Lonestar_logic
Republic of Texas
- May 13, 2009
- 24,539
- 2,233
- 205
Wow, you are just copying and pasting crap you know nothing about.19.So much bullshit, so little time.
You should stick to the bible because you know less about science than you do the bible, .... and you know nothing about the bible.
You have combined misrepresenting the bible with misrepresenting science to CREATE the biggest pile of bullshit I have ever seen.
I picked some of the more obvious examples of both your lack of biblical knowledge and scientific knowledge.
15, Creation violates the FLoT! Energy cannot be created nor destroyed, that is why it is a constant. IOW, you can't get something from nothing and God is not a thing! Creation says no thing (God) created everything from nothing, a direct violation of the FLoT.
16. Energy preexists time. Time has a beginning not Energy.
18. Isaiah 40:22 does not say the Earth is a "sphere." It says the Earth is a "CIRCLE!" Take a coin out of your pocket and LOOK at. It is circular and FLAT!!!
19. The bible also says the Earth is fixed and unmoving and the Sun moves around it changing speed as it goes! Remenber, I posted earlier that the bible contradicts itself everywhere to test the brainwashed. This is yet another example.
Ps 93:1 The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is established, that it cannot be moved.
Ps 96:10 Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved
Ps 104:5 the LORD hath founded the earth upon its own bases; it shall not be removed forever and ever
1 Ch 16: 30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
Contradicted by not only your quote but this also:
Isa 24:19 The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly.
20 The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed
Ec 1:5 The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.
Geocentricity: Does the Bible Really Say the Sun Revolves Around the Earth?
« on: Sep 24, 2010, 02:00:23 AM »
Some but not many intrepid Christian scholars believe that it does.
The case for the defense.
THE BASIC SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTS FOR GEOCENTRICITY
This subject generates far more heat than light in Christian circles. Invariably the reaction is emotional because Christians do not want to be tainted with the labels of "scientific ignoramus" and such like. I here set out the basic arguments that are given more fully in my "True Science Agrees with the Bible" - Appendix 10.
(1) BIBLICAL SUPPORT. There are many references to the sun "going down", "arising" etc. NOT ONCE does the Bible ever refer to the earth rotating. Those who say that the Bible is only recording the "appearance" of the movement of the sun--
(a) are having to ADD to the most obvious meaning of the understanding of the Bible passage and
(b) are adopting the same position as liberal critics who have tried to destroy the Bible by saying that many of the sayings of Christ were "adapted to the simple understanding and low education of His hearers" and that we are more educated today to correct what he said - or such like. The Bible is true in its normal sensible understanding of its statements. We say sensible because we do not literally interpret what are clearly allegories and metaphors - this is usually used by critics to ridicule Bible believers.
(2) THE SEQUENCE OF CREATION. There is a major Biblical problem facing Christian heliocentrists. The sun is not referred to until Day 4. Most contend that it was created on Day 1 but only became visible on Day 4 so that they can have the earth going round the sun from the very first day of its creation. The problem is that the same word is used for the creation of the sun as for other material or animals in Genesis 1. "Bara" and "Asah" are both used for creation and there is no distinction between creation from nothing and creation from previous created material. Both words are used of Man's creation. To say that the sun had already been created before day 4 is to twist the scriptures beyond acceptability in this one specific case to save the heliocentric position - and Hebrew scholars agree. If this interpretation is used in this one instance, why is it not used for all the other verses in Genesis. It would make nonsense of the whole record of events.
So the Hebrew insists that the sun was created on Day 4. How then did the earth rotate around a non-existent sun for three days? And when the sun was created on Day 4, did God give the earth a jolt and send it on its circular route around the sun? Surely the most obvious explanation is that the earth was created FIRST of all the universe - as the Bible says - and the universe rotated around it - with all the planets created later on Day 4. How this could take place scientifically we examine below.
(3) SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENTS. Most scientists know about the Michelson-Morely experiment - that failed to detect any movement of the earth round the sun. This had to be overcome so the Fitzgerald-Lorentz shortening of the apparatus was proposed, and eventually the paradoxical Relativity Theory was invented by Einstein to overcome this problem. However, there are three other experiments that have been deliberately ignored by universities because they support geocentricity -
(a) The Michelson-Gale experiment (Reference - Astrophysical Journal 1925 v 61 pp 140-5 - I forgot to put this reference in my book!) This detected the aether passing the surface of the earth with an accuracy of 2% of the speed of the daily rotation of the earth! Thus, the Michelson-Morely experiment detected no movement of the earth around the sun, yet the Michelson-Gale experiment measured the earth's rotation (or the aether's rotation around the earth!) to within 2%! This surely speaks volumes for geocentricity.
(b) "Airey's failure" (Reference - Proc. Roy. Soc. London v 20 p 35). Telescopes have to be very slightly tilted to get the starlight going down the axis of the tube because of the earth's "speed around the sun". Airey filled a telescope with water that greatly slowed down the speed of the light inside the telescope and found that he did not have to change the angle of the telescope. This showed that the starlight was already coming in at the correct angle so that no change was needed. This demonstrated that it was the stars moving relative to a stationary earth and not the fast orbiting earth moving relative to the comparatively stationary stars. If it was the telescope moving he would have had to change the angle.
(c) The Sagnac experiment (Reference - Comptes Rendus 1913 v157 p 708-710 and 1410-3) Sagnac rotated a table complete with light and mirrors with the light being passed in opposite directions around the table between the mirrors. He detected the movement of the table by the movement of the interference fringes on the target where they were recombined. This proved that there IS an aether that the light has to pass through and this completely destroys Einstein's theory of Relativity that says there is no aether. It is for this reason that this experiment is completely ignored by scientists. More recently Kantor has found the same result with similar apparatus.
All these experiments are never taught at universities, so consequently, scientists, including most Christian creationists, are ignorant of this evidence for geocentricity. Is it any wonder, therefore, that Christian geocentrists find their most vociferous opponents are fellow Christian creationists to whom geocentricity comes as a shock. They do not want to be tarred with such a heretical brush that will only increase the great ridicule they are already receiving for their stance against evolution?
THE ROTATION OF THE UNIVERSE
How can the universe rotate so rapidly without disintegrating? There is growing evidence that the aether has "Planck density" - it is extremely dense and the sun and planets are like corks in very dense water comparatively. This whole universe sweeps round the earth because otherwise it would collapse in on itself due to its density. The mechanics of this system forces the other planets etc. to describe ellipses in their orbit around the sun. Ernst Mach proposed that it is the weight of the stars circling the earth that drags Foucault pendulums around, creates Coriolis forces in the air that give the cyclones to our weather etc. Barbour and Bertotti (Il Nuovo Cimento 32B(1):1-27, 11 March 1977) proved that a hollow sphere (the universe) rotating around a solid sphere inside (the earth) produced exactly the same results of Coriolis forces, dragging of Foucault pendulums etc. that are put forward as "proofs" of heliocentricity! This paper gives several other confirmations of the superiority of the geocentric model.
Thus, there is evidence that the earth is NOT moving around the sun, but either the aether is moving around the earth carrying the planets with it, or the earth is spinning on its axis. The most likely model is that the aether is rotating around the earth as calculations show that if it did not, it would rapidly collapse upon itself.
Malcolm Bowden.
25.9.99
Logged
Ephesians 3:20 [Amplified]
Now to Him Who, by the action of His power that is at work within us, is able to carry out His purpose and do superabundantly, far over and above all that we dare ask or think, infinitely beyond our highest prayers, desires, thoughts, hopes, or dreams.
The Christian Identity Blog
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obadiah 1:18
My soul, wait thou only upon God; for my expectation is from him.
Administrator
Posts: 1117
Re: Geocentricity: Does the Bible Really Say the Sun Revolves Around the Earth?
« Reply #1 on: Sep 24, 2010, 02:03:00 AM »
The case for the prosecution.
Does the Bible Teach Geocentricity?
by Bert Thompson, Ph.D. and Trevor Major, M.Sc., M.A.
The medieval Catholic Church maintained that the Bible taught geocentricity (i.e., that the Sun and planets revolve around the Earth) as opposed to what we now know as the Copernican idea of heliocentricity (i.e., that the planets all revolve around the Sun). This situation began when Claudius Ptolemy of Alexandria restated the ancient Ptolemaic geocentric theory in the second century after Christ, and was able to predict the motion of the celestial bodies with far greater accuracy than the existing theory of heliocentricity. Somewhere along the line, scientific dogma became enshrined in theological dogma, and passages in the Bible were found to consecrate Ptolemys theory. According to the theologians, man was the focus of Gods creative act, and therefore the Earth must be the center of Gods creation. After all, if we were dwelling on one average planet, rotating around one average star, in one average galaxy in an infinite Universe, how could we be the sole focus of Gods attention, and why should His only Son be sent just to this middling planet, as the Bible suggests?
Needless to say, this revolution of thought provided great fuel for the atheists, skeptics and agnostics. According to Paul Steidl:
The truths of Gods word and the work of Jesus Christ in no way depend on our position.... If anything, our lack of a unique position in the natural universe is only an illustration of the natural mans lack of a unique position before God (1979, p. 6).
In other words, the presence of our material selves in the material Universe is not as important to God as our immortal souls. On the other hand, it is difficult to doubt that God has placed our planet in just the right place, and set it in motion in just the right way, to benefit the survival of humanity.
Copernicus submitted his ideas in the early sixteenth century, stating that geocentricity was incorrect after all. Some of Copernicus ideas could not be defended scientifically, but science generally had little to do with the attacks on this theory. Calvin, for instance, criticized Copernicus by appealing to passages in Joshua and Psalms that supposedly show the fixity of the Earth relative to the Sun. Galileo came along a hundred years later and firmed up the Copernican theories with better mathematics and with more accurate and numerous measurements. Unlike Copernicus, Galileo was persistent, arrogant, and prepared to stand up to the wrath of the Inquisition. Galileos assertion that the Bible should be interpreted in light of mans knowledge of the natural world, and that Scripture should not have authority in scientific controversies, did little to endear him to church leaders. Thus, rather than being the case of science versus the Bible, it was dogmatic scientist versus religious dogmatism. This, of course, is not all the story; the remainder would be covered in a good history book.
One of the passages used to defend the biblical basis of geocentricity was Joshua 10:12-14, and later references to the same event, in which Joshua prayed, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; And thou, Moon, in the valley of Aijalon (v. 12), that he might defeat the numerous armies assembled against his people. God immediately answered Joshuas prayer, and in the following verse he wrote: And the Sun stood still, and the Moon stayed. Keil and Delitzsch have suggested that either the day appeared long to the warriors of Israel because of the greatness of the task they performed (i.e., defeating the enemy), or that God miraculously caused the day to be lengthened so the Lords army could perform its task. The former is consistent with similar language in other parts of the Old Testament, and the latter explanation is totally consistent with Gods infinite power over the Universe (1982, 2:106-112). In any case, as Joshua goes on to say in verse 14, there was no day like that before it or after it. Thus, whether miraculous or not, to say that these verses teach that the Earth continues to stand still, and that the Earth is the center of the Universe, is both a gross misinterpretation and a misapplication of the verse. This passage does not teach geocentricity, despite Calvins claims to the contrary.
In addition to Joshua 10, Calvin used Psalm 93:1 in defense of geocentricity. The verse simply suggests that the Earth is stable, and cannot be moved, but is it trying to say that the Earth is totally motionless in every sense? As the passage is primarily concerned with Gods majesty and power, it is more likely that the psalmist is saying, Who but God could move the Earth? Besides, the Earth is set in an unchanging orbit around the Sun, all the while rotating at a steady speed on a fixed axis.
Psalm 19:6 is a passage that often is cited as another example of Scripture teaching pre-Copernican astronomy. In this verse, the Sun is said to move, rather than the Earth, and therefore is said by some to imply that the Sun revolves around the Earth. There are many other verses in the Bible that talk about the Sun going down or rising up. This hardly should be surprising, however, since events in the Bible often are written in accommodative or phenomenal languagei.e., the language used to express phenomena as man sees them. Even today we teach our children that the Sun rises in the east and sets in the west, and astronomers and navigators use the Earth as a fixed point for purposes of simple observation, expressing distances and directions in relation to it. The weatherman on the evening news often will state that the Sun is going to rise at a certain time the following morning and set at a certain time the following evening. Why does no one accuse him of scientific error? Because we all are perfectly aware of, and understand, the Copernican view of the solar system, and because we likewise understand that our weatherman is using phenomenal language.
In addition, scientific foreknowledge could be claimed from Psalm 19:6 if a more literal interpretation was applied in the following way. Astronomers now know that the Sun moves in a gigantic orbit around the center of the Milky Way galaxy; traveling at 600,000 miles an hour it would take the Sun 230 million years to make just one orbit! It also is believed that our galaxy is moving with respect to other galaxies in the Universe. The Suns going forth is indeed from one end of the heavens to the other. In any case, there is no way to substantiate the claims that the Bible teaches geocentricity, or that it promotes any other anti-scientific concept.
Geocentricity: Does the Bible Really Say the Sun Revolves Around the Earth?
Michelson-Morely had nothing to do with trying to detect the motion of the Earth around the sun. It was a test to see the effect of the theorized aether on the speed of light. Light was split to be measured with or against the movement of the Earth and perpendicular to the Earth at the same time. What it ended up proving was the consistency of the speed of light, not that the Earth does not move around the sun or whatever you are trying to claim.
And as the highlighted bible quote shows, not only does the sun revolve around the Earth, it speeds up at night! So even if you want to say it actually means the Earth spins on its axis, then the Earth spins faster between sunset and sunrise.
Here is another version of the same verse:
The New Living Translation
Ecclesiastes 1:5 The sun rises and sets and hurries around to rise again.
To this day we still use the words sunset and sun rise. Even though we know that that's not the case.
Hell watch the local weather and they will tell you what time the sun will set and the sun rise.
