From: rokimoto557@gmail.com
On 2/16/2026 6:46 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 13:26:02 -0600, RonO
> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> He quoted him to claim that he was wrong about the church fathers
>> "teaching" geocentrism. Just as I explained in what you snipped out.
>
> Let me get this right as it goes to the very heart of your arguments;
> do you now accept that the Church Fathers did not *teach*
> geocentricism?
>
> [...]
>
Some of the church fathers did specifically support geocentrism with
Bible verses, and that should in no way be denied as a form a
"teaching". All the others just adhered to the geocentric view and
wrote as if the creation was geocentric. This is no different than what
the authors of the Bible did, and it is waffling to claim that this is
not "teaching" about the subject. If they believed that the Bible was
wrong about geocentrism, some of them would have clearly made that
claim. Just as Origen objected to young earth 6 day creationism and a
flat earth. They all wrote about the earth as round, and were all
considered to not be flat earth creationists even though some of them
never clearly rejected that Biblical notion.
You can't have things both ways. In order to maintain your denial about
a flat earth Biblical creationism you have to claim that the same
behavior doesn't mean the same thing about geocentrism. The church
fathers were providing their opinion. You can claim that this was not
teaching if you want, but who should care when they were all
geocentrists. Flat earth creationism was an issue in the early
Christian church. Parts of the New Testament were likely written by
flat earth creationists even though the Greeks had used physical
measurements to estimate the circumference of the earth a couple
centuries before Christ was born. The Authors of the Bible just wrote
about things as they understood them.
Ron Okimoto
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
