The first shall be second ?

[twinc]

now that numerous views have been aired here - no one has stated what oxygen is - wincam

 

[CabVet]

now that numerous views have been aired here - no one has stated what oxygen is - wincam

Oxygen is a chemical element with atomic number 8.

 

[twinc]

Oxygen is a chemical element with atomic number 8.

is air chemical - number 0 - twinc

 

[AV1611VET]

The Bible doesn't call it first heaven, does it?

Yes, It does.

It is the first time "firmament" is mentioned -- first firmament.

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.

And it is created when a layer of the ocean is sheared off and ballooned out into space.

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.

It is then called "Heaven."

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

Later we see it populated by the birds.

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.


ETA -- This is from a scientific site that is antagonistic to the Water Canopy Theory:

Genesis 1:8 actually defines the term raqia as being the equivalent to the Hebrew word shamayim (Strong's #H8064), which can be translated as "heaven" or "sky." Some examples of the use of raqia in Genesis 1 include the following:

• Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse [raqia] of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years; (Genesis 1:14)
• And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse [raqia] of the sky." (Genesis 1:20)

As can be seen by the uses of raqia, the term is very broad, encompassing both outer space and the atmosphere of earth. Obviously, raqia could not be specifically referring to a water canopy. Other verses state that raqia is declaring (present tense) the work of God's hands. This cannot be referring to a water canopy, since one does not exist at this present time.

SCIENCE

 

[CabVet]

Yes, It does.

It is the first time "firmament" is mentioned -- first firmament.

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.

And it is created when a layer of the ocean is sheared off and ballooned out into space.

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.

It is then called "Heaven."

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

Later we see it populated by the birds.

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.

Funny how you leave out everything between Genesis 1:8 and Genesis 1:20, isn't it? Here, I will help you out:

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:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

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.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

So, the "firmament of heaven" is one thing in Genesis 7-8, another in Genesis 14-17 and then it goes back to being what it was in Genesis 7-8 on Genesis 20. Very consistent.

ETA -- This is from a scientific site that is antagonistic to the Water Canopy Theory:

SCIENCE

"Water canopy" is not a theory, at best it is a hypothesis, but it is not testable. And that site is far from being "scientific", but I am sure you already know that.

 

[AV1611VET]

So, the "firmament of heaven" is one thing in Genesis 7-8, another in Genesis 14-17 and then it goes back to being what it was in Genesis 7-8 on Genesis 20. Very consistent.

Your attempts to blend everything into one firmament in Genesis 1 is sloppy exegesis.

Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

If Genesis 1 consists of only one firmament, how do we get from singular ...

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

... to plural?

Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

 

[morningstar2651]

is air chemical - number 0 - twinc

No. Air is not a chemical element.

Periodic Table of the Elements by WebElements

 

[morningstar2651]

pseudoscience can take a hike

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Your attempts to blend everything into one firmament in Genesis 1 is sloppy exegesis.

Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

If Genesis 1 consists of only one firmament, how do we get from singular ...

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

... to plural?

Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

Does the Hebrew yield this? It is shamayim in both Gen 1:1 and Gen 2:1.

(And this -im is a plural suffix. But be careful, this does not necessarily mean you can count one, two, three. Elohim also has this -im suffix.)

And consequently there are many translations which render it as "heavens" in both Gen 1:1 and Gen 2:1. So many in fact, that the KJV looks like an odditiy.

 

[BelievingIsObeying]

so which really came first - the chicken or the egg and how and why ? - wincam

Chickens come from eggs, so the egg must come first.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Chickens come from eggs, so the egg must come first.

But ... But ... But, where does the egg come from? Huh? Huh??


(Sometimes, I really would really like to know what kind of point people who bring up this chicken-egg thing are trying to make. twinc is by far not the only one whom I have seen do this. And he won't be the last one either.)

 

[BelievingIsObeying]

But ... But ... But, where does the egg come from? Huh? Huh??

(Sometimes, I really would really like to know what kind of point people who bring up this chicken-egg thing are trying to make. twinc is by far not the only one whom I have seen do this. And he won't be the last one either.)

Eggs come from chickens.

 

[RedRover]

But ... But ... But, where does the egg come from? Huh? Huh??

Modern domestic chickens all descended from one of the four known species of jungle fowl or Gallus habituating areas of Southeast Asia, around 50 million years ago.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Eggs come from chickens.

And the chicken, huh?

 

[BelievingIsObeying]

And the chicken, huh?

From an egg.

 

[AV1611VET]

Does the Hebrew yield this?

I'm sure a copy did at one time.

It is shamayim in both Gen 1:1 and Gen 2:1.

You mean it is shamayim in Strong's Concordance?

(And this -im is a plural suffix. But be careful, this does not necessarily mean you can count one, two, three. Elohim also has this -im suffix.)

I'm familiar with the -im suffix; such as "cherub" and "cherubim."

And consequently there are many translations which render it as "heavens" in both Gen 1:1 and Gen 2:1.

I've heard that rumor before.

So many in fact, that the KJV looks like an odditiy.

It should look like an oddity.

In fact, It should stand out in a crowd.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

From an egg.

This is too deep for me.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

I'm sure a copy did at one time.

Cool story, bro. A copyist error, or how should I take this. I mean, how we get from singular to the plural?

(Is there even a "singular of shamayim"??)

You mean it is shamayim in Strong's Concordance?

Admittedly, shamayim is a transliteration. The Hebrew is this: שמים

I don't know how Strong's Concordance transliterates it, though.

I'm familiar with the -im suffix; such as "cherub" and "cherubim."

I've heard that rumor before.

It is not a rumor anymore if you look it up. There is the NIV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, YLT and so on. And they all have "heavens" in Gen 1:1.

It should look like an oddity.

In fact, It should stand out in a crowd.

Uh-huh.

 

[twinc]

From an egg.

how woul;d an egg incubate itself or feed and fend for itself etc - twinc

 

[Lord Emsworth]

(Is there even a "singular of shamayim"??)

If I read this right, it is only plural:
Strong's Hebrew: 8064

So, no copy with the singular of #8064.