Carmack

Does it say anywhere in the Bible that we're in a geocentric universe?

Atheos

No, but many of the writings were centered around oral traditions handed down by pre-technology goat herders. Up until the time of Galilleo most people thought of the earth as being at the center of the universe with the sun, moon, planets and stars circling it. Because of this you tend to see scientifically inaccurate portrayals of the earth in the bible, such as:

• In the creation myth of Genesis, there are three (3) "evenings and mornings" before the sun is created. The ancients did not associate all the light of day with the sun, or understand the concept that they were on a rotating planet.
• In the creation myth it only took God 1 day to create all the vast reaches of the universe (galaxies, stars, etc) and the framework of the earth, but it took 5 additional days for God to finish creating the earth. This implies a tremendous discrepancy between the perceived complexity of the rest of the universe and our planet.
• Joshua's "long day" (Joshua 10) in which the sun and moon stand still in the sky belie the ancient belief that the sun and moon move relative to the surface of the earth. If the rotation of the planet had been halted (or slowed to a rate to keep it facing the sun during its orbit) for this "long day" the moon would have still continued to move relative to the sun and visible landmarks. The only other possibility would involve at the very least causing every object in our solar system to go into geosynchronous orbit around the earth.
• There are several examples of things being declared to be "so large" that they can be seen from the entire earth (Nebuchadnezzar's tree, the pinnacle to which Satan brought Jesus to show him all the kingdoms of the earth in one view, etc). This implies a flat earth worldview.
• The "Day of the Lord" is in some passages described in terms of God descending from the sky in such manner that everyone will see him at the same time. This of course is inconsistent with a round planet although admittedly an omnimax God could easily cause his manifest presence to be seen everywhere at the same time. It also implies a flat earth worldview.
• There are numerous references to the "four corners" of the earth, the "pillars" on which the earth rests, the "four winds" of the earth, etc., each of which imply a flat earth with rectangular boundaries.
• In II Kings 20 the sun moves "backwards 10 degrees". Needless to say this would have involved a major disruption to everything on the planet unless God used some sort of inertial dampers to keep everyone from noticing the sudden deceleration of the planetary rotation from 900 MPH to -900 MPH and back within a few seconds. Once again the scriptures imply that the sun did the moving, but if that were the case the entire solar system would have to be shifted to compensate for the new position of the sun.

Hope this helps...

-Atheos

Clivedurdle

The Bible is very clear it is geocentric and flat!

If its fixed, everything else moves around it!

gregor

The linch-pin of geocentrism, I think, is in Joshua 10, where God holds the sun up in the sky to allow Joshua to kill more enemies. It was this story that supports the sun rotating around the earth argument for Biblical geocentrism.

Bede

Actually, the lynch pins of geocentricism are the ancient (and pagan) Greeks Aristotle and Ptolemy. Theirs was the best science available and Christians were happy to pick it up and run with it.

It is interesting to note that although the Bible clearly implies a flat earth, Christians have always sided with Greek thinkers and insisted that the earth is a globe. The idea that early and medeival Christians thought the earth was flat is a nineteenth century myth (supported by only one ancient source who no one took any notice of at the time). This also strongly suggests that if the ancient Greeks had agreed on a heliocentric system, Christians would have picked that up too despite what the bible says.

Yours

Bede

On the flat earth myth
On Copernicus

Jehanne

In his book Cosmos, the late Carl Sagan has a picture of a 12th-century (?) map that shows the Earth being flat with four corners with Jerusalem at the center. As I recall, it was popular in certain theological circles during the Middle Ages to assert that the Earth was, in fact, flat. I recall reading that at the Scopes trial someone claimed that William Jennings Bryan was a heretic for agreeing that the Earth was round. But, check out Sagan's reference.

Regards,

Don

Bede

Hi Don,

Unfortunately Sagan was wrong. The mappa mundi do indeed show an earth with Jerusalem at the centre but they do not mean the people who made them thought the earth was flat. The maps showed only a quarter of the earth with the rest considered to be empty. We know for an absolute fact this is true because every single book written by Christians in the Middle Ages explicitly states the earth is a globe (except one Greek from the sixth century that had no influence). No theologians of the middle ages ever said the earth was flat and many (Aquinas, Albertus Magnus, Grosseteste, Bede and many others who wrote on science) explicitly say exactly the opposite. Even 'popular' authors like John Mandeville say the earth is a sphere and he describes a ficticious circumnavigation.

The flat earth myth is incredibly pervasive and you hear it here all the time (partly due to Sagan's mistakes - one of several he made). Hopefully, not a mistake you will fall for again . Here's an extremely lengthy mea culpa from an atheist who made the same mistake.

B

Sven

Bede, I think you should be careful here to distinuish between Christian scholars and the average Christian. I'd say to claim that most Christians thought the earth to be flat is not a too proud claim - simply because most of them were uneducated.

Jehanne

I think that Sagan's point (which he did not elaborate on in his book) was to say that certain Church intellectuals (perhaps a minority) did believe that the Earth was flat. In any case, they were unanimous on their teachings that the Cosmos (and the Earth) were created in six, twenty-four days as well as geocentrism. But, in this discussion, we need to differentiate between “theological grades�, which occurs in Roman Catholic theology. These range from “formal heresy� to “theological opinions�. Clearly, denying the existence of “Adam & Eve� would be regarded by the Medieval Church (as well as today’s Church) as constituting formal heresy, which would lead to an automatic excommunication, and possibly (if you lived during the Middle Ages), of being burned alive. So, would Aquinas tolerate a “flat earth� model as being a valid “theological opinion�? I think that the answer is “yes�, even though no major theologian of the era may have held to that viewpoint. I believe that at least one Pope did hold to that viewpoint.

Regards,

Don

Xulfer Cirtsag

This site about a fixed earth theory does a good job of pointing out how heliocentrism was the first blow by secular humanists to eventually pawn off the evolutionary ("My grandpaw was a rock") agenda. :devil3: :angry: :devil1:

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: