Re: Firmament and the Water above was [asa] Re: Slug

From: Paul Seely <PHSeely@msn.com>
Date: Mon Jun 19 2006 - 02:05:02 EDT

PHS: Well, that helps quite a bit. Since Ptolemy is that late, we have the
> clear testimony of the Septuagint before that. It translates the
> Hebrew raqia'with the Greek word stereoma, clearly solid.

GRM: this doesn't help a bit. Aristotle, arguably the most influential of
the Greek philosophers, was already out there before the Hellenistic greeks
translated the Septuagint 20-120 years after Aristotle's death. The idea of
the crystal spheres was, at that time, one of the new ideas of the
intelligentsia. So, the translation of the Septuagint as stereoma may not be
independent of the Greek influence from the greatest Greek philosopher SNIP

All of this was before the Septuagint. When someone concludes what you did
above, you need to be sure that you have actually found the source of the
crystal sphere belief. It wasn't Ptolemy. Ptolemy got it from Aristotle. I
have perused Plato looking for the crystal sphere idea and cant find an
explicit statement to his belief in that.>>

PHS: Your original question (6/17 1:08)only mentioned Ptolemy and the Jews.
My answer was to that question.
Now, you are raising a new question, namely,

GRM If the concept came from Aristotle, can you demonstrate that the
Pre-Aristotle Hebrews believed in the same meaning for raqiya as the post
septuagint ones did?

PHS; As I said in my original response to your first question, there is no
extant Jewish literature from before 350 BC except the OT (and hence none
from before Aristotle). However, as I also mentioned in that post, the fact
that later Jews believed in an ocean above the firmament testifies that they
got their view from the OT not Aristotle. But, the crux of the issue
historically is that the available evidence, which is considerable, shows
that EVERYONE before Aristotle believed in a solid firmament. So, it would
be highly improbable that the Jews before Aristotle did not believe in a
solid firmament. The evidence is so strong, I do not believe you can find
evidence of anyone before Aristotle believing in a non-solid firmament.

GRM: And you have yet to explain my analysis of the other Biblical uses of
raqiya. Here it is again. Why am I wrong?

Daniel 12:1 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the
firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever
and ever.

Well, the solid dome is not always bright. At night it is quite dark.
So,this verse seems to indicate an alternative meaning to raqiya than the
commonly held view of a solid dome.>>

PHS: The firmament here is clearly a reference to the sky, and the non-solid
sky is also dark at night, So, I make no sense of your argument.

GRM: Psalms 150:1 Praise ye the LORD. Praise God in his sanctuary: praise
him in the firmament of his power.

Praise him in the solid dome of his power? I could understand 'expanse' of
his power. But Dome? That doesn't make a lot of sense. Sounds like they are
talking about heaven, not a dome.

PHS: The firmament is the sky which visually comes down all around to
apparently touch the earth, hence a dome. And why not a solid one? To be
"in" the firmament is to be in the space below the dome, as they say in
Seattle, "We watched the football game in the Kingdome."

GRM: Here from 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

The bird flies *in* the open solid dome? Clearly this Genesis usage is not a
solid dome because birds don't fly inside material, so why must we believe
what the raqiyaologists say?>

PHS: The language can be explained as above, they fly in the space below the
dome. In addition, this is a mistranslation of the Hebrew. The Hebrew says
the birds fly in front of the face or surface of the raqia', that is, with
the blue sky in back of them visually. See Gordon Wenham's comment in his
commentary on Genesis. Note also that the mention of the surface of the
raqia' is more apposite to a solid dome than a non-solid one.

Paul

 
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jun 19 02:03:30 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jun 19 2006 - 02:03:30 EDT