Quote FLAT STANLEY="FLAT STANLEY"[iI really don't know why i have to prove this four corners of the Earth, it's nursery stuff. '"
It isn't. Even a child in nursery would probably know a circle has no corners.
Be that as it may, The Earth does not have four corners. As the chap relying on the proposition it is up to you to back it up.
Quote FLAT STANLEY="FLAT STANLEY"Poor lad look up the word [url=https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=corner+definitionCorner[/url.
Isaiah 11-12 was referring to the second phrase of the definition[/i.[i 2. a location or area, especially one regarded as secluded or remote, '"
Oh no, we're not having that! He referred to - very specifically "
the four corners of the Earth". The definite article makes it clear that he is talking of
THE (specific) 4 "corners" that he thinks Earth has.
The problem you have with this bluster is, he specified
FOUR. Now, Earth has many hundreds of thousands of secluded or remote locations or areas, and so your explanation simply won't do. Not even close. If he'd not specified 4 then you could at least argue, if unconvincingly, that when he said "corners", he didn't actually MEAN "corners,
but he did specify FOUR CORNERS and you have no explanation for it.
So your standard bluster of "I can't believe none of you can understand so simple a thing" is just a waste of your keypresses, nobody buys it, it's embarrassing.
You are just doing what you always do, and in this case, you are also reduced to "he may have SAID it ... but Stanley knows what the Prophet Isaiah MEANT". Shame on you for trying to alter the clear words of the Bible! I thought you took this stuff seriously? Who are you to attempt to re-write the clear and unambiguous words of a prophet?
Now go away and come back when you can explain why your man Isaiah said there were "THE FOUR corners of the Earth", as well as saying it was a circle.
Quote FLAT STANLEY="FLAT STANLEY"Look for the word Quarter that's also there too. '"
Why? What has the word "quarter" got to do with anything?