Got your post - it'll take me awhile to read through it.Quote from stu:
oops...I am late for class, but if you are becomming a little more of an honest thesist shoeshine, I do think you must still reconsider your Genesis...
This 'weird' you talk of may well be something to do with the way you make such categorical statements: as... exact sequence and matches exactly so intemperately.
So let's see....
1. Creation of the physical universe. (1:1)
Gen(1:1) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
All at once, or the stars first then the earth, or either.. or it doesn't matter ?!?! The answer to this conundrum however appears in (1:14)
2. Transformation of the earth's atmosphere from opaque to translucent. (1:3)
That simply is Not Possible. There is NO mention of ANY atmosphere by and up to (1:3) Atmosphere even stretching the meaning as "firmament" is first mentioned in Gen(1:6) Note that God names the firmament as "heaven" in (1:8)
3. Formation of a stable water cycle. (1:7)
Gen(1:6) God works on a "firmament" for the first time. He makes this firmament thing whatever it is, to "divide the waters from the waters". Up to now there is no"firmament", no atmosphere.
Gen(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."
Helloo...Here there is water ABOVE the atmosphere or ABOVE heaven. That is most certainly not a stable water cycle. A stable water cycle is maintained by water from outer space?!?
4. Establishment of continents/oceans. (1:9)
Gen (1:9)And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
Just tell me how does that exctly establish the continents and oceans? One sea in one place?? Water is all over the earth. So is the one place supposed to be whaaat... Earth??? How does that match any known science on how the land THEN oceans masses were formed, as you have said it does in your now infamous phrase "match perfectly the astronomical and archaeological record"? Scientific record says land first then water (eventually)!!
5. Transformation of the atmosphere from translucent to transparent, i.e. sun, moon and stars became visible on the earth for the first time. (1:14-16)
Gen (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
Now here firmament and heaven are both separate (in the firmament - of the heaven) yet God names the firmament AS Heaven in in Genesis(1:8).
However let's just ignore that.. and you are saying here that the firmament IS atmosphere. (oops.. and God makes the stars here!!??)
This now has the unfortunate result of endorsing the fallacy of your #2 item and the consequent nonsense of #3. Of course the thing is not to take any of this literally, but is it also not to try to provide any coherence out of it too. Just let its contradictions and undecipherable jibberish wash away everything, including integrity??
Gen(1:15) And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so."
Gen(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.
You say the atmosphere became transparent to let the sun and moon and stars be seen. I presume you interpret this to be so, because if you did not, Genesis says right here God made the sun and moon and stars at this point (Gen 1:14-16). and science shows you don't get the creation of a physical universe with stars and planet earth in one go.
You go on to list the rest of Genesis as an accurate reflection of how the universe and life on earth matches perfectly the astronomical and archaeological record, even though it obviously does no such thing. You cannot match science with Genesis it won't work. Science shows reasons, physical observable and comparative, whilst Genesis is a mythical story.
You are trying to say science proves reptiles after birds as Genesis says when science and evolution says the record is that birds evolved from reptiles .
You are trying to say science proves both fish and birds were created at the same time - as Genesis states, when science and evolution says the record is that fish came into existence long before the first birds do.
You are trying to say science proves atmosphere was created before plants were created - as Genesis states, when science and evolution says plant life is essential for an atmosphere.
You are trying to say science proves marine life was created all at once - as Genesis states, when science and evolution says marine life developed gradually.
It has nothing to do with things getting weird shoeshine, it has everything to do with the reasonable examination of a story too far fetched to be even plausible.
You want the meaning of the word days in Genesis to be any thing from 24 hours or billions of years depending on the verse, in a vain attempt to contort it into some kind of sense, which of course does no such thing. Genesis stated 6 DAYS for the creation of everything. Otherwise the 7th day God rested could well be a period of 1 billion years. Handy for the indolent, but useless for any practical purposes of explanation.
You may not agree with the scientific evidence, and prefer the Glory Be version of the Holy Babble, fair enough, but to say science matches Genesis exactly, is not weird - as reasonable inquiry shows - but just plain bollocks.
666...the Devils Moving Average
- Thread starter crackhead
- Start date
I'll try to not make "broad generalizations" if you'll keep the snide comments (such as "Holy Babble") to a minimum.
A couple of side comments:
1. I greatly appreciate your taking all the time to review that. I know it took quite a bit of effort and so all I can say is 'much obliged'.
2. Keep in mind that a few of these issues, as you will see, deal with the Hebrew language and interpretation. I know from past experience that these kind of things can be very aggravating to both parties, so let's try to just stick to axeman's sign out...
1. I greatly appreciate your taking all the time to review that. I know it took quite a bit of effort and so all I can say is 'much obliged'.
2. Keep in mind that a few of these issues, as you will see, deal with the Hebrew language and interpretation. I know from past experience that these kind of things can be very aggravating to both parties, so let's try to just stick to axeman's sign out...
****************************************************
1. Creation of the physical universe. (1:1)
Gen(1:1) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
All at once, or the stars first then the earth...?
****************************************************
Yes, as I mentioned in a previous thread, the Hebrew translated "heaven and earth" is "shamayan erets" which has only one meaning: the entire universe. This is the creation of everything including stars, earth, etc. This will be important to later questions that you asked.
1. Creation of the physical universe. (1:1)
Gen(1:1) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
All at once, or the stars first then the earth...?
****************************************************
Yes, as I mentioned in a previous thread, the Hebrew translated "heaven and earth" is "shamayan erets" which has only one meaning: the entire universe. This is the creation of everything including stars, earth, etc. This will be important to later questions that you asked.
****************************************************
2. Transformation of the earth's atmosphere from opaque to translucent. (1:3)
That simply is Not Possible. There is NO mention of ANY atmosphere by and up to (1:3)
****************************************************
I think I see the confusion here. I would guess we're both saying the same thing (as far as earth development) even though it might not seem like it. Scientists believe that originally we had an atmosphere with intense interplanetary debris which is also believed to be partially or even mostly blown away by the lunar event (which is a very interesting topic).
Anyway, thereafter, our earth had a primitive atmosphere probably high in carbon dioxide, etc. and some interplanetary debris. There also was already quite a bit of water on the ground as I mentioned in a previous post from asteroidal collusion which are full of water. Science believes that is actually where most of the water on earth came from. And, again, notice in verse two (which is before the verse 3 that you are referencing above), it says "the Spirit hovered over the waters."
So, yes, in a sense I should not use the word atmosphere because it implies an atmosphere like we have on earth. However, in the astronomical sense, the earth did have a primitive atmosphere when it was opaque (meaning of course letting virtually no light in). So I hate to be overly agreeable, but we're both right. It didn't have an atmosphere like our atmosphere of today, but it did have enough carbon dioxide and other interplanetary debris to block the sun.
And of course as this cleared up it would have allowed light onto the surface which is what verse 3 is saying if we take from the standpoint of an observer on the earth.
2. Transformation of the earth's atmosphere from opaque to translucent. (1:3)
That simply is Not Possible. There is NO mention of ANY atmosphere by and up to (1:3)
****************************************************
I think I see the confusion here. I would guess we're both saying the same thing (as far as earth development) even though it might not seem like it. Scientists believe that originally we had an atmosphere with intense interplanetary debris which is also believed to be partially or even mostly blown away by the lunar event (which is a very interesting topic).
Anyway, thereafter, our earth had a primitive atmosphere probably high in carbon dioxide, etc. and some interplanetary debris. There also was already quite a bit of water on the ground as I mentioned in a previous post from asteroidal collusion which are full of water. Science believes that is actually where most of the water on earth came from. And, again, notice in verse two (which is before the verse 3 that you are referencing above), it says "the Spirit hovered over the waters."
So, yes, in a sense I should not use the word atmosphere because it implies an atmosphere like we have on earth. However, in the astronomical sense, the earth did have a primitive atmosphere when it was opaque (meaning of course letting virtually no light in). So I hate to be overly agreeable, but we're both right. It didn't have an atmosphere like our atmosphere of today, but it did have enough carbon dioxide and other interplanetary debris to block the sun.
And of course as this cleared up it would have allowed light onto the surface which is what verse 3 is saying if we take from the standpoint of an observer on the earth.
****************************************************
3. Formation of a stable water cycle. (1:7)
Gen(1:6) God works on a "firmament" for the first time. He makes this firmament thing whatever it is, to "divide the waters from the waters". Up to now there is no"firmament", no atmosphere.
****************************************************
I absolutely agree with you that there was no advanced atmosphere up to this point. But if you are saying that there was not even a primitive atmosphere, then I must disagree with you scientifically and otherwise per my last message.
I think I know what the problem is here. The problem is that I believe you are interpreting firmament as atmosphere. (Maybe I'm wrong, but that's what it seems like.) But to clarify, the Hebrews thought of the clouds as a boundary and the firmament was basically the expanse right at that boundary. Firmament ties to the idea of a piece of metal being hammered into a flat sheet. In other words, picture a sheet encircling the earth at the boundary of the clouds.
I said that firmament means "sky" but I should have said that "sky" is our closest English word to theirs.
So now if you consider the Hebrew definition of firmament, verses 6 and 7 will make much better sense. "Let there be a firmament (a dividing "sheet") ... and let it divide the waters (on the earth's surface) from the waters (in the clouds)" and "Thus God divided the waters (on the surface of the earth) from the waters which were above the firmament (in the clouds)."
I hope that helps...
3. Formation of a stable water cycle. (1:7)
Gen(1:6) God works on a "firmament" for the first time. He makes this firmament thing whatever it is, to "divide the waters from the waters". Up to now there is no"firmament", no atmosphere.
****************************************************
I absolutely agree with you that there was no advanced atmosphere up to this point. But if you are saying that there was not even a primitive atmosphere, then I must disagree with you scientifically and otherwise per my last message.
I think I know what the problem is here. The problem is that I believe you are interpreting firmament as atmosphere. (Maybe I'm wrong, but that's what it seems like.) But to clarify, the Hebrews thought of the clouds as a boundary and the firmament was basically the expanse right at that boundary. Firmament ties to the idea of a piece of metal being hammered into a flat sheet. In other words, picture a sheet encircling the earth at the boundary of the clouds.
I said that firmament means "sky" but I should have said that "sky" is our closest English word to theirs.
So now if you consider the Hebrew definition of firmament, verses 6 and 7 will make much better sense. "Let there be a firmament (a dividing "sheet") ... and let it divide the waters (on the earth's surface) from the waters (in the clouds)" and "Thus God divided the waters (on the surface of the earth) from the waters which were above the firmament (in the clouds)."
I hope that helps...
****************************************************
4. Establishment of continents/oceans. (1:9)
Gen (1:9)And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
Just tell me how does that exctly establish the continents and oceans? One sea in one place?? Water is all over the earth. So is the one place supposed to be whaaat... Earth??? How does that match any known science on how the land THEN oceans masses were formed,
****************************************************
Let me explain what I'm thinking and then you can maybe give me some more detail on what you're thinking cuzz I don't yet understand. The actual order of the earth's geological development was in fact 1) opaque to translucent as the primitive atmosphere cleared, 2) establishment of an advanced atmosphere and water cycle and 3) establishment of the continent and ocean and to me this is the exact order given here.
This verse talks about #3, a single observed event: the oceans are in one "place" AND the dry land cames out of it. Of course, this block of dry land is now called "panagea" and split off somewhere around a quarter of a billion years ago and thereafter we had our "continental drift". So the earth at this point in history was basically covered with water and panagea came out of it.
I think what you are thinking this verse says is that the whole earth was covered with water since the beginning of the planet. But this verse is only a snapshot in time. So you'll have to clarify if I'm missing your point.
4. Establishment of continents/oceans. (1:9)
Gen (1:9)And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
Just tell me how does that exctly establish the continents and oceans? One sea in one place?? Water is all over the earth. So is the one place supposed to be whaaat... Earth??? How does that match any known science on how the land THEN oceans masses were formed,
****************************************************
Let me explain what I'm thinking and then you can maybe give me some more detail on what you're thinking cuzz I don't yet understand. The actual order of the earth's geological development was in fact 1) opaque to translucent as the primitive atmosphere cleared, 2) establishment of an advanced atmosphere and water cycle and 3) establishment of the continent and ocean and to me this is the exact order given here.
This verse talks about #3, a single observed event: the oceans are in one "place" AND the dry land cames out of it. Of course, this block of dry land is now called "panagea" and split off somewhere around a quarter of a billion years ago and thereafter we had our "continental drift". So the earth at this point in history was basically covered with water and panagea came out of it.
I think what you are thinking this verse says is that the whole earth was covered with water since the beginning of the planet. But this verse is only a snapshot in time. So you'll have to clarify if I'm missing your point.
****************************************************
5. Transformation of the atmosphere from translucent to transparent, i.e. sun, moon and stars became visible on the earth for the first time. (1:14-16)
Gen (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
Now here firmament and heaven are both separate (in the firmament - of the heaven) yet God names the firmament AS Heaven in in Genesis(1:8).
However let's just ignore that.. and you are saying here that the firmament IS atmosphere. (oops.. and God makes the stars here!!??)
****************************************************
I'll ignore the snide comments here. Again, think of the firmament as a sheet that divides the sky from the earth. I know that "heaven" in ancient Greek can mean "sky", "space" or "where God lives". I am sure the Hebrews had a similar distinction, although I don't have a good reference book here right now for that to prove it.
Another interesting point here is that the Hebrew could better be translated a "part of the heavens". If that's the case, then it may be referring to the boundary from the clouds up to the heavens. Personally, I don't think that is that germane, but if you want me to research it I will look into it as I'm interested in such things.
In fact, I really don't think the exact meaning of heaven matters in this passage if you stop to think about it, because again if you think of a firmament as a sheet that is above us, it is true that the next step in the earth's development would be for the atmosphere to clear and heavenly objects to poke their way through this firmament (regardless of it's exact location) for the first time in our planet's history.
5. Transformation of the atmosphere from translucent to transparent, i.e. sun, moon and stars became visible on the earth for the first time. (1:14-16)
Gen (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
Now here firmament and heaven are both separate (in the firmament - of the heaven) yet God names the firmament AS Heaven in in Genesis(1:8).
However let's just ignore that.. and you are saying here that the firmament IS atmosphere. (oops.. and God makes the stars here!!??)
****************************************************
I'll ignore the snide comments here. Again, think of the firmament as a sheet that divides the sky from the earth. I know that "heaven" in ancient Greek can mean "sky", "space" or "where God lives". I am sure the Hebrews had a similar distinction, although I don't have a good reference book here right now for that to prove it.
Another interesting point here is that the Hebrew could better be translated a "part of the heavens". If that's the case, then it may be referring to the boundary from the clouds up to the heavens. Personally, I don't think that is that germane, but if you want me to research it I will look into it as I'm interested in such things.
In fact, I really don't think the exact meaning of heaven matters in this passage if you stop to think about it, because again if you think of a firmament as a sheet that is above us, it is true that the next step in the earth's development would be for the atmosphere to clear and heavenly objects to poke their way through this firmament (regardless of it's exact location) for the first time in our planet's history.
****************************************************
Gen(1:15) And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so."
Gen(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.
You say the atmosphere became transparent to let the sun and moon and stars be seen. I presume you interpret this to be so, because if you did not, Genesis says right here God made the sun and moon and stars at this point (Gen 1:14-16). and science shows you don't get the creation of a physical universe with stars and planet earth in one go.
****************************************************
I explained this earlier, but I was probably as clear as mud. There are very few tenses in the Hebrew and past tenses can only be Perfect or Incomplete. This should have been translated "And God had made the two great lights;...He had made the stars also." In other words, this passage is simply God had made these in this past. This would be problematic except for one thing: in verse 1 as I already mentioned, the Hebrew clearly uses "shamayan erets" which means everything. So this passage is simply saying that he had made these two great lights.
This statement seems almost inconsequential to us, but to the ancient Hebrews this was HUGE. You are very perceptive because you picked up on the repetition of this in several passages. These statements were culture-altering and mind-bending for the the ancient Jews. Keep in mind that they this was written by Moses and the Hebrews had just come out of Egypt which was steeped in astrology and the worship of heavenly bodies. Moses was stating repeatedly that all of this was created not living and not to be idolized.
Gen(1:15) And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so."
Gen(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.
You say the atmosphere became transparent to let the sun and moon and stars be seen. I presume you interpret this to be so, because if you did not, Genesis says right here God made the sun and moon and stars at this point (Gen 1:14-16). and science shows you don't get the creation of a physical universe with stars and planet earth in one go.
****************************************************
I explained this earlier, but I was probably as clear as mud. There are very few tenses in the Hebrew and past tenses can only be Perfect or Incomplete. This should have been translated "And God had made the two great lights;...He had made the stars also." In other words, this passage is simply God had made these in this past. This would be problematic except for one thing: in verse 1 as I already mentioned, the Hebrew clearly uses "shamayan erets" which means everything. So this passage is simply saying that he had made these two great lights.
This statement seems almost inconsequential to us, but to the ancient Hebrews this was HUGE. You are very perceptive because you picked up on the repetition of this in several passages. These statements were culture-altering and mind-bending for the the ancient Jews. Keep in mind that they this was written by Moses and the Hebrews had just come out of Egypt which was steeped in astrology and the worship of heavenly bodies. Moses was stating repeatedly that all of this was created not living and not to be idolized.
***************************************************
You are trying to say science proves reptiles after birds as Genesis says when science and evolution says the record is that birds evolved from reptiles .
****************************************************
Can you show me what passage(s) you are talking about? I truly have no idea.
You are trying to say science proves reptiles after birds as Genesis says when science and evolution says the record is that birds evolved from reptiles .
****************************************************
Can you show me what passage(s) you are talking about? I truly have no idea.