POLL: Which of these elements of the creation story do you believe?

[rakovsky]

The firmament is properly translated in Modern English as 'sky', so yes I agree with question number 1. Who goes around calling Sky firmament these days except for those looking to equivocate about the wording.

I am glad that you agree with question #1 in my poll.
However, sky is not quite the same as heavens. In Genesis 1:8, God calls the firmament heavens, as opposed to sky. Sky refers commonly to the air hundreds of feet above the ground all the way up to the stratosphere.

The firmament on the other hand in Hebrew refers to the concept of a firm layer like beaten out metal that supposedly is over the clouds and in which the celestial lights/stars are placed.

The NKJV is made for modern English and says:

6 Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” 7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.​

The word firmament makes sense to me and I've been hearing King James English with the Bible since I grew up.

The NIV unfortunately is a flawed version when it comes to understanding Bible ideas, even though it uses colloquial speech:

Try Answering These From Your NIV
https://www.chick.com/information/bibleversions/articles/nivquiz.asp

New International Version: What today's Christian needs to know about the NIV
http://www.tbsbibles.org/articles/n...odays-christian-needs-to-know-about-the-niv-1

Is the NIV the Word of God?
http://www.scionofzion.com/niv2.htm

 

[rakovsky]

There is no reason to believe that day means anything other then a normal day in Genesis 1. Everything else is pure nonsense.

Yes, there is a good reason. The sun was not made yet to mark time. We don't know if the days then would count 24 hours exactly on a stopwatch or 1000 hours or more. Even days today are not exactly 24 hours and can vary.

 

[StanJ]

I am glad that you agree with question #1 in my poll.
However, sky is not quite the same as heavens. In Genesis 1:8, God calls the firmament heavens, as opposed to sky. Sky refers commonly to the air hundreds of feet above the ground all the way up to the stratosphere.
The firmament on the other hand in Hebrew refers to the concept of a firm layer like beaten out metal that supposedly is over the clouds and in which the celestial lights/stars are placed.
The NKJV is made for modern English and says:

6 Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” 7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.​

The word firmament makes sense to me and I've been hearing King James English with the Bible since I grew up.

Well I'm going to assume that you're not KJVO, but as you still quote from the NKJV, you're still not getting the proper impact of Modern English translations. Yes I also heard firmament when I was growing up 50 years ago but that doesn't mean that it was the correct word.
I suggest you read the following; https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen 1:8&version=NIV;NET;NLT;NRSV;ISV

As far as the garbage about the NIV is concerned, that's totally off topic here so I suggest you open another thread about it.

 

[StanJ]

Yes, there is a good reason. The sun was not made yet to mark time. We don't know if the days then would count 24 hours exactly on a stopwatch or 1000 hours or more. Even days today are not exactly 24 hours and can vary.

I'm pretty sure my last dozen posts or so have proven that you are wrong in this regard. You keep asserting this, but you offer no proof to support your fallacious assertion.

 

[StanJ]

Get a clue, Moses is at the base of Sinai. Have you ever considered the possibility the God told him how He created the world.
Have a nice day
Mark

No doubt in my mind because that's what Paul tells us but may I ask if you actually understood my post? Seems to me based on your response that you didn't.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

All I will say is 1,00 years is a blink of an eye to God. So not sure how to take things when it says "In 7 days". 7 of our days or 7 of his, though He doesn't have "time" per say where hes at. Regardless I still believe it took 7 earth days. And more importantly I don't care about any of this because God not giving a test when we die. Hes not going to be like "So you think the 7 days meant 1,000 years? Well your wrong, your going to hell now!". All this is just pointless argument amongst christians. Though to some degree it can be good argument if you think you are trying to correct/teach someone. But usually that just leads to fights.

 

[rakovsky]

Well I'm going to assume that you're not KJVO, but as you still quote from the NKJV, you're still not getting the proper impact of Modern English translations. Yes I also heard firmament when I was growing up 50 years ago but that doesn't mean that it was the correct word.
I suggest you read the following; https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen 1:8&version=NIV;NET;NLT;NRSV;ISV

As far as the garbage about the NIV is concerned, that's totally off topic here so I suggest you open another thread about it.

The Hebrews were not speaking modern English. So to better understand words, it's important to check Hebrew etymology dictionaries like Strong's, where it explains that the word here means something that is hammered out like metal. The Sumerians believed the firmament was tin. Abraham was from Ur in Sumer.

 

[rakovsky]

I'm pretty sure my last dozen posts or so have proven that you are wrong in this regard. You keep asserting this, but you offer no proof to support your fallacious assertion.

The fact that the sun was not yet made is one of several proofs that the days did not necessarily equate with the same exact time it takes today for the earth to rotate in relation to the sun.

 

[Papias]

I suggest you read through all the gospel to see how many times Jesus attributed the Torah to Moses.

No. Jesus referring to the "Law of Moses" doesn't mean that Jesus thought Moses wrote the pentateuch, any more than me referring to the Gospel of Christ means that I thought Jesus wrote the gospels.

In fact, the idea that Moses wrote Genesis is rejected by most Biblical scholars today, and has been for a long time. There is no support for it in the Bibles, and no support for it from studying the texts themselves. Even the Jewish people didn't have anything that said that until well after Jesus' life, - and modern Jews reject the idea of Mosaic authorship as well.

The firmament is properly translated in Modern English as 'sky', so yes I agree with question number 1. Who goes around calling Sky firmament these days except for those looking to equivocate about the wording.

No, the wording clearly means "hard bowl beaten out of metal". It's even the same word used elsewhere for hard bowl. This is also well known - both among Bible scholar as well as among anyone who speaks Hebrew. Here is a peer-reviewed paper making that clear, since some fundamentalists deny basic language:

https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/te...s/text/articles-books/seely-firmament-wtj.pdf

Oh, and Rakovsky - thanks for the nice comments! yes, I agree - #2 is the most deniable of them, based on a literal reading. Hey, should Stan call you "Rakovfirmment"? : )



In Christ-

Papias

 

[mark kennedy]

Yes, there is a good reason. The sun was not made yet to mark time. We don't know if the days then would count 24 hours exactly on a stopwatch or 1000 hours or more. Even days today are not exactly 24 hours and can vary.

Yea actually you do know that it was 24 hours, it's evident and obvious. The real question is whether your problem is semantics or miracles.

 

[mark kennedy]

No doubt in my mind because that's what Paul tells us but may I ask if you actually understood my post? Seems to me based on your response that you didn't.

You could always explain because you deal with a fair amount of unbelief on this forum

 

[StanJ]

The Hebrews were not speaking modern English. So to better understand words, it's important to check Hebrew etymology dictionaries like Strong's, where it explains that the word here means something that is hammered out like metal. The Sumerians believed the firmament was tin. Abraham was from Ur in Sumer.

Figured that out all on your own did you? There's not much to understand what I'm reading a Modern English translation, and I trust the credentialed scholars who are pre-eminant in their fields. Strong's does NOT indicate this at all.
http://biblehub.com/hebrew/3117.htm
It really doesn't matter what the Sumerians believed only what the Bible teaches. You seem to be more interested in every other point of view other than the Bible? So tell me what exactly do you believe the Bible is for? Do you not agree with what 2 Tim 3:16-17 states? It seems to me instead of accepting God's word as the truth you look for every reason you can find to doubt it and imply that it says something else, even though you're continually refuted.

 

[StanJ]

The fact that the sun was not yet made is one of several proofs that the days did not necessarily equate with the same exact time it takes today for the earth to rotate in relation to the sun.

The sun was created in Genesis 1:1. How do you not know this or not see it?

 

[StanJ]

You could always explain because you deal with a fair amount of unbelief on this forum

Well that's kind of weird because this is a 'Christians only' sub-forum so are you telling me that there are non Christians here debating that are disguised as Christians? Are there wolves in sheep's clothing on this sub-forum?

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

There are wolves here. They come and go.

 

[StanJ]

No. Jesus referring to the "Law of Moses" doesn't mean that Jesus thought Moses wrote the pentateuch, any more than me referring to the Gospel of Christ means that I thought Jesus wrote the gospels.

Of course it does and that along with Exodus 34:27-28 confirms it. Do you think that the Jews of the time would have accepted what Jesus said if it wasn't written down? Moses was long dead and the knowledge of that time was that he had written the Torah. Jesus said many times throughout the Gospels, "it is written".

In fact, the idea that Moses wrote Genesis is rejected by most Biblical scholars today, and has been for a long time. There is no support for it in the Bibles, and no support for it from studying the texts themselves. Even the Jewish people didn't have anything that said that until well after Jesus' life, - and modern Jews reject the idea of Mosaic authorship as well.

Seems someone has been reading Wikipedia? You may have been sucked in by the Documentary Hypothesis, but the Bible is for faith believers who accept what it shows. You may accept the J,P,E,D sources, but I believe the Bible and when Jesus said Moses wrote it, I believe it.
http://www.kencollins.com/bible/bible-p2.htm

No, the wording clearly means "hard bowl beaten out of metal". It's even the same word used elsewhere for hard bowl. This is also well known - both among Bible scholar as well as among anyone who speaks Hebrew. Here is a peer-reviewed paper making that clear, since some fundamentalists deny basic language:

The POINT is not what some liberal university says firmament means, the issue is what they call the firmament, and in most Modern English translations, they translate shâmayim as SKY.

 

[rakovsky]

No. Jesus referring to the "Law of Moses" doesn't mean that Jesus thought Moses wrote the pentateuch, any more than me referring to the Gospel of Christ means that I thought Jesus wrote the gospels.

In fact, the idea that Moses wrote Genesis is rejected by most Biblical scholars today, and has been for a long time. There is no support for it in the Bibles, and no support for it from studying the texts themselves. Even the Jewish people didn't have anything that said that until well after Jesus' life, - and modern Jews reject the idea of Mosaic authorship as well.



No, the wording clearly means "hard bowl beaten out of metal". It's even the same word used elsewhere for hard bowl. This is also well known - both among Bible scholar as well as among anyone who speaks Hebrew. Here is a peer-reviewed paper making that clear, since some fundamentalists deny basic language:

https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/te...s/text/articles-books/seely-firmament-wtj.pdf

Oh, and Rakovsky - thanks for the nice comments! yes, I agree - #2 is the most deniable of them, based on a literal reading. Hey, should Stan call you "Rakovfirmment"? : )



In Christ-

Papias

I think you are smart to get all this down. Or maybe in fact you are just of reasonable, normal intelligence.
#1 is clearly in Genesis 1, but it only gets about 10% of votes. I think it is because modern people don't believe that. So like Luther said, they change the Bible's meaning to conform to their views. Reading "beaten out" / "hard bowl" / "raqa" as "sky" is a good example.
Jeremiah 10:9 KJV uses this Hebrew word in the underlined part: "Silver spread into plates (muruqa) is brought from Tarshish,"

For #2, it never specifies how long the day is in Genesis 1. It's hard to say that it must be exactly 24 hours when in fact even modern days are longer or shorter than 24 hours because the rotation speed changes.
I think that what I have just underlined will not even click in the heads of some people who voted #2.

For #3 and #4, the Bible repeatedly says this and people in ancient times normally believed this. Presumably, at least once when they talked about the flat earth in the Bible they must have intended to express what they believed on this topic.
However, my question to you is can it be shown in some case that one time they definitely did not mean this just as poetry, but that in one of the verses they were not talking about poetry or using a figure of speech but definitely meant it literally?

For #5, yes the Bible says Adam was made directly from clay. So if you don't agree with that factually and believe that the intended meaning is correct, you are stuck arguing that this was only meant as a myth or allegory, like one of Jesus' parables, like Ezekiel being taken to see the dry bones, or like some traditional scholars see Jonah's story. Some traditional theologians like Deacon Kuraev propose that Jonah was a real person but his story was an allegory, as it nowhere says that Jonah actually underwent these things and that this was not an allegory. They point out that there is no record of Nineveh worshiping Israel's God.

Personally, I am open to the opinion that Jonah's story was factually intended, but my impression is that it was an allegory.

 

[rakovsky]

Yea actually you do know that it was 24 hours, it's evident and obvious. The real question is whether your problem is semantics or miracles.

Based on the poll half of people who think Adam came directly from clay say it was not necessarily 24 hours. Is their problem in your eyes semantics or miracles?

 

[StanJ]

Based on the poll half of people who think Adam came directly from clay say it was not necessarily 24 hours. Is their problem in your eyes semantics or miracles?

Really? What post numbers are those?

 

[rakovsky]

So to better understand words, it's important to check Hebrew etymology dictionaries like Strong's, where it explains that the word here means something that is hammered out like metal. The Sumerians believed the firmament was tin. ​

Strong's does NOT indicate this at all.
http://biblehub.com/hebrew/3117.htm

I was talking about the verse on Firmament. Strong's says it means something beaten out:
http://biblehub.com/hebrew/7549.htm
"1 (flat) expanse (as if of ice,
2. the vault of heaven, or 'firmament,' regarded by Hebrews as solid, and supporting 'waters' above it,"

Why did you point me to a section of Strong's on Yom/Day and then said that Strong's does not agree with what I just said, that the firmament implies something solid ?