Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 13

Author Topic: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong  (Read 29943 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline happenby

Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
« Reply #20 on: March 28, 2017, 04:49:07 PM »
Quote from: SoldierOfChrist on March 28, 2017, 04:17:57 PM
Let's look at the Latin for starters.  Psalms 103:5 "qui fundasti terram super basem suam non commovebitur in saeculum et in saeculum"

Commovebitur (from online latin dictionary dot com)

1 passive form of [commoveo]
2 to shake, to stir up, to agitate
3 to displace (emphasis mine), to disturb, to trouble, to worry, to upset
4 to jolt
5 to excite
6 to waken
7 to provoke
8 (money or camp) to move
9 to produce
10 (war) to cause, start
11 (point) to raise

Now this is just the Latin translation from the original (Hebrew?).  So let's say that the latin meant commovebitur in the sense of "to be displaced", as it is clearly listed in the third definition of this word.  Why should we then assume that the literal interpretation must be the eighth sense of the word listed in authoritative latin dictionaries?

The Church has a long history of believing the earth is not round and that it doesn't move.  The above blurb on Latin definitions of 'move' does nothing for your case and doesn't even make sense when you pose your proof as a question you yourself cannot answer.  The Church fathers have discussed this plenty.  You are just unaware of it. St. Augustine, Severian, Bshp of Gabala, St. Jerome, Cosmas, Methodius, St. John Chrysostom and many others confirmed earth is flat and geocentric, a snow globe, as it were.  All saints agree that antipodes do not exist, (that people in Australia walking upside down to the rest because they are on a ball) is at the level of doctrine since it has been held universally for over 1,000 years, as historians reveal.  Some saints did think the earth might be round, but they prove themselves unaware of previous teaching in their writings, and of course, not in agreement with scripture. Not one shred of evidence shows that the Church taught anything except geocentrism.  Ball geocentrism, supported by Sungenis-esque pagan authorities is no proof of anything except flat earth.    
Logged

Offline SoldierOfChrist

Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
« Reply #21 on: March 28, 2017, 05:11:15 PM »
The burden of proof is on you two.  Mw2016 said this was gonna be proof.  Let's see the authoritative texts stating the Earth is flat.  Of course I believe in geocentrism.  Most of us do here, so stop with the pro-geocentric arguments.  It's unnecessary and repetitive.  Show the texts of the fathers supporting flat earth.
Logged

Offline mw2016

Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
« Reply #22 on: March 28, 2017, 06:08:41 PM »
Quote from: SoldierOfChrist on March 28, 2017, 04:04:04 PM
If you are going to accuse others of error, at least do us the service of quoting from a Catholic Bible.  This is either the Darby bible or the Good News Translation.  Especially when we're talking about semantics of individual words, protty texts aren't going to cut it.
Are you mildly retarded? If not, then I am sure you know that the numbers for Psalms are different between the two, but the text is the same.
"Who hast founded the earth upon its own bases: it shall not be moved for ever and ever."
Psalm 103:5-7/DRV

" Qui fundasti terram super stabilitatem suam, non inclinabitur in saeculum saeculi."

http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=21&ch=103&l=5#x
Logged

Offline mw2016

Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
« Reply #23 on: March 28, 2017, 06:12:58 PM »
Quote from: SoldierOfChrist on March 28, 2017, 04:22:52 PM
The group is on Mark Sargent's youtube channel?  Shouldn't they have a website of their own if they are indeed a group?
Mark Sargent has a collection of interviews with surveyors, engineers, pilots, sailors, etc. who all assent to the truth of flat earth and demonstrate why on his YT channel.
Logged

Offline happenby

Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
« Reply #24 on: March 28, 2017, 06:22:35 PM »
Quote from: SoldierOfChrist on March 28, 2017, 05:11:15 PM
The burden of proof is on you two.  Mw2016 said this was gonna be proof.  Let's see the authoritative texts stating the Earth is flat.  Of course I believe in geocentrism.  Most of us do here, so stop with the pro-geocentric arguments.  It's unnecessary and repetitive.  Show the texts of the fathers supporting flat earth.
•Gen 1. 6 And God said: Let there be a firmament made amidst the waters: and let it divide the waters from the waters.
•Gen 1.7 And God made a firmament, and divided the waters that were under the firmament, from those that were above the firmament, and it was so.

•Severian, Bishop of Gabala – Depended upon Scriptures for view of the earth.  “The earth is flat and the sun does not pass under it in the night, but travels through the northern parts as if hidden by a wall” 1.
•  [15]  He shared John Chrysostom’s fundamentalism and opposition to pagan learning. SEVERIAN OF GABALA ON THE CREATION OF THE WORLD
     He made the upper heavens about which David sang: "The heaven of the heavens is the Lord's."6 This heaven forms in a certain way the upper stage of the firmament. As in any two-story house, there is an intermediate stage; well in this building which is the world, the Creator has prepared the sky as an intermediate level, and he has put it over the waters; from where this passage of David: "It is you who covered with water its upper part.“7 

Noted St. Augustine scholar Leo Ferrari, concluded that Augustine was familiar with the Greek theory of a spherical earth, nevertheless, (following in the footsteps of his fellow North African, Lactantius), he was firmly convinced that the earth was flat and was one of the two biggest bodies in existence and that it lay at the bottom of the universe. Apparently Augustine saw this picture as more useful for scriptural exegesis than the global earth at the centre of an immense universe.

•"There are some who assert that this mass is like a point and a globe. What then will the land be over?" St. Jerome, Commentary on Isaiah
•http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2001/PSCF9-01Schneider.html   Passage:
•
•"Greek gýros turns up in its transliterated form gyrus--present in Roman literature as early as Lucretius (mid-first century BC)--in the Latin versions of the Bible as well.27 St. Jerome (c. 340-420), the early Latin Church's master linguist and Bible translator, began his work on the Old Testament by creating a standard version from the several unreliable Old Latin recensions then in existence, using as a valuable aid Origen's fair copy of the Hexapla which he consulted in the library at Caesarea around 386 AD.28 The Old Latin recensions were based on the LXX and commonly rendered this same portion of Isa. 40:22a as "qui tenet gyrum terrae."29 Later, when he prepared a new version from the Hebrew that would become part of the Vulgate, he kept the Old Latin reading, changing only the verb tenet, "dwells," to sedet, "sits."30 And in his Commentary on Isaiah, Jerome, who is regarded by critics today as a competent and careful scholar,31 specifically rejected the notion that in this verse the prophet is referring to a spherical earth." 32
Footnote for 32:
32S. Hieronymi Presbyteri Commentariorum In Esaiam Libri, XI, ed. M. Adriaen. Corpus Christianorum, 73 (Turnholt, Belgium: Brepols, 1963), 2:463. Jerome's comment shows that interpreting the Bible in light of current scientific theory or knowledge has a long history in Christianity. Having in mind the popular Aristotelian theory of the four elements, which makes earth the heaviest and water the lighter element, he states that God "[had] established the great mass of the land and had gathered it together above the seas and rivers, so that the heaviest element [earth] hangs over the lighter weight waters by the will of God, who like a king sits above the circle of the earth." (Deus, qui tantam molem terrae fundas[set] et super maria et super flumina collocasset eam, ut elementum grauissimum super tenues aquas Dei penderet arbitrio, qui instar regis sedet super gyrum terrae.) Although, he adds: "there are some who assert that this mass is like a point and globe" [scil., in the center of the universe, according to Greek theory] ... (Ex quo nonnulli quasi punctum et globum eam [molem terrae] esse contendunt ...), Jerome rejects this assertion: "What, then, will the land be over ...?" (Quid igitur superbit terra ...?) (ibid., xl, 21/26).


Those "some" Jerome had in mind may have been Christian contemporaries, but he also may have been reminded of the views expressed in the works of one of his favorite pagan authors, Cicero, who uses punctum and globum to characterize the earth in Republic, 6.16, and Tusculan Disputations, 1.68, respectively, though it is not clear that in the latter Cicero is referring to a spherical earth, as some have contended: see the note loc. cit. by J. E. King, ed. and trans., Cicero, Tusculan Disputations. Loeb Classical Library (London: Heinemann, 1966), 80.

•St. Cyril of Jerusalem –  He followed Basil’s teaching and was a flat earther, using quotes from the Bible portraying earth with firmament floating on water using Gen. i. 6.  He wrote in his Catechetical Lectures: Lecture IX: “Him who reared the sky as a dome, who out of the fluid nature of the waters formed the stable substance of the heaven. For God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the water. God spake once for all, and it stands fast, and falls not. The heaven is water, and the orbs therein, sun, moon, and stars are of fire: and how do the orbs of fire run their course in the water? But if any one disputes this because of the opposite natures of fire and water, let him remember the fire which in the time of Moses in Egypt flamed amid the hail…”

Methodius:
“Resuming  then,  let  us  first  lay  bare,  in  speaking of  those  things  according  to  our  power,  the imposture  of  those  who  boast  as  though  they  alone  had  comprehended  from  what  forms  the  heaven  is arranged,  in  accordance  with  the  hypothesis  of  the  Chaldeans  and  Egyptians.  For *they*  say  that  the circuмference  of  the  world  is  likened  to  the  turnings  of  a  well‐rounded  globe,  the  earth  having  a central  point.  For  its  outline  being  spherical,  it  is  necessary,  *they*  say,  since  there  are  the  same  distances of  the  parts,  that  the  earth  should  be  the  center  of  the  universe,  around  which  as  being  older,  the  heaven is  whirling.  For  if  a  circuмference  is  described  from  the  central  point,  which  seems  to  be  a  circle,  ‐  for  it is  impossible  for  a  circle  to  be  described  without  a  point,  and  it  is  impossible  for  a  circle  to  be  without  a point,  ‐  surely  the  earth  consisted  before  all,  they  say,  in  a  state  of  chaos  and  disorganization.  Now certainly  the  wretched  ones  were  overwhelmed  in  the  chaos  of  error,  “because  that,  when  they  knew  God, they  glorified  Him  not  as  God…
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 13
« previous next »