Lets read about the firmament

[AV1611VET]

Genesis 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Genesis 1:7 And 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.
Genesis 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Genesis 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
Genesis 1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
Genesis 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
Genesis 1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
Genesis 1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Genesis 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

 

[Davian]

 

[AV1611VET]

Nice unsigned drawing.

 

[Davian]

Nice unsigned drawing.

Anonymous, like the information it is based on.

 

[AV1611VET]

Anonymous, like the information it is based on.

There was a signed drawing like that once, and I looked up the guy that drew it, and he was antibiblical to the core.

Since then, I haven't been able to find the signed version.

 

[HitchSlap]

Nice unsigned drawing.

Oh, the ironing.

 

[Davian]

There was a signed drawing like that once, and I looked up the guy that drew it, and he was antibiblical to the core.

Since then, I haven't been able to find the signed version.

Why would the authorship matter? Does not the drawing accurately reflect the information in your bible?

 

[AV1611VET]

Does not the drawing accurately reflect the information in your bible?

No

 

[HitchSlap]

No

Odd, considering how eplicit G1/2 are.

 

[essentialsaltes]

There was a signed drawing like that once, and I looked up the guy that drew it, and he was antibiblical to the core.

Since then, I haven't been able to find the signed version.

It's a conspiracy!

Or maybe not. Okay, it's not exactly the same, but it's clearly a drawing "like that".

Drawn by Kenneth Kully.

Kenneth Kully "is a practicing Catholic and an avid student of evolutionary creationism, and has worked closely with Denis O. Lamoureux, a leading proponent of that philosophy. (He has even done illustrations for two of Denis' books!) Kenneth rejects the idea that science and religion must be in conflict, but earnestly believes that the universe is a creation."

 

[Davian]

No

Are you concerned that the drawing does not comport with observations of reality?

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you concerned that the drawing does not comport with observations of reality?

If I remember correctly, those drawings are some gnostic bologna.

They were probably drawn to make the Jews look ignorant and mock God's creation.

 

[TLK Valentine]

If I remember correctly, those drawings are some gnostic bologna.

They were probably drawn to make the Jews look ignorant and mock God's creation.

Well then, why don't you draw what's described in great detail in Genesis 1?

When it looks exactly the same (give or take some artistic talent), your creation can be mocked instead.

 

[ChetSinger]

It's a conspiracy!

Or maybe not. Okay, it's not exactly the same, but it's clearly a drawing "like that".

Drawn by Kenneth Kully.

Kenneth Kully "is a practicing Catholic and an avid student of evolutionary creationism, and has worked closely with Denis O. Lamoureux, a leading proponent of that philosophy. (He has even done illustrations for two of Denis' books!) Kenneth rejects the idea that science and religion must be in conflict, but earnestly believes that the universe is a creation."

Thanks for posting that. It clarified things for me: the name Denis Lamoureux rang a bell.

He is a Christian who argues that God deliberately used false human ideas to make theological points. For example, he writes:

The ancient Near Eastern notion of a solid firmament upholding a heavenly sea appears in the Word of God.

Afaik, it's true that the idea of a solid dome was a common during the second temple period. Josephus, a Jewish historian, mentions it in his Antiquities.

But while I agree with Lamoureux that Jews believed it, I disagree that the Bible demands it.

If anyone wants to read a response to Lamoureux's ideas I can recommend this: Does Genesis teach solid-dome cosmology? - Talk Genesis

I think it makes a persuasive argument that the Bible does not demand the "raqiya" be solid, and that modern bibles are correct to translate it as "expanse" rather than "firmament".

Of course, it's not a scientific paper because the issue being discussed isn't science: rather, it's exegesis.

 

[Davian]

If I remember correctly, those drawings are some gnostic bologna.

They were probably drawn to make the Jews look ignorant and mock God's creation.

One would think if they [allegedly] had access to intelligence and information over and above what we would expect of people of that time, that they could have come up with descriptions of the world that would not appear so 'ignorant' in present times.

 

[TLK Valentine]

One would think if they [allegedly] had access to intelligence and information over and above what we would expect of people of that time, that they could have come up with descriptions of the world that would not appear so 'ignorant' in present times.

Language can only express what the mind can conveive -- and even then it almost always comes up short.

 

[AV1611VET]

One would think if they [allegedly] had access to intelligence and information over and above what we would expect of people of that time, that they could have come up with descriptions of the world that would not appear so 'ignorant' in present times.

Only scientists and scientific methods today, see what those gnostics saw.

We do have "access to intelligence and information," and educatees still claim that [unsigned] drawing is how the Bible describes the cosmos.

In short, you guys are no different today, with all your discoveries & inventions, than the gnostics were back then.

Worse even.

This is why I once said that finding Noah's Ark today,* would just make things worse.

* Assuming Noah didn't dismantle it to build his homestead.

 

[AV1611VET]

Language can only express what the mind can conveive --

Thus the Tower of Babel?

 

[Davian]

Only scientists and scientific methods today, see what those gnostics saw.

Why then are the descriptions so markedly different?

We do have "access to intelligence and information," and educatees still claim that [unsigned] drawing is how the Bible describes the cosmos.

Have you drawn your own version yet?

In short, you guys are no different today, with all your discoveries & inventions, than the gnostics were back then.

Worse even.

I would consider describing reality based on current, objective, independently repeatable scientific observations to be different than thousands-of-years-old descriptions based on having information [allegedly] beamed telepathically into the brain by a being for which no direct evidence exists.

This is why I once said that finding Noah's Ark today,* would just make things worse.

* Assuming Noah didn't dismantle it to build his homestead.

*Assuming Noah existed outside of a bible story.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Only scientists and scientific methods today, see what those gnostics saw.

Are you saying that everyone else was/is blind? That's contrary to your usual schtick.

We do have "access to intelligence and information," and educatees still claim that [unsigned] drawing is how the Bible describes the cosmos.

In short, you guys are no different today, with all your discoveries & inventions, than the gnostics were back then.

So stop yammering and correct it. Draw what Genesis 1 clearly and (allegedly) literally describes.