pgwolv
Puritan Board Freshman
Recently, some posts surrounding geocentrism vs. heliocentrism and the sun standing still have come up. I have browsed previous threads on this, but mostly they revolved around the science/natural revelation surrounding it. Some people claimed that sound exegesis/hermeneutics of special revelation demands that the sun physically stood still, not the earth, because the writer of the book of Joshua believed the sun moved around the earth, and God answered his prayer without correcting his knowledge.
From a scientific perspective, the most reasonable exchange in my eyes was as follows:
From a scientific perspective, the most reasonable exchange in my eyes was as follows:
If God says in the Bible, that the earth is fixed and everything else moves around it, our concept of motion does not/would not change. The only thing that would change is our view of what is the absolute reference point.
Now, I am yet to learn Greek and Hebrew to be able to perform proper exegesis myself. Rev. Winzer and AMR had talked about text needing internal markers to indicate that it may be read figuratively or phenomenologically. Would exegetes from both sides please explain their reading of the text in Joshua 10? Sorry if it is a can of worms, but I would love for some kind of clarity on this issue, as some have pointed out that several doctrines are affected.Confessor said:
I agree with this absolutely. I do not know why I did not mention it earlier. I should have moved from my position that motion always depends on an arbitrary reference point to the fact that God has decreed that Earth is the reference point -- thus it is non-arbitrary in the truest sense of the term. Thanks for the correction.
As Rev. Winzer said, if Joshua ordered that the sun stop, then he ordered that the sun actually stop. Earth is in fact the reference point.