Bible · Objection
The Bible describes a flat earth with a solid dome and says the sun stands still, so it cannot be a reliable revelation.
Why people find it persuasive
Passages speak of the earth's 'foundations', 'pillars', and 'windows of heaven', and Joshua 10 says the sun stood still. Ancient Near Eastern cosmology had a solid sky, and reading Scripture as a modern science text seems to place it in conflict with astronomy.
Important distinctions
- • Phenomenological language (how things appear) versus technical scientific description.
- • Poetic imagery versus prose claims.
- • What the text asserts versus the cosmological background it uses.
Christian response
- • Everyday speech in every era uses appearance language; modern meteorologists still say 'sunrise'. Scripture's purpose is theological, not to teach astronomy.
- • Many biblical cosmological terms are poetic. Job 26:7 speaks of the earth hanging on nothing, while Psalm 104 uses architecture imagery for creation.
- • Some scholars, such as John Walton, argue the text uses the cognitive environment of its time to communicate who God is without endorsing that cosmology as revelation.
- • The historical church, including Augustine in De Genesi ad litteram, warned believers against making Scripture look foolish by dogmatic claims about nature.
Strongest version of the objection
The Bible describes a flat earth with a solid dome and says the sun stands still, so it cannot be a reliable revelation.
Christian counterresponse
Accommodation is a coherent view of inspiration: God communicates through the language and categories of the audience. Christians also differ on how much the text endorses ancient cosmology.
Remaining questions
Questions remain about how literally to read Genesis 1 and how to describe divine accommodation without undermining authority.
Related arguments
For further study
Primary and secondary sources on both sides of this question. Reading the strongest opposing case is part of the work, not a concession.
The Text of the New Testament — Bruce Metzger and Bart Ehrman
The standard textbook on manuscripts, variants, and how critical texts are established.
Misquoting Jesus — Bart Ehrman
The popular skeptical case that textual variants matter more than apologists admit — required reading for anyone answering it.
Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism — Elijah Hixson and Peter Gurry (eds.)
Evangelical textual scholars correcting overstated apologetic claims about manuscript counts and dating.
The Canon of the New Testament — Bruce Metzger
How the canon actually formed, against both conspiracy and instant-consensus stories.
Canon Revisited — Michael Kruger
A theological and historical account of canon formation answering the 'the church created the Bible' objection.