I’ve just discovered a very interesting group of people. Apparently, they believe that not only does the Earth not revolve around the Sun but that the entire Universe revolves around the Earth. As crazy as this may sound, some of these people are well educated. This is from one of their websites, The Association for Bible Astonomy:
To hear tell, geocentrism, the ancient doctrine that the earth is fixed motionless at
the center of the universe, died over four centuries ago. At that time Nicolaus Copernicus , a Polish canon who dabbled in astrology, claimed that the sun and not the earth was at the center of the universe. His idea is known as heliocentrism. It took a hundred years for heliocentrism to become the dominant opinion, and it did so with a complete lack of evidence in its favor.
Yet the victory of heliocentrism has been less than total. Over the years geocentrism has had its spokesmen…Astronomers, pastors, and educators in the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church maintained the geocentric truths well into the twentieth century. They, with the reformers such as Luther, saw that the embracing of heliocentrism would weaken not only science, but also the authority of the Bible.
The second of these two concerns: how the Bible’s authority is weakened by heliocentrism; stems from the firm manner in which the Bible teaches geocentricity. Geocentric verses range from those with only a positional import, such as references to “up” and “down;” through the question of just what the earth was “orbiting” the first three days while it awaited the creation of the sun; to overt references such as Ecclesiastes 1, verse 5:
The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.
Perhaps the strongest geocentric verse in the Bible is Joshua 10:13:
And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day….
…In other words, either God writes what he means and means what he writes, or else he passes off mere appearances as truths and ends up the liar. The ultimate issue is one of final authority: is the final say God’s or man’s? This is brought home again and again by humanists, such as the twentieth-century philosopher Bertrand Russell and astronomer Ivan King, who point to the church’s abandonment of geocentricity as having “freed” man from the ancient God-centered outlook on life to the modern man-centered outlook. For complete documentation of the Biblical significance of geocentricity see G. D. Bouw’s book, Geocentricity
The folks over at Static Earth (who provided the above photograph) don’t beat around the bush:
There is NO proof that the Earth rotates on an “axis” daily and orbits the sun annually.
Not many Biblical literalists, however, think that there is much merit to this idea. Wikipedia says:
Many scholars such as those at the Institute for Creation Research would argue that interpreting the descriptions of heavenly/spacial events as phenomenological rather than strictly scientific or literal is important. For one, it shows that science and the Bible are not contradictory. The Bible describes things as man describes them (sunrises, sunsets, etc.). Also, it shows that the Bible is very careful to avoid specifics that would make no sense to the majority of readers throughout the majority of history. While the descriptions may not be strictly scientific, they are not erroneous or inaccurate. The Bible describes the heavens from man’s perspective, and not in intricate detail. This is in great contradistinction to Apocryphal and Koranic descriptions of cosmology, which are very specific and demonstrably inaccurate (e.g. 2 Esdras 6:42, 1 Enoch 72, Koran 41:9-12). Finally, they would argue that it is necessary to interpret the seemingly geocentric passages as phenomenological because it is easily demonstrable that the Bible describes other heavenly events in similar language (the moon’s light, stars falling from heaven, etc.).
But do the Geocentrists make a good point when they argue that;
reasoning that “explains away” such verses with arguments such as “the Bible is not a science book” or the Bible is “contextual” leads to the appearance of the scriptures containing lies or inaccuracies. They see this sort of reasoning as very dangerous, and associate it with the perceived recent rapid disintegration of all Bible-based religion and, by extension, society.
Most of you already know that I do not believe in Creationism. But a lot of pretty smart people do. If we want to justify our science by what the Bible has to say, then isn’t it unreasonable to completely disregard the Geocentrist position? Or, if you agree with the statement from the Institute for Creation Research that “the Bible describes the heavens from man’s perspective, and not in intricate detail”, then why wouldn’t that also apply to other areas that the Bible addresses?
( If you think that I am using an extreme example to prove my point, then think again. Even the Geocentrists hesitate to associate with the Flat Earth folks.)