Re: Fossil Man again

GRMorton@aol.com
Sun, 24 Sep 1995 23:23:43 -0400

Stephen Jones wrote:
>>As I understand it, "the Galileo affair" had very little to do with
the Bible and more to do with Roman Catholic philosophical theology.
The Protestant Reformers were much more Biblical and they had no
problem with Galileo.<<

I am sure that some historian or philosopher of science could do a better job
of this, but what you state is not the case. The Galileo affair was all about
the experimental data for the Copernican system. The protestant church was
no less vociferous against Copernicus and his followers than the Catholic.
Martin Luther stated, "People gave ear to an upstart astrologer who strove
to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun
and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise some new system,
which of all systems is of course the very best. This fool wishes to reverse
the entire science of astronomy; but sacred Scripture tells us that Joshua
commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth." Andrew White, A History
of the Warfare of Science with Theology," George Braziller, 1955, p. 126.

Melanchton" In his treatis on the Elements of physics, published six years
after Copernicus's death, he says: "The eyes are witnesses that the heavens
revolve in the space of twenty-four hours. But certain men, either from the
love of novelty, or to make a display of ingenuity, have concluded that the
earth moves; and they maintain that neither the eighth spehre nor the sun
revovles... Now, it is a want of honesty and decency to assert such notions
publicly, and the example is pernicious. It is the part of a good mind to
accept the truth as revealed by God and to acquiesce in it." White, p.
126-127

Calvin wrote:"Who will venture to place the authority of Copernicus above
that of the Holy Spirit?" White, p. 127

John Owen, a puritan leader, said, the Copernican system was "delusive and
arbitrary hypothesis, contrary to Scripture" p. 128

John Wesley said the new ideas "tend toward infidelity."

White even tells of a Lutheren book published in 1873 in St. Louis, which had
this in the introduction.
"It would be very simple to me which is right, if it were only a question of
human import. But the wise and truthful God has expressed himself on this
matter in the Bible. The entire Holy Scripture settles the question that the
earth is the priniciple body of the universe, that is stands fixed, and that
the sun and moon only serve to light it." p. 151

Even today there are some YEC's who hold to geocentrism. In the June, 1979,
Creation Research Quarterly, the first one I subscribed to, had a letter by
Harry Akers which asked, "Surely Dr. Hanson is not seriously suggesting that
we abandon the heliocentric model of the solar system in favor of a
geocentric model of the entire universe!" P. 82

To which Dr. James N. Hanson replied,
"I surely am suggesting a geocentric model for the whole Universe.
Specifically, one wherein the earth does not spin nor does it translate
through space but is at the center of Creation just where the Bible puts it."
p. 83

Jim Hoffman missed my point about White's book depressing me. What depressed
me is that these types of statements above are quite similar in form to
statements I have seen concerning evolution, geology, and the age of the
earth. I know that Christianity has not invariably been an enemy of science,
but there is a strong streak which runs through, which discounts
observational data and distrusts the scientist.

glenn