If the Church denies evolution and you believe what they say,....?

....shouldn't you also believe that the Earth is the centre of the Universe. Galileo Galilei was condemned for saying the Earth revolved around the Sun yet he laid the foundations for Astronomy. If everytime the church had gotten its way wouldn't it had meant the devolution of man?...

17 Answers

Relevance
  • Favorite Answer

    @forgiven490: "It was not the theologians who balked at Galileo's ideas.."

    Bullcrap! Here is what the theologians said:

    "The first proposition, that the sun is the center and does not revolve about the earth, is foolish, absurd, false in theology, and heretical, because it is expressly contrary to Holy Scripture....The second proposition, that the earth is not the center but revolves about the sun, is absurd, false in philosophy, and, from a theological point of view at least, opposed to the true faith."

    And it wasn't just the Catholic Church. Here is what Luther said about Copernicus:

    "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....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."

    If Bible believers really believed the Bible, they would oppose the idea that the earth moves as much as they oppose evolution. And they would also reject the modern view of the universe, because the universe, as we know it, does not exist according to the Bible.

    According to Ecclesiastes 1:5 the sun actually goes around the earth--as, of course, it must, since, according to Ps 93:1, Ps 96:10, and 1 Chr 16:30, the earth does not move. And the earth cannot move because, according to 1 Samuel 2:8 and Ps 75:3, it is placed on pillars. And because it is placed on pillars, it has an underside and an upper side, as confirmed by Isaiah 40:22 which indicates that the earth is a flat disk.

    (If earth were a sphere it would not have an under side and an upper side. The Hebrew word translated as "circle" in Isaiah 40:22 is chuwg, which means "circle" not "sphere." Strong's Concordance: "circle"..."describe a circle." Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament: "Circle...the earth conceived as a disc, Is 40:22." Hebrew-Aramaic and English Lexicon of the Old Testament: "draw round, make a circle." If a sphere were meant, the Hebrew word duwr would have been used.)

    Since the biblical earth is flat, it has an underside and under the earth is the abyss, which is referred to several times in the Bible. That is also what is being referred to in Job 26:7 when it says that the earth hangs over nothing. Job 26:7 implies that the earth has an upper side and an underside, which the actual earth does not have. (The original Hebrew word translated as "upon" in that passage in the KJV also means "over.") The actual sphere of the earth in space is not "suspended' or "hanging" "over" or "upon" nothing. It is orbiting the sun at 66,700 miles per hour.

    There are several other verses in the Bible indicating the earth is flat. Nebuchadnezzar's vision in Dan 4:10-11 clearly indicates the earth is flat (if it were not flat the tree could not be seen from all the earth), and Dan 2:28 states that the visions of Nebuchadnezzar are from God. If the biblical god says the biblical earth is flat, it must be flat.

    The original Hebrew word translated as firmament is raqiya. That is a noun derived from the Hebrew word raqa, which is a verb meaning "to beat out." That term is used in the bible in reference to beating out metal into plates or expanses of the metal (as in Exodus 39:3). So raqiya, as a noun, would literally mean "that which is beaten out."

    The idea is that the firmament, or sky, is a solid, beaten out expanse or vault set on the rim of the flat disk of the earth. The firmament holds back the waters that are above the firmament, as stated in Genesis. If the firmament were not solid, it could not hold back the waters.

    This understanding is confirmed in Job 37:18, which states:

    "Can you beat out the vault of the skies as he does,

    hard as a mirror of cast metal?" (New English Bible. .)

    There, the Hebrew word translated as "beat out" (or "spread out" in other versions) is, as noted above, raqa.

    Also, the stars in the biblical cosmos are just lights set in the firmament. As mere lights in the sky, they will fall to the earth in the Last Days (Matt 24:29), something that is ridiculous considering the actual stars are other suns and many times larger than the earth.

    Some might say that the language of such things is just poetic allusion. If that is so, how does one determine what is allusion and what is not? Even if it is poetry, that does not mean that it cannot reflect what the writers of the Bible actually believed. And if the Bible is the word of god and god does not lie, would he make statements that are not factual even if they are in the form of poetry? Moreover, the above descriptions provide a coherent, structurally consistent view of the biblical cosmos and that view is consistent throughout the whole Bible.

    The original Flat Earth Society was Bible based.

    http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/fe-scidi.htm

    Christian geocentrists who say the earth does not move are still out there today.

    http://www.geocentricity.com/

    Several early Christian writers believed the earth to be flat, including Eusebius, John Chrysostom, Lactantius, Tertullian, Theophilus, and Clement. In the sixth century, Cosmas Indicopleustes wrote a book called Christian Topology in which he used the Bible to prove that the earth is flat.

    And don't forget. Bible believers burned Giordano Bruno at the stake for saying in contradiction to the Bible that the earth moves, and would have done the same to Galileo if he had not recanted

  • 4 years ago

    The Catholic Church has commented on theories of Evolution, and the Catholic Church recognizes that some aspects of the theories seems a minimum of in area supported via information. The Catholic Church, despite if, is extremely stressful whilst it includes accepting scientific claims. The Catholic Church demands that scientific claims have finished scientific information. Such information only does not yet exist to declare conclusively what factors of theories of evolution are perfect. Of maximum relevance, i think of, is that The Catholic Church has stated continuously for pretty much 2, 000 years that despite if mankind got here into existence, God is the only actual writer. That, of course, is real. i'm Roman Catholic. Peace be with you.

  • Acorn
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Yes.

    But the Church doesn't deny evolution. It has supported the science of evolution since the 1950s. Catholics are free to believe in abiogenesis and evolution, or in the Genesis creation stories, as their consciences allow.

    "If everytime the church had gotten its way wouldn't it had meant the devolution of man?" It certainly might. For sure it could mean that scienctific truth would be slowed. Luckily the Church now recognizes that it shouldn't be in the game of teaching what is and isn't science.

    Now if it could only do the same with politics....

  • Gary P
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    Did the Catholic church at the time make a poor decision? Sure...it wasn't their first, isn't their last.

    Do thinking Christians believe in science? Yes. Was Galileo a Christian? Yes.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Frizby
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    If you actually researched astronomy with an open mind you'll find that all the celestial bodies are positioned and located in a place that is the centre of the universe according to their point of view..

    Everything at the beginning was in the current location they reside today yet they all started in one place together, then they stretched outward to their current locations even though their current locations are exactly where they began..

    Every star is moving away from our star the (sun) but from the position of any star you choose you'll find that it appears that all the other stars are moving away from your stars location, Therefore the centre of the universe remains with your star always..

  • 1 decade ago

    Wrong on every count.

    The Church does not deny Evolution.

    Evolution is not ONE thing (see Dawkins - Gould debates )

    Galileo's main supporters were Cardinals, his friends and nun-daughter begged him to stick to science and not insist on his own biblical exegesis.

    Neither evolution (because of its indefiniteness) nor the status of the Earth is a matter of Faith.

    This is one of the most poorly written, poorly reasoned pieces of garbage I've seen in awhile.

  • riam
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    The church is the body of believers of Christ. At no time has the believers of christ ever accepted evolution. Neither have they ever said the earth is the centre of the universe. check your facts.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    It was not the theologians who balked at Galileo's ideas, but rather mathematicians at the University of Pisa who were so outraged that he challenged Aristotle that they refused to even look through his telescope at the stars.

  • 1 decade ago

    The church doesn't say the Earth is the center anymore.

  • 1 decade ago

    The Bible doesn't say that the earth is the center of the universe. Only atheist mockers CLAIM that Christians say that the Bible says that the earth is the center of the universe, and as such, your question is a straw man argument, because it isn't based on any REAL claims!

    The Bible says that mankind is God's special creation, made in His image, and as such, is the "center" of God's will, but it is really stupid to stretch that to mean that the earth is at the physical center of the universe!

    I can't speak for those who misinterpret the Scriptures; I can only tell you what the Scriptures actually tell us.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.