“Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.
And there was no day like that before it or after it, that the Lord hearkened unto the voice of a man: for the Lord fought for Israel” (Joshua 10-12-14).
So, my friend Zach Bauer just made a video attempting to refute what the above text actually says, stating that it is all a “perspective issue” from the Earthbound observer’s point of view.
Now, to be fair, I have made some of the exact same arguments myself. But there are several problems I now have with this view:
1. The text says Joshua commanded the sun and the moon, not the Earth to stand still. He took LEGAL authority with his words. Words mean things, but even more so in a legal framework. If one is going to take legal authority over the natural world, then the words used should be quite accurate and very definitive. YHWH did not say, “Oh well, I know my servant is an ignorant moron, so I’ll do what is necessary to make his command come true. I know what he meant to say, so I’ll go ahead and stop the Earth and suspend a host of post-Copernican ‘laws’ on order to make it happen.”
2. Yes, if you stop the Earth in the current post-Copernican model, the sun would appear to stop in the sky. However, the text says the moon stopped too. This presents another problem for anyone who refuses to simply take the Bible at its word. The moon is allegedly in orbit around our world, both spinning itself (in a fashion that just so happens to keep the same “face” pointed toward us all the time) as well as moving around us. So, for Joshua’s command to work as stated (and understood in the post-Copernican model of the cosmos), YHWH would have had to stop the Earth nd the moon. If He stopped the moon, but didn’t stop its rotation too, then how could it remain in sync with the same face pointed toward us precisely as it is?
3. If the Earth stops rotating, Newton’s orbital laws of motion would have to be suspended. In short, you would lose “gravity.” The magnetic field would also collapse and you would have to deal with 1,000 mile wind-sheer as the atmosphere would continue to spin even if the Earth stopped, in accordance with the Law of Inertia. The same would be true of the oceans, which would have to totally flood the whole Earth in accordance with the same law. I see no evidence of the Isrealites being drowned in this encounter.
4. The Earth (allegedly) spins and is as Zach believes heliocentric, meaning it is going around the sun. But if the sun stood still, there would have to be a suspension of both our orbital movement as well as our rotational movement in order to keep the sun specifically over one location “upon Gibeon”. So, where do we see any evidence that the Earth then spun back up to 1,000 mph, and proceeded to move back into its heliocentric orbital speed of 67,000 mph around the sun?
5. If the moon is allegedly in charge of the tides of our seas, then we’d also have significant tidal issues as it ramped back up to speed doing its thing after being stopped from doing it by Joshua’s command.
But since Zach and others like him prefer to agree with modern, monkey-man science over what the Scriptures actually say, I’ll direct such people to the same monkey-men they trust to explain many of the same problems I just gave above:
More ( lying ) video links:
And in the case of Hezikiah and the sun dial going backward, things get even worse!
“In those days was Hezekiah sick unto death. And Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz came unto him, and said unto him, Thus saith the Lord, Set thine house in order: for thou shalt die, and not live.
Then Hezekiah turned his face toward the wall, and prayed unto the Lord,
And said, Remember now, O Lord, I beseech thee, how I have walked before thee in truth and with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in thy sight. And Hezekiah wept sore.
Then came the word of the Lord to Isaiah, saying,
Go, and say to Hezekiah, Thus saith the Lord, the God of David thy father, I have heard thy prayer, I have seen thy tears: behold, I will add unto thy days fifteen years.
And I will deliver thee and this city out of the hand of the king of Assyria: and I will defend this city.
And this shall be a sign unto thee from the Lord, that the Lord will do this thing that he hath spoken;
Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down.” (Isaiah 38:1-8)
Here you would have the Earth stop rotating. Then start rotating backward, then reversing again and ramping back up to 1,000 mph again. Really?? Do you have any idea how badly that would jack up all of the oceans, rivers and lakes?? Of course, you could say, “Well, it’s called a ‘miracle’ for a reason Rob. God just made it all work out that way, with no accompanying issues, which would have to occur according to our monkey-man science.” Sure. You could use that argument. Or… you could just simply agree with what the Bible says!
At no time whatsoever does the Bible in any way, shape or form even remotely support a spinning, heliocentric ball Earth concept. The sun doesn’t even show up until Day 4 of Creation for crying out loud, showing the singular importance of the Earth over the sun. The sun is here to support life on the pre-existing, stationary Earth. The Earth was here first in the Biblical model and – according to Moses – the sun, moon and stars were later placed over us inside the firmament (dome-like, metallic enclosure) that separates the waters above from the waters below. But in the model Zach supports, the firmament is gone and all importance is shifted to the sun and everything quite literally “revolves” around it instead of Earth. The problem for those who want to hold on to both the Bible and monkey-man science is that in Scripture we always see the Earth as center stage, not the sun and it is to the Earth that everything else in the cosmos remains subordinate. You cannot hold onto both the Bible and monkey-man science as they are most certainly diametrically opposing (pardon the pun) viewpoints.
Zach then goes on to talk about the various transits in front of the sun and the moons of Jupiter and such. So what?? Big deal. That doesn’t conflict with anything in the geocentric model (whether the Earth is flat or round is also irrelevant in that argument). Naturally, Mercury and Venus would have to be wayyyy smaller in order for the Flat Earth model to be true, but again, so what? Where does the Bible give us any scale to work from? Oh yeah, we trust NASA and Atheistic monkey-man science more. Right. I forgot. Sorry. Regardless, yes, Joe Blow can buy a telescope and observe all of these things for themselves. In fact, I have done just that many times in my youth. I was glued to my 300x telescope and have seen a lot of this stuff myself… but it does not prove heliocentricity.
Zach then attempts to debunk The Principle and cites the complaints of Kate Mulgrew and others who were in the film (such as Lawrence Kraus), who incidentally hate God and spend their whole careers doing all they can to discredit the Bible. So, it is no big surprise why they would be upset with the message of The Principle and having their name associated with it. To say they were “misrepresented in the film” is simply ridiculous though. They were fairly and accurately presented, giving their views on the evidence. They just didn’t like the conclusions the film makers came to as a result of that evidence and thus didn’t want their names associated with the project. Yet, you have Michio Kaku basically stating that they know they have no clue what they are talking about:
The above is not taken out of context. It was not skillfully manipulated through editing. The man said those words on camera! But I must say it is nothing short of shocking that Zach (a man I truly do love and respect) is taking the sides of men who quite literally hate God and are proud to state as much frequently as abundantly evident in their consistent disdain for all things Biblical:
The Kate Mulgrew argument is probably the most absurd. She read the script (for 3 weeks no less) and was the freaking narrator for crying out loud! So she knew exactly what she was getting into. How could you not? If you are the narrator, you have a script. If you can read and comprehend what you are reading, then you know exactly what it is you are talking about and there can be no surprise. For the other side of Zach’s argument regarding criticism against the film makers of The Principle, please be sure to watch:
Forgetting The Principle and Flat Earth altogether, if you are still interested in the geocentric argument, please watch this video:
• Rob Skiba