Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,455 Year: 3,712/9,624 Month: 583/974 Week: 196/276 Day: 36/34 Hour: 2/14


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Unacknowledged Accuracy of Genesis 1
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2786 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 40 of 302 (352632)
09-27-2006 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by jar
09-26-2006 11:27 AM


Re: Illogic in genesis.
jar writes:
As late as 300 BC Euclid still believed that vision worked by rays going from the eye to the object.
Leonardo Da Vinci also held to this opinion (according to a statement of his which I quoted in a paper on the subject for an English class about a hundred years ago).
I can't help but wonder how these men explained why it is that we cannot see in the dark!?
Edited by doctrbill, : Edited to pose question.

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by jar, posted 09-26-2006 11:27 AM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by MangyTiger, posted 09-27-2006 5:24 PM doctrbill has not replied

doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2786 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 57 of 302 (356309)
10-13-2006 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Mespo
10-11-2006 4:07 PM


Re: Please explain Morning and Evening
Mespo writes:
Please explain the concept of "morning" and "evening" after the light and darkness had been separated.
Maybe doctrbill's Adult Sunday School can help.

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Mespo, posted 10-11-2006 4:07 PM Mespo has not replied

doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2786 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 61 of 302 (361315)
11-03-2006 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Equinox
10-30-2006 12:31 PM


Re: ahh, the truth , yet again...
From the articles to which you link, regarding
The Light:
quote:
We need not suppose that God spake just as a human being speaks, but the coming forth of light out of thick darkness would have seemed to a spectator as the effect of a divine command ...
The Earth:
quote:
The word "earth" ... must not be understood to mean ... land ... but simply matter in general
The Water:
quote:
... "Waters" means not the oceans and seas as we know them, but the gaseous condition of the matter ...
The Firmament:
quote:
What was it to divide? ... the gaseous matter ... above the heaven ... the "waters" below it include the clouds of our atmosphere as well as the oceans and seas ...
The Luminaries:
quote:
... originally their light was merged in that of the earth's own outer covering of light, ...
Let me see if I've got this straight.
  • God did NOT speak things into existence.
  • Water means Gas (except where it means Water)
  • Firmament separates Water from Gas (or is it Gas from Water?)
  • Earth means Matter in General (except where it means Earth)
  • Earth once produced its own light!?
So: The "Word of God" is inaccurate; he didn't actually say anything during creation but the author's imagination was working overtime.
Does this mean Jesus turned Gas into Wine, and is coming back again to save matter in general?
How could anyone suggest that these guys are trying to rewrite Genesis?

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Equinox, posted 10-30-2006 12:31 PM Equinox has not replied

doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2786 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 107 of 302 (382469)
02-04-2007 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by MacCullock
02-04-2007 12:00 PM


Obviously not reading the Bible
MacCullock writes:
What is between the waters above and below was MADE on the second day from pre-existing clouds and atmosphere.
The scripture doesn't mention what, if anything, was created between the waters on the second day, but it does say that the "firmament" was made on that day. Firmament is a Latin word, not an English word. In English we call it a 'dome,' as some Bible translators like to do. The "firmament" dome was created for the same reason as the Astro Dome: to keep the ground dry under it, and to hold up the big lights. This is what you get from Genesis when you actually read the Bible.
Please remember "create", at least in Genesis' early chapters is always a translation of the Hebrew "bara" which means a divine creation from nothing.
NO. IT DOESN'T. Silly Boy!
From the very sources which you cite: bara means "TO CUT, TO CARVE OUT, TO FORM BY CUTTING" and to the best of my knowledge, you can't cut "nothing." Besides, Saint Peter makes it clear that the universe was made from water.
Your disagreement may be about what "heaven" means in Genesis 1:1. The Hebrew "twot" can mean either the sky or the visible universe as this concordance ref shows.
You seem to have gone off half cocked here, and I'm going to let the humorous detail of your mis-reference slide, but seriously man, Heaven is defined at verse 8. "And God called the firmament Heaven." What more do you need in the way of "Obvious." Sure, the region between the ground and the dome is also called 'heaven,' and the word 'heaven' is used metaphorically of righteous government, but aside from those permutations there is no reason to believe that the author(s) describe anything like our concept of earth and space. In your post you cite and link to Psalm 91; and I am wondering if you have actually considered the implication of verse 6:
quote:
The sun rises at one end of the heavens and follows its course to the other end.
Lovely poetry but it speaks to a geocentric view of the universe.
I am ever amazed at the complex mental gymnastics required to deny the simple words and obvious imagery of Genesis Chapter One. Beginning at verse one the believer is taught to ignore the Bronze Age philosopy revealed there and to imagine it rather: Space Age science.
I can almost remember what it was like to be a creationist.
It is a terrible feeling.
A feeling of being outgunned.
A feeling of ignorance.
And where was God ?

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by MacCullock, posted 02-04-2007 12:00 PM MacCullock has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by arachnophilia, posted 02-04-2007 11:16 PM doctrbill has replied
 Message 113 by danny, posted 02-06-2007 1:25 AM doctrbill has replied

doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2786 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 110 of 302 (382486)
02-04-2007 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by arachnophilia
02-04-2007 11:16 PM


Re: Obviously not reading the Bible
Hi Arach,
Thanks for the info.
Hope you don't mind my jumping in on that one, but then I figured there was plenty of nonsense to keep a number of us busy.
Always a pleasure watching you work.

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by arachnophilia, posted 02-04-2007 11:16 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by arachnophilia, posted 02-04-2007 11:35 PM doctrbill has replied

doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2786 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 112 of 302 (382493)
02-04-2007 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by arachnophilia
02-04-2007 11:35 PM


Re: Obviously not reading the Bible
Thank you for the kind words.
It feels like flattery, - but then - I know it true.
Seriously though, I defer to and often rely upon your knowledge of Hebrew. As for my knowledge of theology and the text - that comes in part from a little formal education and a lot of hitting the books. I could wish for another lifetime to spend in pursuit of my biblical hobby.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by arachnophilia, posted 02-04-2007 11:35 PM arachnophilia has not replied

doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2786 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 121 of 302 (382917)
02-06-2007 11:29 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by danny
02-06-2007 1:25 AM


Re: Obviously not reading the Bible
danny writes:
Doctrbill, as I understand it, you are saying that the firmament can be equated with the edge of the universe,
As one commentary puts it:
quote:
“the upper limit of created order.”
it is the expanse (and expansion (?) of the universe).
Expanse, yes but only in the sense of spaciousness. The Hebrew word is an industrial technical term meaning: hammered out and in other places the Heaven is said to be solid like a cast metal mirror.
In my own interpretation of the verse "God made the firmament, and separated the water under the firmament from the water above it" I have asked the question - How can there be water 'above' the firmament? To me this indicates something that stands outside the universe. I have figured that the only possible way for this to occur is if something existed BEFORE the universe was created, only then can it be said to be outside or 'above' the firmament.
OK.
Genesis is quite specific that there was indeed such a situation - "The earth was a vast waste, darkness covered the deep, and the spirit of God hovered over the surface of the water." Here we are specifically told that there were at least two elememts that existed before the creation of the universe - the spirit of God and the water (this must surely be a reference to the waters 'above' the firmament.)
All the waters, I think.
The next step of pondering the above verse was asking - How can the firmament 'separate' the waters above the firmament from the waters below?
I view the waters below the firmament as the energy that initially poured into the newly created universe (although I'm not sure whether the Hebrew word for water can be used in this sense),
Sounds like you may be getting the cart ahead of the horse. We are talking about Act Two of Genesis Week and you speak of the “newly created universe” already. And, as far as I know, ancient philosophers did not use the word water to describe energy. They did, however, have a liquid energy source (naptha) which may have been loosely, or poetically, described as “water.”
whereas the waters above the firmament must be viewed as some kind of energy that could exist in a state where there was no physical space.
Seems to me that you can’t manipulate something which occupies “no physical space.” I mean: Where is it? With what is it combined? How do you extract it, separate it, put it in its place?
As mentioned earlier I view the firmament, not only as the expanse of the universe but also it's expansion.
You are welcome to your view, of course, but before you build further on the word firmament, you should really look it up in a dictionary, keeping in mind that this word hails from at least 405 AD when Jerome produced the Latin Vulgate Bible. Firmament implies limitation, NOT expansion.
When the universe was first created there were only two elements at play, the initial energy and expansion. As the universe expanded it cooled, as it cooled the initial energy changed 'forms' to make sub-atomic particles, then atoms, then the first elements (hydrogen etc), then gases, liquids, solids etc and on and on until we have todays visible universe.
So, the firmament (expansion) separates the waters (various 'forms' of energy) by cooling the universe down as it expands.
A nice scenario; if you don’t care what you say.
I agree that we should put our imaginations to it and try to find a way for people to see it together. That is what I have attempted to do. Beginning at about twenty years of age, I set out to explain and legitimize the holy scripture to a world of unbelievers. In the process, I learned that I did NOT, in the beginning, understand it myself. Long story short: I now seek to explain the holy scripture to believers and unbelievers.

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by danny, posted 02-06-2007 1:25 AM danny has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by danny, posted 02-06-2007 11:57 AM doctrbill has replied

doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2786 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 126 of 302 (382943)
02-06-2007 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by danny
02-06-2007 11:57 AM


Re: Obviously not reading the Bible
danny writes:
I use word 'expansion' because in my Oxford Collins Holy Bible Concordance it specifically relates it to 'firmament'...
You need to quote this concordance. I suspect that you are misinterpreting what you find there.
When you say firmament implies limitation, does this mean in a purely static sense, ie: so far and no more?
A firmament (L. firmamentum) is a supportive structure. i.e. solid, immobile. A scaffolding fits the definition very nicely.
You haven't bothered to look it up for yourself, have you? Let me make it easy for you. Pay special attention to the etymology: http://education.yahoo.com/...nce/dictionary/entry/firmament
There are graphics, you know; old woodcuts and etchings made in the day of the scholars who first produced the Bible in English. These artworks demonstrate the 'scientific' perspective of pre-copernican cosmology. In these works: the firmament is clearly depicted in a way which satisfies the qualities given it by the text.
I must stress, I'm n ot trying to lay down some law with all this, it's more an exercise in the possibilities of interpretation.
I'm not worried. There is only one interpretation consistent with both the text AND 'science' as it existed when these lines were written.

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by danny, posted 02-06-2007 11:57 AM danny has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024