Does the sun revolve around the earth?

[AV1611VET]

You guys wanna answer my question, or do you just wanna yak and say nothing?

I'm giving you "scientists" a chance to fix this, and what do you do?

Nothing.

Impress me with your great knowledge, please.

 

[Adivi]

You guys wanna answer my question, or do you just wanna yak and say nothing?

I'm giving you "scientists" a chance to fix this, and what do you do?

Nothing.

Impress me with your great knowledge please.

Um, I already answered it. I said that I would probably still say something like "the sun stood still" if I was Joshua, because I wouldn't have known that the Earth rotates as opposed to the Sun moving. The OP said that a literal reading of this passage would support the geocentric theory, and I agree with that. His point wasn't necessarily that it should've been written differently, but that sometimes we have to read things nonliterally.

 

[AV1611VET]

Um, I already answered it. I said that I would probably still say something like "the sun stood still" if I was Joshua, because I wouldn't have known that the Earth rotates as opposed to the Sun moving. The OP said that a literal reading of this passage would support the geocentric theory, and I agree with that. His point wasn't necessarily that it should've been written differently, but that sometimes we have to read things nonliterally.

Ay-yi-yi --- oh well, I wouldn't know how to respond if someone answered me on the first try (with the exception of Wiccan_Child and MrGoodBytes, who really do impress me).

For the second time:

Here we go ---

Originally Posted by Joshua 10:12

Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, [...]
​

--- complete the verse in your own words, please.

 

[Adivi]

Ay-yi-yi --- oh well, I wouldn't know how to respond if someone answered me on the first try (with the exception of Wiccan_Child and MrGoodBytes, who really do impress me).

For the second time:

Here we go ---

Originally Posted by Joshua 10:12

Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, [...]
​

--- complete the verse in your own words, please.

I probably would have said something along the same lines that he did: "O sun, stand still over Gibeon, O moon, over the Valley of Aijalon." But that's if I still accepted the geocentric model; under a heliocentric one, I would've said something like "O Earth, halt thy ponderous rotation" or something like that.

 

[AV1611VET]

I probably would have said something along the same lines that he did: "O sun, stand still over Gibeon, O moon, over the Valley of Aijalon."

So if Joshua was geocentric (and I don't really see why he wouldn't be), and God honored his request without coming back with something like, "Ask Me right, and I'll do it." --- then what's the problem?

Why all the moaning and groaning that the Bible teaches geocentrism?

It's not so much as Joshua being geocentric as it is you guys interpreting the Scriptures geocentrically.

 

[Adivi]

So if Joshua was geocentric (and I don't really see why he wouldn't be), and God honored his request without coming back with something like, "Ask Me right, and I'll do it." --- then what's the problem?

Why all the moaning and groaning that the Bible teaches geocentrism?

It's not so much as Joshua being geocentric as it is you guys interpreting the Scriptures geocentrically.

The OP isn't saying that the Bible teaches geocentricism, and I don't think anybody here does. What he's saying is that a literal reading teaches geocentricism:

If one were to understand the Bible literally, it would be hard to suggest that the earth revolves around the sun.

 

[AV1611VET]

The OP isn't saying that the Bible teaches geocentricism, and I don't think anybody here does. What he's saying is that a literal reading teaches geocentricism:

If a literal rendering teaches geocentrism, then what would a mature reader do?

1. Interpret it literally and assume it was a mistake?
2. Interpret it figuratively, using what is called the "language of the observer," and assume it was not a mistake?

Depending on how you answer the above, tells me your level of maturity.

Even I, an ultraliteralist, wouldn't make that mistake.

 

[Greeble]

Even I, an ultraliteralist, wouldn't make that mistake.

Yes you do. And spin all kinds of webs trying to justify literal interpretations
of passages that should not be read as such. You insist on doing it all the time and ignoring reality and facts. Twist your own logic. Maybe we don't fell like it.

 

[SpyridonOCA]

If we interpret the Bible figuratively when it supports geocentrism, why read it literally when it suggests that the earth is less than ten thousand years old?

 

[Loudmouth]

If a literal rendering teaches geocentrism, then what would a mature reader do?

You hold science to a "higher standad" and accept geocentrism, right?

 

[ResoluteShaman]

All I can tell you, AV, is that when I have my telescope outside, and am using it, the tracking shows we are moving. A photograph of 'streaking stars' in a polar aligned camera shows that we are turning, not the sky.

Mathematically, you can predict orbital paths, and stellar drift to show what constellations used to look like. Sun observing satellites also show that we are the ones moving, not the sun going around us. Math calculations to land probes on Mars, to send one out to Saturn, which shows the sun is central, the planets orbiting it.

Empirical proof? Sorry, can't stand on the sun with a plumb bob for you. You have my permission to try.

 

[kangitanka]

If a literal rendering teaches geocentrism, then what would a mature reader do?

1. Interpret it literally and assume it was a mistake?
2. Interpret it figuratively, using what is called the "language of the observer," and assume it was not a mistake?

Depending on how you answer the above, tells me your level of maturity.

Even I, an ultraliteralist, wouldn't make that mistake.

You missed the third option-
Interpret it literally and assume no mistake was made, thereby accepting a geocentric solar system (if not universe). Some "ultraliteralist" Christians still accept a geocentric solar system (if not universe), and at least one belongs to this forum. Of course, you won't contradict him.
You are, apparently, are not an ultraliteralist, despite the fact that you take 4-legged grasshopers, cud chewing rabbits, satyrs and cockatrices as "ultraliteral".

 

[Nathan Poe]

So if Joshua was geocentric (and I don't really see why he wouldn't be), and God honored his request without coming back with something like, "Ask Me right, and I'll do it." --- then what's the problem?

Why all the moaning and groaning that the Bible teaches geocentrism?

It's not so much as Joshua being geocentric as it is you guys interpreting the Scriptures geocentrically.

Well then, by rejecting a plain literal reading and instead inserting some common sense, we can forget geocentricism.

And we can do the same thing to reject Creationism and a literal Global Flood as well. I mean come on, talking snakes? Magic trees? Giant boats holding two of every animal? Sheesh, what a fairy tale.

What kind of hypocrite would reject geocentricism but accept all that other nonsense?

 

[Nathan Poe]

If a literal rendering teaches geocentrism, then what would a mature reader do?

I've yet to met a literalist who qualifies as a mature reader -- I'm happy to see that you too consider them two separate entities.

 

[AV1611VET]

If we interpret the Bible figuratively when it supports geocentrism, why read it literally when it suggests that the earth is less than ten thousand years old?

The _ Bible _ does _ not _ support _ geocentrism _ .

And I love the way you worded that:

• supports geocentrism
• suggests less than 10,000 years

 

[AV1611VET]

All I can tell you, AV, is that when I have my telescope outside, and am using it, the tracking shows we are moving. A photograph of 'streaking stars' in a polar aligned camera shows that we are turning, not the sky.

Mathematically, you can predict orbital paths, and stellar drift to show what constellations used to look like. Sun observing satellites also show that we are the ones moving, not the sun going around us. Math calculations to land probes on Mars, to send one out to Saturn, which shows the sun is central, the planets orbiting it.

Empirical proof? Sorry, can't stand on the sun with a plumb bob for you. You have my permission to try.

What on earth was this all about?

You're preaching to the choir here.

 

[Nathan Poe]

The _ Bible _ does _ not _ support _ geocentrism _ .

Nor_does_it_support_a_10,000_year_old_Earth.

 

[SpyridonOCA]

The church fathers understood these passages literally, and some were bothered by the very suggestion that the earth revolves around the sun. St. Augustine's warning, on the other hand, that we not deny scientific observation in the name of Scripture is important, especially for us today.


"It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 1:19–20 [A.D. 408]).

 

[AV1611VET]

The church fathers understood these passages literally, and some were bothered by the very suggestion that the earth revolves around the sun. St. Augustine's warning, on the other hand, that we not deny scientific observation in the name of Scripture is important, especially for us today.

There's nothing like junk theology and junk science in the same thread, is there?

I've said this before, and I'll say it again:

• The Bible nowhere teaches geocentrism.

Like 7UP used to say about caffeine: Never had it - never will.
​

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

There's nothing like junk theology and junk science in the same thread, is there?

I've said this before, and I'll say it again:

• The Bible nowhere teaches geocentrism.

Like 7UP used to say about caffeine: Never had it - never will.​

Of course it was considered to teach geocentrism until science showed differently. I am sure you have seen the letter of Cardinal Bellarmine. I bolded a bit.

Second. I say that, as you know, the Council [of Trent] prohibits expounding the Scriptures contrary to the common agreement of the holy Fathers. And if Your Reverence would read not only the Fathers but also the commentaries of modern writers on Genesis, Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Josue, you would find that all agree in explaining literally (ad litteram) that the sun is in the heavens and moves swiftly around the earth, and that the earth is far from the heavens and stands immobile in the center of the universe. Now consider whether in all prudence the Church could encourage giving to Scripture a sense contrary to the holy Fathers and all the Latin and Greek commentators. Nor may it be answered that this is not a matter of faith, for if it is not a matter of faith from the point of view of the subject matter, it is on the part of the ones who have spoken. It would be just as heretical to deny that Abraham had two sons and Jacob twelve, as it would be to deny the virgin birth of Christ, for both are declared by the Holy Ghost through the mouths of the prophets and apostles.