Had a bit too much space cake, have we?

The center of gravity in the solar system is inside the sun.

But, to say one revolves around the other implies a "true" frame of reference. In a relativistic universe, conceiving the sun as epicenter is no more true than conceiving the earth as the epicenter. Indeed, since we observers are all on the earth, it is rather less true. So Galileo was wrong, sort of.

Yes, but it isn't relativistic, it's subjective. If not observed the sun doesn't even exist.

The Bible teaches that the Earth is corrupt (Ge 6:12, 2 Pe 2:20, Rev 19:2), is ruled by Satan (Jn 12:31, Jn 14:30, Rev 12:9), and is irredeemable (1 Pe 1:18, Jn 3:17, Rev 14:3). It is hardly the "center of the Universe"; that probably comes from a misreading of Ge 1-2.

The center of the universe is the Godhead, which is unreachable in the materialist sense.

One of my undergraduate physics professors subscribed to The Brahean Debater, a newsletter which advocated for a geocentric universe. Lots of fun. (I understand that nearly all the subscribers were physicists, as are nearly all the members of the Flat Earth Society.)

God created the Universe and pre-exists it though, so can't be its center.

Isn't it pretty much stock physics these days that everything is just membranes laid on top of one another? Everything is flat.

One of the more esoteric teachings of Mormanism is that heaven is located on (or near) a real, physical, planet named Kolob.

In the Battlestar Galactic series it is called Kobol.

OJ:

Actually, I think the membranes are wrinkled... and 14-dimensional, or some equally absurd thing. At least, that makes the math work out nicely.

Mike;

Of course their theories are nonsense, it's just amusing how they all end up "proving" the ancient views right.

There seems no plan because it’s all plan. There seems no center because it’s all center. - CS Lewis

Membranes?

No, it's all ball-bearings.

In their way, these crackpots are close cousins to the trolls who wander through Internet places like this.

The crackpot believes his theories are supposed to be presumed to be correct until proven wrong. It is up to those who object to show where exactly the crackpot's mistakes have been made. The crackpot gets to decide if the objections are valid (and they never are). When confronted with contrary facts, the crackpot either ignores them or makes up his own counter-facts which just happen to perfectly fit the theory. The crackpot quickly resorts to insulting non-believers, and emits a sense of self-righteousness and superiority. And the crackpots are almost exclusively men, with only the occasional Ann Elk tossed in. Of course, the major difference is that no troll could ever produce a "1,000-page tome" on any subject.

And the great thing about a closed, homogeneous, symmetrical universe is that everywhere is the center. (The proof is an exercise for the student.)

Joe: I'm not supporting the idea! I just thought OJ would enjoy jumping on it. To me it's a reductio ad absurdum for his silly anti-science attitude.

Homocentric? What is this, queer eye for the straight planet?

What, of course, is left unsaid is that lumping Intelligent Design with Geocentrism ignores vital differences, one of which is that Geocentrism denies the mass of scientific evidence that can be gathered today by current instruments, while Intelligent Design explicitly adopts the results of Microbiology to challenge an idea whose evidence cannot be gathered today by current instruments. again, a facetious equvalence made on a single association to deny vital differences, because acknowledging them would shoot huge holes in a pet argument.

The cell has turned out to be far more complicated than Darwin or his contemporaries. Evolution survived because this process of discovery was so gradual, they could talk themselves into thinking Nature could do it because THEY IMAGINED IT.

P:

No. it doesn't. The mass of evidence demonstrates geocentrism.

Amos:

You flatter yourself... :)

Geocentrism sounds environmentalist.

God obligated us to care for the Earth, but gave us dominion over it.

Sorry orrin, your evidence is all mere appearance. "Judge not according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment."

P:

Yes, reason demonstrate that appearance is all we can know scientifically. We know truths via faith.