Creation

I know better than to ask. But do you have any clue what evidence scientist cite for the BBT? I see here that you just label certain concepts assumptions, but do you know what the heck you are talking about? I ask this because you have a track record here of getting science wrong.

Surely it is okay to cite the Bible for what it says in the Accuracy and Inerrancy thread, particularly when someone claims that the text is in error.

Non sequitur.

Moses didn't write Genesis.

I did - the word "firmament". According to Wikipedia:

quote:

---

The word "firmament" is used to translate rāqaʿ (רָקִ֫יעַ‬), a word used in Biblical Hebrew. It is derived from the root raqqəʿ (רָקַע), meaning "to beat or spread out thinly", e.g., the process of making a dish by hammering thin a lump of metal.

---

Wikipedia again:

quote:

---

The word is anglicised from Latin firmamentum, used in the Vulgate (4th century).[5] This in turn is derived from the Latin root firmus, a cognate with "firm".[5] The word is a Latinization of the Greek stereōma, which appears in the Septuagint (c. 200 BC).

---

Plants growing on the third day (Geneis 1:11-13) before the sun was created (Genesis 1:14-19).

Oh dear - glad you got that sorted.

quote:

---

εἱλίσσω, Ionic and poetic and occasional in later prose for ἑίσσω (Winer's Grammar, 2, 1 a.): (present passive ἑιλίσσομαι); εἴλω to press close, to roll up (cf. Liddell and Scott, under the word, at the end)), to roll up or together: Revelation 6:14 R G; but L T Tr WH have restored ἑλισσόμομαι. (From Homer down.)

---

That's from Thayer's Greek Lexicon.

quote:

---

εἱλίσσω heilssō, hi-lis'-so; a prolonged form of a primary but defective verb εἵλω helō (of the same meaning); to coil or wrap:roll together. See also G1667.

---

From Strong's.

quote:

---

I find no strong's # for this word nor do I find a definition. It is used in the Textus Receptus, Morphological Greek New Testament, and the Septuagint 1 time in each. So far I haven't found it in early Greek literature.

---

Verbs come in many flavours, they conjugate.The verb 'to run' in the past tense is 'ran' and in the present tense is 'running'. Its somewhat irregular, but not as irregular as 'go' which becomes 'went'.είλισσόμενον is the perfect mediopassive form of εἱλίσσω or ελίσσω - that's what the -μενον suffix is telling us. This form doesn't alter verbs in English as it does in Greek. In any event it is translated in the KJV as

quote:

---

when it is rolled together

---

NIV as

quote:

---

being rolled up

---

Douay-Rheims as

quote:

---

folded up

---

Young's as

quote:

---

rolled up

---

So the evidence confirms the verb is as I said. You put a lot of effort into my interesting piece of trivia. Nobody says that word is in the Greek Text in that exact form. It'd be like me saying the sentence 'The evolution of cats is interesting' contains reference to the verb 'evolve' and you arguing that the word 'evolve' is not literally in the sentence. Or 'I went running' and you saying the verb 'go' and 'run' are not in the sentence. It's pretty silly given the triviality of the point, don't you think?Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

Hi ringo, Last I heard the sun was part of the universe.Since the Universe existed complete at the end of verse 1 there is no plants before the sun.Either you are mistaken or whoever you are talking behind do not know what they are talking about.God Bless,

Hi NoNukes,Did you put me back on your talk to list? But we are not talking about the BBT. It does not start until the universe exists.In other words we are talking about where it came from.Now if you know of any evidence of T=0 I am all ears. The only scientific answer I have been given to date is: "we don't know".To me, "we don't know" translates into we will assume it exists and then go from there. And I nor anyone else should question what the BBT says.

Hi ringo, First thing is that Wikipedia is not an authority on Biblical Hebrew.Never the less it does tell you where the domed earth belief came from. It states plainly that it came from the Latin Vulgate which is not the Hebrew text. The Latin Vulgate was translated by the Catholic Church.I like Gods definition of raki'a better than that of any man or woman.

quote:

---

Genesis 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

---

Remember that whatever it is it begins at the surface of the water and extends upwards to wherever water exists. That could mean it is even outside of our milky way.So God called the expanse which is one of the definitions of raki'a, heaven which is the sky, even to where the stars are and including them.God Bless,

Hi ringo, And you know that because________________God Bless,

That isn't what it says.

And neither are you. It says that it came from the Septuagint, which is the closest thing to the "original" Hebrew text that we have. You're thinking backwards. You're projecting the modern concept of "space" backwards onto the word "heaven". Yes, the stars were seen as lamps attached to the firmament (ceiling). There's no reason to think there was any appreciable thickness to the firmament.

The idea that Genesis was written by Moses is just a tradition.

Hi ringo, My Bible Language degrees and further studies would disagree with you. But the nearest stars to Earth are in the Alpha Centauri triple-star system, about 4.37 light years away.The star Deneb is the farthest star that can be easily seen with the naked eye. It is thought to be between 1,400 and 3,000 light years from Earth.So if those are attached to the ceiling as the ancient Greeks believed they are a long way from the earth and therefore a roof over planet earth is nonsense.God Bless,