With Antonio Antranik on Scope of Biblical Inerrance and Patristic Collective Infallibility

1) Debating with Antonio Antranik on Aether · 1b) Appendix on Aether · 2) With Antonio Antranik on Scope of Biblical Inerrance and Patristic Collective Infallibility · 3) More on Biblical Inerrance - Featuring Apocalypse

Antonio Antranik

Where does it say that the stars and other planets in the solar system stood still? All that would be necessary for God to freeze the sun and the moon (and everything else) be to suspend the laws of physics and freeze time for the closed volume system of the earth and the moon. That does not prove the sun and/or stars revolve around the earth. As for what the Church Fathers may have said, none of them are infallible in anything and not even the Pope is infallible in matters of natural science, but only in FAITH and MORALS.

Heath Wilson

According to the Papal Condemnation of Galileo's errors, the immobility of the Earth and the mobility of the Sun ARE matters of faith.

"Whereas you, Galileo, son of the late Vaincenzo Galilei, Florentine, aged seventy years, were in the year 1615 denounced to this Holy Office for holding as true the false doctrine taught by some that the Sun is the center of the world and immovable and that the Earth moves, and also with a diurnal motion; for having disciples to whom you taught the same doctrine; for holding correspondence with certain mathematicians of Germany concerning the same; for having printed certain letters, entitled "On the Sunspots," wherein you developed the same doctrine as true; and for replying to the objections from the Holy Scriptures, which from time to time were urged against it, by glossing the said Scriptures according to your own meaning: and whereas there was thereupon produced the copy of a document in the form of a letter, purporting to be written by you to one formerly your disciple, and in this divers propositions are set forth, following the position of Copernicus, which are contrary to the true sense and authority of Holy Scripture: This Holy Tribunal being therefore of intention to proceed against the disorder and mischief thence resulting, which went on increasing to the prejudice of the Holy Faith, by command of His Holiness and of the Most Eminent Lords Cardinals of this supreme and universal Inquisition, the two propositions of the stability of the Sun and the motion of the Earth were by the theological Qualifiers qualified as follows: The proposition that the Sun is the center of the world and does not move from its place is absurd and false philosophically and formally heretical, because it is expressly contrary to Holy Scripture. The proposition that the Earth is not the center of the world and immovable but that it moves, and also with a diurnal motion, is equally absurd and false philosophically and theologically considered at least erroneous in faith. "

Papal Condemnation (Sentence) of Galileo
By Professor Douglas O. Linder
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/condemnation.html

[Note, the site which labels this condemnation as papal is not a Catholic one.]

Oh, as to the aether, Michelson/Morley, Michelson/Gale and Sagnac prove it's existence, as well as disproving that the Earth is moving in the way necessary to be orbiting the Sun, but show that there is relative movement to show a diurnal rotation. That meets the requirements of the Neo-Tychonic geocentric model and falsifies the heliocentric one.

Stefan Schwarz

Scripture's Inerrancy is a matter of faith.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Antonio Antranik "Where does it say that the stars and other planets in the solar system stood still?"

It says Sun and Moon did so - after Joshua ordering Sun and Moon to stand still, not ordering Earth to stop turn.

"All that would be necessary for God to freeze the sun and the moon (and everything else) be to suspend the laws of physics and freeze time for the closed volume system of the earth and the moon."

Here you talk of Sun and Moon freezing - correctly.

BUT you are not dealing with the fact that it was Sun and Moon which stopped, not JUST phenomenologically, but also after THEY had been given a miraculous command.

Hence the attention to verse 12, which you neglected.

"That does not prove the sun and/or stars revolve around the earth."

If Earth is usually rotating, one of three:

• Joshua should have told Earth to stop rotating;
• OR Joshua's words should not be immediately followed by the miracle;
• OR God is a deceiver.

Supposing Christopher Columbus had prayed "God, bring us to China now", and they had been miraculously brought to America, God would have been fooling Christopher Columbus that America was China.

As there was no miracle per se and he had prayed less specifically for "land", there was no deception on the Columbus case.

How do you as a Heliocentric (or at least Turning-Earthist) argue that God was not deceiving by Joshua's miracle?

Antonio Antranik "As for what the Church Fathers may have said, none of them"

Individually is ....

"are infallible in anything"

However, they are collectively so.

Bring up one Church Father on your side, a canonised saint, and the consensus for Geocentrism is broken, you are free to be Heliocentric.

"and not even the Pope is infallible in matters of natural science,"

Unless they are also matters of faith and morals, like being contained in the Bible.

"but only in FAITH and MORALS."

That does not exclude all matters of natural science, but only those that the Bible does not touch on and which have no moral implication.

Heath Wilson As to "Papal condemnation of 1633" that is a title given by the university, which is not a Catholic one.

Some Heliocentrics could argue it was only an Inquisitional condemnation.

However, I am not sure Pius VII signed the sentence in the Anfossi case either, so that could cut both ways.

Or my memory could be lousy. I remember there was SOMETHING about Pius VII's presence or absence, but not exactly what.

Antonio Antranik

You really are an idiot. What did the ancient Israelites know about astronomy? For all they knew the sun and everything else revolved around the earth and they had no concept of physics or chemistry or the masses and distances involved and there was no point in God trying to teach them about it. The only thing that mattered (and still matters) is that God created everything, heaven and earth and the whole universe. How He did it and how He made it work and how He maintains it and all the details of physics and chemistry etc. are not the subject of the Scriptures. Once in a while He did give them some engineering instructions like how to build the Ark and how to build the Temple, but He also didn't give them a lecture series on Statics or Mechanics of Materials or Civil Engineering, but just said "build it this way" and the builders knew they could trust in the Lord's design.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"What did the ancient Israelites know about astronomy?"

They had been 40 years in the desert. Doing very little work with their hands, collecting manna was not a chore and their clothes were miraculously kept intact, so there was no mending clothes either.

God knew perfectly well that He was going to make that miracle and gave them no indication that geocentrism was not the rule.

"For all they knew the sun and everything else revolved around the earth"

Indeed, for all that mankind knows, most of it, for most of the time. You are putting modern science in a VERY privileged position, compared to the rest of mankind.

"and they had no concept of physics or chemistry"

Because they were not Heliocentrics?

"or the masses and distances involved"

As if these were very relevant to the point?

"and there was no point in God trying to teach them about it."

God very well knew He was going to make that miracle.

God also knew that Joshua's words were going to produce it.

God could either have given them some hint of Heliocentrism, or inspired Joshua to speak somewhat differently.

[Supposing Heliocentrism had been true, of course.]

Some would say that Joshua's words tell Sun and Moon to stay on relative positions, which is fulfilled even it if it is Earth which stops turning. I'd answer that even so, he directed the words to Sun and Moon, not to Earth.

BBL.

Antonio Antranik

Christ did not come down from heaven to teach astrophysics or any kind of natural science, so anyone trying to claim that the Church is infalible in matters of anything other than FAITH and MORALS is a heretic, and anyone claiming that natural science is a part of FAITH is exceeding their authority. Where are the huge horse-shaped locusts with women's hair and lion's teeth and scorpion's tails that St. John spoke about in the Apocalypse? Where is the sea of glass? Have you seen any lion-headed horses? Have you ever seen a woman clothed in the sun? Where in Scripture does it say that the woman clothed in the sun is revolving around the earth? Do you not understand that these are all metaphors? Since the Woman clothed in the sun is the Blessed Virgin Mary, how is it that she could appear to St. Bernadette and the Famita children etc. without her solar clothes vaporizing the whole earth?

Modern science and engineering allows man to know more about the physical nature of the universe, just like modern optometry allows people with myopia and astigmatism to see.

Adam and Eve were naked, so God sacrificed a couple animals and took their skins to clothe Adam and Eve. He did not teach them mechanical and electrical engineering so they could build sewing machines to make garments for themselves.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"Christ did not come down from heaven to teach astrophysics or any kind of natural science, so anyone trying to claim that the Church is infalible in matters of anything other than FAITH and MORALS is a heretic,"

False, unless by "anything other" you mean anything other *and unrelated.*

Astronomy, including horoscopes, was also not a thing He came down to teach.

Even so, we must believe Jacob was holding the heel of Esau when both came out of the womb, and therefore had the same horoscope. As St Augustine specifies.

This is not inerrant truth because horoscopes are one subject on which God inspired the Bible, per se, but because the birth of Jacob and Esau is an inerrant part of the Biblical story and therefore related to the "qui locutus est per prophetas" which includes Moses.

God also wanted to shed a light on the fact that horoscopes, no matter how well documented they are by astronomic observation, have little to do with character and nothing to do with ultimate fate.

" and anyone claiming that natural science is a part of FAITH is exceeding their authority."

Natural science systematically is not part of the faith.

Things which pertain for one reason to natural science may however for another reason pertain to the faith, this is NOT heretical.

In such cases, the supernatural aspect takes precedence over the natural one, precisely as in what in politics are called "materiae mixtae".

"Where are the huge horse-shaped locusts with women's hair and lion's teeth and scorpion's tails that St. John spoke about in the Apocalypse?"

Possibly seen in recent wars. A chopper looks like a locust with a scorpion tail.

If not, there may well be upcoming monsters too.

"Where is the sea of glass?"

In the future after Doomsday, unless the aether should have been so described.

"Have you seen any lion-headed horses?"

Don't know exactly what you are talking about.

[Unless he was again talking of horseshaped locusts, rather than horses properly speaking.]

"Have you ever seen a woman clothed in the sun?"

That horoscope will however be upcoming this year, I think 22 September. Also, due to modern technology, it will be able to be observed, even if otherwise the Sun would be hiding the stars of Virgo.

"Where in Scripture does it say that the woman clothed in the sun is revolving around the earth?"

No need, if other passages, such as Joshua DO indicate it. Once again, if verse 13 could be narrator adressing things as they were seen (phenomenological language), this does not cover Joshua's words in verse 12.

"Do you not understand that these are all metaphors?"

Not just, they are descriptions of symbolic objects. And constellation Virgo will be showing forth symbolically a constellation (with nine fix stars of Leo together with three planets making a crown this year) which will honour Our Lady a little before 100th anniversary of Fatima.

Besides, Joshua is a historic book and not a prophetic one.

"Since the Woman clothed in the sun is the Blessed Virgin Mary, how is it that she could appear to St. Bernadette and the Famita children etc. without her solar clothes vaporizing the whole earth?"

The constellation Virgo as she will appear later this year was not so approaching the children. Virgo's being clothed in the Sun represents Our Lady being clothed in the Justice of Her Son, who is the Sun of Justice.

"Modern science and engineering allows man to know more about the physical nature of the universe, just like modern optometry allows people with myopia and astigmatism to see."

Correct for engineering and instruments of observation, as also for observations.

[At least if medieval counts as modern : glasses were invented then. By, you have guessed it, some geocentric.]

NOT correct for all its modes of concluding.

"Adam and Eve were naked, so God sacrificed a couple animals and took their skins to clothe Adam and Eve. He did not teach them mechanical and electrical engineering so they could build sewing machines to make garments for themselves."

Nor does the science of sewing machines constitute any matter of dispute between Literalists and Antiliteralists.

Catching up where I left off before:

"The only thing that mattered (and still matters) is that God created everything, heaven and earth and the whole universe. How He did it and how He made it work and how He maintains it and all the details of physics and chemistry etc. are not the subject of the Scriptures."

Check out the distinction in St Thomas between primary and secondary objects of faith.

"Once in a while He did give them some engineering instructions like how to build the Ark and how to build the Temple, but He also didn't give them a lecture series on Statics or Mechanics of Materials or Civil Engineering, but just said "build it this way" and the builders knew they could trust in the Lord's design."

AND they were good enough at physics and chemistry to actually be able to use the instructions.