The Motion of the Sun

Conclusion

The scriptures frequently and consistently describe the perceived motion of the sun using terms such as “rise,” “rising,” “set,” “setting,” “going down”, etc.  In fact, this is consistent with what any person will see with their eyes.  The sun appears to rise or come up from below the horizon in the morning, and it appears to set or go down below the horizon in the evening.

It is worth pointing out that what the scripture does not describe the sun as doing is moving off into the distance in a lateral fashion.  And in fact, this is not what we observe with our eyes either.  Objects which move away into the distance always remain above the horizon and appear to shrink or diminish in size as they move further away.  This is not what the sun appears to do and it is not how scripture describes the sun’s motion.  As the sun sets, it continues to remain visibly the same size the entire time, and it moves below the horizon as it does so.  Therefore, the proper understanding to derive from the Bible is that the sun does not appear to move away in the distance, but that it appears to rise and set above and below the horizon.  And this is consistent with what we observe with our eyes.

There may be some people who would argue that the two references above are suggestive of the sun rising in the west.  Being as there are no people who have ever observed the sun to rise in the west, it seems unlikely that someone would argue in favor of that.  However, for the sake of clarity, there are a few considerations that will aid in confirming that the passage is not making a statement which implies the rising of the sun in the west.  The NKJV and the NASB translations of these passages have been included for the sake of clarifying a point, though they are likely to be considered erroneous by anyone who believes that the KJV alone is trustworthy.

The hypothetical argument would be made on the suggestion that since “rising of the sun” is immediately followed by “from the west,” that the passage intends us to understand a relationship between the two statements, namely that the rising of the sun occurs in the west.  But it is not necessary to force the passage to mean this, on the basis of the following four points.

1. This first point applies only to the first verse, Isaiah 45:6.  Upon examining the NKJV and the NASB renderings of this passage, we can see that rather than using the preposition “from” with regard to “the west” or to “the setting of the sun,” the preposition “to” is used instead.  The effect is to make the verse say “from the rising of the sun to the west” instead of making it say “from the rising of the sun and [correspondingly] from the the west,” (brackets added to illustrate the hypothetical argument).

2. Secondly, if we do insist “from” as an absolutely correct word to use in both passages, the verses could be understood to mean that independently from both the east and west directions, it will be known that there is no god except the one true God (Isaiah 45:6), and that independently from both the east and west directions, the name of the Lord and His glory will be feared (Isaiah 59:19).  This is the position that I most favor.

3. Thirdly, based on the interlinear resources available at biblehub.com, it appears that the prepositions “from” or “to” are not even present in the original Hebrew.  Those prepositions have been necessarily inserted for the sake of English grammar.  “From the rising” is a single Hebrew word מִמִּזְרַח־ (S. Hebrew 4217), and “from the west” is a single Hebrew word וּמִמַּ֣עֲרָבָ֔הּ (S. Hebrew 4628).  In each case, a single Hebrew word has required multiple English words to be included in the translation in order to be rendered in English with proper grammar.  This is true regardless of what English translation is used, whether KJV or any other translation.  The point is that we should not be too insistent on the use of the preposition “from” rather than the word “to,” because these prepositions are not even present in the original Hebrew.

4. Fourthly, if we were to suggest that these two verses indicate that the sun rises in the west, we would be concluding that the Bible conflicts with itself given the other references which more clearly indicate that the sun rises in the east.

Conclusion

The Bible correlates the rising of the sun as being an action which is perceived as occurring in the east.  It also correlates the setting of the sun as being an action which is perceived as occurring in the west.  There are fewer references to correlate the setting of the sun with the west, but it does not seem necessary to question it because no one has ever observed the sun to rise anywhere other than from the east and no one has ever observed the sun to set anywhere other than in the west.  What the scripture describes correlates with what we observe with our own eyes.

For those two verses which some might construe to suggest that the sun rises in the west, it has been demonstrated in the four points above that those verses do not in fact indicate that the sun rises in the west.  As further support for this, it can be reiterated that no one has ever observed the sun to rise in the west.

In Psalm 19:6, The scripture describes the motion of the sun using the word “circuit.”  The definition of “circuit” as provided by the Oxford Languages dictionary is as follows:
Noun: a roughly circular line, route, or movement that starts and finishes at the same place.
Verb: move all the way around (a place or thing).

It is to be noted that the word circuit used in Psalm 19:6 is a noun, not a verb.  This denotes which definition should apply, though it is doubtful that many people will argue that there is a practical difference between the two definitions.

In examining the verse, it should be noted that although “circuit” is only used with regard to the portion of the sun’s motion which refers to its setting, the rising of the sun should not be excluded as part of that circuit.  A circuit necessarily has a starting and ending point which are in the same place and is at least approximately circular in its shape.

The proper understanding of the verse appears to be that the “circuit” simply refers to the path which the sun appears to take each day, from its rising to its setting and then back again.  Since the sun repeatedly rises again on each successive day, the perception is that it has completed a circuit; that since it rose again, it must have continued to move during the time when it was not seen, eventually returning to the position of rising again.

It has already been demonstrated that the Bible clearly describes the perceived motion of the sun as an up and down, rising and setting motion each day.  This implicitly means that the sun appears to rise from below the horizon each day and descend below the horizon each night.  This conclusion also correlates with the observations that we can make with out own eyes.  Therefore, in order to reconcile the perceived rising and setting of the sun that scripture repeatedly emphasizes with the circuit mentioned in Psalm 19:6, the circuit that the sun takes must be understood to be a path that is followed from over the observed surface of the earth to under the observed surface of the earth repeatedly.

It is to be noted that when the sun’s circuit is properly reconciled with the perceived rising and setting motion each day, this does not facilitate the possibility of a circuit for the sun which is within a plane parallel to the earth’s surface.  To further reinforce this point, Psalm 19:6 actually defines the path of the sun’s circuit as “from the end of the heavens...to the end of them.”  The end of the heavens can be understood as being the sky at its lowest or furthest observable points, namely at the horizon.  So the circuit that is described is not parallel to the earth’s surface, but is perceptively perpendicular to it.  This is how scripture describes the circuit and this is further confirmed by what our own eyes see when we observe the motion of the sun.  Additionally, It is important to remember that scripture does not contradict itself.  The idea that the sun has a “circuit” is not a contradiction to the idea that the sun “rises and sets.”  The two ideas can be reconciled by understanding that the circuit of the sun must incorporate the perceived rising and setting motion which a vast number of other scriptures confirm.  This can only be reconciled with a circuit that is perpendicular to the perceived surface of the earth, not a circuit that is parallel to it.

Conclusion

The scriptures describe the sun as moving in a circuit (a path which ends in the same place it started).  Based on the scripturally-defined circuit parameters of “from the end of the heavens...to the end of them,” it can only mean that the circuit is one which is perpendicular to the perceived surface of the earth, similar to the path you would get from tracing the edge of a coin that stands on its edge.  The orientation of this perpendicular circuit, according to the Bible, is such that its edges are on the east and the west, and we would understand half of the circuit passes out of view to go “under the earth” perspectively (which is when night occurs).

A horizontal circuit which is oriented parallel to the perceived surface of the earth contradicts the scriptures, since it would not accommodate the perceived rising and setting of the sun from below the horizon to underneath the horizon, so this is not a viable explanation.  To further strengthen this last argument, one could observe that there is only one verse which mentions the circuit of the sun, and there are very many verses which refer to the rising and setting of the sun.  However, it is important to acknowledge that the Bible does not contradict itself, and so an argument to majority in that fashion is not necessary.