How I answered Mike P with Scripture on Catholicism

John Gideon Hartnett

• Who are geocentrists in this community?
  
  
• If you are what is your number 1 reason for being so?
  
  
• If a bible verse then give me your 1 only 1 best verse.

Wes

Hi John, I'm a geocentrist mainly because I believe the literal reading of scripture, as enforced by the Catholic Church's authoritative stance on the issue. Funny thing is, back when I was a Protestant investigating the Catholic Church, I ran across Bob's book, Galileo Was Wrong-The Church Was Right, and was immediately intrigued by it. I didn't buy the book until some time later, but now that I have it, I'm confident in saying that I believe in geocentrism not only because scripture teaches it but because the science backs it as well. If you haven't got the book, you're missing out. I think it's very well written in that it appeals to both the beginner and the scholar, and, as expected, it's loaded with footnotes. At any rate, you should check it out.

I missed a lot

of the ensuing debate (and Wes's answer, and will be missing some more which is more astronomy/Bible than Catholicism/Bible) up to:

Mike P [SDA, lawyer]

While you and we are at it, Christopher, though this isn't the intent of this group, since we're getting down into the basics of geo- vs. helio- and you've stated some Catholic Church positions as if they are authoritative of the matter, doesn't the Church also approve of praying to Mary the Holy Mother? If not, please clarify for me what her role is. Isn't the rosary a form of prayer?

For me, she's certainly not part of the Trinity and while she is to be deeply respected and honored for being the earthly motherhood vessel for Christ, nowhere does Scripture identify her as being holy, and she most certainly shouldn't be the subject of worship or even be considered an intercessor in any shape, manner or form. What do you say as to her role in the church?

Finally, how can one even call the Pope our Savior's representative on earth? Nowhere did Christ ever indicate or delegate ANY MORTAL to be His "representative," either pre- or post-crucifixion and -resurrection. Even if the Holy Spirit, the Helper, were to be deemed His representative, He is also part of the Trinity and is Himself holy. There is nothing "human" about the Holy Spirit; He is divine and infallible. Even the brightest and most moral of us humans (if we can truly label any of us as such) is neither divine nor infallible.

What's bothering me is the linkage being made here between the Catholic Church and geocentrism and their AUTHORITY to make that a spiritual doctrine, an exegesis if you will, when Scripture itself in my view doesn't demand that whatsoever, and is silent on the issue of geo- vs. helio-. For me, this linkage is being made eisegetically rather than exegetically.

Normally, discussion of this kind belongs in the Discussion Group, but not when we're dealing here with Astronomy and where geocentrism and the Catholic Church are being authoritatively coupled together to give geocentrism a spiritual overtone.

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but this is what I see happening here.

Hans-Georg Lundahl (answering John Gideon)

• 1) I for one.
  
  
• 2) Does away with Distant Starlight Problem AND with "Heaven and Hell are in other dimensions" (than the three).
  
  
• 3) Joshua's words to Sun and Moon (and not to Earth).

Hans-Georg Lundahl (answering Mike P)

"Isn't the rosary a form of prayer?"

Yes, but not of adoration, as far as the Hail Mary's are concerned.

The Our Fathers before a string of Hail Mary's and the Glory Be:s after such one are acts of adoration, adressed to "Our Father" or explicitly to the Holy Trinity and not to Mary.

"nowhere does Scripture identify her as being holy"

Henceforward all generations shall call me blessed. Blessed art thou among women.

I shall put enmities between thee and the woman, between thy seed and the woman's seed.

Enmity between Satan and Mary means she never sinned.

"and she most certainly shouldn't be the subject of worship"

Not of adoration, no. But of dulia, even hyperdulia.

How is it that the mother of my Lord comes to me?

"even be considered an intercessor in any shape, manner or form."

Marriage of Cana - who interceded for the bridegroom?

"What do you say as to her role in the church?"

As much Queen of Heavenly Jerusalem while Christ rules there, as Bathseba was Queen of Earthly Jerusalem under the reign of Solomon.

Interceding for the people of God before her Son, precisely as Queen Esther interceded for the people of God before her husband (Persia unlike Judah counted wives rather than mothers as Queens).

"Finally, how can one even call the Pope our Savior's representative on earth? Nowhere did Christ ever indicate or delegate ANY MORTAL to be His "representative," either pre- or post-crucifixion and -resurrection."

He who hears ye, hears me, and hears him who sent me.

Spoken to the Twelve or the Seventy, of whom Peter was one.

[Actually, as I saw when looking it up: to the Seventy]

I am with ye all days until the consummation of all time.

Spoken to the Eleven (Twelve minus Judas the Traitor) of which Peter was one.

Feed my lambs.

Spoken to Peter at Genesareth.

"Even if the Holy Spirit, the Helper, were to be deemed His representative, He is also part of the Trinity and is Himself holy. There is nothing "human" about the Holy Spirit; He is divine and infallible."

Correct. But the Spirit came down to the Twelve (Eleven plus Matthias), of which Peter was one. He was also the one of them who spoke longest and the one of them whose sermon is recorded.

Since then the Holy Spirit is transmitted by their hands and the hands of their successors.

"Even the brightest and most moral of us humans (if we can truly label any of us as such) is neither divine nor infallible."

Except when the Holy Ghost is speaking through him or her. Prophetically in a charismatic way, as through Elisabeth and Mary.

Or prophetic in respect of someone's office, like through Caiaphas when for the last time a Cohen was certainly prophet when he said "it is better that one man die" (though he meant it in a more cynic way) or through Peter on Pentecost Day for the first time speaking through a Pope. Due to his office.

"What's bothering me is the linkage being made here between the Catholic Church and geocentrism and their AUTHORITY to make that a spiritual doctrine, an exegesis if you will, when Scripture itself in my view doesn't demand that whatsoever, and is silent on the issue of geo- vs. helio-. For me, this linkage is being made eisegetically rather than exegetically."

As a Catholic I of course DO believe the Catholic Church has authority to make exegesis.

But as a scholar (if you like, of sorts) I am more convinced by St Robert Bellarmine take on Joshua than by Galileo's.

Especially since I see another aspect to Joshua. What did the human miracle-maker adress his public and audible words to? Earth? Or Sun and Moon. As already stated.

"where geocentrism and the Catholic Church are being authoritatively coupled together to give geocentrism a spiritual overtone."

I am perfectly aware that I am adressing a mostly Protestant public here and have argued the case on exegetical and scientific merits that I deem accessible even to Protestants.

But these are of course free to interpret this as my being brainwashed by RC authority (even though Geocentrism puts me in conflict with recent apparent Popes and leaves me either the alternative to seek out a Pope who's Geocentric - Pope Michael, whose Vatican in Exile is in Kansas - or, before accepting him as Pope, to have a very strained relation to people I did accept as such or a strained relation to the question of Papal succession, while considering Papacy vacant) and they are also free to ignore my actual words by interpreting them in the light of my supposed motivation as a Catholic. CSL called that Bulverism.

Jere

Error 404. No Bible references to be found.

Example:

"Do not be quick in spirit to be angry. For anger is in the heart of fools."

- Ecclesiastes 7:9 (New Life Version)

Hans-Georg Lundahl

If you knew your Bible as well as YOU pretend to, you would have identified my quotes from memory. And given the references like book, chapter and verse.

I am a Catholic, I am not totally in that culture.

So, does that mean I gave no Bible quotes? I did, I just did not give book chapter or verse for them. For one of them I was even unsure if it was spoken to the seventy or to the twelve. But it is there in the Gospel.

Btw, was the reference you gave as an example chosen so as to backhandedly rebuke a supposed anger in me? I said every thing I said with some irritation at the bad tone I thought I detected in ex-Catholic Hartnett's original question and very clearly detected in Pincher's tirade. But I also said every thing I said as things I would have said a clear sunny day to a friend whom I considered as honestly enquiring. That should answer any questions as to whether I was quick to be angry here.

Jere

It seems you were bothered by that request. You claimed that I am a pretender. Good. Go with that. Ride that train. Make baseless accusations.

Sigh.

I don't think you knew what the request intended. Anyone sharing verses need to put down the location so that all people reading here can refer back to what one are talking about. It's about being polite and pleasant.

Hans said: "Btw, was the reference you gave as an example chosen so as to backhandedly rebuke a supposed anger in me?"

That wasn't my intention. I have a little booklet called "The Bible Promise book" sitting next to me as part of my study, and I used a passage from there.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

If you did not intend it to hit me, someone else was praying for me to get such rebukes. I am wondering how long God will allow this to continue.

Now, as to your "Anyone sharing verses need to put down the location" - I am not a part of the Protestant culture, I am 46 and not getting reeducated.

In Biblical times, for instance St Paul (or St Barnabas) writing to Hebrews, it was customary to cite from memory as to events, and on one occasion it was cited from Tradition not Scripture, like when the author gave the names of the two Pharaonic magicians.

(2 Timothy 3:8 - I just searched for it in OT, where Jannes and Mambres are not to be found).

So, I will do the searches for you.

Joshua's words:

Joshua 10:12.

Mary holy:

Luke 1:48, Luke 1:42/1:28, Genesis 3:15

Elisabeth's reverence for Mary,

Luke 1:43

Mary interceding at Cana,

John 2:3

Solomon hearing intercession of Bathseba:

3 Kings 2:18 - 20

Persian King hearing Esther

- see her book.

Christ's words to the Seventy:

Luke 10:16

To the Eleven

Matthew 28:18-20

To Peter,

John 21:17.

Now, you spoke of politeness, it was not polite to exact references if you knew where the passages were from, and it was not knowledgeable of you, if you didn't.

You see, Catholics and Protestants have different ideas about how one is polite and pleasant. A normal person, who does not specialise in memorising Bible verses, will more easily recall what is written than "where" in the reference way, more easily when in Jesus' life than in what Gospel and even more so chapter.

To me it is less than perfectly polite and pleasant to be exclusive against those who cannot CITE the Bible the way you do. Or who cannot do so everytime spontaneously. I was not preparing an essay, I was answering in some hurry some baseless accusations against Catholicism and its supposedly being unbiblical.

Matt

As far as the catholic thing. I was not attracted Geo-centricity because of Catholicism, By no means! I personally hold that Roman Catholicism is Heresy and Will gladly have a formal debate with anyone who teaches it. (preferably recorded on my radio show That being said, it is not fair to dismiss geo-centricity on the grounds of association with Catholicism. It is like dismissing YEC on the grounds of 7th day adventism. Or dismissing evangelism for being associated with the baptist church. This is the genetic fallacy. something is not true or false just because the opposition agrees to it.

Jere

I said: "Anyone sharing verses need to put down the location so that all people reading here can refer back to what one are talking about. "

=> I hope you can see I was making a general statement. Others who posted before you were not citing scriptures. It wasn't wholly intended for you.

I said: "It's about being polite and pleasant."

=> Err, I was choosing my words carefully. Well, more abstractly. Maybe the meaning was lost in translation. I was intending to say, to anyone, please make citations so no one can accuse you of making stuff up. Kindly, though. Even Atheists (and by extension F.S.M. worshipers) cite Bible verses.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl

Also, it may have been lost in a sea of posts, but I and Lea Greenall were asking for verses pertaining to the alleged verses that support Geocentrism. Kindly. Not the verses you made in retort to Mike P's statements, though I would imagine he would appreciate them just the same.

Matt (in answer to a Cameron I missed)

Isaiah 38:7-8Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

7 And this shall be a sign unto thee from the Lord, that the Lord will do this thing that he hath spoken; 8 behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Oh, as to verses supporting Geocentrism, I thought you knew very well what chapter of Joshua I meant!

As said, 100 esp v 12

Sorry, computer hitch, 10 (not 100 obviously) especially verse 12.

In verse 13, the result given can be explained as "from standpoint of the Earth and its observers", though this would not be strictly true as St Robert observed, if Earth only stopped rotating around its axis, Moon would have been moving on for a sensible angle during the 12 extra hours or especially 24 extra hours if such.

But in verse 12 Heliocentrics are basically asking us to believe Joshua wanted Earth to stop spinning and instead of adressing Earth in the name of God he adressed Sun and Moon. After talking to God, before all of the people who heard him adress Sun and Moon.

FSM worshippers?

Ah, Matt, thank you!

Now, Cameron, if Sun getting back ten degrees had been Earth returning on rotation, why no jerk felt? Of course, God could have made an extra miracle. BUT in this case also we have an indication in the words of a man making a miracle on behalf of God (i e making a miraculous offer to Hezekiah) that it was indeed the Sun that changed direction way far up above us (and astronomers can tell you how far) so we felt no jerk.

Ah, FSM as in Flying Spaghetti Monster! I get it!

They might be a bit more likely to dig out the verses themselves and try to make fun of us by presuming Heliocentrism to be *so obviously* true etc. But I always keep forgetting what chapter of Isaiah the second sun miracle is. Sorry for that.

Mike P

Hans-Georg Lundahl: "I said every thing I said with some irritation at the bad tone I thought I detected in ex-Catholic Hartnett's original question and very clearly detected in Pincher's tirade."

I assume English isn't your first language if you construe what I said as a tirade with an obvious "bad tone." It was a straight inquiry and nothing more or less than that. [sic scripsit!]

There was at least one poster here who clearly intimated that geocentrism has operative force simply because the "authoritative" Catholic Church says it does. I dispute that "authority" and still do.

There are a number of Catholics among our members. They don't resort to this "authority" line of argument for the church. Nobody else should either. Now if my point is a "tirade" to you Hans-Georg Lundahl you need to go back to the drawing board.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"It was a straight inquiry and nothing more or less than that."

It included a lot of allegations against the Catholic Faith and by way of ignorance of the Bible. [Vide ut supra!]

And it came in the form of a series of accusations, starting with an accusation of idolatry against the Rosary. If that is NOT an illmannered tirade, I don't know what is.

If anyone said that Geocentrism is authoritative because the Catholic Church says so, I agree, but that is not the kind of point I am making here. If I am however challenged on it, yes I am fully willing to admit with pride that I am also submitting to the judgement of Inquisitors that was in relation to Galileo confirmed by Pope Urban VIII, because I do very much submit to that authority.

If however someone admitted it before, as I do here, when directly asked about it, in that case Mike P, it was off topic on your part to not just draw attention to the fact, but even do it in an accusatory manner - off topic that is UNLESS you hold that any reason given by a Catholic from Bible or from undisputed scientific or commonplace facts must be a mere camouflage for a "Catholic agenda". Whether it was off topic or leading up to an accusation, it was a bad mannered tirade. If you find a better word in English for tirade, do let me know!

(Bad mannered, ill mannered, wonder what is the better word in English ... Swedish has "ohyfsad" ...)

Now, apart from your tirade having been ill mannered and your defense of it hypocritical, and apart from your having tried to paint it out my English is too bad to make my meaning clear (which is also very "ohyfsadt" - whether you translate it as bad mannered or ill mannered - of you), if you really do feel in your conscience a real justification for accusing any Catholic submitting to earlier Popes (and to Pope Michael but not to Bergoglio!) in being Geocentric to wilfully or by way of brainwashing distort Biblical implications and distort sensorial and logical evidence, there are two things I would like to say about that too:

• that is as an attitude extremely ill mannered towards anyone, I am not even taking it against Watchtower society or against eLLen goVLD VVhIte fans and don't relish taking it;
  
  
• PLUS that is how YEC position very probably was expelled from Protestant mainstream back when one yer after Darwin's Origin of the Species the Catholic priest George Leo Haydock published a perfectly YEC and optionally even Geocentric Bible commentary. Precisely as Geocentrism had been driven out of Protestant mainstream before it.

Anticatholicism and Protestantism is the lever in the fall that is called The Great Apostasy.

Just checked Mike P, the guy who invoked Catholic authority actually said: "because I believe the literal reading of scripture, as enforced by the Catholic Church's authoritative stance on the issue."

A question posed by John Gideon Hartnett.

So, he was not trying to impose on you non-Catholics any submission to Catholic authority, he was mentioning it enforced a literal reading of Scripture (as some of you do also) and answering a question.

After that the tirade of Mike P was extremely ill mannered (or bad mannered, if that is the better word in English, which as you say is not my first language, only my third).

Lea Greenall [a female SDA pastor]

How about you stick to the scriptures relating to geocentricism instead of a diatribe on your defense of a flawed roman catholic system. After all, the thread was asking fro scriptural references.

I completely understand that roman catholics say [sic!] that tradition and what the pope states can, and usually does out-trump what the bible says, but the OP did ask for scriptural reference.

[See how she is putting words in our mouths - saying we "say" - that are neither what Wes nor what I said, and completely ignoring what we actually did say!

Hans-Georg Lundahl

How about Mike P leaving a mention of the supposedly flawed Roman Catholic system by Wes as a mention, without doing a long diatribe against it THEN, Lea Greenall? Is that unreasonable?

As to verse, I give Joshua 10:12 - the actual words of Joshua being adressed to Sun and Moon when performing the miracle that happened next verse.

Already debated with Vy on other thread.