CathInfo.com

I'm curious if those who support Geocentrism find it a necessary theory is due to their understanding/interpretation of Holy Writ.

In other words, is Geocentrism, in your view, something Christians have a duty to believe based on Holy Scripture.

From the very beginning the immediate problem with this thread is the red herring...the equivalence of the Earth's lack of motion with its location...an Earth that is at rest/immobile/akinetic in the universe, as Scripture describes, with geocentrism, the belief that the Earth is at the center of the universe.
This strawman is intended to divert and confuse the dialogue...an indication that its source is the prince of deception and the father of lies.  

FIRST ERROR: Earth's immobility as defined in Scripture is geofixic (fixus, Latin, at rest ,immobile), which became conflated with geocentric by semantic drift at the time of Copernicus and Galileo. Unless the meaning of 'center' in geocentrism is defined,  geocentrism's discussion is vanity of vanities.  

GeoFixic verses:
1 Chronicles 16:30: Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
Psalm 19:6: It [the sun] rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other; nothing is hidden from its heat.
Psalm 93:1: The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is established, that it cannot be moved.
Psalm 96:10: Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously.
Ecclesiastes 1:5: The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.
Genesis 15:12 And when the sun was GOING DOWN...15:17 ...the sun WENT DOWN...19:23 The sun was RISEN UPON THE EARTH...28:11 ...the sun was SET...32:31 ...the sun ROSE upon him
Exodus 22:3 If the sun be RISEN upon him...22:26 ...the sun goeth DOWN:
Leviticus 22:7 And when the sun is DOWN...
Numbers 2:3 And on the east side toward the RISING of the sun
Deuteronomy 11:30 ...by the way where the sun goeth DOWN 23:11 ...when the sun is DOWN...24:13 ...when the sun GOETH DOWN...24:15 At his day thou shalt give him his hire, neither shall the sun go DOWN upon it...
Judges 5:31 ...but let them that love him be as the sun when he GOETH FORTH in his might. 8:13 And Gideon the son of Joash returned from battle before the sun was UP, 9:33 And it shall be, that in the morning, as soon as the sun is UP..14:18 And the men of the city said unto him on the seventh day beforethe sun WENT DOWN...19:14 ...the sun went down upon them
2 Samuel 2:24 ...the sun WENT DOWN...3:35 ...till the sun be DOWN.23:4 ...when the SUN RISETH...
2 Chronicles 18:34 the time of the sun GOING DOWN he died.
Psalms 50:1 ...RISING of the sun unto the GOING DOWN thereof. 104:19 He appointed the moon for seasons: the sun knoweth his GOING DOWN. 104:22 The sun ARISETH...113:3 From the RISING of the sun unto THE GOING DOWN of the same the LORD's name is to be praised.
Isaiah 38:8 ...So the sun RETURNED ten degrees, by which degrees it was GONE DOWN. 41:25 from the RISING of the sun 60:20 Thy sun shall no more GO DOWN; neither shall thy moon withdraw itself...
Jeremiah 15:9 her sun is GONE DOWN...
Daniel 6:14 ...he laboured till the GOING DOWN of the sun to deliver him.
Amos 8:9 I will cause the sun TO GO DOWN at noon...
Jonah 4:8 And it came to pass, when the sun did ARISE...
Micah 3:6 the sun shall GO DOWN over the prophets...
Nahum 3:17 ...when the sun ARISETH...
Habakkuk 3:11 The sun and moon STOOD STILL in their habitation...
Malachi 1:11 For from the RISING of the sun even unto the GOING DOWN of the same 4:2 But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness ARISE with healing in his wings...
Matthew 5:45 ...he maketh his sun to RISE...
Mark 1:32 And at even, when the sun did SET...
Luke 4:40 Now when the sun was SETTING...
Ephesians 4:26 Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun GO DOWN upon your wrath:
James 1:11 For the sun is no sooner RISEN...
All say the Sun moves or the Earth does not...

ERROR 2 ..some read that the Bible says the Sun is at rest:  
Nowhere is this true.
Joshua 10:12-13: On the day the LORD gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the LORD in the presence of Israel: "O sun, stand still over Gibeon, O moon, over the Valley of Aijalon."
So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, till the nation avenged itself on its enemies. The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day.
Joshua's long day is in fact the miraculous exception(Sun at rest) that proves the rule(Sun is kinetic).

2 Kings 20:9 Isaiah said, "This shall be the sign to you from the LORD, that the LORD will do the thing that He has spoken: shall the shadow go forward ten steps or go back ten steps?" 10-So Hezekiah answered, "It is easy for the shadow to decline ten steps; no, but let the shadow turn backward ten steps."…
Hezekiah's shadow reversing ten steps implies motion is its  normal course, not rest.  

No need for the Magisterium here..with a literal reading and rational exegesis the meaning is transparent.

ERROR 3: The necessity of belief depends on the knowledge of the geofixic verses. Ignorance of the existence or the meaning of the GF verses cannot have salvific import, any more than can ignorance of Baptism.
But those who are cognizant of the GF verse content are bound by the inerrancy dogma to accept that geofixism is true, despite what mainstreeam science or any other source believes.
"To whom much is given, much is expected."
The adviser to Popes and Defender of the Faith, St and DC Roberto Bellarmino stated clearly that what is believed in a non-religious or secular context - like scientific and mathematical heliocentric models - can be freely believed or not, but what is described in the Bible - anywhere - must be accepted as true.  Else, the failure of one part questions all.
"Man does not live on bread alone, but on EVERY word from the mouth of God."  
Once the Bible is recognized as geofixed, the reader is bound to neither deny nor ignore geofixism.  

ERROR 4: Very prevalent in this forum is a misunderstanding of a most precious gift of God - the Magisterial interpretation of the deposit of faith handed down through the centuries via the Spirit of God.
The Magisterial gatekeepers are three:
Concerning matters of faith and morals,
The Pope acting alone, ex cathedra
The bishops acting collectively in union with the Pope
The unanimous belief of the Church Fathers.
Not the saints, no matter how holy or revered, not bishops separately from the Pope, not local parish priests, no matter how beloved....
No one else.

ERROR 5: Without the Magisterium the protestant exegesis of self-interpretation and aliteralism destroys Scriptural inerrancy.
One position is that we couldn't understand relative motion, that celestial rotations are only apparent and not real. So the Bible uses phenomenal language to agree with the cosmic kinetic appearances, because of our ignorance. So the earth moves, not the heavens.
The modernistas are quite willing to say that God lied to us because of our ignorance, because we can't understand relative motion...incredibile dictu!  
Further, if God is the source of our intellect, why would He neglect giving us the ability to understand His words and yet be bound by them?
 
Prots slice and dice the Bible into parts they choose to believe and parts they don't....because it fits their lifestyle and Weltanschauung.... .
Whole sections are questioned for veracity if self-designated as 'not relevant to salvation'...btw: also a liberal argument for Vat II obscurantism.
Or...
Poetry is emotional so not true!  
So...
God is love
Love is an emotion
Emotions are false
Ergo: God is false!

What about parables?  They may be true stories or not, or some combo of T/F. It's human nature to use fiction to make a moral point, but divine nature never lies (as would be the case if Scripture said the Earth moves).
This exposes the deep mystery of the God-man and the Trinity, most evident when the divine Christ says, "The Father and I are one", and another time, as human, "The Father is greater than I".

All of Holy Writ is true..... category partitions are just arbitrary classifications of content...science, philosophy, poetry. Understanding of the deposit of faith is not a matter of personal interpretation but defined by the Magisterium.

ERROR 6:  Mainstream science in its darkness proclaims that relativity has proven that geofixism is invalid.
Well, the relativity of motion principle holds that any observer can do physics...that is, apply the laws of dynamics to predict future motion.  
Since this includes an earth observer, the statement is self-contradicting.
Choosing to always use an earth observer is geofixism.

Now we can return to the original issue...
Is Geocentrism something Christians have a duty to believe based on Holy Scripture?
As GC is undefined the first correction is to replace GC with GF ... a universe with a fixed immobile Earth.
Next replace 'have a duty to'  with this;
Is GeoFixism something Christians commit a sin by denying or ignoring, based on Holy Scripture?
A mortal sin must
1- be a serious matter.....Inerrancy of the Bible?...you betcha.
2- have full knowledge of the matter by the intellect; that is,
a- all Biblical verses support GF; none deny GF
b- inerrancy of all content of Revelation is dogmatic
c- denial of GF is a serious sin
no knowledge => no sin
partial knowledge=> venial
3- have full consent of the will
denial of GF  based on 2a,b,c
Realistically ..only a small trad remnant even know that GF involves inerrancy of the Word of God and that 2a,b,c are true.
For those few that do, denial in invincible ignorance is mortal and heretical.
Thanks to current liberal catechesis and apologetics virtually all the faithful are immune from sin in their blissful ignorance.  
And so...the majority's vote that a fixed Earth is unnecessary to believe would be expected of any random secular poll....  just as a majority of catholics voted for Obama ...and probably will vote for Hillary.

For a couple of thousand years, up until the beginnings of modern science, everyone believed that the Sun went around a stationary Earth, and thought that that was what the Bible was saying. This includes a component of the Magisterium, the Church Fathers.  
 

With the errors in the beginning, by not defining terms and common ground, no wonder demonogenic confusion - like the Flat Earth diversion  - reigns throughout these pages.  


Truth forever on the gallows,
Lies forever on the throne.

AMDG

.... If the evidence for the position of the Earth in our universe is shown to be in one place, or another, it has absolutely no effect on our understanding and belief of Holy Scripture. ........
It would be a heresy, in my opinion, to think that geocentrism is a required belief of Catholics. I remember St. Thomas Aquinas speaking on this point specifically (but I can't remember where right now). He said (something to the effect of:), that if our understanding of the cosmos would have changed, which it very well may do, it would not have any affect on our Faith at all.

Position is not the issue in Scripture...absence of motion is.

GeoFixism, not GC, is a required belief for all Catholics with a fully-formed conscience.

St. Thomas (RIP) is not the Magisterium.  He did not believe in the Immaculate Conception, a dogma declared 150 years ago. btw: would appreciate a fact-checking link to his statement.

..... Whatever position I have the most evidence for, I'll adopt.

The GeoFixed verses were given in a prior post.  Science has no counter-proof that the Earth moves.
So....what position will you now adopt?

Well the Church did condemn heliocentrism as a heresy, some say infallibly. Then the Church later accepted heliocentrism, ane even taught it in their Catechisms (heliocentrism is taught in the Baltimore Catechism which I just reread). So I can understand Catholics holding both positions. ...

"the Church"  = ?
Specifically, the MAGISTERIUM did condemn heliocentrism as a heresy... infallibly.
In disputes of doctrine on this forum one rarely sees the Magisterium cited....  Why not?  

The Church accepted HC as a mathematical model simplifying understanding of cosmic motions but the MAGISTERIUM condemned HC as a heresy, when taken as reality.
E.g., the relative acceleration of a free-falling man is the same whether measured from the ground or by the man.  But only the man is really accelerating, not the Earth.

The Baltimore Catechism is a minor catechism - approved by the local ordinary.  When not in conflict with the Magisterium, the BC is a useful catechesis tool...but the BC is not the Magisterium.

.... Dogmatic truth is clear, defined and undeniable (in the sense that if one wishes to remain Catholic, one is unable to deny defined dogma (and doctrine for that matter)).
.....  St. Thomas said he would have no problem with it[GC or GF?] ..... Certainly holy popes and other holy and studied men seemed to have no problem with it. If they did, they didn't say as much, so I'm going to take their lack of controversy on the matter as a de facto acceptance, which I think fair.

So... Biblical inerrancy is clear, defined and undeniable.

Everyone had no problem with GF until 5 centuries ago.  After that HC was seemingly given baptism (as a secular belief of science). So no surprise that the GC or GF debate was pushed into the background.
But certainly the reasoning cannot be to accept as true what is not controversial...the logical fallacy of the majority rule.

Is Geocentrism Necessary to the Faith

In other words: Is a geocentric reading of Scripture necessary for the Catholic faith.


Throughout the drift into Modernism or neo-Gnosticism as it could be called, Catholicism as a sacramental religion sustained the flock as ever before and not a pope, bishop, priest or layperson thereafter saw the condemned heresy of a fixed sun at the centre of the universe or a moving earth as having any significance or bearing on their Catholic faith. This is because Galileo’s heresy undermined the basis of the faith like dry rot in a cathedral, invisible and unnoticed by those worshipping in the pews. The nature of this subversion had to be planned in hell, for unlike other heresies, its subject matter was one that seemed to be confined to the mere physical order as ascertained by science, one that seemed to have no consequence to Catholic belief, and yet it did more damage to the faith of millions thereafter as it affected Scripture, Scholastic philosophy and the credibility of the Church’s dogma of infallibility.

 "As a result of the collapse of geocentrism, which she has come to accept, the Church is now caught between her historic-dogmatic representation of the world’s origin, on the one hand, and the requirements of one of her most fundamental dogmas on the other – so that she cannot retain the former without to some degree sacrificing the latter… In earlier times until Galileo, there was perfect compatibility between historical representation and the Fall and dogmas of universal Redemption – and all the more easily too, in that each was modelled on the other… Today we know with certainty that the stellar universe is not centred on the earth, and that terrestrial life is not centred on mankind." --- Teilhard de Chardin.