The Meaning of "Firmanent" in Genesis
Curt van den Heuvel
is shared by every ancient culture encountered to date, even those
that have never been in contact with each other. No, it has nothing to
do with a global flood. In fact, the Universal Myth states that the
sky is a solid construction that supports the Sun, Moon and Stars.
Sometimes the sky is thought to be a round platform supported by
pillars. In other cultures, it is thought to be a dome that surrounds
the earth. In still other cultures, the sky is thought to be a tent,
stretched out over the flat floor of the earth. In some cases, where
considerable contact has occurred between cultures, we find all three
of these elements represented.
The ancient Hebrews were no different. Like their Semitic neighbors,
they, too, believed that the sky was a solid artifact, created by God
and placed above the earth. This is reflected in the Bible.
In Genesis 1:6, we are told that God created the firmament, and used
it to separate the waters above from the waters below. What is the
firmament? Conservative Christians claim that it is the earth's
atmosphere, but a quick exegesis will show that this is impossible.
The word itself is a translation of the Hebrew 'raqia', which is
derived from a root (raqa) that means to 'beat out flat', as a
blacksmith would beat out a sheet of metal. The root word is used, for
example, in Exodus 39:3 '...they did beat (raqa) the gold into thin
plates...', and Isaiah 40:19 '...and the goldsmith spreadeth (raqa) it
over with gold...'.
In the context of Genesis 1:6, raqia refers to a solid, broadly beaten
structure, possibly a flat platform, or even a solid dome. Evidence
for this usage comes from Ezekiel 1, where raqia is used four times to
refer to the solid crystalline platform that carries the throne of God
in the prophet's vision (vs 22, 23, 25, 26).
With this in mind, let's return to Genesis 1, and take special note of
the positional prepositions that are associated with the firmament.
Verses 6 and 7 tell us that the firmament separated the waters below
from the waters above. What were the waters above? Christians tell us
that this refers to the clouds of water vapor in the atmosphere. But
note the prepositions - the waters are "above", not "in" the
firmament. In order to elucidate the meaning of this verse, we need to
turn to Babylonian mythology.
The Babylonian version of the Creation, known as the Enuma Elish,
records that the god Marduk slew Tiamat, the chaos monster, and
fashioned the earth from her body. Note the following lines:
"The lord rested; he gazed at the huge body, pondering how to use it,
what to create from the dead carcass. He split it apart like a
cockle-shell; with the upper half he constructed the arc of sky, he
pulled down the bar and set a watch on the waters, so t hey should
never escape."
If one reads the whole poem (it is quite long), it will be seen that
this battle took place in the primeval sea, the Eternal Abyss of Gen
1:2 (translated "the deep" in the KJV). Marduk thus used Tiamats's
body to create a space in the Deep, a space where he later built the
earth.
This is precisely the same image presented in Genesis 1:6. God created
the firmament to make a space in the Deep where the earth could be
built. The waters remained above the firmament, where they later
rained down on Noah through windows in the Sky (Genesis 7:11). Note
that during the Flood, God brought the Abyss together again for a
while - the fountains of the Great Deep were opened, and the waters of
the Abyss stored above the firmament were released.
Having established the waters above the firmament, God goes on to
create the Sun, Moon and Stars. Note their position with regard to the
firmament:
Genesis 1:14-17 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
lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the
earth...And God made two great lights...he made the stars also.
And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the
earth...
Note that the Sun, Moon and Stars are said to be "in" the firmament,
not "above" it as would be expected if the firmament were the
atmosphere. (Some Christian commentators will claim that "firmament"
here refers to the entire observable universe. This argument is
treated with the contempt it deserves.) Again, note the correspondence
with the Enuma:
"He stretched the immensity of the firmament, he made Esharra, the
Great Palace, to be its earthly image, and Anu and Enlil and Ea had
each their right stations.
He projected positions for the Great Gods conspicuous in the sky [i.e.
the Planets], he gave them a starry aspect as constellations; he
measured the year, gave it a beginning and an end, and to each month
of the twelve three rising stars. [i.e. the Zodiac - the 'signs and
seasons' of Genesis 1:14]"
One final piece of proof remains. Genesis 1:20 in the KJV reads "...
and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of
heaven." This verse is badly translated, one suspects deliberately in
order to obscure the real import of the phrase. The word that the KJV
committee translated "open" is in fact the hebrew word "paneh", which
means "surface" or "face". The translators correctly identified the
word in Gen 1:2, where it is rendered "face".
Thus, Gen 1:20 should read "... let birds fly above the earth across
the face of the firmament of the heavens."
To summarize: the word 'firmament" is derived from a hebrew word which
carries the meaning of "beat out flat". We are told that it carries
the waters of the Abyss above it, and that these waters are let down
through windows in the sky. We are told that the Sun, Moon and Stars
are placed "in" the firmament (i.e. below the waters). We are further
told that the firmament has a "face", i.e. a surface.
The facts are very clear: the Genesis "firmament" is none other than
the solid sky of the ancients, with all its mythological trappings.
Thus is revealed the true "science" behind Creationism.
-Curt
http://www.primenet.com/~heuvelc
Brian O'Neill
A few points : you mention common mythologies of peoples who "were never
in contact" - prove they were never in contact. If they seem to be so at
some point in history it is most likely beacuse some catastrophe
separated them - either a cultural decay, or the rising of the sea by
350ft at the beginning of the current interglacial for example.
As is well known the Jews were in Babylonian captivity. There is no
question the Babylonians modified the Jewish texts as part of cultural
warfare, so it is no surprise to find echoes of Marduk. Contact can take
many forms. So can cultural warfare.
By the way you would be surprised which neighbors were Dravidian and not
Semitic, so echoes of the Vedas must be there somewhere too. Maybe one
should check this out. I severely doubt their firmanment was a solid and
they predate all other known writings as shown by Tilak in "The Orion".
A remark - maybe today the firmament is the Continuum of Cantor? Not
solid, and full of potential and infinities of all kinds?
Faker
heu...@primenet.com (Curt van den Heuvel) wrote:
[...]
> The word itself is a translation of the Hebrew 'raqia', which is
> derived from a root (raqa) that means to 'beat out flat', as a
> blacksmith would beat out a sheet of metal. The root word is used, for
> example, in Exodus 39:3 '...they did beat (raqa) the gold into thin
> plates...', and Isaiah 40:19 '...and the goldsmith spreadeth (raqa) it
> over with gold...'.
>
> In the context of Genesis 1:6, raqia refers to a solid, broadly beaten
> structure, possibly a flat platform, or even a solid dome. Evidence
> for this usage comes from Ezekiel 1, where raqia is used four times to
> refer to the solid crystalline platform that carries the throne of God
> in the prophet's vision (vs 22, 23, 25, 26).
i have been uniquely privileged to hear Carl Baugh speak on this very
topic. Outlined in his _Panorama of Creation_, he takes this to mean
that the firmament was a solid layer made of a super-cold, metallic
state of hydrogen encircling the entire earth at a distance of about 11
miles. Apparently this metal-like H has all sorts of really cool
properties that made the antediluvian world just oh so much better (the
firmament collapsed to cause the flood, don't you see). He explains
away all of the biblical references to the firmament through this
fantasy. What a loon.
And he claims various fictional degrees on the back of the book. Don't
remember exactly what they are, but it was one PhD and one or two
others. It's funny how his credentials change over time. If he is going
to lie, he should at least be consistent.
--
Faker
"This Snow Crash thing--is it a virus, a drug, or a religion?"
Juanita shrugs. "What's the difference?"
Neal Stephenson, _Snow Crash_
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Mark Isaak
Brian O'Neill <brian....@philips.com> wrote:
>A few points : you mention common mythologies of peoples who "were never
>in contact" - prove they were never in contact. If they seem to be so at
>some point in history it is most likely beacuse some catastrophe
>separated them - either a cultural decay, or the rising of the sea by
>350ft at the beginning of the current interglacial for example.
The idea of a firmament is worldwide. I can give examples from myths
from all continents and many islands. In fact, I can't think of any
region of any appreciable size which did not have a firmament in its
mythology. And although the firmament idea is common, the myths
themselves (both those regarding the firmament and other myths in the
region's mythology) are distinct. That would not be the case if the
commonality of a firmament was spread by contact.
--
Mark Isaak atta @ best.com http://www.best.com/~atta
"The commonest fallacy is to suppose that since the state of doubt
is accompanied by a feeling of uncertainty, knowledge arises when
this feeling gives way to one of assurance." - John Dewey
Michael L. Siemon
Isaak) wrote:
+ The idea of a firmament is worldwide. I can give examples from myths
+ from all continents and many islands. In fact, I can't think of any
+ region of any appreciable size which did not have a firmament in its
+ mythology. And although the firmament idea is common, the myths
+ themselves (both those regarding the firmament and other myths in the
+ region's mythology) are distinct. That would not be the case if the
+ commonality of a firmament was spread by contact.
Mark, I know you've got a lot of data on flood myths, but I hadn't
heard you comment on this before. I don't feel very happy with your
statement here, though I don't have extensive data to use to dispute
it.
But I don't think that anything like the "firmament" idea is present
in Greek mythology, or in Chinese sources (nor do I remember anything
in Indian (as in sub-continent) sources, though there might well be
some analogue there I just don't know about.)
I don't quite know what you are accepting as a firmament analogue,
but the _only_ case I know outside the Mesopotamian context of the
Biblical version is that of the Egyptian goddess Nut, whose body
is a physical presence as a kind of "boundary" of the sky -- and
even that is not really the same kind of thing as the firmament,
as the stars are _on_ her body, so that she is not a "separator"
of the world above from the world below: she is an iconic repres-
entation of the world above (with no separator actually intended.)
The most peculiar (and definitive) aspect of the Mesopotamian
firmament notion is a barrier between the waters above and those
below. I have _never_ encountered _that_ notion outside the Meso-
potamian context.
I would be interested in a few citations of non-Mesopotamian and
non-Egyptian myths that you categorize as exempla of "firmament."
--
Michael L. Siemon We must know the truth, and we must
m...@panix.com love the truth we know, and we must act
according to the measure of our love.
-- Thomas Merton
sc...@home.com
>In article <3A24C517...@philips.com>,
>Brian O'Neill <brian....@philips.com> wrote:
>>in contact" - prove they were never in contact. If they seem to be so at
>>some point in history it is most likely beacuse some catastrophe
>>separated them - either a cultural decay, or the rising of the sea by
>>350ft at the beginning of the current interglacial for example.
>
>
organisms from all continents and many islands. In fact, I can't think of any
region of any appreciable size which did not have RNA in its organisms. And
although the RNA is common, the organisms themselves are distinct. That
would not be the case if the commonality of RNA was spread by descent
from a common ancestor.
Scott
stev...@my-deja.com
sc...@home.com wrote:
> In <9075up$306a$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com>, at...@best.comNOSPAM (Mark
Isaak) writes:
> >In article <3A24C517...@philips.com>,
> >Brian O'Neill <brian....@philips.com> wrote:
never
> >>in contact" - prove they were never in contact. If they seem to be
so at
> >>some point in history it is most likely beacuse some catastrophe
> >>separated them - either a cultural decay, or the rising of the sea
by
> >>350ft at the beginning of the current interglacial for example.
> >
> >from all continents and many islands. In fact, I can't think of any
> >region of any appreciable size which did not have a firmament in its
> >mythology. And although the firmament idea is common, the myths
> >themselves (both those regarding the firmament and other myths in the
> >region's mythology) are distinct. That would not be the case if the
> >commonality of a firmament was spread by contact.
> >
> The presence of organisms with RNA is worldwide. I can give examples
from
> organisms from all continents and many islands. In fact, I can't
think of any
> region of any appreciable size which did not have RNA in its
organisms. And
> although the RNA is common, the organisms themselves are distinct.
That
> would not be the case if the commonality of RNA was spread by descent
> from a common ancestor.
>
shared no other features, you would have an excellent point. If,
however, the various organisms did share many other features (common
genes, common enzymes, a common genetic code, etc), the notion of
shared descent would be more plausible. Likewise, if the various
mythologies shared no common features EXCEPT a solid, dome-like sky
(unlike other posters to this thread, I have no expertise in this area,
and have no grounds for an opinion), that would be evidence that the
firmament was independendently invented by each culture.
>
> Scott
>
>
-- Steven J.
Faker
stev...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <3a272...@news1.prserv.net>,
> sc...@home.com wrote:
> > In <9075up$306a$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com>, at...@best.comNOSPAM (Mark
> Isaak) writes:
> > >In article <3A24C517...@philips.com>,
> > >Brian O'Neill <brian....@philips.com> wrote:
> never
> > >>in contact" - prove they were never in contact. If they seem to be
> so at
> > >>some point in history it is most likely beacuse some catastrophe
> > >>separated them - either a cultural decay, or the rising of the sea
> by
> > >>350ft at the beginning of the current interglacial for example.
> > >
myths
> > >from all continents and many islands. In fact, I can't think of
any
> > >region of any appreciable size which did not have a firmament in
its
> > >mythology. And although the firmament idea is common, the myths
> > >themselves (both those regarding the firmament and other myths in
the
> > >region's mythology) are distinct. That would not be the case if
the
> > >commonality of a firmament was spread by contact.
> > >
> > The presence of organisms with RNA is worldwide.
Just about universal.
I can give examples
> from
> > organisms from all continents and many islands. In fact, I can't
> think of any
> > region of any appreciable size which did not have RNA in its
> organisms. And
> > although the RNA is common, the organisms themselves are distinct.
> That
> > would not be the case if the commonality of RNA was spread by
descent
> > from a common ancestor.
> >
> And if the RNA were identical, or very similar, while the organisms
> shared no other features, you would have an excellent point. If,
> however, the various organisms did share many other features (common
> genes, common enzymes, a common genetic code, etc), the notion of
> shared descent would be more plausible. Likewise, if the various
> mythologies shared no common features EXCEPT a solid, dome-like sky
> (unlike other posters to this thread, I have no expertise in this
area,
> and have no grounds for an opinion), that would be evidence that the
> firmament was independendently invented by each culture.
Exactly. The simple idea of a firmament could come about much more
easily than the complex, ubiquitous hereditary system.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> -- Steven J.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
>
--
Faker
"This Snow Crash thing--is it a virus, a drug, or a religion?"
Juanita shrugs. "What's the difference?"
Neal Stephenson, _Snow Crash_
Matt Silberstein
from m...@panix.com (Michael L. Siemon):
[snip]
>I would be interested in a few citations of non-Mesopotamian and
>non-Egyptian myths that you categorize as exempla of "firmament."
I know that the Navaho have something like a firmament as their flood
story has people climbing above the sky to another land. And Blackfoot
(IIRC) stories have Raven flying into the sky to visit some gods.
--
Matt Silberstein
Pardon me whilst I adjust my accoutrements.
D.D.
Tracy P. Hamilton
"Mark Isaak" <at...@best.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:9075up$306a$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com...
> >in contact" - prove they were never in contact. If they seem to be so at
> >some point in history it is most likely beacuse some catastrophe
> >separated them - either a cultural decay, or the rising of the sea by
> >350ft at the beginning of the current interglacial for example.
>
> from all continents and many islands. In fact, I can't think of any
> region of any appreciable size which did not have a firmament in its
> mythology. And although the firmament idea is common, the myths
> themselves (both those regarding the firmament and other myths in the
> region's mythology) are distinct. That would not be the case if the
> commonality of a firmament was spread by contact.
Jeez, all it takes is a little common sense. Look up at the night sky.
What shape is it? Hemispherical. There are things up there. Why
don't they fall down? Must be attached up there.
Tracy P. Hamilton
Michael L. Siemon
<mat...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
+ In talk.origins I read <mls-301100...@mls.dialup.access.net>
+ from m...@panix.com (Michael L. Siemon):
+
+ [snip]
+
+ >I would be interested in a few citations of non-Mesopotamian and
+ >non-Egyptian myths that you categorize as exempla of "firmament."
+
+ I know that the Navaho have something like a firmament as their flood
+ story has people climbing above the sky to another land. And Blackfoot
+ (IIRC) stories have Raven flying into the sky to visit some gods.
+
The first would be reasonably classifiable as a "firmament" kind of
notion, but the mere notion of habitations (of gods or other) in the
skies is not, IMHO.
Matt Silberstein
from m...@panix.com (Michael L. Siemon):
>In article <e2df2tkacl29u0eh4...@4ax.com>, Matt Silberstein
><mat...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>+ In talk.origins I read <mls-301100...@mls.dialup.access.net>
>+ from m...@panix.com (Michael L. Siemon):
>+
>+ [snip]
>+
>+ >I would be interested in a few citations of non-Mesopotamian and
>+ >non-Egyptian myths that you categorize as exempla of "firmament."
>+
>+ I know that the Navaho have something like a firmament as their flood
>+ story has people climbing above the sky to another land. And Blackfoot
>+ (IIRC) stories have Raven flying into the sky to visit some gods.
>+
>
>The first would be reasonably classifiable as a "firmament" kind of
>notion, but the mere notion of habitations (of gods or other) in the
>skies is not, IMHO.
I don't have the book at hand, but it was more like a whole land up
there. Raven flew into a cave in the sky, the image I had reading the
story was that the sky was solid, not a isolated location.
Mark Isaak
Michael L. Siemon <m...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <9075up$306a$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com>, at...@best.comNOSPAM (Mark
>Isaak) wrote:
>+ The idea of a firmament is worldwide. [...]
>
>[...]
>But I don't think that anything like the "firmament" idea is present
>in Greek mythology, or in Chinese sources (nor do I remember anything
>in Indian (as in sub-continent) sources, though there might well be
>some analogue there I just don't know about.)
>
The book _Classical Chinese Myths_ by Jan and Yvonne Walls has a chapter
titled "Nu-Wa mends the firmament": "One year, no one knows exactly
why, a great disaster befellthe universe: half the firmament collapsed,
leaving ugly holes in the sky. . ."
I don't remember specific references to the firmament in Hindu myth, but
in the Ramayana, Ravana, before trying to conquer earth, conquers both
the heavens and the underworld. This shows that there at least was a
consideration of the skys as a seperate kingdom.
The Yanomamo in Amazonian South America have a myth that part of the
firmament collapsed and broke through the earth to fall into the
underworld.
I just finished a book on Miwok (native Californian) mythology (_The
Dawn of the World_ by Merrian). They believe in a firmament with five
holes in it, one each to the north, south, east, west, and straight up.
I don't have time to give more examples now, but they really are very
common.