[_ Old Earth _] No evolution taught or heliocentrism?

[PopeAlsatiusXVI]

Fellow Christians, I am sure you are all well aware of the controversy of teaching Darwins theory of evilution in schools. It is controversial, since it clearly denies biblical truths.

My question is why is there not similar anger at Galileo's theory of Heliocentrism taught in schools? It is unbiblical to believe the earth revolves around the sun, and not the other way around. The Church in her (then) wisdom of the 1600s was able to recognize Galileos lie for what it was. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said now. What do y'all think?

 

[Vaccine]

Fellow Christians, I am sure you are all well aware of the controversy of teaching Darwins theory of evilution in schools. It is controversial, since it clearly denies biblical truths.

My question is why is there not similar anger at Galileo's theory of Heliocentrism taught in schools? It is unbiblical to believe the earth revolves around the sun, and not the other way around. The Church in her (then) wisdom of the 1600s was able to recognize Galileos lie for what it was. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said now. What do y'all think?

welcome to the forums! I am interested in this topic. I don't have quite enough information to understand your position. Could you elaborate on why you think heliocentrism is unbiblical?
Also, just to clarify my point of view, the controversy isn't Darwin's theory of evolution but rather the inference of the origin of the species.

 

[stovebolts]

I think that in the 1600's the church put too much emphasis on it's dogma.

Correct me if I'm reading you wrong, but you seem to be inferring that since the RCC church committed such a now obvious mistake against observational science, that somehow we who believe in a young earth must be making that same dogmatic mistake when it comes to evolution. While some may try to argue a young earth through church dogma, there really is no need to any longer as the same observational science that is used to support evolution, can also just as easily support a young earth in line with biblical themes and accounts.

 

[Pizzaguy]

My question is why is there not similar anger at Galileo's theory of Heliocentrism taught in schools? It is unbiblical to believe the earth revolves around the sun, and not the other way around. The Church in her (then) wisdom of the 1600s was able to recognize Galileos lie for what it was. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said now. What do y'all think?

Galileo told no lie about the sun being the center of the solar system. It is quite clear that this is the case and I see nothing in scripture that indicates the "sun revolves around the earth".

What are your intentions in coming to this site and making such statements?

 

[Free]

Fellow Christians, I am sure you are all well aware of the controversy of teaching Darwins theory of evilution in schools. It is controversial, since it clearly denies biblical truths.

My question is why is there not similar anger at Galileo's theory of Heliocentrism taught in schools? It is unbiblical to believe the earth revolves around the sun, and not the other way around. The Church in her (then) wisdom of the 1600s was able to recognize Galileos lie for what it was. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said now. What do y'all think?

Clearly "the Church" changed her mind. Was it wrong to do so? If so, then it is not infallible, or at least the Pope isn't. If the Church was right to change it's mind, then your position is in error.

Just as there is nothing in the Bible to suggest that the Earth is young, neither is there anything to suggest geocentrism, if that's what you want to propose.

 

[Barbarian]

Luther and Calvin both assailed Heliocentrism, correctly pointing out that a iiteral reading of the Bible does not support it.

Of course there was nothing wrong with heliocentrism (which the Church did not deny, BTW; some people in the Church did so, but no Pope denied it ex cathedra).

Here we are:

Said Martin Luther: ``People gave ear to an upstart astrologer who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise some new system, which of all systems is of course the very best. This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred Scripture tells us that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth.''
Martin Luther, Table Talk

"The heavens revolve daily, and, immense as is their fabric, and inconceivable the rapidity of their revolutions, we experience no concussion -- no disturbance in the harmony of their motion. The sun, though varying its course every diurnal revolution, returns annually to the same point. The planets, in all their wandering, maintain their respective positions. How could the earth hang suspended in the air were it not upheld by God's hand? (Job 26:7) By what means could it [the earth] maintain itself unmoved, while the heavens above are in constant rapid motion, did not its Divine Maker fix and establish it? Accordingly the particle, ape, denoting emphasis, is introduced -- YEA, he hath established it."

- John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Psalm 93

 

[Pizzaguy]

... neither is there anything to suggest geocentrism, .

I'll say. This thread REALLY puzzles me, reminds me of the Facebook page: "The Flat Earth Society" - of which I am a member.


We have a blast, we are a bunch of FACEBOOK TROLLS! ;)

 

[Barbarian]

There was, just a few years ago, an organization of flat-Earthers, who were serious. And on one Catholic board, I knew one guy who was a geocentrist. So you never know.