Ok, whether the closest word for disk in the Hebrew is Kaphtor as you mentioned or the one I mentioned which was mecab if your correct that kaphtor is the closest this still begs the question, why didnt the bible authors who you say believed the earth was flat USE the word Kaphtor then?
It doesn't beg the question if you're familiar with the language. Even if we assumed they could have used that word for some reason they didn't. Either the word doesn't fit the context or they had no understanding of a spherical world. Since I'm being honest here I'm not going to jump off and say...(it's because they had no understanding.....). No. It's because the word itself would not fit the context properly. Other Hebraic words that, in our opinion or loosely rendered in English, do no justice to the suttle nuances of Semitic languages. This is why the Hebrew to English lexicons and dictionaries can only go but so far. They are a good resource though.
If I am over interpreting a simple word, then so would you.
I'm really not. The word simply means circle in the Hebrew language and is the equivalent of what we in the English language regard as a 2d object. This is why (mchuwgah) is used in their language to describe and instrument known as a drawing compass and its purpose is to draw 2d circles. We use an instrument today just like that in math classes, art class and one similar to that, that was used in the early days by ship captains.
It does mean sphere in the particular lexicon link I showed you.
Right..and more "careful" research shows that others do not. Not even Strong's renders the word as sphere. I list the Strong's because it appears that is the one people are familiar with but I traditionally use the (AHL - Ancient Hebrew Lexicon). Guess what? They don't render it as "sphere" either.
And round can mean global or spherical according to the dictionary http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/round number 5 down.
Again, no problem but a modern meaning of the word in English is completely different that the meaning of the day in that language. Circle in Hebrew did not mean globe or sphere or round. They already had words for round and sphere. None of these were used to describe to spherical shape of the earth.
Bible Studies: Hebrew Meaning, hebrew meaning, isaiah 40
"The word is chug (the "ch" pronounced like in loch or Bach).
The cognate verb means "to draw a circle." The noun means circle, or horizon --which is the circle which defines the edge of your vision. It is extremely interpretive to understand the term as orb or sphere. Perhaps that was a later meaning of the term. The simple meaning is "circle". How much further you want to take that meaning is up to you."
It can mean this yes, but it can also mean go around, or walk around. It does not just mean surround. So yes they really could have used this word. You take a journey and start at one corner of the earth and walk around and end where you started. They could have used this.
Cabab does not fit that verse contextually which is why Hebrew speaking people of the day didn't use it there. I know that after rendering the word in English and understanding the meanings you may think it could work there but that's what I'm getting at. Not all these words fit just because one of their sub-meanings in English give you the impression it could work. In that verse "God's" action is already described (he's sitting above). Now the next word is just a description of what he's sitting above. Cabab doesn't fit.
I have three points to say to this:
1: If its referring to the sky or heavens, then Isaiah 40:22 is NOT talking about the circle of the EARTH, so in that case you cannot say that this passage in Isaiah is implying a FLAT CIRCULAR DISK, because its not referring to the earth (even though it clearly shows it is) but rather its referring to the heavens. So therefore, we cannot know based on the text what shape the earth actually is, since its only talking about the heavens. This means you cannot prove your point.
Does this ALSO mean you can't prove your point either?
2: If you do say its referring to the earth and NOT the heavens in Isaiah, then that means the lexicon I gave that says spherical, is referring to the EARTH being spherical. Thus that proves my point.
3: If you say its referring to BOTH the earth and the heavens; that is, the earth is a circular disk and the sky is HALF a sphere or arch, well it does not say that in the lexicon. So the lexicon would be more so implying if its referring to BOTH, that the heavens AND the earth are BOTH spherical, which is actually the real case according to NASA pictures. So if you say it refers to BOTH, this proves MY POINT.
So which one do you go with, 1, 2 or 3 here?
It was your evidence. I was simply pointing out that they rendered the word in reference to mean the vault of heaven and not the earth itself. Maybe what the lexicon was hinting at was that the earth itself was flat and the vault was more live a domed shaped structure above it. But not enough info is given by that lexicon.
Aristotle http://reformation.org/flat-earth-exposed.html
There, that is a better source. So, this shows that ancient people, at least some or many did in fact believe the earth was spherical. The biblical authors would have known the SAME observations Aristotle had. And Aristotle would NOT necessarily be superior minded to the biblical authors either.
Right. And I agree to this. I'm not saying everyone believed the earth was flat but obviously it wasn't that apparent to some that the earth was spherical. The debate of whether it was, was in existence before, during and even Aristotle.
IBSS - The Bible - Genesis 1:9-13 DAY 3: Circle of the Earth
The site above is very informative. I believe it's a Christian site as well. It does a decent job in shedding some light on the verse.