The lesson of Geocentrism

[Bushido216]

vance posted:
Before Galileo began promoting the heliocentric view of the universe, the Church believed that the sun and stars, the entire universe in fact, revolved around the earth. This was based, they believed, on a simple, plain reading of Scripture. The entire scheme of Genesis 1 made it clear: the earth was there at the very beginning and the rest of the universe was built around it. The sun and moon were "greater and lesser lights" *for the earth*, the stars part of the firmament over the earth. The earth played the central role, it was the location of God’s special creation, Man, and everything they read conformed to the idea of the earth being at the physical and literal center of things, with all else revolving around it. And there were other Scripture throughout the Bible which backed this up.

Once again it sounds like vance is making claims with out any historical or biblical support. I have asked him several times to provide the historical and biblical references for the points he is trying to make and so far has presented goose eggs.

Where does the bible claim that the sun physically revolves around the earth?

Where does history say that the church of that time held to a dogmatic argument that the sun revolved aroound the earth?

With out answers these questions, vances question are purely speculative and based upon imagination rather than some sort of biblical or historical reference.

He has you on his ignore list. Pelting him with questions is useless.

 

[Vance]

Ah, now that you have quoted them, I can just point out that I have already answered them:

1. The Bible *doesn't" truly support geocentrism, but for all the reasons I have stated in the OP, as well as the Joshua/sun passages and the earth being "fixed", etc, it was extremely understandable that all those who could read the Scripture believed that geocentrism was the "plain reading" of the text. It actually is, when you are entirely ignorant of the truth of heliocentrism.

2. I have provided the quote, as well as the fact that Galileo was actually condemned as a heretic for raising the idea of heliocentrism. Luther agreed, as well as Calvin on the Protestant side.

So, no, these are not pure imagination by a long shot. The parallels are there and compelling. Heed the lessons of history or be doomed to repeat them.

 

[Bushido216]

Vance, don't be so harsh on these people. They're suffering from hind-sight bias, not their fault.

 

[Vance]

You know, I don't feel I am harsh at all. It is a kind of hate the sin, but not the sinner. I hate all the damage YEC'ism is doing, but you are right, I tend see the actual YEC's themselves as simply misguided.

 

[Buck72]

You know, I don't feel I am harsh at all. It is a kind of hate the sin, but not the sinner. I hate all the damage YEC'ism is doing, but you are right, I tend see the actual YEC's themselves as simply misguided.

Bro, we share the EXACT same perspective from opposite sides of the debate.

So close....

 

[Vance]

Exactly.

Again, all I want YEC's to do is acknowledge that there are other beliefs which may be valid and never teach their beliefs as the sole possible approach. Let each side hold their beliefs and let all else judge for themselves, without being told that a belief in the non-YEC view is equal to not believing Scripture. Even you can see how dangerous that can be. I gladly and readily admit where the dangers in a naturalistic philosophy and how we can only accept the conclusions of science keeping God in mind. I have yet to see a YEC acknoweldge that it is equally dangerous to draw this theological connection between YEC'ism and sound Scripture.

 

[Blueberry Sponge]

Just as a six 24-hour creation week was the traditional view before the early 1800's when geologists (all Christian) gathered the evidence that the earth was dramatically older than 6,000 years ago.

What is this evidence that the earth was dramatically older than 6,000 years ago?

If the Christian community accepted that Heliocentrism was actually the correct way to view the universe, and simply adjusted their reading of Scripture accordingly, why do YEC's have such a hard time with doing the same things now?

Why should anyone accept heliocentrism as the correct way to view the universe? Doesn't heliocentrism just mean that the sun is the center of the solar system and not the universe? That would explain to me why YEC's would have a "hard time" adjusting their reading of Scripture to fallacies such as 'the sun is the center of the universe'.

 

[Vance]

What is this evidence that the earth was dramatically older than 6,000 years ago?

Why should anyone accept heliocentrism as the correct way to view the universe? Doesn't heliocentrism just mean that the sun is the center of the solar system and not the universe? That would explain to me why YEC's would have a "hard time" adjusting their reading of Scripture to fallacies such as 'the sun is the center of the universe'.

No, you are confused. The issue was never whether the sun was the center of the universe, Galileo's point was that the sun did not revolve around that earth, but that the earth, and the rest of the planets, revolved around the sun. He also pointed out that the sun was a star like all the rest, and that the stars also did not revolve around the earth, but that the earth revolved, making it look like they did. All these statements were true, and it is these statements which the Christian community rejected as being contrary to Scripture. The Christian community was wrong.

The point is that the YEC's are doing the exact same thing as the Christian community back then in regards to an old earth and the possibility that God used evolution as part of His creative process. They are clinging to their own traditional interpretation which is in conflict with the evidence of God's Creation itself.

As for the evidence that the Earth is dramatically older than 6,000 years, it really is impossible to set out all the evidence here. But I would refer you to a few sources, starting with a couple of Christian sites:

www.reasons.org and go to the "Age of the Earth" section

http://answers.org/newlook/NEWLOOK.HTM#Contents

Lastly, I would check out the sister forum to this one, Called Science, Creation and Evolution. There are a number of intelligent discussions about the age of the earth.

 

[Blueberry Sponge]

The point is that the YEC's are doing the exact same thing as the Christian community back then...

Biblically speaking, there is no "official position of the church" in regard to geocentricism or the age of the earth. The NT church isn't rightly represented by RCC, Luther, Calvin, Augustine, etc. Only members of the body of Christ make up the church and their views on these 2 subjects are diverse. So I think that the only relevant point to made by comparing geocentricism and YEC is that we shouldn't execute, in the name of Christ, those who disagree with us.

The Christian community was wrong.

That parallel would only hold up if YEC is now currently the "official position of the church". And if it ever becomes the "official position of the church" that will have no bearing on my holding to a young earth and a 24/6 view of creation (which I hold to). Gee, the official position of the (so-called) church has included all kinds of wicked atrocities down through the centuries. At the same time "the church" was persecuting Galileo they were persecuting Bible believing Christians who wouldn't conform to the state church's "official positions". The NT church had nothing to do with enforcing Christianity with the sword.

Regarding the 'reasons' URL, I've seen Hugh Ross on TV and listened to him on the radio and have observed many fallacies in his views so I likely won't visit the page (other than the fact that I just did to make sure it was him).

 

[wblastyn]

Regarding the 'reasons' URL, I've seen Hugh Ross on TV and listened to him on the radio and have observed many fallacies in his views so I likely won't visit the page (other than the fact that I just did to make sure it was him).

No wonder you never see any evidence, you probably ignore anyone who says differently than what you believe.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html

 

[wblastyn]

Bro, we share the EXACT same perspective from opposite sides of the debate.

So close....

I can't see how TE pushes intelligent people away from Christianity?

 

[Vance]

Blueberry: whether it was an official position, or even a majority position, at the time is irrelevant. The point is that a group of Christians wrongly held to their traditional interpretation of Scripture in the face of evidence from science that their interpretation was incorrect. That group (whether "official" or not) went so far as to say that a belief in this scientific concept was contrary to Scripture and if one was true, the other wasn't.

They were wrong, as we all know now. The YEC's are doing the same thing, whether they are the majority or not, whether they are the official position of the Church or not. They have fallen into the same fallacy as those who clung to their Geocentric interpretation of Scripture in the face of the evidence from God's Creation.

 

[Blueberry Sponge]

The YEC's are doing the same thing ...

What exactly are they doing?

 

[Vance]

Just as with Geocentrism, the YEC's are holding to their "plain reading" of Scripture when the evidence of God's Creation shows that this plain reading is very likely incorrect. Further, just as with Geocentrism, they argue that the conclusion of the scientific community based on this evidence is entirely and unambiguously in conflict with Scripture to the extent that if one is true, then the other must be false. This has been stated on this very forum many, many times. Just as with Geocentrism (where they branded Galileo a heretic), YEC's believe that any Christian who is not a YEC is placing man's word over God's, is compromising their beliefs to please the world and other such nonsense. In short, YEC's tend to think that Christians who don't believe as they do are not as in touch with the truth of God's Word as they are.

All of these are direct parallels. All we can hope is that the parallel plays itself out and that in another hundred years YEC'ism is no more of a stumbling block to the Christian message than geocentrism is today.

 

[Blueberry Sponge]

Just as with Geocentrism, the YEC's are holding to their "plain reading" of Scripture...

A plain reading of Scripture is better that an unplain reading. God made things plain in His revelation. That's a good thing.

...when the evidence of God's Creation shows that this plain reading is very likely incorrect.

I haven't seen any evidence that a plain reading of God's Word is incorrect.

Further, just as with Geocentrism, they argue that the conclusion of the scientific community based on this evidence is entirely and unambiguously in conflict with Scripture...

From what I've seen it is.

... to the extent that if one is true, then the other must be false.

If one is true and they oppose each other, the other one would HAVE to be false. That's just common sense.

This has been stated on this very forum many, many times.

The devil has made statements against a plain reading of God's Word many many times. That shouldn't surprise a Christian who accepts a plain reading of God's Word.

Just as with Geocentrism (where they branded Galileo a heretic), YEC's believe that any Christian who is not a YEC is placing man's word over God's...

If they hold to theistic evolution they ARE placing man's word over God's. Because that's all it is - man's word. And it's definitely in conflict with God's. However that's not "just as with Geocentrism" since the Bible doesn't teach geocentricism.

... is compromising their beliefs to please the world

That's something Scripture warns us against, pleasing the world. We should watch out that we don't become a friend of the world and an enemy of God.

...and other such nonsense.

Man does place and always has - especially in religion - and especially in nominal christianity - placed his word over God's Word. That's something God's Word tells us to watch out for. It's not nonsense when we watch out for it.

In short, YEC's tend to think that Christians who don't believe as they do are not as in touch with the truth of God's Word as they are.

If you reject a plain reading of God's Word you're not GOING to be as in touch with the truth of God's Word as someone who holds to a plain reading of it.

All of these are direct parallels.

If most Bible obeying Christians said that geocentricism was required by the Bible in Galileo's time there would be a parallel. But a Bible obeying Christian wouldn't have called for Galileo's death in the name of Christ. The "church" you're talking about and the obedient church that the Bible requires are 2 different things so you don't really have a case with your "parallel".

All we can hope is that the parallel plays itself out and that in another hundred years YEC'ism is no more of a stumbling block to the Christian message than geocentrism is today.

YECism isn't a stumbling block NOW to the Bible's message. In a hundred years from now people will be laughing at the absolute foolishness of theistic evolution.

 

[Vance]

Ah, see, you have proved my point about what YEC's do, and how they have fallen into the same error.

It matters not whether it was 100% of the Christian body or just a dozen, who believed in Geocentrism. The point is that there were Christians who believed that the plain reading of Scripture was geocentrism, and believed this as conclusively as any YEC today asserts that a young earth is required by the "plain reading". That group (however large) was dead wrong because they failed to allow valid scientific discoveries to inform how they interpret Scripture. They held to the belief that was based on their PLAIN READING. Their plain reading was wrong, as we all know now.

That is the parallel, and it fits exactly.

As for the concept of a plain reading, I can guarantee you that you do not always interpret Scripture in the plainest meaning. This is a myth you have told yourself is true. You use your ability to interpret Scripture based on logic and your knowledge of the world all the time. This is what God expects us to do. The only question is which Scripture can we read based on the plainest reading, and on which occassions this plain reading is misleading.

Geocentrism is just one example where a plain reading was false.

 

[Blueberry Sponge]

Geocentrism is just one example where a plain reading was false.

Geocentricism isn't the result of a plain reading of Scripture; it's only your myth that it is. That's why your so-called parallel doesn't hold water.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Geocentricism isn't the result of a plain reading of Scripture; it's only your myth that it is. That's why your so-called parallel doesn't hold water.

I have a nice diagram here which shows you what you get from a "plain reading of Scripture". I take it you believe this is how the universe is, or do you let "man's science" influence how you read Scripture?

http://freespace.virgin.net/karl_and.gnome/creationisminconsistent.htm

 

[Vance]

Blueberry, read Genesis one again, setting aside ALL your existing knowledge of how the universe works. This is a difficult thing to do, but if you can, you will see that it clearly describes a universe in which the earth is created before the sun, moon and stars, which is the primary point of creation, along with heaven. The Sun and the Moon are merely "greater and lesser lights" created to provide light *for the earth*. Then you add to this the other verses in Scripture such as Joshua commanding the Sun to stand still and the Scripture saying it did. The plain reading of this is obviously that it is the sun which stopped in its motion, so it must be the one moving. Scripture says that the earth is fixed, immovable. These along with other Scriptures of this sort (sun rising and setting, etc) would tell any reader of the day, without the benefit of our current knowledge, that the sun, moon and stars revolve around the Earth.

Today, we know how to read those verses in a LESS PLAIN, but more accurate manner. And this is precisefly because we know more about how the universe works and know that geocentrism in not correct. So, we then look at Scripture again and determine what those verses must mean in the light of our new scientific knowledge. You are simply putting you hands over your ears and saying "la, la, la" if you continue denying that a strictly plain reading of Scripture can point to geocentrism. Again, the point is that it until science came along to clarify how the universe worked, there were very few, if any, in the Christian community who did NOT read Scripture to describe a geocentric universe.

So much so, in fact, that there are still Christians out there who insist that geocentrism must be correct. Check out this site, please:

http://www.geocities.com/armedconventicle/geocentrism.html

This site states near the top:

"According to the Bible, it is actually the sun that travels around the earth. Our world stands unmoving in the center of a universe that was created by a wise and all-powerful God. Isaiah records a miracle where God simply and clearly made the sun move backwards in its normal course. [size=+1]"Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sundial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down" (38:8)[/size][size=+1]
Wise Solomon wrote about the futility of life. Everything seems to go in circles: human history, the sun, the jet stream and the water cycle: [/size][size=+1]"One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth forever. The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose. The wind goeth toword the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits. All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again" (Ecclesiastes 1:4-7)
[/size][size=+1]The Psalmist compares the sun to a runner in a race around the earth: [/size][size=+1]"...the sun...rejoiceth as a bridegroom to run his race. His going forth is from the end of heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof" (Psalm 19:4-6)[/size][size=+1].
Are these Scripture verses "mere poetry"? Are they the silly myths of ancient, "primitive" peoples? The Bible nowhere teaches the modern theory that the earth is in motion around the sun. Christian heliocentrists, like "christian" evolutionists, must bring their atheistical assumptions with them when they come to God's Word. A man stranded on an island with only a Bible could never dream up such things."

The site goes on to point out all the important Christians of that and later times which insisted that the universe was geocentric, and goes on to show how the Church got duped by science into believing all this Heliocentrism stuff.

I particularly like this section:
Let us say right up front that the modern creationism movement has been a great blessing to the world. Since the publication of [size=+1]The Genesis Flood[/size][size=+1] by Whitcomb & Morris, a large and productive world-wide network of truly Biblical scientists has arisen.
However, the mainstream creationists have completelydropped the ball when it comes to the science of astronomy. By their acceptence of the heliocentric error, they undermine the very things that they have worked so hard to demonstrate. This expose gives us no pleasure, but it is the truth as we find it in God's Word.
As has been shown above, the Bible clearly teaches geocentrism. How do modern creationists get around this? By using the same argument used by theistic evolutionists! Whatever you don't like in Scripture is mere poetry - or worse, the misunderstanding of "primitive" peoples." [/size]
[size=+1]dropped the ball when it comes to the science of astronomy. By their acceptence of the heliocentric error, they undermine the very things that they have worked so hard to demonstrate. This expose gives us no pleasure, but it is the truth as we find it in God's Word.
As has been shown above, the Bible clearly teaches geocentrism. How do modern creationists get around this? By using the same argument used by theistic evolutionists! Whatever you don't like in Scripture is mere poetry - or worse, the misunderstanding of "primitive" peoples.
[/size]
[/size]

 

[Blueberry Sponge]

[size=+1][size=+1]
As has been shown above, the Bible clearly teaches geocentrism. [/size]
[/size]

No, it doesn't teach geocetrism. It uses the earth as a ground reference: the earth doesn't move and the sun rises & sets. It's not teaching geocentrism because the relationship of the movements of the sun and earth are not the point of what those passages ARE teaching. Creation, on the other hand, IS the point of what the Bible teaches.