The PuritanBoard - View Single Post

Davidius · #13 (**permalink**) 12-17-2007, 11:44 PM

I was reading through the archives of Brian Bosse's logic blog and found the transcript of a recent debate between himself and an atheist. The issue of a geocentric solar system came up and, since his response was much more thorough and hard-hitting than mine here, I felt it would be worth sharing.

Quote:

Argument 1

In the Bible it is quite explicit that the world is stationary and all other objects revolve around it.

Phenomenological language is language which describes things as they appear to the naked eye. When biblical writers describe the universe around them, they do so in terms of external appearances and not with a view to scientific, technological precision. This isn’t unusual in our human experience. Take for instance the forecast given by a meteorologist. He uses scientific terminology, and state of the art technology. He speaks of dew point, barometric pressure, cold/warm fronts, precipitation probability, etc…However, at the end of the forecast it isn’t unusual to hear, “Sunrise tomorrow will be at 5:53 A.M.” Do any of us think the weatherman is asserting that the sun revolves around the earth? No! We realize he is using phenomenological language, and we take it as such. We should do no less for the biblical writers.

Argument 2

Further evidence…is witnessed in Psalms where on numerous occasions the writer gives evidence that the world rests on pillars and will not be moved (Psalm 93:1 96:10).

The science of interpretation, whether it be the Bible, or an other book is called hermeneutics. One of the principle rules of hermeneutics is the principle of sensus literalis, which essential means that we interpret literature according to its genre. For example, historical narrative is interpreted as historical narrative, and not as poetry. Concerning this, my opponent has quoted from a section of the Bible whose literary content is poetry. Poetry is highly figurative, and isn’t meant to be taken literally. In Shakespeare’s The Merry Wives of Windsor (II, ii, 2-3) the thief Pistol declares, “Why, then the world’s mine oyster, Which I with sword will open.” Would someone interpret this passage as asserting that the world is an oyster? Pistol was speaking metaphorically. In the same manner, the psalmist is describing God’s reign, sovereign control, and regulation of His creation. It’s not to be taken literally as my opponent has mistakenly done.