Does the Earth Have Four Corners?

Yes, I know this isn't what people mean by the earth having four corners,
but I still think the picture is kind of neat. ;-)

There are four passages in the Bible that use the phrase "four corners of the earth".

• Isaiah 11:12 - "He will raise a signal for the nations and will assemble the banished of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth."
• Ezekiel 7:2 - "And you, O son of man, thus says the Lord GOD to the land of Israel: An end! The end has come upon the four corners of the land." [The Hebrew word for land is eretz, which also means earth.]
• Revelation 7:1 - "After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth, that no wind might blow on earth or sea or against any tree."
• Revelation 20:8 - "...and will come out to deceive the nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle; their number is like the sand of the sea."

Do any of these verses mean that the earth literally has four corners? Let's look at each of them in turn.

Isaiah 11:12

Since we are required to interpret the words in a strictly literal manner in order to believe that this refers to literal corners, we must also assume that "the dispersed of Judah" are only dispersed into those four corners or else they will only be gathered from those four corners, leaving the remaining of the banished Jews in whatever land they were banished to. This would also mean that God only names the places from which he will gather the remnants of the Northern Kingdom (Israel/Ephraim) but leaves the source of the remnants of the Southern Kingdom (Judah) unnamed. 

This seems like a very unlikely interpretation. It's more likely that the places mentioned were simply the places that came to the minds of the people of Isaiah's day when they thought of "the nations": Assyria, Egypt, Chad, Ethiopia, Babylon, Asia Minor, and Philistia. When God said that he will assemble the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth, he meant "from wherever they have been dispersed, no matter how far."

Ezekiel 7:2

Once again sticking to the literal meaning of the words, the end prophesied in this verse can only apply to the four corners of the earth, leaving the the rest of the earth alone. However, the first part of the verse strongly indicates that the prophecy is only against the land of Israel, not the whole world. So, does the land of Israel have four corners? I can't find a single map of Israel, depicting any period in its history, in which it could reasonably be described as having four corners. Most maps show borders that follow rivers, ridges, and valleys or that taper off into the wilderness and fluctuate with the political winds. There could be ten thousand corners of Israel or there could be no corners at all, depending on what period of time you want to consider. 

There is no reasonable way to interpret "four corners" in this verse as literal corners. It is clearly an idiom intended to mean "the furthest reaches of the land in every direction".

Revelation 7:1

If the "four corners" in this verse means that the earth has four literal corners, then it must also mean that the earth has four literal winds. Since it says that no wind can blow on the earth while the four winds are held back, then the earth can only have four winds. No more. I suppose if you believe the earth is square, then you also must believe that weather maps are all fake, so I can't appeal to weather maps to prove that there are more than four winds. Perhaps if you go stand on any open hilltop, you'll be able to feel that the winds come from all directions, shifting constantly, but this could also be attributed to the interplay of two or more winds coming from different directions simultaneously. 

The typical flat-earth model shows the sun and moon attached to a dome and circling in the sky above. The sun setting below the horizon is only an illusion caused by it receding into the distance. However, v2 says that the rising sun. Since we are interpreting everything literally, this can only refer to the sun rising from below the horizon in reality, not apparently. This doesn't directly address the claim of "four corners", but it does address the related claim that the earth is flat and the sun follows a circuit around the sky. Either the earth has four literal corners OR the sun rises from the horizon in one direction and sets below the horizon in the other direction, without simply receding into the distance.

Once again, the most likely intended meaning of "the four corners of the earth" in this verse is none of the above. The most natural and obvious meaning is "the whole earth", not four literal corners. It's an idiom meaning "as far as you can go in any direction".

Revelation 20

I hyper-literal interpretation of this verse requires that Gog and Magog be precisely the same as "the nations that are at the four corners of the earth", which doesn't really make a lot of sense. There are no nations today that go by those names, so they would have to be ancient names that have changed since then. Nobody who believes that the earth has four corners is able to say what nations these are. Exactly which nations are at the four corners? Is this a prophecy against Australia, Argentina, South Africa, and India? That seems more than a little absurd. Nobody in the first century Roman Empire had any clue that Australia and Argentina existed, let alone have a name for them.

The most likely intended meaning, for the fourth time, is that "the four corners of the earth" was understood by everyone in the first century to mean "the whole earth", with no implication that the earth actually has any corners.

Corners in all of these cases, even if it is translated as "quarters", just means "directions", as in North, East, South, and West. It's an idiom, like "I blew off his advice", which has nothing to do with blowing on anything, and like "He was slow as molasses", which doesn't mean anyone was actually as slow as molasses. All languages spoken by all people in all times have idioms that nobody thinks are supposed to be taken literally. This is one of them.

Even most flatearthers agree that "four corners" is just an idiom for "all parts". Those who interpret it to mean a literal four locations where two lines intersect are an extreme minority of an extreme minority. So why bother writing an article about it? Because some people still need to hear it.

Does Job 37:10 Say the Seas are Flat, Not Curved?

By the breath of God frost is given: and the breadth of the waters is straitened.
Job 37:10 KJV

Once more for the those seated in the mezzanine, Job was not written in English. I'm not sure it would matter if it was, though, because the King James Version is more-or-less written in modern English, but its vocabulary might be too challenging for those who think this verse says the seas are flat.

The Hebrew word translated as "is straitened" in Job 37:10 is bamutzak (במוצק). I don't have a problem with that. It's a perfectly acceptable translation. The problem is that some people think it says "straightened" rather than "straitened".

To be fair, the words are homonyms (they sound alike), but they have different etymologies. Strait means "a narrow, confined place" and comes from the Old French word estroit (Online Etymology Dictionary). Straight, on the other hand, means "not bent or curved" and comes from the Old English streht (Online Etymology Dictionary).

Job 37:10 is not saying that the waters are flat (straightened), but that the waters are confined (straitened) within their boundaries, i.e. shorelines. It's acknowledgint that God separated the water from the land in Genesis 1:9 and is completely irrelevant to the flatearth debate.

P.S. This verse isn't saying that frost literally comes out of God's mouth either.

Does Job 38:4-7 Mean the Earth Is Flat?

 

Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell me, if you have understanding.
Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
On what were its bases sunk,
Or who laid its cornerstone,
When the morning stars sang together
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?
Job 38:4-7 ESV

Several things about this passage lead some people to believe that it teaches a flat-earth cosmology.

1. V4 says the earth has a foundation.
2. V5 says the earth was measured by a line, not a curve.
3. V6 says the earth is supported by pedestals (or a foundation) and a corner stone.

Before I get to the real problem of interpreting this passage to refer to a flat earth, let's see if the actual words in these verses even say what people claim.

Foundation (v4) - If something has a foundation, that must mean it has a bottom and must be sitting on something, right? No. It doesn't even mean that in English, even though it wouldn't matter if it did. I know you think it might seem pedantic, but it seems necessary to me to remind you that the Bible wasn't written in English. The word "foundation" is not in the original text, because that's an English word. The Hebrew word used is bisdi (ביסדי), which does not mean foundation. It's actually rendered into an entire English phrase, "when I laid the foundation", but that's not a strictly literal translation. It literally means "when I founded" or "when I established" and doesn't say anything at all about what's underneath whatever was founded. The root word yasad can refer to a physical foundation of stone, but it doesn't have to. It can refer to the establishment of anything that has a beginning, such as the nation of Egypt in Exodus 9:18 or the Chaldeans in Habakkuk 1:12.

Line (v5) - The Hebrew word for line here is kav (קו), which refers to a string used to measure something. It has no relationship to the mathematical concept of a straight line in English. A kav, in this context, is essentially just a measuring tape. It can be used to measure a property line, a waistline, or the circumference of a bowl. In fact, it is used in precisely that manner in 2 Chronicles 4:2: "Then he made the sea of cast metal. It was round, ten cubits from brim to brim, and five cubits high, and a line (kav) of thirty cubits measured its circumference."

Bases, pedestals, or foundations (v6) - You got me on this one. The word adeniah (אדניה) literally means pedestals or bases. Keep reading, though. Don't get too excited yet.

Corner stone (v6) - Here's another one that means exactly what is claimed. Eben pinatah (אבן פנתה)  literally means corner-stone. But again, don't count your chickens before they hatch. (No, that doesn't mean I think you must have chickens. It's just an expression.)

Two out of four wouldn't be bad if we were playing the lottery, but this is Biblical interpretation, and that's a really bad ratio in this arena. Even so, let's talk about bases, foundations, and corner stones for a moment.

Clearly, Job 38:6 says that the earth's bases were sunk (into what?) and its cornerstone was laid, but does that mean that the earth actually has bases and a cornerstone? 

Only if vs 8-10 means the sea has bars and doors and came out of someone's womb. I suppose if you are a true believer in the Olympian deities, then you could argue that this supports the myth that Gaia gave parthenogenic birth to Pontus, her future lover and the primordial sea god, but that's hardly a biblically sound position to take, and it doesn't account for the bars and doors.

The only sensical reading of Job 38:8-10 is that God is using non-literal poetic language to speak of creating and managing the earth's oceans, not that he is describing the actual process of that creation. The Sports Page in the newspaper must pose quite a challenge for anyone who can't agree with that. "Nebraska Warming after Latest Cold Finish" must be a post-Ragnarok weather report....but there we go with the paganism again.

I kid, but what else can you do on a topic like flatearth? Humor is therapeutic.

Obviously Job 38:8-10 was never meant to be a literal description of the creation of the oceans. This means that vs 4-7 don't have to be entirely literal either, and it's most likely they aren't. God's artistry isn't limited to the natural world. He loves beauty in all forms. He wanted the furnishings of the Wilderness Tabernacle to be beautiful. He gave Abraham a beautiful wife and David a beautiful voice. Apparently, he also loves beautiful poetry and dramatic prose.

PaRDeS and the Quadriga

The Jewish hermeneutical¹ system of PaRDeS is fairly well known in Torah-observant circles, but few people know where it came from. Even fewer know that a competing Christian system was developed and formalized at about the same time.

PaRDeS is a method of interpreting Scriptures in which every (or almost every) passage is assumed to have four levels of meaning:

• Peshat - the plain, literal meaning that the original author intended to convey to his original audience. It still requires some common sense and doesn't mean that everything written is literally true. For example, when David wrote, "YHWH is my shepherd; I shall not want," he didn't mean that God is literally a man guarding a herd of four-footed livestock and that he (David) was a one of those four-footed beasts and would never lack anything at all, especially grass to eat and a stream to drink from. Obviously, David meant for us to understand that God is like a shepherd and that he is like a sheep, and this metaphor is still part of the Peshat (also spelled P'shat) meaning.
• Remez - the allegorical meaning that is suggested by the text, but not spelled out. For example, Noah's ark and the basket that sheltered Moses on the Nile river are both coated with pitch and protect their contents from both drowning and wickedness. The word for pitch is related to the word for atonement, a spiritual covering. One Remez interpretation of these stories could be that God will provide those who are willing to trust him completely with a spiritual atonement--a Messiah--that will protect them from eternal destruction.
• Derash - the moral or ethical meaning derived from a passage. In the case of Noah's and Moses' arks, a Derash (also spelled Drash) interpretation would be that we should simply obey God's instructions in troubled times, and everything will work out for the best in the end, even if we can't see how.
• Sod - the mystical, esoteric meaning of a passage. Sod ascribes deep, hidden meanings to what seem to be straightforward statements. For example, it may employ numerology, "Hebrew word pictures", or "Equidistant Letter Sequencing" to find hidden codes in the Biblical text. Sod often asserts that the real meaning of the text is the opposite of the plain (Peshat) meaning. For example, in the story of the serpent tempting Eve to eat of the Tree of Knowledge, one Peshat interpretation says that God actually wanted Adam and Eve to eat of it, despite telling them not to. He sent the serpent to urge them to rebel so that, through the experience of hardship and resistance to divine will, they could develop into the gods that the Creator planned for them to be all along.

Although the techniques of PaRDeS have a very long history, the hermeneutical system was formalized by Jewish mystics in the twelfth century. It also has some pretty clear problems. The Peshat level is common sense, and the Derash level can be helpful so long as it takes the whole Biblical text into account, but the Remez and Sod levels can get a person into a lot of theological trouble, especially the Sod which often makes a mockery of the Peshat.

The Quadriga, a parallel Christian hermeneutical system, was formalized at the same time that PaRDeS was first becoming popular among Jewish teachers. I suspect that both systems were developed in response to the other. Just as in PaRDeS, the Quadriga subjects every (or almost every) passage to four levels of meaning:

• Literal - the plain, literal meaning that the original author intended to convey to his original audience. Precisely the same meaning as Peshat.
• Allegorical - the allegorical meaning that is suggested by the text, but not spelled out. Essentially the same as Remez, but usually with an emphasis on Christological typology.
• Tropological - the moral or ethical meaning derived from a passage. Precisely the same meaning as Derash.
• Anagogical - the mystical or eschatological meaning of a passage. This is similar to Sod, but very rarely asserts any meaning that is opposed to the literal, at least not to how the interpreter understands the literal meaning, which can itself be flawed. The Anagogical interpretation deals with the unknowable nature of God, the ultimate fulfillment of prophecy, the spiritual realities that lie behind the physical and apparent universe, the fate of the dead, and existence beyond the Final Judgment.

Both systems are rooted in very ancient--and even common sense--methods of interpreting any religious text. Both systems also have the same basic flaws that make them prone to abuse by false teachers who want to impose their own ideas onto the text. Gnostics, Kabbalists, antinomians, and metanomians all live in the Sod/Anagogical level of interpretation and force the Peshat/Literal to conform to their mystical eisegesis².

The Bible is an organic text, a collection of works that were spoken and written by and to people in specific cultural, political, and linguistic circumstances. Each work was written for its own purposes and in its own style. Even as they were guided by the Holy Spirit in communicating their messages, each author wrote from his own perspective to people experiencing their own circumstances. It seems extraordinarily misguided to expect every passage of the Bible to fit into the same interpretive framework. Letters must be read as letters, histories as histories, etc., with each work and author adding metaphor, poetry, allusion, and apocalyptic imagery as God guided and his message required.

All systematic theologies eventually fail because the Bible wasn't written as a system. The message of the Bible is cohesive and consistent, but it is not a monolithic text of mystical philosophy.

¹ Hermeneutical - "of or pertaining to interpretation; exegetical; explanatory; as, hermeneutic theology, or the art of expounding the Scriptures" (Webster's 1913 English Dictionary)

² Eisegesis - "the introduction by an interpreter of his own ideas into a text under explication." (-Ologies & -Isms. (2008).)

See Tom Steele's more detailed discussion of PaRDeS at Truth Ignited.

An Anonymous Commentary on Jude

Someone shared this commentary on Jude with me, and I'd like your input, whoever you are.

My impression is that it's not bad, but nothing to write home about either. It seems to be trying too hard to avoid anything especially controversial, even to the point of not really saying anything very profound either. 

Commentary on the Epistle of Jude

by Anonymous

Overview:

Yehudah (Jude), a servant and brother of Yeshua (Jesus) and Yaakov (James), wrote this letter in haste--hence its brevity--warning his readers about the dangers of false teachers and apostates among the believers in Yeshua. His message is a passionate plea to contend earnestly for the faith against anyone who might lead believers astray, perverting the grace of God into licentiousness and denying Yeshua's authority. Jude’s focus on apostasy and judgment draws heavily from the Hebrew scripture and contemporary apocalyptic literature, which he probably intended to evoke thoughts of demonic forces and spiritual warfare.

Jude identified himself as the brother of James, connecting him to the well-known leader of the Jerusalem church, but this obliquely also identifies him as the brother of Yeshua, a subtle reminder to his readers that he isn't speaking from ignorance or speculation. He had intimate knowledge of the Messiah, his life, and his teachings. Though Jude did not directly claim Apostleship on the same level as James and Peter, his message carries an authority by association that would resonate with those familiar with the Apostles and the Hebrew scriptures.

Jude’s epistle warns, encourages, and blesses.

V1-2: The Calling and Blessing of the Saints

Jude addresses his readers as those "called" and "beloved in God the Father," underscoring the divine election and love bestowed upon them. This reflects Paul's sentiments in Romans 1:7, where believers are set apart as saints, not due to their own merits but because of God’s calling. The greeting of mercy, peace, and love echoes the deep Hebrew understanding of God’s covenantal blessings, extending beyond mere feelings to a holistic well-being that results from being in right relationship with God.

V3-4: Contending for the Faith

Jude’s original intention was to write a more general letter about salvation, but the urgency of false teaching compels him to focus on exhorting believers to "contend for the faith" delivered once for all. This statement places a strong emphasis on the immutability of the Gospel. Here, the term “faith” refers not just to belief but to the entire body of teachings and practices passed down from Yeshua and the Apostles (2 Timothy 2:2). The intrusion of "ungodly" individuals perverting grace recalls Paul's warnings in Romans about those who turn liberty into license (Romans 6:1-2). Jude’s emphasis is on preserving the purity of the faith.

V5-7: Historical Warnings of Judgment

Jude offers three historical examples of apostasy and its consequences: the unbelief of those saved from Egypt, the angels who sinned, and Sodom and Gomorrah. The use of these examples is consistent with Jewish midrashic traditions, where Scripture is applied to current situations to warn and instruct the people of God. In each case, Jude points to a form of rebellion—whether it’s disbelief, overstepping divine boundaries, or moral corruption—that resulted in divine judgment. 

• Israel’s disbelief (Numbers 14) serves as a reminder that being part of the covenant community does not guarantee salvation if one falls into unbelief and disobedience.
• The angels who abandoned their proper dwelling (Genesis 6:1-4, also referenced in 2 Peter 2:4) symbolize those who reject God's established order. Jude’s emphasis on their punishment highlights the severity of defying divine authority.
• Sodom and Gomorrah are vivid examples of immorality and a rejection of divine law, illustrating how sexual perversion and moral decay lead to destruction. The connection to “eternal fire” underscores the irreversible consequences of rebellion against God's moral standards.

V8-10: Characteristics of Apostates

Jude identifies the apostates as dreamers who defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones. The reference to "dreamers" might suggest individuals who claim special revelations or visions as the basis for their teachings, much like the false prophets criticized by Jeremiah (Jeremiah 23:25-32). Rejecting authority can be seen as a rejection of Yeshua’s lordship and the apostolic teaching, while "blaspheming the glorious ones" refers to disrespecting spiritual beings or divine matters. This is contrasted with the Archangel Michael's restraint when contending with Satan over Moses' body, demonstrating that even angels respect divine authority (Deuteronomy 34:5-6, implied in Jewish tradition).

V11-13: The Way of Cain, Balaam, and Korah

Jude’s use of three Old Testament figures—Cain, Balaam, and Korah—emphasizes the different forms of rebellion seen in the apostates. 

• Cain symbolizes jealousy and selfishness leading to murder and separation from God (Genesis 4).
• Balaam represents greed and the perversion of spiritual gifts for personal gain (Numbers 22-24).
• Korah reflects the rejection of legitimate authority and the desire for self-exaltation (Numbers 16).

Jude’s poetic language (e.g., "waterless clouds" and "wandering stars") paints a vivid picture of these false teachers as empty, unstable, and doomed to destruction. The references to nature—trees without fruit and twice dead—reinforce the idea that these individuals are spiritually barren and devoid of the life that comes from being rooted in Yeshua.

V14-16: Enoch’s Prophecy

Jude cites a prophecy from the apocryphal Book of Enoch (1 Enoch 1:9), a text well-known in Jewish apocalyptic tradition. This highlights the seriousness of the coming judgment, where the Lord will execute justice on the ungodly. Jude’s use of this text is not an endorsement of Enoch as Scripture but serves to emphasize the theme of divine judgment, which was prevalent in Jewish thought. It serves as a solemn reminder that no one, not even angels or mighty men, can escape the consequences of rejecting God’s authority.

V17-19: Apostolic Warnings

Jude reminds the believers of the Apostles' teachings, warning that scoffers will arise in the last days, following their own ungodly passions. This reiterates Paul’s warnings in 2 Timothy 3:1-5 and Peter’s in 2 Peter 3:3, both of which foretell the rise of false teachers in the end times. The emphasis on sensuality shows that these individuals live by their desires rather than by the Spirit, causing divisions within the community. Jude highlights the communal responsibility to remain vigilant and united in the face of these challenges.

V20-23: Exhortation to Persevere

Jude calls the believers to build themselves up in their most holy faith and to pray in the Holy Spirit. The emphasis here is on personal and communal growth in faith, ensuring that the love of God sustains them while they await the mercy of Yeshua leading to eternal life. Jude’s encouragement to "snatch others from the fire" shows the balance between judgment and mercy, emphasizing the need for discernment in dealing with those who are wavering or caught in sin (James 5:19-20). Mercy and fear are both necessary in confronting falsehood, reflecting a balanced approach of grace and truth.

V24-25: Doxology

Jude concludes with a beautiful doxology, reminding the believers of God's ability to preserve them and present them blameless before His glory. The focus is on God's sovereignty and power, who alone can sustain the believer through the trials of apostasy. This doxology offers reassurance that despite the dangers of false teachings, God is faithful and will complete His work in those who remain steadfast in the faith.

Genesis 2:1 and the Expanding Universe

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
Genesis 2:1 ESV

I read on a website that "finished" in this verse means that the universe absolutely can't be expanding. When the text says that the heavens and the earth were finished, that means.... Well, honestly, I'm not sure how this verse could be interpreted to mean the universe isn't expanding. 

The Hebrew word for "to finish" is kalah (כּלה). It can also mean to accomplish, to cause to end, or to destroy. We know that it can't mean "to cause to an end" or "to destroy" in this context because we can observe that the heavens and the earth still exist.

What's that you say? Observation of the physical universe can help us to correctly interpret the Bible? Why, yes! It most certainly can. 

If observations can definitively show that the universe is expanding, then we can also rule out that kalah could mean the universe is not expanding. Of course, no observations can definitively prove that today. We can only make indirect measurements, calculations, and reasonable hypotheses, unlike the shape and dimensions of the earth, which we can measure and prove definitively.

We don't have to rely only on extra-Biblical evidence to show that kalah doesn't have to mean "finally completed with no possibility of expansion" in Genesis 2:1. Kalah is used more than 200 times in the Old Testament. For example, Genesis 27:30 says that Isaac finished (kalah) blessing Jacob, but just a few verses later in Genesis 28:1, Isaac blessed Jacob again. In 1 Samuel 18:1, David finished (kalah) speaking to Saul, but he spoke to him again in that same chapter. Clearly the word doesn't mean "finally completed with no possibility of expansion" in either of these instances. In fact, it almost never means "finished" with that kind of static finality.

The heavens are constantly moving. The earth is constantly changing. "Finished" in Genesis 2:1 only refers to God's work of creation, not to any ongoing processes that might have been set in motion during that creation. This verse doesn't support a static universe, geocentrism, or flatearth.

Genesis 1 and the Shape of the Earth

I recently saw an argument that since the earth was created before the sun in Genesis 1, the earth must be flat. How does someone who thinks like that even have meaningful conversations with other people? It's like saying, "My son was born before my daughter, therefore my daughter is a tree." The one has nothing whatsoever to do with the other.

Maybe if they had argued that Genesis 1:2 says "the earth was without form", therefore the earth can't be a sphere, it would at least have some kind of internal logic. However, just like all human language, no matter how technical and precise, the Hebrew of Genesis 1 uses idioms and figurative language, which is then translated into another language (e.g. English) that uses idioms and figurative language.

The earth was without form (תהו) and void (בהו), and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
Genesis 1:2 ESV

"Without form" is the Hebrew word tohu, which can mean formless, but can also mean unorganized, pointless, or useless. It rarely refers to anything's actual shape. "Void" is the word bohu (notice the rhyming?), which means empty, pretty much exactly what void would mean in the 17th century English of the KJV. It's not a technical term referring to the vacuum of space, but empty like the Sahara desert is void of trees.

The picture that Genesis 1 draws of the earth immediately after its creation is of a muddy place without clear delineation between land and sea, dark, useless, and lifeless. You, the reader, have to read into the text your own idea of how the universe works before you can find even a hint of the earth's shape. The order of creation is completely irrelevant to the flatearth debate.