was the original Coachella for Catholics. “Come one, come all! Free miracle! Bring umbrellas!”
So the crowd shows up. It’s pouring rain. Then the clouds part, the sun peeks out… and suddenly it’s disco inferno in the sky. The sun “danced,” “spun,” “changed colors,” “zigzagged,” and “dove at the earth” according to eyewitnesses. People screamed, cried, prayed, and probably shit their wool pants.
Except… not everyone saw the same thing. Some saw the full laser light show. Some saw a vague spinning. Some saw nothing at all and just got a killer headache. A bunch of reporters and skeptics who were there wrote it up as “eh, weird but whatever.” The ones who did see it? They’d been staring straight at the fucking sun for ten minutes after weeks of hype, in a state of religious ecstasy, post-rain when the atmosphere was doing that perfect “water droplets as natural prism” thing.
Science called. It’s called solar retinopathy plus mass suggestion plus afterimages plus pareidolia on steroids. Stare at the sun long enough and your retinas throw a rave. The “dancing” was your optic nerve having a seizure. The “colors” were the same reason you see spots after a camera flash. The “plunging toward Earth” was your brain going “OH SHIT WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE” because evolution didn’t wire us to treat the sun like a fidget spinner.
But sure, it was totally the Virgin Mary doing a victory lap for three kids who spent the summer telling everyone she wanted them to suffer more. (One of the “penances” was literally eating grass and tying ropes around their waists until they bled. Kid stuff!)
The Catholic Church investigated this with all the rigor of a drunk uncle judging a fart contest, declared it “worthy of belief” in 1930, and has been milking it for tourist euros ever since. Meanwhile, every other religion has its own “dancing sun” stories when enough people stare at the sky expecting magic. Hindus have had sun miracles. Buddhists. Even some random 19th-century American cultists. Turns out when you prime a huge crowd with “the sun’s gonna do tricks!” and then have them all crane their necks at the brightest object in the sky… your brain delivers.
TL;DR: The “miracle” was a bunch of devout, terrified, sun-staring peasants experiencing a perfectly explainable optical group freakout after months of religious hysteria peddled by children who probably just wanted attention and free pastries from pilgrims. Mary didn’t show up. The sun didn’t dance. God didn’t need to perform like a budget circus act in rural Portugal to prove he exists.
If the Almighty wanted to flex, he could’ve just fixed World War I or cured polio instead of giving Portugal’s farmers a light show that only worked if you forgot sunglasses existed.
But hey, at least the gift shop’s doing great business. Hail Mary, full of marketing.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

I don't believe there is any possibility that christianity is a true religion. But since my deconstruction, this is the one thing that I still don't have an explanation for, and I was hoping someone here did. How did jesus fulfill about 300 prophecies?

It seems like all of them aren't actually fulfilled, for example, there's a lot of evidence he was actually born in nazareth instead of bethlehem, so maybe people changed the story to fit all these prophecies and it got accepted as truth over time.

That's just an idea, but I would love to hear if anyone has some ideas or information they can share about this!

Let’s collect a list of the best DZ lore from the past few years. Everything from Manar to Baby Paste. Upvote the best comments.

Hey everybody, I’m Dan McClellan. I’m a scholar of the Bible and religion. Let’s take a look at a video. ‘Is the Earth Flat - Is that what the Bible teaches?’ [from NeedGod.net YouTube Channel] All right. Let’s see it now.

>”Some people are bringing up this word firmament which is mentioned in the King James translation in Genesis 1:6. They’re thinking that the word firmament means that there is like some sort of fixed structure, a fixed dome outside the earth and it is water outside of that, space is not real.

Dan: “Uh yes, Genesis 1:6 absolutely represents the firmament as a solid dome of some kind that suspends the chaotic waters above, separating them from the waters beneath so they can be made to flourish between the waters above and the waters beneath and for the best discussion of why this is I would recommend the ‘Theological dictionary of the old testament’ Volume 13 has an entry on raqia and here the first section ‘the root and lexical field discusses how fundamentally whether verbs or nouns this root refers to things that are spread thin, things that are beaten thin, things that are hammered thin, and if we go down a few pages we get to the discussion of the Priestly source and Genesis 1 is a part of the Priestly source and we read in the Red box in P including his possible proto-text ‘therefore raqia denotes a stable solid entity situated above the Earth which protects the Living World from an influx of the waters of chaos. The noun bears the connotation ‘compact, firm’ so that translations such as expanse miss the mark. This firmament was absolutely conceptualized as a solid dome that held off the chaotic waters above so that they could be separated from the waters below and so that between the two, life could be made to flourish.

>”But that’s not what the Bible actually says.”

Dan: “Yes it is.”

> “The word firmament is an old fashioned word that simply means ‘sky’. It’s an expanse and so the separation of the waters above from the waters below is simply the waters above of the clouds. Remember how it rains, that’s water, clouds are made of water, the water below is the sea, the area in the middle is an expanse called the sky. That’s what the word firmament means. Just the sky between the water above the clouds and the waters below the sea.

Dan: “Uh, this is flatly false. The word for sky in Biblical Hebrew is shamayim.

>”We can even. base on our own observations see how the Earth is not flat. You can go to the edge of the ocean. You can see a ship going out to sea as you watch it go out to sea the last part you’re going to be able to see of it is the top of it, the top of the ship, you’re going to see the bottom of the hull and all that disappear. Why? Because the curvature of the Earth is not flat.

Dan: “Of couse the earth is not flat. But you’re failing to decouple two different questions. Does the Bible say the Earth is flat and is the Earth flat and this refusal to decouple thes two very different questions obziously is based on the ridiculous dogma that everything the Bible says is true and that’s pure and utter nonsese. But if one insists on this dogma, they’re constantly going to be running into cognitive dissoance because reality so frequently disagrees with what the Bible says and when you’re confronted with that cognitive dissonance and you refuse to acknowledeg that so much of what is in the Bible is just not true then you’re left with two options: you can either prioritize the Bible and challenge reality or prioritize reality and challenge the interpretation of the Bible. Now flat earthers are going to prioritize the Bible and challenge reality. You have decided to prioritize reality and challenge the interpretation of the Bible with this ludicrous argument that ‘raqia’ actually just refers to the sky and the clouds and that’s simply laughable. Clearly, you cannot engage competently with the underlying source text but you’re just performing confidence and understanding for an audience that is even less able to engage the underlying sources and their languages. So you don’t need to actually put together an argument that convinces people who can actually can engage with the underlying sources and that’s not very ‘cash money’ of you so do better.

Proof: https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/s/rVtlMGt8Ou

View Poll

Why you should choose yes: https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/s/rVtlMGt8Ou (high def images - zoom into to read the passages)

# Modern Scholarly Consensus

Dan McClellan, PhD – Biblical scholar; scripture translation specialist – “The Bible’s authors assumed a flat earth under a solid dome.”

Michael S. Heiser, PhD – Hebrew Bible & ANE – “The Bible’s prescientific cosmology… round and flat with a solid dome over it.”
Joshua Bowen, PhD – Assyriologist (Johns Hopkins) – “The Old Testament clearly assumes a flat Earth with a rigid sky.” – MythVision

Peter Enns, PhD – Biblical studies (Genesis/ANE) – “Ancient Israelites… assumed the world was flat… the raqia is a solid dome.” –
Joshua Sears, PhD – Hebrew Bible (BYU) – “For the Israelites, the earth is flat… we’re living in an inverted snow globe.”

Robin A. Parry, PhD – Biblical theology / “The Biblical Cosmos” – “The biblical earth… was not a globe but flat,” with a solid sky dome and waters above.

Paul H. Seely, MDiv (widely cited in journals) – History of science & Bible (peer-reviewed) – “Within its historical context… the ‘earth’ in Gen 1 was a flat circular disc.”

Andrews Norton - American Unitarian Preacher and Theologian of Bowdoin and Harvard - “The Pentateuch: and its Relation to the Jewish and Christian Dispensations - “The blue vault of heaven is a solid firmament, separating the waters which are above it from the waters on the earth, and that is this firmament where the heavenly bodies are placed.”

John H. Walton – OT, Wheaton College – Cites raqiaʿ as “a solid dome‑like structure … ancient Israelites assumed the world was flat.”

Kyle Greenwood – OT, Colorado Christian Univ. – Concludes the Bible mirrors the ANE’s three‑tiered cosmos (heaven/earth/sea).

Mark S. Smith – Hebrew Bible, Princeton – In The Priestly Vision of Genesis 1 he treats Gen 1 as adopting the standard ANE layered‑cosmos.

Nahum Sarna – Jewish biblical scholar – Notes Genesis “conceived the cosmos as a flat disc‑shaped earth… held in by the firmament.”

Justin of r/DeconstructionZone MDiv and Seminary who can read Hebrew and Greek - “The Bible says the earth is flat”

#Christian Flat Earthers:

Sean Griffin — Kingdom in Context: Teaches biblical cosmology with a physical hard firmament, enclosed system, luminaries within the dome. Also produces debates, cosmology charts, and Genesis exegesis.

Rob Skiba (deceased, but hugely influential): Formerly one of the largest flat-earth Christian voices. Co-founded the Testing the Globe project. Influenced a generation of flat-earth Christian YouTubers.

Mark Sargent: Not explicitly doctrinal in every video, but frequently ties flat earth to biblical cosmology and interviews many Christian FE believers.

Zen Garcia: Author/YT commentator teaching Enoch-based enclosed cosmology, angels as luminaries, and earth as a plane beneath a firmament.

Celebrate Truth (Robbie Davidson): Runs conferences and debates presenting enclosed Biblical cosmology. Hosts FE documentaries with explicit Christian theology.

Paul on the Plane: Promotes firmament model, Biblical cosmology livestreams, conference debates.

Nathan Roberts: Author and outspoken FE evangelist, known for street preaching flat earth as a gospel-adjacent truth claim.

Nathan Oakley: More debate-driven and polemical, but defends flat earth from both scientific and biblical angles.

"Take On The World" Conference Speakers: A rotating group including Christian flat-earth researchers, Enoch scholars, luminary-model cosmologists.

Taboo Conspiracy (Ben): Has videos examining biblical firmament cosmology, earth as immovable plane, geocentrism objections.

David Weiss (Flat Earth Dave): Not explicitly Christian in all content, but collaborates frequently with Christian FE groups and Biblical cosmology debates.

Dr. Michael Heiser (deceased, IMPORTANT nuance): Heiser did not believe the earth was flat—but he strongly argued that the Bible itself teaches ancient flat-earth cosmology, which made him highly influential in the scholarly side of the movement. Many flat-earth Christians cite him academically even though his personal stance rejected FE. A bridging figure between scholarship and belief.

Young Earth Creationists / Apologists who reject Biblical Flat Earth Cosmology

Ken Ham — Founder of Answers in Genesis; publicly argues against flat-earth claims.
Andrew Snelling — AiG geologist advocating a young earth formed by global catastrophic processes.
Jonathan Sarfati — Chemist, prolific YEC author; has written detailed rebuttals of flat-earth interpretations.
Georgia Purdom — Molecular biologist with AiG; affirms young age + spherical earth.
Danny Faulkner — PhD astronomer, prominent critic of flat-earth cosmology within YEC circles.
Jason Lisle — Astrophysicist, advocates a literal 6-day creation while defending modern astronomy.
Todd Friel — “Wretched Radio” host, theologically conservative YEC who mocks flat earth claims as unbiblical.
Ray Comfort — Prominent evangelist with YEC leanings; rejects flat earth.
Paul Garner — YEC geologist who accepts plate tectonics + global flood geology.
Brian Thomas — Institute for Creation Research (ICR) writer on genetics + young chronology, not flat-earth.
Heinz Lycklama – YEC Apologist https://www.heinzlycklama.com/flat-earth/
Donny Budinsky - Standing for Truth YEC Apologist YouTube channel

Organizations (that teach YEC (Young Earth Creationism) , but not flat earth)

Answers in Genesis (AiG)
Institute for Creation Research (ICR)
Creation Ministries International (CMI)
Creation Research Society (CRS)
Bob Jones / Pensacola / similar conservative university science departments
Master’s University creation research group

From a Video:

Hey everybody, I’m Dan McClellan. I’m a scholar of the Bible and religion. Let’s take a look at a video. ‘Is the Earth Flat - Is that what the Bible teaches?’ [from NeedGod.net YouTube Channel] All right. Let’s see it now.
>”Some people are bringing up this word firmament which is mentioned in the King James translation in Genesis 1:6. They’re thinking that the word firmament means that there is like some sort of fixed structure, a fixed dome outside the earth and it is water outside of that, space is not real.
Dan: “Uh yes, Genesis 1:6 absolutely represents the firmament as a solid dome of some kind that suspends the chaotic waters above, separating them from the waters beneath so they can be made to flourish between the waters above and the waters beneath and for the best discussion of why this is I would recommend the ‘Theological dictionary of the old testament’ Volume 13 has an entry on raqia and here the first section ‘the root and lexical field discusses how fundamentally whether verbs or nouns this root refers to things that are spread thin, things that are beaten thin, things that are hammered thin, and if we go down a few pages we get to the discussion of the Priestly source and Genesis 1 is a part of the Priestly source and we read in the Red box in P including his possible proto-text ‘therefore raqia denotes a stable solid entity situated above the Earth which protects the Living World from an influx of the waters of chaos. The noun bears the connotation ‘compact, firm’ so that translations such as expanse miss the mark. This firmament was absolutely conceptualized as a solid dome that held off the chaotic waters above so that they could be separated from the waters below and so that between the two, life could be made to flourish.
>”But that’s not what the Bible actually says.”
Dan: “Yes it is.”
> “The word firmament is an old fashioned word that simply means ‘sky’. It’s an expanse and so the separation of the waters above from the waters below is simply the waters above of the clouds. Remember how it rains, that’s water, clouds are made of water, the water below is the sea, the area in the middle is an expanse called the sky. That’s what the word firmament means. Just the sky between the water above the clouds and the waters below the sea.
Dan: “Uh, this is flatly false. The word for sky in Biblical Hebrew is shamayim.
>”We can even. base on our own observations see how the Earth is not flat. You can go to the edge of the ocean. You can see a ship going out to sea as you watch it go out to sea the last part you’re going to be able to see of it is the top of it, the top of the ship, you’re going to see the bottom of the hull and all that disappear. Why? Because the curvature of the Earth is not flat.
Dan: “Of couse the earth is not flat. But you’re failing to decouple two different questions. Does the Bible say the Earth is flat and is the Earth flat and this refusal to decouple thes two very different questions obziously is based on the ridiculous dogma that everything the Bible says is true and that’s pure and utter nonsese. But if one insists on this dogma, they’re constantly going to be running into cognitive dissoance because reality so frequently disagrees with what the Bible says and when you’re confronted with that cognitive dissonance and you refuse to acknowledeg that so much of what is in the Bible is just not true then you’re left with two options: you can either prioritize the Bible and challenge reality or prioritize reality and challenge the interpretation of the Bible. Now flat earthers are going to prioritize the Bible and challenge reality. You have decided to prioritize reality and challenge the interpretation of the Bible with this ludicrous argument that ‘raqia’ actually just refers to the sky and the clouds and that’s simply laughable. Clearly, you cannot engage competently with the underlying source text but you’re just performing confidence and understanding for an audience that is even less able to engage the underlying sources and their languages. So you don’t need to actually put together an argument that convinces people who can actually can engage with the underlying sources and that’s not very ‘cash money’ of you so do better. “

#Important Poll Instructions:

For the poll, pick the answer that aligns to your religious beliefs. Yes if you think the Bible says the Earth is flat. No if you think the Bible doesn’t say the Earth is flat. It doesn’t matter whether you believe the earth actually is flat, most of us here know it isn’t.

View Poll

SE Tour - Fort Pierce, Florida