Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
[quote=Mallon;47199953] Even aside from the etymology of the word, the Bible describes the firmament as being "hard as a mirror of cast bronze" (Job 37:18) and crystaline or "sparkling like ice" (Ezekiel 1:22).quote]
37:18 Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass? No bronze here.
Even aside from the etymology of the word, the Bible describes the firmament as being "hard as a mirror of cast bronze" (Job 37:18) and crystaline or "sparkling like ice" (Ezekiel 1:22).quote]
37:18 Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass? No bronze here.
The passage is probably clearer in non-KJV translations; however, the original text implies a surface of mirror.
You ignore the passage in Ezekiel. Note that the passages below it which talk about the angels below the surface, and God's throne above it. Definitely gives the impression of solidity.
The passage is probably clearer in non-KJV translations; however, the original text implies a surface of mirror.
You ignore the passage in Ezekiel. Note that the passages below it which talk about the angels below the surface, and God's throne above it. Definitely gives the impression of solidity.
That is the whole point of the verse in Job; to describe the firmament as likened to a sort of large, mighty, mirror; which during the daytime it certainly is. The sun shining on it from above gives it the reflective 'silver backing' necessary in glass mirrors. It reflects and diffuses light from all sources within and below it. Absent the sun, at night it becomes clear, revealing the vastness of space, stars, etc. Very ingenious of God to design it that way.
I did respond to Ezekiel 1 but it failed to post. This 'frosty' firmament is only above the heads of the creatures, and is part of the whole strange apparatus. It is not descriptive of the entire "firmament of heaven".
owg
Last edited by oldwiseguy; 2nd June 2008 at 03:24 PM.
That is the whole point of the verse in Job; to describe the firmament as likened to a sort of large, mighty, mirror; which during the daytime it certainly is. The sun shining on it from above gives it the reflective 'silver backing' necessary in glass mirrors. It reflects and diffuses light from all sources within and below it. Absent the sun at night it becomes clear, revealing the vastness of space, stars, etc. Very ingenious of God to design it that way.
I did respond to Ezekiel 1 but it failed to post. This 'frosty' firmament is only above the heads of the creatures, and is part of the whole strange apparatus. It is not descriptive of the entire "firmament of heaven".
owg
I agree that the former is using simile; however, doesn't this support Lamoureux's point? The idea of the solid firmament was a commonly held belief of the times, and the use of such simile would make the text more understandable to the reader of the time.
Where I think it gets taken too far is when the metaphor is extended to try and match some scientific truth. The firmament was not meant to mean the atmosphere, and it is a mistake to try and make the connection - it can only lead to misunderstanding of the meaning of the original text.
Even aside from the etymology of the word, the Bible describes the firmament as being "hard as a mirror of cast bronze" (Job 37:18) and crystaline or "sparkling like ice" (Ezekiel 1:22).quote]
37:18 Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass? No bronze here.
Oops I can see where you might misread the AV here. It is not molten-looking glass, looking like melted glass, but a 'molten' looking-glass. Unlike King Jame's time when mirrors were made of glass (which is where looking glasses go the name), when the bible was written they were made of solid metal. We find the same word molten used to describe the huge brass bowl or 'molten sea' in 1Kings 7:16. 'Molten' refers to cast metal, usually bronze or brass, which is where Mallon's NIV gets its translation.
But the issue is the hardness of the sky in the description not the precise metallurgy. Interesting the way 'strong' or 'hard' comes in front of the simile "hard as a mirror of cast bronze". They may not have thought the sky was really a bronze mirror, but they did think it was a hard as one.
Incidentally it is interesting how perceptions change. We think of mirrors as fragile, easily broken, in biblical times a brass mirror was probably one of the toughest items in the household.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by Assyrian; 2nd June 2008 at 03:39 PM.
The firmament was not meant to mean the atmosphere, and it is a mistake to try and make the connection - it can only lead to misunderstanding of the meaning of the original text.
Oops I can see where you might misread the AV here. It is not molten-looking glass, looking like melted glass, but a 'molten' looking-glass. Unlike King Jame's time when mirrors were made of glass (which is where looking glasses go the name), when the bible was written they were made of solid metal. We find the same word molten used to describe the huge brass bowl or 'molten sea' in 1Kings 7:16. 'Molten' refers to cast metal, usually bronze or brass, which is where Mallon's NIV gets its translation.
But the issue is the hardness of the sky in the description not the precise metallurgy. Interesting the way 'strong' or 'hard' comes in front of the simile "hard as a mirror of cast bronze". They may not have thought the sky was really a bronze mirror, but they did think it was a hard as one.
Incidentally it is interesting how perceptions change. We think of mirrors as fragile, easily broken, in biblical times a brass mirror was probably one of the toughest items in the household.
I agree that it was a description for its day and time. What is interesting is that it is likened to a mirror, which it actually is kinda/sorta in that in the daytime it traps and reflects light.
I agree that it was a description for its day and time. What is interesting is that it is likened to a mirror, which it actually is kinda/sorta in that in the daytime it traps and reflects light.
owg
Interesting.
__________________ I believe everything in my Bible is true—even the part about genuine leather.
If "earth" and "water" are really two different words that describe one undifferentiated whole before Genesis 1:8, why bother using two different, normally non-synonymous words? I assume that there is a perfectly usable Hebrew word for "mud".
I'm not sure mud is the best word either. The original earth was formless and deep and "waters" was likely the best hebrew word to describe it. But we know for certain that land didn't exist prior to verse 9. And we know for certain that waters were used to describe earth prior to verse 9, but never after verse 9.
Originally Posted by shernren
The fact that two different words are being used shows that your thesis is untenable. Even if the physical separation of water and earth is only accomplished in verse 8, the ontological separation of water and earth has already been accomplished from verse 2
Wrong! Read closely. The waters is title description of earth, not a distinct component as it became in verse 10. From verse 10 on, waters only refers to bodies of water. The original earth was formless and empty—the waters. The post verse 9 earth was dry solid land.
Originally Posted by shernren
There is already a "heaven" in existence before the creation of the firmament in vv. 7-8, some kind of heaven which has properties not contingent upon the firmament, and in which the firmament is later set. vv. 7-8 clearly mean that the firmament is set in heaven - the firmament is heaven insofar as it is located in heaven. How can I know that? Because both qualifiers are used in tandem later on:
I tend to look at Gen. 1:1 as a summary statement of the entire creation being that dry land and the expanse weren't created until verse 6 and 9. But even if it was, it was not in the form we view it today just as the earth was in a different original form.
Your posts are dificult to respond to, Shernren. I wish you'd try a different tone.
__________________ I believe everything in my Bible is true—even the part about genuine leather.
Last edited by Calminian; 2nd June 2008 at 08:05 PM.
Linear Mode
