The Bible May Not Change but Our Understanding of It Does!

In the sixteenth century Nicholas Copernicus suggested that the earth moves, when Scripture seems to teach the earth is immovably fixed in space.

 

This may not seem to be a huge deal nowadays, but at the time it was a very hot topic. The reason? In the fourth century BC the Greek philosopher Aristotle taught that the earth was fixed in the center of the universe and that the sun, stars, and planets revolved around it.  This fixed-earth view held sway for centuries even though, as early as 250 BC.a sun-centered system was suggested. After all, it made a lot of sense to ordinary people; the sun appears to go round the earth; and, if the earth moves, why aren't we all flung off into space? Why does a stone, thrown straight up into the air, come straight down if the earth is rotating rapidly? Why don's we feel a strong win blowing in our faces in the opposite direction to our motion? The idea that the earth moved was absurd.

 

Aristotle's work was translated into Latin and in the Middle Ages it came to influence the Roman Catholic Church. The fixed-earth seemed to fit in well with what the Bible said.

 

tremble before him, all the earth; yes, the world is established; it shall never be moved. 1 Chron 16:30

 

The Lord reigns; he is robed in majesty; the Lord is robed; he has put on strength as his belt.
Yes, the world is established; it shall never be moved. Psalm 93:1

 

He set the earth on its foundations,
    so that it should never be moved. Psalm 104:5

 

He raises up the poor from the dust;
    he lifts the needy from the ash heap
to make them sit with princes
    and inherit a seat of honor.
For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's,
    and on them he has set the world. 1 Samuel 2:8

 

Furthermore, the Bible seemed not only to teach that the earth was fixed; it seemed equally clearly to say that the sun moved:

 

Their voice goes out through all the earth,
    and their words to the end of the world.
In them he has set a tent for the sun,
5     which comes out like a bridegroom leaving his chamber,
    and, like a strong man, runs its course with joy.
6 Its rising is from the end of the heavens,
    and its circuit to the end of them,
    and there is nothing hidden from its heat. Psalm 19:4-6

 

The sun rises, and the sun goes down,
    and hastens to the place where it rises. Eccl 1:5

 

So it is no surprise that when in 1543 Copernicus advanced the view that the earth and the planets orbited the sun, this startling new scientific theory was called into question by Protestants and Catholics alike. It is alleged that even before Copernicus published his book, Martin Luther had rejected the "heliocentric" point of view in rather strong terms:

 

"There is talk of a new astrologer who wants to prove that the earth moves and goes around instead of the sky, the sun, the moon, just as if somebody were moving in a carriage or ship might hold that he was sitting still and at rest while the earth and the trees walked and moved. But that is how things are nowadays: when a man wishes to be clever he must needs invent something special, and the way he does it must needs be the best! The fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside-down. However, as Holy Scripture tells us, so did Joshua bid the sun to stand still and not the earth."

 

John Calvin believed that the earth was fixed:

 

"By what means could it (the earth) maintain itself unmoved, while the heavens above are in constant rapid motion, did not the Divine Maker fix and establish it?"

 

Some years later Galileo challenged the Aristotelian view. This incident has gone down in history as an iconic example of how religion is antagonistic to science.  Galileo, far from being an atheist, was convinced that the Creator, who had"endowed us with senses, reason and intellect," did not intend that we would"forego their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them." He believed the laws of nature are written by the hand of God in the "language of mathematics" and that the "human mind is a work of God and one of the most excellent."

 

Galileo was attacked for his theory of a moving earth, first by followers of Aristotle and then by the Roman Catholic Church. The issue at stake was clear; Galileo's science was threatening the view held by academy and the church. The conflict was more between two "scientific" world-pictures than between science and religion.  History records how the Church treated Galileo.

 

But now we need to face an important question: why do Christians accept this "new" interpretation, and not still insist on a "literal" understanding of the "pillars of the earth?"  Why are we not still split up into fixed-earthers and moving-earthers? Is it really because we have all compromised, and made Scripture subservient to science?

 

And then we have young-earthers and old-earthers.