Features
- Unknown Binding: 266 pages
- Published by: The Biblical Astronomer 1999
- Written in: English
- ASIN: B0006SB94M
Reader Reviews(Note: this review applies to a later edition published in 2005.) When Bouw starts thundering about the heresy of believing that the earth revolves around the sun, it is easy to dismiss purely on the basis of scientific evidence. But if you read far enough (and it does take far too long), you get to the meat of his science, and it's quite intriguing. According to astrophysicists, the universe itself could be in motion. In theory, it could be spinning on its axis once every 24 earth hours. This does not violate the laws of relativity because they only apply to objects within the universe, not to the universe itself. Furthermore, according to the laws of relativity, any particular point in the universe could serve as a point of reference. So Bouw's thesis is that the point of reference about which the universe is spinning once every 24 hours is the center of our very own planet. The earth is not spinning; it stands still while the universe spins around it! From the scientific perspective, Bouw's thesis is completely unprovable and arbitrary. You would need to stand outside the universe itself in order to establish whether it's spinning, and if so, how fast and around what axis. And of course none of us can hope to step outside the universe to get that perspective. Bouw's reply is that there is Someone who is not trapped within the bounds of our universe: our Creator. As the Creator, He does observe the state of the universe. Bouw further contends that He has in fact spoken of a geocentric universe in His word, the Bible. Alas, here is where Bouw's reasoning breaks down. His analysis of the Biblical evidence is, to put it charitably, incomplete. He refuses, for example, to look at the Hebrew and Greek texts, claiming that the Bible itself establishes that it will always be accurately translated, and therefore he can simply rely on an English translation. A quick examination of the history of Bible translation demonstrates that this cannot be the case. Furthermore, the doctrine of inerrancy as it has been formulated everywhere (until Bouw) refers to the original manuscripts, not the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts that have been preserved. And certainly not to the translations! For Bouw's thesis to go anywhere, he really must deal with the original languages; failure to do so casts it into very serious doubt. He also claims that there is only one permissible hermeneutical approach to Biblical texts, namely the most literal possible. So if Psalm 104 says the earth "can never be moved," it means exactly that the earth is completely still. In Bouw's view, it is not permissible to regard Psalm 104, or any other passage of the Bible, as being poetic. Where this gets interesting is when Bouw analyzes other texts that refer to the Earth's having motion. Bouw states that these do not refer to the physics of the Earth in its relationship to the rest of the universe, but rather are apocalyptic descriptions of future judgement. The alert reader will recognize, of course, that Bouw is stating that these passages should be approached with a non-literal, poetic hermeneutic. Though Bouw slams the front door on a non-literal hermeneutical approach, he quietly ushers it in the back door when it is convenient. So Bouw's reasoning is completely circular. He adopts different hermeneutical approaches not based on the content of the texts under examination but based on whether they will help or hinder his thesis. While I have no doubt about the sincerity of Bouw's faith, I have to conclude that his thesis of geocentricity is flawed beyond repair.
Search for books at
