• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

How Heliocentrism entered the Bible

Research2

Find my research threads in Unorthodox Theology
Mar 22, 2011
226
1
England
✟362.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
- In Romans 1:25, Paul says, referring to the Hellenists: ''they changed the truth into a lie''.

- The Letter of Aristeas, a 2nd century BC account of the making of the Greek Septuagint Bible, suggests that the Hebrew Scriptures were ''not in their original form'' and were in "need of correction" by the Greek court at Alexandria. This implies the Greek version did not accurately represent the Hebrew in some way, possibly in its cosmology.

- Pseudo-Longinus in the 1st century AD work "On the Sublime" quotes the Genesis creation account, as a fine example of sublime writing: "God said, 'let there be light', and light was. 'Let there be earth', and earth was." But there is an obvious discrepancy between the text of the first few verses of Genesis 1 in our Bibles and the quotation by Pseudo Longinus. Part of the text quoted by Pseudo Longinus cannot be found in our versions. The statement "God said, 'let there be light, and light was,' is there, but there is no mention of God having said, "'Let the earth be,' and it was so."

- The discrepancy between the quotation from Genesis by Pseudo Longinus, and the text of scripture as we have received it, has given rise to a considerable amount of scholarly discussion over several centuries, which continues today.

- The ancient writer who has been called Pseudo Longinus must have been referring to a different version of Genesis than the one we have inherited.

- Aristobulus was a Hellenistic, Jewish, Peripatetic philosopher of Alexandria in the mid 2nd century BC, a contemporary of Ptolemy Philometor. He was thoroughly acquainted with Greek philosophy. He wrote a commentary on the law of Moses, and attempted to reconcile and identify Greek philosophical conceptions with Jewish beliefs. According to some accounts (e.g. Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica, vii. 32, 16) he was involved in the production of the LXX. Aristobulus claimed that Plato and Pythagorus 'imitated' some of the concepts in the law of Moses, which would explain the presence of cosmological concepts of the Greeks in the Genesis creation account (Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 13.12.1-2). And not only philosophers, but many of the poets borrowed from Moses, he said (Ibid., 8.10.4).

- 1 Maccabees says that during the hellenization campaign of Antiochus IV, the hellenists introduced likenesses of pagan deities into the scriptures.

- After the reign of Antiochus IV, Jewish scholars were influenced by, and imitated Hellenistic scholars of Alexandria, only instead of studying Homer, they studied the Biblical text.

- The Foreword to the Wisdom book of Sirach, writing in 132 BC, refers to the existing Greek translations of the law, the prophets and other writings. He indicates there were notable differences between the Greek versions and their Hebrew originals, very possibly referring to cosmological differences. He wrote: "For words spoken originally in Hebrew are not as effective when they are translated into another language. That is true not only of this book but of the law itself, the prophets and the rest of the books, which differ no little when they are read in the original."

Conclusion

The flawed cosmological notions occur in the Bible because of corruptions that were introduced in the 2nd century BC, which changed the Bible's cosmology to fit that of the ancient Greeks in the hellenistic era. The changes were initiated by Antiochus IV, a Seleucid king who controlled Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine, and Jerusalem. It was foretold in the prophecies of Daniel. See here: Bible Cosmology Revisited
 

Papias

Listening to TW4
Dec 22, 2005
3,967
988
59
✟64,806.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
NSP wrote:

Which parts of the Bible support geocentricisty / heliocentrism? I don't usually get involved in these conversations so I don't really know.

I've added headings and a few more verses (Rev.) to Mallon's previous very good summary of this. It is below. I know of zero verses that support heliocentrism.

-Papias

**********************************

Flat Earth-
Bible tells us that the earth is flat like a piece of clay stamped under a seal (Job 38:13-14), that it has edges as only a flat plane would (Job 38:13-14,.Psa 19:4), that it is a circular disk (Isa 40:22), and that its entire surface can be seen from a high tree (Dan 4:10-11) or mountain (Matt 4:8), which is impossible for a sphere, but possible for a flat disk. Taken literally, as the YECs insist we do, any one of these passages shows a flat earth. Taken together, they are even more clear.

Geocentrism-
The Bible also describes the earth as unmovable, set on a foundation of either pillars or water (1 Sam 2:8, 1 Chr 16:30, Job 9:6, 38:4, Psa 24:1-2, 75:s3, 93:1, 96:10, 104:5, 136:6). It also tells us that, although the earth does not move, the sun and stars do move about it (Josh 10:12, Psa 19:4-6, 50:1, Ecc 1:5, Hab 3:11). And that the stars could be dropped down onto the earth like fruit falling from a tree (Rev. 6:13). Taken literally, as the YECs insist we do, these verses show geocentrism. And many Christians in history have interpreted it as such.

We live in a Planetarium-
The Bible describes the sky (firmament -- literally "metal flattened by a hammer"- Gen 1:6-8, 1:14-17) as a solid dome, like a tent (Isa 40:22, Psa 19:4, 104:2), that is arched over the surface of the earth. It also has windows to let rain/snow in (Gen 7:11, 8:2, Deut 28:12, 2 Kings 7:2, Job 37:18, Mal 3:10, Rev 4:1). Ezekiel 1:22 and Job 37:18 even tell us that it's hard like bronze and sparkles like ice, and can be removed (Rev 6:14). Taken literally, as the YECs insist we do, these verses show a solid sky above us. And again, many Christians in history have interpreted it as such.
 
Upvote 0

Notedstrangeperson

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2008
3,430
110
36
✟19,524.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
In Relationship
Papias: Thanks for the references. I had a quick look through a few of the versus you listed (not all of them) and I'm not sure they're to be taken literally, like the 'days' of Genesis. Daniel 4 for example is describing a dream. Matthew 4 might have been in Jesus' mind.

Alternatively they could be taken literally but they've been misinterpreted by people who didn't understand the nature of the universe - Revelations 6:13 could be describing meterorites. Then again Revelations is a nightmare to interprate. There might be a few translation differences as well. I prefer the King James or New King James versions of the Bible, others might state the verses slightly differently.

... But that's just my point of view. Again, thanks for the references. :)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Papias

Listening to TW4
Dec 22, 2005
3,967
988
59
✟64,806.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
NSP wrote:

Papias: Thanks for the references. I had a quick look through a few of the versus you listed (not all of them) and I'm not sure they're to be taken literally, like the 'days' of Genesis.

Oh, yes of course. I'm mainly arguing that requiring that all interpretations must be literal (as YEC's say) renders most Bibles nonsensical, and more importantly, misses important messages. However, their preponderance does suggest to me that the Bible is written a way that the people of the time would understand (geocentrism, etc.)


Daniel 4 for example is describing a dream.
Matthew 4 might have been in Jesus' mind.

Yes, but the fact that he specifies that it was a tall tree is what makes it possible for the seeing. If it were just a fantasy type dream, he wouldn't have needed to provide that explanation. The writer clearly is writing that the explanation (the tree being tall) explains the ability to see, while on a round earth, it would not do that. The same goes for Mt 4 (otherwise no mountain need be used at all if this were just a "vision").

Revelations 6:13 could be describing meterorites. Then again Revelations is a nightmare to interprate.

Perhaps. That's not my guess because it seems to be implying that 1/3 of the stars would no longer be in the sky (meteors wouldn't remove the stars from the sky), and also, because it says "stars". Maybe Joshua 10:11 is a better meteor reference (below). But yes, I agree about Rev. being difficult to interpret with surity.

As they fled from before Israel, while they were at the descent of Beth-horon, the LORD threw large stones from heaven on them as far as Azekah, and they died

I prefer the King James or New King James versions of the Bible,

Version isn't a big deal to me (after all, my Catholic Bible has 7 more whole books compared to the NIV), but I should mention that the KJV is the most altered Bible available. As you probably know, over time with copying and such, copyists added many verses and even whole paragraphs to the Bibles as they saw fit. Many of these have been identified by Bible scholars and most are not present in newer translations like the NIV (because they are usually based on manuscripts from before the changes). Because the KJV is based entirely on a few manuscripts from the late middle ages (the 11th century), the KJV has nearly all of these parts that scribes added during the middle ages kept in it. Those additions by copyists amount to about the same amount of text in the books of I and II Peter combined.

... But that's just my point of view. Again, thanks for the references.
smile.gif

Yep, me too. All good. :) Have a good day-

Papias
 
Upvote 0

Research2

Find my research threads in Unorthodox Theology
Mar 22, 2011
226
1
England
✟362.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Flat Earth-
Bible tells us that the earth is flat like a piece of clay stamped under a seal (Job 38:13-14), that it has edges as only a flat plane would (Job 38:13-14,.Psa 19:4), that it is a circular disk (Isa 40:22), and that its entire surface can be seen from a high tree (Dan 4:10-11) or mountain (Matt 4:8), which is impossible for a sphere, but possible for a flat disk. Taken literally, as the YECs insist we do, any one of these passages shows a flat earth. Taken together, they are even more clear.


Most of this is wrong.

- The 'edges', 'corners' or 'ends' of the earth are just the ends of the mapped geography by the ancient authors of the Old Testament or New Testament, they had a limited knowledge of geography.

- Matthew 4: 8 only concerns a local territory, hence my Bible translates this as 'country', while three other translations i looked up as similar.

- The Earth on the ground anyway is percieved to be flat, you can't see or detect curvature - so the ancient authors of the Old Testament and New Testament (even if they did believe it was flat) were just writing from that perspective of observation from the ground.

Geocentrism-
The Bible also describes the earth as unmovable, set on a foundation of either pillars or water (1 Sam 2:8, 1 Chr 16:30, Job 9:6, 38:4, Psa 24:1-2, 75:s3, 93:1, 96:10, 104:5, 136:6). It also tells us that, although the earth does not move, the sun and stars do move about it (Josh 10:12, Psa 19:4-6, 50:1, Ecc 1:5, Hab 3:11). And that the stars could be dropped down onto the earth like fruit falling from a tree (Rev. 6:13). Taken literally, as the YECs insist we do, these verses show geocentrism. And many Christians in history have interpreted it as such.

- All added to scripture under Hellenistic influences. See the OP.

We live in a Planetarium-
The Bible describes the sky (firmament -- literally "metal flattened by a hammer"- Gen 1:6-8, 1:14-17) as a solid dome, like a tent (Isa 40:22, Psa 19:4, 104:2), that is arched over the surface of the earth. It also has windows to let rain/snow in (Gen 7:11, 8:2, Deut 28:12, 2 Kings 7:2, Job 37:18, Mal 3:10, Rev 4:1). Ezekiel 1:22 and Job 37:18 even tell us that it's hard like bronze and sparkles like ice, and can be removed (Rev 6:14). Taken literally, as the YECs insist we do, these verses show a solid sky above us. And again, many Christians in history have interpreted it as such.

- See 1 above.
 
Upvote 0

Greg1234

In the beginning was El
May 14, 2010
3,745
38
✟19,292.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Since you're kinda new to these parts, it's relevant to point out that all of these have already been refuted. The Darwinian interpretation attempts to show that there is conflict in the cosmological patterns being referenced here, but as we read from Psalm 148, we get a better view:
"Praise him, sun and moon
praise him, shining stars
praise him, highest heavens
and the waters above the heavens!

Let them all praise the name of Yahweh,
at whose command they were created;
he has fixed them in their place for ever,
by an unalterable statute.",

The sun does actually appear to be fixed and the reference here is towards the statutes upon which they are established.
 
Upvote 0

Papias

Listening to TW4
Dec 22, 2005
3,967
988
59
✟64,806.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Research2 wrote:

Most of this is wrong.

Except that you go on to agree with the idea that taken literally, it is incorrect.

- The 'edges', 'corners' or 'ends' of the earth are just the ends of the mapped geography by the ancient authors of the Old Testament or New Testament, they had a limited knowledge of geography.

- The Earth on the ground anyway is percieved to be flat, you can't see or detect curvature - so the ancient authors of the Old Testament and New Testament (even if they did believe it was flat) were just writing from that perspective of observation from the ground.

So, as above, you agree that taken literally, the verses describe a flat earth of limited geography.

- Matthew 4: 8 only concerns a local territory, hence my Bible translates this as 'country', while three other translations i looked up as similar.

OK, which translations, specifically, did you check? I'm sure you are being honest here.....

The NIV has:
Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world .... The KJV and NASB are similar.

- See 1 above.

In #1 above, you agreed with me that taking the verses literally doesn't match the real world.

***************************************
Greg, so you are saying that the Bible says the Moon is fixed in place, and we live in a lunacentric world? How can all three of the moon, sun, and earth (plus all the stars!) be fixed in their given places, since all three move in relation to each other? That doesn't match the real world. I think you have just provided yet another example of where taking a literal interpretation doesn't match the real world. Thanks for that.

Papias
 
Upvote 0

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,833
7,854
65
Massachusetts
✟393,421.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
OK, which translations, specifically, did you check? I'm sure you are being honest here.....
I'd like to see that answer too. "Kosmos" can have a number of meanings (order, ornament, the entire physical world, the social world of humans), but "region" isn't one of them that I've ever seen.
 
Upvote 0