Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DittoJed2
Just so we'll be on the same page, so to speak, here are a few geocentric passages in scripture, King James version. The first two, Ecclesiastes and Joshua, were definitely used in Galileo's heresy trial. (Source: The Galileo Affair, by Maurice A. Finocchiaro, University of California Press, 1989.) I'm not certain of the other verses, but they speak for themselves:
Ecclesiastes:
1:5 The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose. [Clear, unambiguous description of the sun's orbit around the earth.]

Joshua:
10:12 Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
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.
10:14 And there was no day like that before it or after it, that the LORD hearkened unto the voice of a man: for the LORD fought for Israel.

1st Chronicles:
16:30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.

Psalms:
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 stablished, that it cannot be moved.
96:10 Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously.
104:5 Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be re-moved for ever.

Thus, there are many places in the Bible where a literal reading is contrary to the solar system. This conflict is at least as clear as any passages you can cite which conflict with evolution. Yet you seem to accept the solar system. Everyone does -- now, but they didn't in Galileo's day, and scripture hasn't changed at all. So what's going on here? That is the double standard of which I spoke.
2,454 posted on 08/25/2003 8:27:08 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Hic amor, haec patria est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2441 | View Replies ]


To: Nakatu X; Right Wing Professor; PatrickHenry
To continue the research into the antiquity and authenticity of Enoch, I am now pursuing the earliest date for man’s observation of a supernova. At post 2266, I pondered whether this verse from Enoch was a reference to a supernova:

“And I saw another thing regarding lightening: how some stars arise and become lightening and cannot dwell with the rest.” 1 Enoch 44

The earliest I’ve found is in China:

A Brief History of High-Energy Astronomy: Pre-1800 Era

Apr, 4 BCE (or BC) Chinese astronomers observe and record for about a month a `po star' towards the direction of the modern constellation of Aquila. Wang et al. (ApJ, 569, L43, 2002) argue that this `po star', unlike most others which are now believed to be comets, was actually a hypernova (a supernova like SN 1998bw which had much more kinetic energy release than the typical value), and that the soft gamma repeater SGR 1900+14 is the neutron star created in this event.

Baker’s History of Astronomy

1054 AD SUPERNOVAE DISCOVERED, ASTRONOMERS IN CHINA & JAPAN

Reported New Star In Constellation Taurus. This was later established to be a supernova which was the birth of the crab nebulae.

The relevance of this inquiry is from post 2370, that 4Q208 fragment of a copy made at Qumran (Dead Sea Scrolls) of the 1 Enoch book on astronomy has a Paleographic age 200, and was carbon-dated - calibrated 166-102 BC and 186-92 BC.

2,469 posted on 08/25/2003 8:51:08 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2454 | View Replies ]

To: PatrickHenry
You are dealing with passages that are either a) not even purporting to be scientific statements b) are poetry literature or c)A clear miracle in Scripture as described from the vantage point of earth.

Talk to a meteorologist about the terms "sunrise" and "sunset". Is he being unscientific in those declarations? No. Not hardly. He is describing from a different vantage point what is seen (the sun rising and setting). There is no contradictions with the Bible and Science and the examples you are giving show a complete (not necessarily deliberate) misunderstanding of Biblical Exegesis.
2,482 posted on 08/25/2003 9:19:28 AM PDT by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2454 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson