BIBLICAL GEOCENTRICITY
Dr. Thomas M. Strouse
Emmanuel Baptist Theological Seminary
296 New Britain Ave.
Newington, CT 06111

INTRODUCTION

There is no question that the Bible teaches that the Lord God created the heaven and earth in six days (Gen. 1:1-31; Ex. 20:11; cf. also Ps. 104:1-26; Col. 1:16). The Biblical Creationist movement educated Twentieth Century Christians by requiring that science harmonize with the literal interpretation of Scriptures in respect to the creation account, the Noahic flood and other science-oriented passages. The Biblical Creationist movement has legitimatized the Christian world view to such an extent that it has become a serious threat to the secular humanist evolutionary world view in public education, and rightfully so. However, for all the good that Biblical Creationism has generally done for Christianity, the movement for the most part, has rejected the Biblical teaching concerning Geocentricity, or the teaching of a stationary earth with the revolving heavens including the sun, moon and stars. This rejection is due to several fallacious approaches to the Scriptures. These approaches include the following: 1) the un-biblical presupposition of an “infinite universe,” 2) the phenomenological interpretation of Scripture, 3) the presumption that the Bible must be subjugated to science, 4) the erection of straw men arguments, and 5) the presence of faulty exegesis of Scripture. This essay will present and then repudiate with Scripture these aforementioned approaches. In addition, this essay will exegete several key passages and several minor passages, that demand the biblical Geocentric worldview of the cosmos. Consistent biblical exegesis will then allow the Lord Jesus Christ to speak authoritatively about His creation.

FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS FOR HELIOCENTRICITY

The Unbiblical Presupposition of an “Infinite Universe”

Several Creationist scientists adopt the unbiblical presupposition of an “Infinite Universe.” Henry Morris interjects into the Bible the pantheistic presupposition of an “infinite universe,” stating that on the first day of creation “God created and energized the entire universe, the infinite sphere of divine activity and purpose.” Another vocal proponent of Heliocentric Creationism states: “We really don’t know where the physical center of the universe is. If God’s heavens are infinite in extent, then no center actually exists. But the question of the earth’s physical position is less important than the spiritual reality of God’s love for his people.” These authors are representative of those who posit the pantheistic presupposition of an infinite universe upon the Bible, and their reasoning seems evident. If the universe (heaven and earth) has no edges then it cannot have any center; therefore their argument can discount the Biblical teaching of a physical center. The Bible with the following Scriptural arguments easily refutes this foundational premise of Heliocentric Creationism:

1. God created the Third Heaven (Col. 1:16; cf. Job 38:7) with limitations (I Ki. 8:27).
2. God created the First and Second Heavens with limitations (Gen. 1:6-19; Dt. 4:32; Ps. 19:6).
3. Only God is eternal and infinite (Gen. 21:33).
4. God’s creation, in contrast with His infinite person, is finite (Ps. 90:2).
5. God will destroy the present heaven and earth (universe) and will create the new heaven and earth (universe) (Isa. 65:17; II Pet. 3:10-13 ; Rev. 21:1).
6. All that is “above the heaven(s)” (cf. Ps. 8:1; 57:5, 11; Eph. 4:10) is God Himself.

What is this infinite universe about which some creationists speak, and where are the Scriptural passages supporting this “science falsely so called”? Is this not an evolutionary presupposition from pre-conversion teaching forced, perhaps inadvertently, upon the Bible?

The Phenomenological Interpretation of Scripture

The second fallacious approach all Heliocentric Creationists must apply to the Bible is that of selective phenomenological interpretation. This hermeneutic requires that all references to a Geocentric earth must be from the appearance or phenomenal perspective (vantage point) of the writer of Scripture, and thus the earth merely seems to be center because that is where the writer is standing. This erroneous approach never allows the Author of Scripture to speak absolutely, but instead requires that He must speak phenomenologically from the human writer’s vantagepoint only. DeYoung affirms his hermeneutic of phenomenology applied to Josh. 10:13 by stating the following:

Geocentrists take this as evidence that the sun and moon actually orbit a static earth. Instead, however, the miraculous event is explained in this passage using the language of appearance (bold in the original), the only way it could be understood. We still today speak of the sun rising and setting, even though we know that the earth’s spin is the real cause of sunrise and sunset.

In a similar manner, theologian Kenneth Mathews, commenting on Gen. 1:3-31 avers the same phenomenological interpretation of God’s revelation, stating, “The six days of creation (vv. 3-31) are told from the perspective of one who is standing on the earth’s surface observing the universe with the naked eye. The account is geocentric in its telling.”
The difficult problem that both the scientist and the theologian must overcome is that their respective statements are factually inaccurate. In the case of Joshua’s long day miracle, it is true that he commanded the sun and moon to stand still from his vantagepoint on earth (Josh 1:12). However, the following verse (13) was written from the divine narrative vantage point of the Creator Who is outside of His creation and Who wrote absolutely about His creation. The theologian’s phenomenological argument is even more blatantly erroneous since there was no human standing on earth with his “naked eye” observing the creation (at least through Day Five). The phenomenological hermeneutic does not allow the Lord God to speak absolutely. Would the Heliocentric Creationist want to employ the phenomenological hermeneutic to the account of the ten plagues on Egypt (Ex. 7-12), or to the Red Sea crossing (Ex. 14), or to the feeding of the five thousand (Mt. 14), or to the account of the Lord Jesus walking on the water (Mt. 15:26)? Did the Lord Jesus Christ walk on water absolutely, or did it only appear, from a phenomenological perspective, that He walked on water? To reject the phenomenological hermeneutic for some Scriptures and to utilize it selectively for Geocentric passages is not only subjective but also un-biblical and therefore an erroneous handling of the Bible. This phenomenological hermeneutic devastates the absolute truth of Scripture and must be avoided by Christians who want to honor the Lord’s Words. Although the Bible has figures of speech and poetry, it must be interpreted literally and contextually for the student of Scripture to understand God’s absolute truth.
It is not enough for Heliocentric Creationists to argue for a “Galactocentric” cosmology or for merely a spiritual Geocentrist position. For instance, DeYoung asserts that “the earth is truly a spiritual centre-point of the universe. This truth is of much greater significance than the false and unnecessary notion that the earth has no motion.” Obviously, it is true that if the earth is Geocentric absolutely then it is Galactocentric, and it is also the Spiritual center of the Lord’s divine redemption plan. For Creationists to argue, however, for the spiritual Geocentricity of the earth and reject its physical Geocentricity is to counter the Lord Jesus Christ’s own teaching example. The Lord taught with parables, showing spiritual truths with physical realities. For example, He taught the spiritual truths of sowing the Word of God (the seed) in the world (the field) with the incumbent opposition from the devil (the enemy) in Mt. 13:3 ff. His parables would have been pointless if there was no physical reality behind His spiritual truths. The earth as the center of God’s universe is the physical reality behind the spiritual truth that the Lord’s redemptive plan for His creation is focused on earth (Jn. 3:16). The Bible teaches that the earth is Geocentric physically, galactically and spiritually.

The Presumption that the Bible must be Subjugated to Science

Most Christian Creationists require that science must be subjugated to the Bible in the Creationist-Evolutionist debate, and rightly so. However, with regard to Geocentricity, they reverse this biblical requirement, and subjugate the Bible to science. For instance, Creationist DeYoung gives a classic example of this fallacious reversal stating:

The geocentric alternative leads to a fundamental problem: the nearest night star is Alpha Centauri, 4.3 light years away. If this star actually circles the earth every 24 hours, then its speed must be nearly 10,000 times faster than the speed of light! Such motion is clearly impossible in our physical universe. The earth’s motion is clearly shown by the graceful movement of the sun, moon, and stars through the sky.

Who says that Geocentric physics is impossible—God or man? DeYoung, speaking for other Heliocentric Creationists, assumes that the present day knowledge of physics is absolutely accurate and must dictate to the Bible physical truths. This of course is the same argument evolutionists use against the Bible in general. Furthermore, this fallacious argument is in contrast to the Lord’s treatment of man’s knowledge of physical sciences. Jehovah challenged Job about his knowledge of the physical creation with the purpose to humble him (Job. 38:1 ff; cf. 42:6). To assume that science must have the last word and Scripture must be harmonized with scientific “discoveries, laws, constants, etc.” is false and therefore diabolical (I Tim. 6:20).

The Erection of Straw Men Arguments

This fallacious approach of erecting a “straw man” argument and then dismantling it is always a temptation in debate. Humphreys provides a classic example of this in Geocentric-Heliocentric debate. In critiquing the Geocentric position, he declares that the “foundational text” is Ps. 93:1, which states “the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.” This is a straw man attack. Danny Faulkner sizes up Gerardus Bouw’s defense of Geocentrity under the three arguments of Ps. 93:1, “sunrise and sunset,” and the firmament. The erection of Ps. 93:1 and the expressions “sunrise” and “sunset” as the key defenses for Geocentricity clearly show either the lack of understanding the biblical defense of Geocentricity or the acknowledged biblical inability to exegete the passages actually used to defend Geocentricity. Believers of the past have held to Geocentricity because of the exegesis of passages such as Gen. 1:1-19, Josh. 10:12-13, Ps. 19:4-6, Eccl. 1:5-8, and Isa. 38:8 (see the exegesis of these passages later in this essay). Secondary arguments based on Ps. 93:1, I Chron. 16:30, etc., although in harmony with these passages, should not be put forth as the main or only arguments for Geocentricity.

The Presence of Faulty Exegesis of Scripture

Humphreys is a prime example of this approach of faulty exegesis. After his disclaimer that revision may be necessary to his interpretation of the Creation Week, he sets forth at least two erroneous assertions. He asserts that God created “a large 3-D space” and then the “deep.” This is inaccurate because the only “space” on Day One was the “ball” of water. Moses, the writer under divine inspiration, wrote Gen. 1:1-2:1 (extending through v. 3) as a literary inclusio. In other words, what the Lord began to create on Day One was finished on Day Six and is therefore included in this extended passage between 1:1 and 2:1. He began to create the heaven and earth on Day One and He finished the heavens and earth on Day Six. The word behind heaven(s) is hashshamayim (~yIm;V'h') and has the distinct dual (ayim), not plural (iym) ending. The dual ending designates the two heavens (of the three biblical heavens; cf. II Cor. 12:2) that the Creator created that first week—the atmospheric heaven and the stellar heaven. Moses declares that these two heavens (hashshamayim) were created the Second Day from within the midst of the water and were called the “firmament” (raqia` [;yqir').
Humphreys’ second erroneous assertion is that “the deep speeds up its rotation” on Day One. The only movement biblically recorded on Day One was the Spirit of God Who “moved upon the face of the deep.” The Spirit, Who was covered “with light” (Ps. 104:2), was the source of the moving light in relationship to the earth. The earth was not rotating but the light and the light source were moving (in a westward direction) in relation to a stationary earth. Heliocentric “eisegesis” (the reading “into” Scripture) is part and parcel of Heliocentric Creationism. Humphreys and company are merely examples of this widespread faulty exegesis.
These five fallacious arguments for Heliocentricity have been repudiated with Scripture. Although Heliocentric Creationism has done much to refute evolution, it nevertheless lacks full Scriptural authority because it rejects biblical Geocentricity. Biblical Geocentricity, on the other hand, is supported by the biblical exegesis of key cosmological passages in Scripture. This exegesis is now presented.

THE EXEGESIS OF COSMOLOGICAL
PASSAGES SUPPORTING GEOCENTRISM

Several major passages that deal with cosmology are clearly Geocentric (Gen. 1:1-19; Josh. 10:12-13; Ps. 19:4-6; Eccl. 1:5-8; and Isa. 38:8), numerous minor passages harmonize with Geocentricity (Pss. 50:1; 93:1; Job 22:14), and several verses express the limits of man’s knowledge about the physics of the cosmos (Job 38:33; Jerm. 31:37). The exegesis of these passages will be forthcoming in this essay and Heliocentric Creationists, who want to honor the Lord’s word, need to respond seriously and scripturally to this biblical exegesis.

Major Cosmological Passages Teaching Geocentricity

Gen. 1:1-19

Moses uses very simple yet specific terms to describe the initial creation “in the beginning” (bere’shith tyviareB.) the heaven and earth to his Jewish audience. Before this creation all there was was the Triune God (cf. Jn. 1:1-3; Ps. 104:30; I Jn. 5:7). Nothing existed, other than the Lord God (Prov. 8:22 ff.), before creation including time, space, heaven, etc. (cf. I Ki. 8:27; Ps. 90:2). Moses’ description of divine activity moves toward the creation of the earth (v. 2 ff.) and its suitability for man’s habitation (vv. 3-31; cf. Isa. 45:18), and the creation of heaven (v. 6). The first verse is the introduction and 2:1 is the conclusion of this literary inclusio structured by Moses under inspiration (cf. II Pet. 1:21). The details of this inclusio are recorded in vv. 1:2-31, beginning with the creation of the earth and then the creation of the heavens from within the initial mass of water. Moses succinctly states that God (‘elohim ~yhil{a,) created (bara' ar'B') heaven (hashshamayim ~yIm;;V'h') and earth. The plural noun for God allows for the Trinity doctrine to be developed (cf. Isa. 48:16-17; I Jn. 5:7), and the dual noun for heaven(s) demands that the two physical heavens, about which this very context reveals (vv. 6-8, 15-17, 20), be understood in this cosmological passage.
The Lord God, through the human writer, records the initial day of Creation (vv. 2-5). Moses moves the revelatory narrative immediately to focus upon the earth, causing the reader to recognize the centrality of the earth in God’s creative plan. Moses uses three clauses to describe the conditions needing God’s creative action. First, the earth “was without form and void” (tohu wavohu Whbow" Whto), indicating its futile barrenness. Its lack of form does not refer to the lack of a geometrical shape because the Bible indicates that the geometrical shape of the earth is a sphere (Isa. 40:22; Prov. 8:27). On Day One the earth was un-inhabitable and lifeless. The second clause states that “darkness was upon the face of the deep,” the waters which were upon the earth (cf. Ps. 104:6). The third clause parallels the waters with the deep and contrasts the Spirit of God with the darkness. God created the waters, with the associated darkness, as His un-furbished earth. The good corrective for the darkness was the creation of light, which source was the Spirit of God (cf. Isa. 45:7; Ps. 104:2) Who “moved” (rachaph @x;r') upon the face of the waters. The Lord’s creative fiat “let there be…and there was” (yehiy…wayehiy yhiy>w: yhiy>) produced the light (‘or rao). This light, distinct from sunlight, moonlight and starlight (vv. 15-18), is the light to which Solomon refers, stating “While the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars, be not darkened…” (Eccl. 12:2; cf. I Cor. 15:41). This created and good light was the first of three divisions during the first three days (cf. vv. 6, 9). God divided (wayyavedel lDeb.Y:w:) the light from the darkness and called or named (qara` ar'q') them both, thus indicating His creative and authoritative power over them. He defined the Day (yom ~Ay) and Night (layelah hl'y>l' ) with regard to the movement of the light (from the Spirit) upon the dark earth, affecting simultaneously on opposite sides of the earth the presence or absence of light. Since the Lord God created darkness first, the light presumably came twelve hours later (cf. Jn. 11:9) to dispel the evening (`erev br,[,) and bring in the light of the morning (boqer rq,Bo), producing the first day (yom ‘echad dx'a, ~Ay). At the end of Day One all that God had created was the mass of darkened water, with the light moving around it (presumably from east to west). This movement initiated time, making the creation of time earth-centric, and therefore all time “earth-time.” There was no heaven, and consequently the earth had no relationship with the un-created sun, moon or stars. God’s creation was exclusively Geocentric.
On Day Two (vv. 6-8), Jehovah made His second division which was spatial. He divided the waters of the watery sphere with the firmament (raqia` [;yqir'). The waters under the firmament constituted the earth (cf. vv. 9-10) and the waters above constituted the edge of the outer limits of the firmament (cf. Ps. 148:4). This firmament, named heaven (raqia` = shamayim [;yqir' = ~yIm;v') came into existence the second day, and its parameters include the earth (below) and the earth water (above). The word “firmament” comes from the Latin Vulgate word firmamentum and is a good translation because the “emptiness” of space has substance and is substance, since it was created. The biblical writers used the verb raqa` to refer to the spreading out of silver (Jer. 10:9) or of gold (Isa. 40:19) as beaten metal. Elihu likened the firmament to a strong, molten looking glass (Job. 37:18) which suggests the reflective powers of the outer layer of water over the heaven. Presumably the waters above the firmament are the same as the “sea of glass like unto crystal” before the Lord’s throne (cf. Rev. 4:6). God’s throne (Ps. 11:4), which is in the third heaven, is “above the firmament” (Ezk. 1:22-26). The firmament, as days four and five will bear out, contain both the stellar realm of the heavens with the sun, moon, and stars (vv. 14-18), and also the atmosphere (v. 20) in which the fowl fly.
Moses records the conclusion of Day Two with the familiar refrain “and the evening and the morning” were the second day. The light source was the same Spirit Who moved around the earth creating the effect of night replaced by day. The earth is the fixed focal point around which all cosmic movement revolves (cf. Ps. 50:1). The Bible records that the earth is the fixed divine footstool from God’s perspective, stating, “Thus saith the LORD, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? And where is the place of my rest?” (Isa. 66:1). At the end of Day Two, God had separated the earth’s waters with the firmament between the water below and the waters above. The movement of light necessary to establish Day Two was relative to the fixed, Geocentric earth. Earth was the center of the heavens and had no relationship with the un-created sun, moon, or stars.
Day Three concludes the first half of the creation week with the third division. The Lord separated the waters on earth from “the dry land” (hayyabashah hv'B'Y:h;) and named the waters Seas and the landmass Earth. Solomon refers to the boundaries of God’s created seas and land, stating, “When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth” (Prov. 8:29). The Lord declared that the land and seas were good. The second creative act on Day three was the creation of life-bearing vegetation. This is the first example of indirect creation wherein the Lord created vegetation through the life-bearing earth. The vegetation included plants and trees with seeds. The light from the Spirit of God, moving around the stationary earth, was sufficient for the growth of this vegetation prior to the creation of the sun on Day Four. The Lord set boundaries for the vegetation to produce “after his kind” (cf. Gen. 1:21, 24-25; 6:20; 7:14). Through Day Three, the Lord had created sufficiently to turn the formless (i.e., “watery wasteland”) earth into that which was livable. At the conclusion of Day Three, which was still based on the time reference of night and day, evening and morning, and was produced by the moving light from the Spirit of God, the earth was a fixed, livable sphere, with no relationship to the un-created sun, moon, or stars.
On Day Four (vv. 14-19), Moses introduces the creative activity with the divine fiat “Let there be.” The fourth day begins the second series of days and is the middle day of the first week. This second series gives the divine remedy for the formless earth. Not only did God make the earth livable but also He now gives it living creatures. Day Four parallels Day One with regard to the creation of light. On the first day, God created light that emanated from the Spirit of God, and on the fourth day He created the two great light-bearers. There are at least four reasons that the creative activity of the fourth day repudiates any notion of Heliocentricity. First, the creation formula “let there be… and there was” demands that the two great light-bearers were created on Day Four, and were not hidden since Day One. Second, there was no heaven on Day One for the placement of the two great light bearers. Third, since time hitherto had been determined by the movement of light around the earth, biblical hermeneutics demands that time still be determined by the movement of light, whatever its source, around the earth. Fourth, if the earth began to orbit the sun, this passage fails to indicate that teaching, and it fails to record any change from a Geocentric to a Heliocentric creation.
God placed the sun, moon, and stars “in the firmament” (bireqiya` [;yqir>Bi ) of heaven or in the celestial heaven, on Day Four. Moses utilizes this expression three times (vv. 14, 15, and 17) to emphasize the divine placement and celestial location of these light bearers. The Lord revealed the three-fold purpose of the light-bearers (vv. 17-18) with the Hebrew conjugation of the Hiphil infinitive construct: “to give light” (leha’iyr ryaih'l.), “to rule” (welimeshol lvom.liw>), and “to divide” (ulahavediyl lyDIb.h;l.W). The narrative repeats the purposes of the celestial lights, all of which are for the benefit of the earth. The earth needs physical enlightening, celestial governing, and temporal dividing. Moses gives four functions for the temporal separation that the celestial light-bearers provide. Their functions are “for signs” (le’othoth ttoaol.), “for seasons” (ulemo`adiym ~yrI[.Aml.W), “for days” (uleyamiym ~ymiy"l.W) and for “years” (weshaniym mynIv'w>). Because of Moses’ linguistic de-emphasis on “the stars” (hacocaviym ~ybik'AKh;), the divine account indicates they are relatively insignificant in God’s overall redemptive plan for earth (cf. Mt. 19:28) and mankind (Jn. 3:16). The movement of light on the earth, now from new sources, the sun, moon, and the stars, constituted Day Four. The celestial light-bearers, primarily the greater light and lesser light, encroached upon the darkness of earth, dispelling the evening and giving morning throughout the world.
The divine account of the creation of the heaven and earth through the first four days teaches an exclusively Geocentric perspective. This perspective is not phenomenological, because no one was standing on earth at this time, but it is absolute. The Lord God, outside of His created heaven and earth, has spoken authoritatively about His creation of a Geocentric universe (the heaven and earth). He made the earth into a livable and living world for His special redemptive purposes. On Day One, He created the earth as a darkened sphere of water and commenced time with light moving across the face of the earth. On Day Two He created the Heavens which separated the earth’s upper waters from the earth’s lower waters. On Day Three, He separated the land from the seas and created life-bearing vegetation. On Day Four, He placed the light-bearers in the firmament to benefit the Geocentric earth. Of course, Day Five records the creation of animal life and Day Six focuses on the creation of man imago Dei. Never once does the Scripture state that the earth rotated relative to the sun, moon, stars or firmament. Never once does the Bible teach that the earth was placed in the heavens to have motional interaction with the sun, moon, or stars. This locus classicus of all cosmological passages in Scripture teaches exclusively and consistently the Geocentric cosmology of a stationary earth and a revolving firmament with sun, moon, and stars.
Joshua 10:12-13

Joshua’s conquest of Southern Canaan involved defeating the Amorites before they retreated to their walled cities (v. 20). He needed more time, presumably more daylight, to rout them completely. Joshua’s prayer of faith and the Lord’s amazing response are stupendous, and require the reader to agree with the narrator that this was a unique day (v. 14). There is no question that a supernatural intervention occurred on behalf of Joshua to aid his victory. Heliocentric Creationists do not question the miraculous but do question whether the account was written phenomenologically or absolutely. In actuality, the account was written both phenomenologically and absolutely.
Since verse 12 gives Joshua’s prayer, it obviously gives his vantage point with reference to the sun and moon. Joshua was on earth and certainly it looked like the sun and moon moved relative to the earth. The words that he used are significant. Joshua was cognizant of Jehovah’s omnipotence and prayed to Him (cf. v. 14), although the account records the expression as addressed to the sun (shemesh) and moon (yareach). The Qal imperative Joshua used was dum (~Wd) meaning “cease” or “be silent,” and is in parallel with “stood still” (`amad dm;['), thus explaining its contextual meaning. From Joshua’s perspective on earth, he wanted the sun to stand over Gibeon and the moon to stand over the valley of Ajalon. His reference to the moon, although queried by many exegetes, indicates at least two significant truths concerning the cosmos. First, the moon, along with the sun, is a light-bearer (Gen. 1:14), and this biblical fact supports the interpretation that Joshua needed more light, and not less heat. Second, since the interpretation of Gen. 1:1-19 demands that the heaven, with the sun, moon, and stars, revolves around the earth, this fact supports the interpretation that the miracle affected the whole revolving heaven which houses the sun and moon (cf. Ps. 19:4).
Although verse 12 is phenomenological in that Joshua viewed and expressed himself from the earth’s vantage point, verse 13 is not phenomenological but absolute. This assertion is true because the divine author of verse 13 utilized a series of two other Hebrew conjugations, the imperfect and perfect verbs, rather than the imperative conjugation of verse 12, to require an absolute narrative. This narrative does not quote Joshua’s prayer but records the Lord God’s declaration. The Creator declared that the sun “stood still” (wayyidom ~doYIw") and the moon “stayed” (`amad). This lack of movement of the sun and moon with reference to the earth was emphasized a second time, as God stated that this miracle was recorded in the Book of Jasher (sepher hayyashar). Then the Lord, for the third time, stated emphatically that the sun “stood still” (wayya`mod) in the midst of heaven, and that it hastened not to go down. This last clause gives the final and complete meaning of the two verbs damam and `amad. These two verbs are qualified with the negation of the verb “hastened” (‘atz ca') coupled to the Qal infinitive construct “to go down” (lavo’ aAbl'). The Lord God has spoken authoritatively that the sun slowed or stopped, literally “the sun did not hasten to go,” in its respective motion relative to the stationary earth. From Joshua’s perspective it looked like the sun and moon moved, phenomenally, and he wanted them to stop. From God’s perspective the sun and moon did move, absolutely, and He stopped them. Neither Joshua nor the Lord ever said that the earth stopped rotating. The Heliocentrist Creationist has the unenviable task that he must debate with the Creator about the alleged truth of Heliocentrism. The Lord’s word is very clear in this cosmological passage that God made a Geocentric creation.

Ps. 19:4-6

The psalmist David structured this psalm around the proclamation of nature (vv. 1-6), the proclamation of the Law (vv. 7-10), and finally the desired proclamation of the psalmist (v. 14). This last point is pertinent and practical, both scientifically and theologically. In order that the Creationist’s words and meditations “be acceptable” in the Lord’s sight, he must say and think what God has revealed through nature and Scripture. This psalm declares what God has revealed about His Geocentric creation.
In verse 1, David equated the heavens with the firmament ([yqir' = ~yIm;V'h') following the Mosaic cosmological revelation in Gen. 1:8. According to verses 4-6, the most significant object of the Lord’s creation in the firmament is the sun upon which David focused his interest. The psalmist used four descriptive terms to refer to the movement of the sun. God has “set” (sam ~f') a tabernacle in the firmament for the sun. This bright orb, “comes out” (yotze’ aceyO) as a bridegroom leaves his nuptial chamber, rejoices as a strong man does “to run” (larutz #Wrl') his race, and “goes forth” (motza’o Aac'Am ) throughout its complete circuit (“and his circuit” Atp'Wqt.W) to the ends of heaven. David utilized similies to compare the sun’s sisyphean movement with natural activities. Poetic figures of speech are based on actual realities such as a bridegroom leaving his nuptial chambers and a racer running around his race track. The sun is likened to these things because of the common bond of movement. David’s Geocentric cosmology is absolute and not phenomenal. It accords with other Scriptures that teach that the earth is stationary and the center of a revolving firmament containing the moving sun.

Eccl. 1:5-8

Solomon employed one historical observation and three natural phenomena to teach the truth about the futility of the cycles of life without God (cf. 12:13-14). There is no question that Solomon’s perspective is Geocentric, or “under the sun” (v. 3). Generations of mankind “passeth away” (holeche %leho) and “cometh” (ba’ aB') but the earth stands forever. In the ebb and flow of human history, one truth is certain according to the Preacher, the earth “abideth” (literally “continues standing still” ‘omadeth td,m'[o). Solomon juxtapositions three Qal participles (“going,” “coming,” and “standing”) emphasizing the unmoving stability of the earth relative to the cycles of human history.
Solomon, the wisest man other than Jesus Christ, revealed truth both as a historian and a scientist under the process of inspiration. He recorded three natural phenomena that move incessantly relative to a stationary earth to express his spiritual point of the futility of life without God. First, relative to a stationary earth, the sun “riseth” (zarach xr;z"), “goeth down” (ba’ aB'), “hasteth” (sho’aph @aeAv) to where it “arose” (zoreach x;reAz). The human author employed two perfect verbs and two Qal active participles to denote the movement of the sun around the standing, stationary earth. Second, the wind has its incessant currents, from south to north and back again. The Preacher used six participles to designate the motion of the wind relative to the stationary earth. The wind “goeth” (holeche %leAh), “turneth about” (sovev bbeAs) “whirleth about continually” (sovev sovev holeche %leAh bbeso bbeAs), and “returneth” (shav bv;). Third, the continual flow of water currents (and subsequent evaporation) upon a stationary earth depict Solomon’s message of truth. The author designated the three participles “run” (holekiym ~ykil.ho), “come” (holekiym ~ykil.ho), and “return” (shaviym ~ybiv') and one infinitive construct (literally “to flow” lalaketh tk,l'l') to depict the moving waters relative to the fixed earth. In this section of Solomon’s essay denouncing the vanity of the futile cycles of life, the author referred to the stationary, standing earth with the cycles of history and natural phenomena moving incessantly around the earth. Along with the participle referring to the standing earth, Solomon employed sixteen words of motion for the sun, wind and rivers, including two verbs, thirteen participles and one infinitive construct.
For the Heliocentric Creationist to overcome these great linguistic barriers, he must argue for one or the other of the following fallacious views: 1) He must posit the faulty hermeneutic that Ecclesiastes is poetry and cannot be interpreted literally. The obvious biblical objection to this popular argument is that Hebrew poetry is based upon truth. If poetry is not based upon the truth of the cosmos then it becomes meaningless. 2) He must advance the phenomenological hermeneutic that it only looks like the sun moves. This becomes ludicrous because consistency would demand that the same phenomenological argument be used for the wind and rain. The selective phenomenological argument that would suggest that only the wind and water move relative to the earth, but sun does not, is not allowed. Unless the Heliocentric Creationist wants to ignore this passage, he must admit that it teaches the biblical doctrine of Geocentricity.

Isa. 38:8 (cf. II Kings 20:9-11)

The prophet Isaiah recorded in his book (cf. 8:1; 30:8; 34:16; 40:8) the impending death of Hezekiah (v. 1), his subsequent supplication to the Lord (vv. 2-3), and the Lord’s supernatural intervention accompanied with a sign (vv. 5-8). The Lord God’s sign to Hezekiah was that the sun’s shadow on Ahaz’s sun dial would go ten “degrees” (ma`aloth tAl[]m;) backward rather than the normal ten degrees forward. The Lord confirmed His promise of adding fifteen years (v. 5) to the king’s life with the miracle of the sun returning ten degrees. The prophet utilized two Hebrew verbal conjugations (a participle and a verb respectively) to designate that the shadow went backwards (“bring” [meshiyv byvime] and “gone down” [yaredah hd'r>y"]), and the same two verbs to indicate that the sun went backward (“returned” [watashav bv'T'w:] and “was gone down” [yaradah hd'r'y"]). The author of II Kings added another verb (“go” halache %l;h') and an infinitive construct (“to go down” linetoth tAjn>li) to indicate further motion on the part of the sun (II Kings 20:9-10). Whatever happened on this day in the land, the writers of Scripture indicate by inference (the shadow) and by declaration (the sun) that the sun’s movement relative to the stationary earth was reversed. All cosmological movement in this recorded miracle was done by the sun and not by the earth, confirming the Geocentric position. Heliocentric Creationists may ignore the aforementioned passages to their scriptural and spiritual discredit, but they cannot refute them exegetically to defend their erroneous Heliocentric position.

Minor Cosmological Passages Teaching Geocentricity

Ps. 50:1

This psalm records Jehovah’s summons for His creation to hear the indictment on His people for their hypocrisy (vv. 7-13). God reveals that the earth is stationary relative to the moving sun, which rises and goes down. The two Hebrew words Asaph employs are the nouns mizerach (xr;z>mi) and mevo’o (oAabom.), describing the movement of the sun. The sun’s movement relative to the earth accords with Gen. 1:1-19 and other cosmological passages.

Ps. 93:1

The psalmist declares that Jehovah is the absolute, established, fixed sovereign of creation Who is over all uprisings, natural or human (cf. v.4). The psalmist reveals (cf. vv. 3 then 2) that just as God’s throne “is established” (kun !WK) so the world “is stablished (kun !WK), that it cannot be moved” (bal timot jAMTi lB). All three of these verbs in the construction are Niphal or passive, indicating God’s action relative to the objects. In other words, the Lord God has created his throne and the world so that they will not move but will be stationary.

Job 22:14

Eliphaz, in falsely accusing Job of sin, made a passing remark about the transcendence of God. This friend declared that God walked in “the circuit of heaven” (chug shamayim ~yIm;v' gWx). According to Scripture, the heavens (both the atmospheric and the stellar heavens) have a circuit, and the sun has a circuit (Ps. 19:4-6), but nowhere does the Bible teach that earth has a circuit. The circuits of the heavens and the sun is around the earth, both phenomenally and absolutely.

The Movement of the Earth because of Judgment

Job 38:14

This is one of several passages that speak of God’s judgmental movement of the earth. The divine judgment on man will occur during the Tribulation period following the rapture of those in Christ (cf. I Thess. 4:16-17; Rev. 3:10). In the specific passage at hand, the Lord alludes to something occurring to the earth when he deals with the wicked (vv. 13, 15). The subject of the verb “it is turned” (tithehapecke %Peh't.Ti) is the earth. Although this cryptic analogy with the clay and seal may be difficult for modern readers to comprehend, ultimately any movement of the earth is in God’s judgment on man, and certainly not about the earth’s rotation upon its axis or revolution around the sun.

Isa. 13:13

In Isaiah’s section on the burden of the nations, the prophet predicts the Lord’s Tribulation judgments on the nations (Isa. 13-23). During the judgment aspect of the Day of the Lord, Jehovah will “shake” (ragaz zg:r') the heavens and “remove (ra`ash v[;r') out of her place (mimmeqomah Hm'AqM.mi)” the earth. This horrific shaking of the cosmos (cf. Rev. 6:12-17) will no doubt traumatize the inhabitants of the earth to the extent that some will repent and trust in the Lord (cf. Rev. 7:9-14). Not only will the earth be removed out of her place by violent shaking (i.e., a worldwide earthquake), but the sun will cease shining in its “going forth” (betze’tho AtaceB.) through its circuit around the quaking earth (v. 10). The movement in the cosmos during the Tribulation will include the shaking of the earth in its center location and the shaking of the sun in its darkened revolution around the earth.

Isa. 24:19-20

This is another Tribulation passage that is universal in scope (cf. vv. 1, 4, 5, 6, 17-21). The Lord, through a series of three infinitive absolutes, declares that He will severely break, dissolve, and move (hithemotetah hj;j.Amt.h jAm) the earth (v. 19). The movement of the earth is likened to that of a drunkard and a cottage (v. 20) who “shall reel to and fro” (no`a tanu`a [;WnT' [;An). These verses are consistent with other Geocentric passages that teach the earth is fixed with a revolving sun. The only movement for the fixed earth is that of mega-earth quakes (cf. Rev. 6:12; 11:13) which shake it. This does not describe, however, the earth moving in rotation around its own axis or around the sun in its revolution. These verses teach that the fixed stationary earth will be shaken during the Tribulation in judgment; they do not argue for Heliocentricity.

Limitations of man’s physical knowledge

There are several passages that teach that man’s knowledge of the physical world is highly limited and that the only absolute physical knowledge man may obtain is from God’s revelation in Scripture. This truth of course forces man to subjugate all physical knowledge to the Bible. No Christian should say that the Bible cannot be correct at this point with regard to science because science teaches something contrary. This is a basic Christian truth that is regularly violated by Heliocentrists. The following are several biblical truths for all Creation scientists and Biblicists to consider.

Job 38:33

The Lord God asked Job a series of questions about His physical creation to humble this righteous man (1:1; 2:3) who was becoming proud in his unjust suffering (cf. 40:8). Job of course could answer none, and his ignorance in the realities of the physical realm proved that he was ignorant of the realities of the spiritual realm, and consequently he needed to repent (42:6). The Lord’s single question had two parts: did Job know “the ordinances of heaven” (chuqqoth shamayim tAQxu) and could their “dominion” (mishetaro Arj'v.mi) be established on earth? The word for ordinances, which refers to statutes or laws (cf. the laws for the Passover [Ex. 13:10]), is plural and in construct with the dual noun “heaven.” The word for “dominion” is a Hebrew hapax legomena, but a similar noun is shoter (rjevo) for “officer, arranger, or organizer,” suggesting the accurate and legitimate translation of dominion or rule. In other words, the Creator humbled proud Job by asking him if he knew what the laws of the two heavens were, and if they were applicable to rule on earth. The application of this question to the Heliocentrist is, “What are the physical constants throughout the created cosmos and are they applicable on earth?” DeYoung’s statement that the constant of the speed of light must be exceeded many times over in Geocentricism and “such motion is clearly impossible in our physical universe” should be subjected to Jehovah’s inquiry to Job. Man is incapable of understanding the absolutes of God’s physical creation without revelation through the Scriptures.

Jerm. 31:37

Another passage in which the Lord challenged proud man’s lack of knowledge is the Lord’s conditional declaration to cast off the seed of Israel for their sin “if” (‘im ~ai) heaven could be “measured” (yimmadu WDM;yI) and the earth’s foundation “searched out” (weyechaqeru Wrq.x'yEw>). The word for “measured” is in the Niphal (passive) stem referring to the act of measuring some object. The assumed subject of this verb is man who is limited in measuring something that is finite (cf. Jerm. 33:22). The verb for “searched out” is also in the Niphal stem and refers, in the context, to the inability of man to explore (cf. I Kings 7:47) “the foundations” (mosedey ydes.Am) of the earth. Man is ignorant about and limited in his measurement of the heavens and earth. Pride causes man to look everywhere for knowledge except to the Scriptures. Without biblical revelation, man, including Creationists, is ignorant of God’s creation.

CONCLUSION

Why does the Bible depict the Lord God as such a “die hard” Geocentrist? The truth of the matter is that His creation, based on the consistent exegesis of the Bible, is Geocentric. This essay, while acknowledging many valuable contributions from Heliocentric Creationists in their individual and collective rejection of atheistic evolution, has critiqued and repudiated with Scripture their biblically flawed Heliocentric position. The popular but faulty arguments for Heliocentricity, including the “infinite universe” presupposition, the phenomenological hermeneutic, the Bible relegated to Science requirement, the Straw Men approach, and the faulty exegesis practices clearly contradict consistent Bible exegesis. Furthermore, this essay has exegeted the Masoretic Hebrew text in five key cosmological passages (Gen. 1:1-19; Josh 10:12-13; Eccl. 1:5-8; Ps. 19:4-6; Jer. 38:8) and three minor passages (Pss. 50:1; 93:1 Job 22:14), demonstrating the required interpretation of the fixed, stationary, and centered earth with the revolving sun, moon, stars and heavens. The essay also demonstrated from Scripture that the only movement this present earth should ever experience will be God’s Tribulation judgment of His shaking it with mega-earthquakes (Job 38:14; Isa. 13:13; 24:19-20). Finally, the essay exposed all creationists, Heliocentric and Geocentric alike, to the extreme limitations of man’s understanding of God’s physical creation without biblical revelation (Job 38:33 and Jerm. 31:37). All Creationists should be committed to teaching “all the counsel of God” (Acts 20:27).