A Literal Interpretation of Genesis 1 Cosmology

[WolfSyndrome]

YT didn't tell me you posted this...I just found it...and thanks for the response! So, there are at least three books of The Bible that corroborate the idea of a literal interpretation of Genesis: Exodus (literal days) and Job (literal dome) and 2 Peter (literal creation from water). Creation from water? Sounds like somebody ripped off the Egyptian creation myth... May Anubis have mercy on their souls on Judgement Day.

[violentlygraceful]

@WolfSyndrome Not just the creation from water, but the formation of order from primeval chaos. This is a feature of other creation myths from the Ancient Near East, most notably (in this case) Enuma Elish, the creation myth of the Babylonians which exalts their national god, Marduk. In fact, Genesis 1 seems to be polemicizing against this creation myth. SuperFly covered this well in the following videos:

/watch?v=jDGH8yypjJY (starting at 8:19)

/watch?v=DYEFv0OLf0M

[ytubeact123]

@violentlygraceful part 2 - In the past, there have been many such instances of prosecution by various churches within christianity for holding beliefs that now we know as factual science. What we get from modern "literalists" (i.e YEC) is an extremely superficial and cultic literalism and there is no such thing as biblical inerrancy. The sternest literalist today would be declared the most heretical and unbelieving person by the early christians, to whom which would be stupidly figurative.

[ytubeact123]

@violentlygraceful This plain interpretation that you gave had been the consensus view of virtually everyone until the Renaissance.The message in genesis is so unambigous that belief in contrary was taken as an act of unbelief or heretical. For example,in 1615,a Carmelite friar by the name of Paulo Antonio Foscarini was prosecuted by the Congregation of the Holy Office for his book wherein he maintained that the heaven is very thin and tenuous as opposed to the established view that it is solid.

[ytubeact123]

Can you like him spread out/beat out [raqa] the sky, [which is] as hard as a cast metal mirror? (Job 37:18)

This verse is just one of hundreds of instances where the sky above us is clearly depicted as firm-solid in the bible. And often, so considerably detailed in its description of the sky, i.e. firmament in genesis. It can not be more unequivocal and clear than this.

Only willful ignorance or serious intellectual dishonesty can account for the claim that bible is the inerrant word of god.

[MrMassdebater]

By the way, I like the cat in the background. He is a domesticated animal, and animal that relies on you for its survival, as opposed to being wild, one which relies on oneself. And with that analogy, go and read the story of creation again.

[JohnWsol]

Your attention to detail and faith that Scripture will ultimately prove true is noteworthy. Forget arguments over translations -- be direct: Hebrew/Greek. The entire "Earthly realm of existence is made out of this elastic fluidic medium- "the waters" -- what Issac Newton called the “Luminiferous aether” Dig into the words (and roots) and you'll notice that Heavens (Shamaym) is full of these waters (Maym). Isaiah 29:11 "Read this I pray thee..." MysteriesOfTheUniverse(dot)inf­o

[JohnWsol]

Your attention to detail and faith that Scripture will ultimately prove true is noteworthy. Forget the arguments over translations -- go direct to the - Hebrew/Greek. The entire "Earthly realm of existence is made out of this elastic fluidic medium- "the waters" -- what Issac Newton called the “Luminiferous aether” Dig into the words (and roots) and you'll notice that Heavens (Shamaym) is full of these waters (Maym). Isaiah 29:11 "Read this I pray thee..." MysteriesOfTheUniverse(dot)inf­o

[JohnWsol]

Your attention to detail and faith that Scripture will ultimately prove true is noteworthy. Forget the arguments over translations -- go direct to the - Hebrew/Greek. The entire "Earthly realm of existence is made out of this elastic fluidic medium- "the waters" -- what Issac Newton called the “Luminiferous aether” Dig into the words (and roots) and you'll notice that Heavens (Shamaym) is full of these waters (Maym). Isaiah 29:11 "Read this I pray thee..." MysteriesOfTheUniverse.info.

[WoundedEgo]

Dude, you *get it*!!!!

Kudos.

[MegaVelvetElvis]

Yep, early cosmology suggested we lived in a snow globe. The circle of the earth the horizon as it appears from an observer. Obviously there was water above, it rained.

Not only do we have concepts of deductive reasoning, but the #7 which we now accept as the limit of short term memory. I've always believed that Gen 1 was more of an instructional guide on how something even as complex as the snow globe cosmos could be broken down into smaller parts so even a child could understand & recall

[tierragloriosa]

So do you believe the BIBLE or not…… because you keep saying that you can see why the writer (Writers where did you get that from Moses wrote the first five books of the bible, some so called scholar told you so) said that, like you don’t believe that the writer

[tierragloriosa]

@tierragloriosa (for ALL scripture is given by inspiration of God) knows what he is talking about. And also you might want to get a better translation then the perversion you are reading from that way you can understand it more clearly......(AV 1611)

[violentlygraceful]

@tierragloriosa Why, precisely, is the KJV the best translation? It uses archaic language which is difficult to read, is inaccurate in its translation of various words, and doesn't use the best manuscripts available.

Also, the use of 2 Tim 3:16 is anachronistic. The only writings considered scripture at the time it was written were those which comprised the Hebrew Bible.

[MrMassdebater]

@violentlygraceful You are correct regarding the KJV. Beautiful literature, highly inaccurate.

[MrMassdebater]

@violentlygraceful As for the story of creation, it is a story of symbolisms used to create a story, common throughout ancient literature. But I challenge you to study each sentence of the story of creation, and find out the significance of what is used. You might find it rather interesting.

[wayman29]

@tierragloriosa If God gave man the KJV he would have used better English. And IF all scripture is inspired he would have done a much better job.

[violentlygraceful]

@tierragloriosa That's an odd question. Moses did not write the first five books of the Bible, that much is clear. To say so is a dogmatic presupposition which is not supported by the evidence. I'm sure you've heard of the Documentary Hypothesis. It seems like a good (but not perfect) explanation for why the Pentateuch appears as it does.

[AgentOfDoubt]

Whoa! The cat moved behind you! YAY! It's alive!

Let's give that cat a name! Let's call the cat "Stay".

That way you could say "Come here Stay! Come here Stay!" and the cat would look like it was following your orders.

As for your subject matter, I notice you didn't bring up how the moon isn't actually a light but a reflector of the sun's light. This is a point for some atheist arguments. Is there a translation problem here? Is a light not necessarily a light-source in the original text?

[violentlygraceful]

@AgentOfDoubt Both the sun and the moon are referred to as a maor, which means light, shining or bright. If someone is changing the definition of the moon in this chapter, they also have to change the definition of the sun.

[wayman29]

Nice Job! NJPS says when God began to create the heavens and the earth. Your right about dusk and dawn...nice Job! There are three waters maºyim, yâm, and tühôm.

[violentlygraceful]

@wayman29 is tühôm what is referred to as "the deep" in verse 2?

[MegaVelvetElvis]

@wayman29

Where tühôm can refer to the waters above (rain), and waters below(ocean or river)? Also, IIRC, men, those who pass water against walls?

[kalsolarUK]

great to see someone really taking the time to examine the creation story this way. If people could see how and why the writers wrote things to be the way they did this might well help some people to not be so blind in their literal beliefs of it all.