Judaism and Geocentrism

I’ve blogged before about geocentrism as a modern phenomenon. Geocentrism, the belief that the Earth is at the center of the universe, was a center piece of the Ptolemaic system and was overthrown by the work of Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo. However, certain extremist religious groups have continued to insist on geocentricity and have claimed to have scientific bases for their beliefs. Until recently, I believed that the modern geocentrist movement existed only in certain extreme Christian groups especially Protestants.¹ This view is in error. There are ultra-Orthodox Jews who are geocentrist.

Most of the active Jewish geocentrists are Lubavitchers. In contrast to the Christian geocentrists who have as their main impetus for geocentrism various Biblical verses, 2 the Jewish geocentrists seem to in a large part be motivated to preserve the correctness of certain statements by Maimonides. In particular, they defend the cosmology as set out by the Maimonides in the Mishne Torah. I am puzzled by these apologetics for two reasons: First, there does not appear to be any similar attempt to defend incorrect medical statements by Maimonides. Second, there’s no theological need even among charedim to believe that Maimonides was infallible. Prior to this, I have seen attempts to argue for what amount to infallibility of the Talmudic authors but had not previously encountered such attempts where later authors such as Maimonides were concerned.3

Like the Christian geocentrists, the Jewish geocentrists prefer two lines of argument which are contradictory and yet are used in tandem. First, they argue that under General Relativity one can always construct a coordinate system with a given point as stationary so one might as well assume that the Earth is at the center.⁴ This argument has been sometimes called “weak geocentrism.

The second argument, “strong geocentrism,” is the claim that the Earth is at the center of the universe in a meaningful fashion; that is, there are lines of evidence which only make sense if the Earth is at the center of the universe. How both these claims can be made simultaneously is not clear to me. Apparently, studying Talmud on a daily basis does not help ones logical skills as much as one might hope. As with the Christian geocentrists, the Jewish geocentrists have a strong anti-science bent; they either insinuate or state outright that there exists a massive conspiracy within the scientific establishment to discredit geocentrism. Like their Christian counterparts, the Jewish geocentrists credit the Copernican system with inspiring later heresy such as evolution.

On the whole, the Jewish geocentrists in thoughts and arguments are very similar to the Christian geocentrists. As with the Jewish and Christian anti-evolutionists it is not obvious to me whether there is cross-fertilization or independent arrival at the same ideas. I suspect there is cross-fertilization but the mechanism is unclear. More research is needed.
1.
While Catholic geocentrists also exist they are rarer than their Protestant counterparts. Geocentrism is in fact not the most extreme extant cosmological belief; there are a handful of extant flat-earthers especially among Islamic groups. See for example this video of a debate on Iraqi television about whether the Earth is flat.
2. Such as Joshua 10 in which the sun stands still.
3. Orthodox apologists use a variety of different arguments to defend against apparent errors of fact in the Talmud. One of the more transparent attempts is to claim that the nature of the universe has changed since the Talmudic time. This claim shows up in a variety of different forms including explaining the Talmud’s apparent confusion about the human female menstrual cycle. My impression is that many such claims are pro forma; I have yet to find anyone who was been willing to state explicitly that they think the basics of human anatomy have changed in the last 2000 years.
4. I’m not sure this is in fact strictly true. I’d appreciate input on this subject from people who understand general relativity. In fact, this weak geocentrism is not sufficient to save Maimonides's cosmology since he has the various planets in circular orbits about the Earth and has the sun in a circular orbit about the earth (along with a few epicycles). This contradicts observed data even if the Earth were stationary.

Modern Geocentrism

Naftali was kind enough to give me a copy of a tract that he received in the mail. This isn’t any ordinary tract. It is geocentrist. That’s right: There are people who still believe the sun revolves around the earth. They even direct you to a website, www.geocentricity.com , apparently run by one Gerardus D. Bouw who has a PhD in astronomy from Case Western University and is a professor emeritus at a small Methodist university.

I’m not going to discuss in detail why geocentrism is stupid or why this website contradicts itself. I will however briefly note that the proponents cannot make up their minds whether all evidence is completely consistent with both geocentrism and the standard view of the universe, or whether there is in fact actual evidence for geocentrism. Logically, either but not both of these can be true.[1]

There are four similarities in both the geocentrists’ rhetoric and the rhetoric of anti-evolution proponents.

First, the geocentrists base their views on their interpretation of the Bible. According to the pamphlet, “The change in theories damaged our viewpoint of the Bible, which is geocentric. The King James Bible is openly geocentric.” This is almost identical to what anti-evolutionists say. For example, Answers in Genesis, the largest Young Earth Creationist ministry in the United States, emphasizes that it is devoted to “defending the Bible from the very first verse."

Second, the geocentrists assert that “if the earth is not fixed on center stage of the universe, then life on earth and man himself are essentially meaningless.”[2] This claim is identical to claims made by all sorts of anti-evolutionists, such as young earth creationist Henry Morris and intelligent design proponent Phillip Johnson.

Third, the geocentrists attempt to disguise what they talking about by changing its name. However, their disguises are even more superficial than those of the anti-evolution proponents. The geocentrists claim that they aren’t proponents of ideologically-driven “geocentrism” but rather the modern, scientific notion of “geocentricity,” just as creationism became creation science and then later became intelligent design and “sudden emergence theory.”

Fourth, the geocentrists emphasize that they have supporters who have PhDs, some of which are even in physics and astronomy. This claim is identical to how anti-evolution proponents point how they have supporters who have PhDs in mathematics, chemistry, and even cell biology.

To all this one might retort that geocentrists are a tiny minority. However, 18% of the population of the United States thinks that the sun revolves around the earth. Geocentrism is so common that Answers in Genesis has felt a need to respond to it in multiple articles on its website. The next time an anti-evolution proponent makes one of these arguments, ask the person, “Hey! I’ve heard geocentrists make the same claim. How is your claim any different?”

---

[1] Actually, I can’t resist pointing out another example of how interesting these people are. Bouw correctly explains arrow notation and then uses it to make an apologetic argument for how you don’t want to be in hell for 10↑↑10 years and that eternity is even worse.

[2] Bouw also claims that heliocentrism leads to the mistaken notion that man is the measure of all things as opposed to God. I’m a bit confused how to reconcile this with the claim that humanity not being at the center of the universe makes humanity meaningless.

Edit: Fixed mistake pointed out be Harry below.