Another look at the moon landing.

[trophy33]

The Bible proves it all, for the last time, they can't get though the firmament.

Bible cannot prove it, because its not a right tool/proof for it. The literal existence of the firmament is a scientific/practical question, not biblical/theological one.

Bible can prove the existence of such concept or of such belief thousands years ago. But not its real existence - for that, we need our own experience.

 

[Apple Sky]

Bible cannot prove it, because its not a right tool/proof for it. The literal existence of the firmament is a scientific/practical question, not biblical/theological one.

If the Bible says there is a firmament, this is good enough for me.

 

[trophy33]

The Hebrew word refers to an expanse of air pressure between the surface of the sea and the clouds, separating water below from water above

I am afraid its a modern eisegesis. The ancient authors had no concept of atmospheric pressure. I wonder, why did the NET translators explained it like that.

 

[trophy33]

If the Bible says there is a firmament, this is good enough for me.

Bible does not say "there is a firmament", as a statement of faith. It only refers to it when explaining theological concepts (like that even the stars, the sun and the moon are created and put in order by God).

If Bible was written in the 19th century, it could refer to Newton's explanation of gravity, if it was written in the 21st century, it could refer to Einstein's explanation of gravity. Bible uses the cultural context it was written in and this cultural context is not inspired.

Similarly, Bible refers to the concept of mythical Rahab to illustrate a theological point, but it does not state "you must believe in Rahab".

 

[Apple Sky]

Bible does not say "there is a firmament", as a statement of faith. It only refers to it when explaining theological concepts (like that even the stars, the sun and the moon are created and put in order by God).

I think you should read Genesis 1-6 again, it says nothing about God putting in order the sun, moon & the stars.
It says that he set them in the firmament.

 

[trophy33]

I think you should read Genesis 1-6 again, it says nothing about God putting in order the sun, moon & the stars.
It says that he set them in the firmament.

Yes, on the surface it says that God placed them into the firmament. However, the theological point of the text is He put them in order, for humanity, creating His temple in which He can rest.

The theological point of Genesis 1 is not "believe in the firmament".

 

[Apple Sky]

The theological point is He put them in order, for humanity, creating His temple in which He can rest.

Where does it state this ?

The theological point of Genesis 1 is not "believe in the firmament".

I don't believe there is a firmament, I know there is a firmament as God tells us so.

 

[Apple Sky]

The theological point is He put them in order, for humanity, creating His temple in which He can rest.

Where does it state this ?

The theological point of Genesis 1 is not "believe in the firmament".

I don't believe there is a firmament, I know there is a firmament as God tells us so.

 

[Strong in Him]

That b/c it's not solid, the firmament has a strong protective layer that domes the earth & the sun, moon & the stars are within.

So the moon is within the firmament, same as the earth?

That contradicts your previous statement that the moon landings didn't happen because the rockets would not be able to get through it.

 

[Strong in Him]

I am afraid its a modern eisegesis. The ancient authors had no concept of atmospheric pressure.

No, I realise that, but that's what they said the word meant.

I wonder, why did the NET translators explained it like that.

I don't know.
I was looking to see how other Bibles explained/translated "firmament", and notice the comment from the NET about the Hebrew.

 

[Apple Sky]

So the moon is within the firmament,

Yes & the sun & the stars, they reside above the firmaments protective layer. This protective layer is about 375 mile up as far as the exosphere.

And if you want proof of this go watch the video I put up about sprites.

 

[Strong in Him]

Yes & the sun & the stars, they reside above the firmaments protective layer. This protective layer is about 375 mile up as far as the exosphere.

Of course they do.

And if you want proof of this go watch the video I put up about sprites.

Would that be the video made by the person who works for NASA - who are known for being liars?

 

[Apple Sky]

Would that be the video made by the person who works for NASA - who are known for being liars?

No the other one.

Of course they do.

That's right, they do.

 

[Strong in Him]

That's right, they do.

You believe they do.

If the earth and the moon are both within the firmament, rockets don't need to go through the firmament to get to the moon.
And they have clearly done so.
Eye witness accounts, physical evidence, written evidence etc are far greater than "the Bible says there is a firmament, which rockets cannot get through." If your statement was truth it would be confirmed by what can be seen and recorded. People would be blasting off to the moon, coming back and saying "we can't get through, the firmament's in the way; I guess the Bible was right after all."
But that hasn't happened.

 

[Apple Sky]

If the earth and the moon are both within the firmament, rockets don't need to go through the firmament to get to the moon

Yes they do, rockets must go through this protective layer of the firmament first, in order to get to to the moon.

I think today they are calling it the Van Allen Belts.

NASA engineer admits they can’t get passed the Van Allen Belts & they must test this region of of space before we can send people through this part of space.​

​

Lol's - I thought they already had done this during the Apollo 11 mision ??

 

[Apple Sky]

People would be blasting off to the moon, coming back and saying "we can't get through, the firmament's in the way;

Which it was, this is why they had to stage the moon landing.

 

[Strong in Him]

Which it was, this is why they had to stage the moon landing.

There's been more than one moon landing, over several years.

 

[Strong in Him]

I think today they are calling it the Van Allen Belts.

NASA engineer admits they can’t get passed the Van Allen Belts & they must test this region of of space before we can send people through this part of space.​

1. "Van Allen Belts" is not in Scripture and there is nothing to say that it is the firmament - as you believe that Scripture proves everything.
2. So now you're quoting another of those "lying" NASA employees?

 

[Strong in Him]

There's been more than one moon landing, over several years.

Country	Notes
Russia	The first country to successfully land on the moon (1959), soft-land on the moon (1966), and successfully retrieve samples from the moon on an unmanned mission (1970).
United States	First soft-landed a few months after Russia in 1966. As of 2022, has 11 soft landings (most in the world) and is the only country to land humans on the moon (six times/12 people in all, 1969-1972).
China	China's Chang'e 3 lander touched down on 14 Dec. 2013, marking the first moon landing since the USSR's Luna 24 in 1976. Chang'e 4 completed the first soft landing on the dark side of the moon on 3 Jan. 2019.
India	Designed to impact rather than soft-land, India's probe Chandrayaan-1 reached the lunar surface on 22 Oct. 2008, making India the seventh country to successfully impact the moon. On August 23, 2023, the Chandrayaan-3 orbiter successfully deployed its Vikram lander and its cargo, the Pragyan rover, which touched down near the moon's South Pole. India thus became the fourth country to successfully soft-land on the moon.

 

[Apple Sky]

There's been more than one moon landing, over several years.

I know, but this video is on about todays orion rocket.