Genesis 1:6-8

[Darren0803]

��

Is it possible to reconcile Genesis 1:6-8 with the sky being the expanse that separates the water from water. I have tried to fit the troposphere into the equation, but this would imply that the sky is in between the troposphere that starts at the earth and reaches up to the troposphere.
Genesisc1:6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse in the midst of the water, and let it be a separation between water and water."
7And God made the expanse and it separated between the water that was below the expanse and the water that was above the expanse, and it was so.
8And God called the expanse Heaven, and it was evening, and it was morning, a second day.

 

[vulcanlogician]

Not really.

But I still like the Genesis story on account of its myth value.

Sure, it portrays women unfairly and all that etc., etc., etc.. But you gotta expect that from ancient literature. The gist of the myth is that "now we know the difference between good and evil. We are no longer innocent, and life sucks because of that."

The antiquated cosmology of the whole story pretty much exempts it from being understood as a serious history. One of the most glaring errors is the now defunct assertion that the heavens are filled with water.

Of course, everybody knows that the Greeks had the best myths. But the Jews could myth pretty hard too when they wanted. And I appreciate more of their work than you'd expect.

 

[Darren0803]

Not really.

But I still like the Genesis story on account of its myth value.

Sure, it portrays women unfairly and all that etc., etc., etc.. But you gotta expect that from ancient literature. The gist of the myth is that "now we know the difference between good and evil. We are no longer innocent, and life sucks because of that."

The antiquated cosmology of the whole story pretty much exempts it from being understood as a serious history. One of the most glaring errors is the now defunct assertion that the heavens are filled with water.

Of course, everybody knows that the Greeks had the best myths. But the Jews could myth pretty hard too when they wanted. And I appreciate more of their work than you'd expect.

I know, it doesn't seem I can stretch the expanse to read into the text. This is my article which I am still working on, call a long stretch, but I am using logic:

In chapter one of Genesis the Bible states the following:

1 In the beginning of God's creation (bā·rā) of the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was astonishingly empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep, and the spirit of God was hovering over the face of the water.
((Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg's Translation.)

From this it important to note that the Hewbrew transliterated word used for God's initial act of creation is "bā·rā", and implies that God created all the elements out of nothing, which through the separation of matter, and the expansion of combined materials formed the galaxies, stars, and planets. Now although this was the first stage of creation, hence the phrase "in the beginning", it cannot be determined when the beginning occurred, but rather a stage of stages, for example, the next stages mentioned are in verses 3-5 when the first day was established from light being emitted from it's source, which was subject to the expression of God's will through His power of speech, I.e. God said to the source "be" or "become," which is based on the Hebrew transliterated word "hayah". (הָיְתָ֥ה - Strong's Concordance - 1961: To fall out, come to pass, become, be).

For example, when the transliterated word "hayah" is applied to it's source, chapter one of Genesis can be read follows:

3 And God said, "(to the source), ("become" (hayah)) light." 4 And God saw the light that it was good, and God separated between the light and between the darkness.5 And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night, and it was evening and it was morning, a first day (Sunday).
(The Jewish Study Bible combined with Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg's Translation.
(Brackets not included in the translation)

From this it is important to note that when the source emitted light, verse five ends with, "...and it was evening and it was morning. So this shows that the sun was the source that was subject to the power of God's speech, I.e. when God said "become light," the earth's rotation on it's axis relative to the sun completed the "first day", which shows that when God created the heavens, this included the galaxies, stars, planets, sun and moon.

Also when applying the transliterated word "hayah" again to the source, the next verses of chapter one of Genesis can be read follows:

14 God said, (to the source), ("become" (hayah)) lights in the expanse of the sky to separate day from night; (and "be" (hayah)) signs for the set times-the days and the years; 15 and ("become" (hayah)) lights in the expanse of the sky to shine upon the earth." And it was so. 16 God made (asah - עָשָׂה) the two great lights, the greater light to dominate the day and the lesser light to dominate the night, and the stars. 17 And God set them in the expanse of the sky to shine upon the earth, 18 to dominate the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that this was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.
(Translation - The Jewish Study Bible)
(Brackets not included in the translation)

Now when God said to the source, "be" or "become" lights in the expanse of the sky, God's will was for the lights to "be" (hayah) signs and seasons, and for days and years". Therefore God willed the revolution of the moon about the earth every 29.53 days to mark the seasons, the earth’s rotation on it's axis relative to the sun every 24 hours to mark the days, and the revolution of the earth about the sun around 365¼ days to mark the years.

 

[Twilight Hue]

��

Is it possible to reconcile Genesis 1:6-8 with the sky being the expanse that separates the water from water. I have tried to fit the troposphere into the equation, but this would imply that the sky is in between the troposphere that starts at the earth and reaches up to the troposphere.
Genesisc1:6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse in the midst of the water, and let it be a separation between water and water."
7And God made the expanse and it separated between the water that was below the expanse and the water that was above the expanse, and it was so.
8And God called the expanse Heaven, and it was evening, and it was morning, a second day.

It is an imaginative and poetic way to interpret the water cycle.

 

[Darren0803]

It is an imaginative and poetic way to interpret the water cycle.

I agree.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

From this it important to note that the Hewbrew transliterated word used for God's initial act of creation is "bā·rā", and implies that God created all the elements out of nothing, which through the separation of matter, and the expansion of combined materials formed the galaxies, stars, and planets. Now although this was the first stage of creation, hence the phrase "in the beginning", ...

Why did you do that?

Why state "hence the phrase 'in the beginning', ..." when you [finally] concur that a better rendering would be Rosenberg's "in the beginning of" or, perhaps, Alter's "when God began"? It's as if you've simply acceded to a rendering that you really don't quite understand.

There exists an extensive number of commentaries written by scholars who have invested an impressive number of years specializing in the study Hebrew scripture and Semitic languages. May I ask what credentials you have that warrants authoring a competing treatise?

 

[Darren0803]

Why did you do that?

Why state "hence the phrase 'in the beginning', ..." when you [finally] concur that a better rendering would be Rosenberg's "in the beginning of" or, perhaps, Alter's "when God began"? It's as if you've simply acceded to a rendering that you really don't quite understand.

There exists an extensive number of commentaries written by scholars who have invested an impressive number of years specializing in the study Hebrew scripture and Semitic languages. May I ask what credentials you have that warrants authoring a competing treatise?

Are not in the Beginning or When God began the initial starting point? Sorry if I never completed the phrase of either, "when God began to", "In the Beginning of", or "at the beginning of". I have no credentials, that's the reason I include the brackets. I use whichever translation gives the easiest understanding. The reason for combining the two translations was because The Jewish Study Bible ended verse 3 with "a first day" as opposed to "one day"

I study the Rabbinical literature and the Tanakh. So if you could please provide one commentary or scholar that can convey a correct understanding of Genesis 1:6-8 instead of the extensive Rabbinical literature that conveys an unacceptable meaning, I would appreciate that. I reject the hammered out solid dome that separates the waters, but there is the solidified expansion which explained in the commentary by Charles Kahane, New York, 1963.

Genesis chapter 1:​

וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֔ים יְהִ֥י רָקִ֖יעַ בְּת֣וֹךְ הַמָּ֑יִם וִיהִ֣י מַבְדִּ֔יל בֵּ֥ין מַ֖יִם לָמָֽיִם׃
The Almighty said: “Let there be a partition in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters above from the waters below.”
(ירושלמי, יונתן.)

וַיַּ֣עַשׂ אֱלֹהִים֮ אֶת־הָרָקִ֒יעַ֒ וַיַּבְדֵּ֗ל בֵּ֤ין הַמַּ֙יִם֙ אֲשֶׁר֙ מִתַּ֣חַת לָרָקִ֔יעַ וּבֵ֣ין הַמַּ֔יִם אֲשֶׁ֖ר מֵעַ֣ל לָרָקִ֑יעַ וַֽיְהִי־כֵֽן׃
The Almighty solidified the partition, and divided the waters which were under the partition — the rivers and seas — from the waters which were above the partition — the mists and rain-producing clouds. And when it was so,
(ראה רש"י בפסוק ו', ירושלמי ברכות פ"א: רב אמר יהי רקיע: יחזק הרקיע. תורה שלמה אות ת"פ, א"ע.)


וַיִּקְרָ֧א אֱלֹהִ֛ים לָֽרָקִ֖יעַ שָׁמָ֑יִם וַֽיְהִי־עֶ֥רֶב וַֽיְהִי־בֹ֖קֶר י֥וֹם שֵׁנִֽי׃ {פ}
the Almighty called the partition “Heaven.” And there was evening and morning, the second day.
(ראה תהלים קד, ו-ח.)

Also in the Commentary of Rashi:

ויקרא אלהים לרקיע שמים. שָׂא מַיִם, שָׁם מַיִם, אֵשׁ וּמַיִם, שֶׁעֵרְבָן זֶה בָזֶה וְעָשָׂה מֵהֶם שָׁמַיִם:
ויקרא אלהים לרקיע שמים AND GOD CALLED THE EXPANSE HEAVEN — The word “שמים”, Heaven, may be regarded as made up of שא מים “Carry water”, or שם מים “There is water”, or אש ומים “Fire and water”. He mingled fire with water and of them He made the heavens (Chagigah 12a).

 

[Yokefellow]

��

Is it possible to reconcile Genesis 1:6-8 with the sky being the expanse that separates the water from water.

In my opinion, you are better off understanding that the 'expanse' that separates water from water is what we call our universe.

Something like this...

The so called 'waters' are not H20. They are dimensional boundaries.

• Waters Below = Boundary between 2D and 3D
• Waters Above = Boundary between 3D and 4D

We exist in 3D, while 2D is the 'underworld'. 4D and above is still a bit of a Mystery to me. I simply call it the Multiverse.

This video explains in better if you are interested...

 

[Yokefellow]

@Darren0803 , your Avatar is mostly correct, it is the interpretation that many get wrong...

​

The 'Sky' in the above image should be interpreted as *both* Earth's atmosphere *and* outer space. In other words, the Firmament is anything above ground level.

Case in point, birds do not fly in outer space...

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."

Birds fly in the Firmament. Thus 'Heaven' is simply the Macrocosm in that context. The 'Third Heaven' is the Microcosm, not the Atmosphere as commonly understood. The 'Highest Heaven' exists outside of our universe. The 'Waters Above' separates the universe from God. Again, it is a boundary layer.

The 'Sea' in the above image is what separates our Universe from the Underworld...

"The underworld, also known as the netherworld, is the supernatural world of the dead in various religious traditions and myths, located below the world of the living."

Underworld - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

God created order out of chaos.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

��

Is it possible to reconcile Genesis 1:6-8 with the sky being the expanse that separates the water from water. I have tried to fit the troposphere into the equation, but this would imply that the sky is in between the troposphere that starts at the earth and reaches up to the troposphere.
Genesisc1:6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse in the midst of the water, and let it be a separation between water and water."
7And God made the expanse and it separated between the water that was below the expanse and the water that was above the expanse, and it was so.
8And God called the expanse Heaven, and it was evening, and it was morning, a second day.

No, you cannot accept Genesis as history and expect it to square with what science has shown us. The Cosmology of the Bible is simply contrary to known fact.

 

[Darren0803]

@Darren0803 , your Avatar is mostly correct, it is the interpretation that many get wrong...

View attachment 86950
​

The 'Sky' in the above image should be interpreted as *both* Earth's atmosphere *and* outer space. In other words, the Firmament is anything above ground level.

Case in point, birds do not fly in outer space...

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."

Birds fly in the Firmament. Thus 'Heaven' is simply the Macrocosm in that context. The 'Third Heaven' is the Microcosm, not the Atmosphere as commonly understood. The 'Highest Heaven' exists outside of our universe. The 'Waters Above' separates the universe from God. Again, it is a boundary layer.

The 'Sea' in the above image is what separates our Universe from the Underworld...

"The underworld, also known as the netherworld, is the supernatural world of the dead in various religious traditions and myths, located below the world of the living."

Underworld - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

God created order out of chaos.

The sky/heaven and troposphere begins at the Earth's surface, but the height of the troposphere is between 11-12 miles up. Obviously the sky/Heaven has no solid firmament separating the waters. The Rabbinical literature in some cases explains a solidified firmament. A better understanding of the water cycle if the troposphere is to be taken into consideration. I would say the troposphere is in the midst of the sky/heaven. Could it be that the sky is in the midst of the troposphere?

 

[wellwisher]

��

Is it possible to reconcile Genesis 1:6-8 with the sky being the expanse that separates the water from water. I have tried to fit the troposphere into the equation, but this would imply that the sky is in between the troposphere that starts at the earth and reaches up to the troposphere.
Genesisc1:6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse in the midst of the water, and let it be a separation between water and water."
7And God made the expanse and it separated between the water that was below the expanse and the water that was above the expanse, and it was so.
8And God called the expanse Heaven, and it was evening, and it was morning, a second day.

My guess is the early earth was so hot that the modern earth's surface and atmospheric water, respectively, was in the form of steam and a hot dense phase of supercritical water with various dissolved minerals; phase diagram. There was not yet any liquid water, since supercritical water is neither gas nor liquid but a very dense fluid that can dissolve rocks and minerals to form a solution. These are all phases of water; the waters.

Separation of the water from the waters is about the condensation of the stream phase of water in the upper atmosphere, and the phase separation of the minerals within supercritical water; solid crust appears, as the cooling rain falls, also forming the salty liquid oceans, making a distinction from the water vapor in the atmosphere; heavens. This would have been the most severe atmospheric storms in the earth's history, setting the stage for the precursors of life; Miller Experiments simulation with extreme lightning.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Are not in the Beginning or When God began the initial starting point?

See, e.g., Gen 1:1,2 Creation ex nihilo ... NOT

I study the Rabbinical literature and the Tanakh. So if you could please provide one commentary or scholar that can convey a correct understanding of Genesis 1:6-8 instead of the extensive Rabbinical literature that conveys an unacceptable meaning, I would appreciate that.

What extensive Rabbinical literature did you study?

I reject the hammered out solid dome that separates the waters, ...

Oy vey!

 

[Darren0803]

My guess is the early earth was so hot that the modern earth's surface and atmospheric water, respectively, was in the form of steam and a hot dense phase of supercritical water with various dissolved minerals; phase diagram. There was not yet any liquid water, since supercritical water is neither gas nor liquid but a very dense fluid that can dissolve rocks and minerals to form a solution. These are all phases of water; the waters.

Separation of the water from the waters is about the condensation of the stream phase of water in the upper atmosphere, and the phase separation of the minerals within supercritical water; solid crust appears, as the cooling rain falls, also forming the salty liquid oceans, making a distinction from the water vapor in the atmosphere; heavens. This would have been the most severe atmospheric storms in the earth's history, setting the stage for the precursors of life; Miller Experiments simulation with extreme lightning.

Thank you for the details information. How would you explain the expanse (sky) separating the waters above and below?

 

[Darren0803]

See, e.g., Gen 1:1,2 Creation ex nihilo ... NOT


What extensive Rabbinical literature did you study?


Oy vey!

I said I study. So in defence on the Tanakh, I attempt to resolve the so called contradictions or problematic. So any Rabbinical literature that explains the verses. That's the reason for this post. Ex Niliho - yes, unless you don't believe in an eternal God.

 

[Darren0803]

No, you cannot accept Genesis as history and expect it to square with what science has shown us. The Cosmology of the Bible is simply contrary to known fact.

You mean contrary to known theories. If could show me the errors in the post that contradicts the scientific theories I would appreciate that.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

You mean contrary to known theories. If could show me the errors in the post that contradicts the scientific theories I would appreciate that.

You apparently have no clue what a scientific theory is. There is more evidence for evolution than Gravity.

 

[Yokefellow]

The sky/heaven and troposphere begins at the Earth's surface, but the height of the troposphere is between 11-12 miles up. Obviously the sky/Heaven has no solid firmament separating the waters. The Rabbinical literature in some cases explains a solidified firmament. A better understanding of the water cycle if the troposphere is to be taken into consideration. I would say the troposphere is in the midst of the sky/heaven. Could it be that the sky is in the midst of the troposphere?

Is your heart really set on interpreting Genesis 1 with a Troposphere being created?

The verses do not appear to care about that aspect of Earth's makeup. In other words, Genesis 1 does not describe any kind of atmosphere being created because is not important to what we are supposed to learn and understand.

The biggest mistake people make is to assume that Genesis 1:2 is describing an ocean (H20) on Earth...

Genesis 1:2
"And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."

This is incorrect. Earth, with its oceans, was created much later...

Genesis 1:10
"And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good."

What you are doing is trying to fit a Troposphere on a planet that does not yet exist. Look at Genesis 1:2 again. The word 'void' means a complete vacuum. The word 'without form' means it is two-dimensional. In other words, the Third Dimension had not even been created yet.

The Third Dimension is what is created here...

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."

Again, our Universe, much less Earth, was only a flat plane at that point. Genesis is describing profound knowledge that we are just now beginning to understand. This flat two-dimensional plane (Waters) could be what we call a Brane...

"In string theory and related theories such as supergravity theories, a brane is a physical object that generalizes the notion of a zero-dimensional point particle, a one-dimensional string, or a two-dimensional membrane to higher-dimensional objects."

Brane - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

God divided the Waters, i.e., the Brane, into 3D space.

There is also the 'Worldsheet'...

God created the World Volume, i.e., the Firmament of outer space in Genesis 1:7.

I encourage you to watch the beginning of the video I made. I know it is long, but it explains all of this in greater detail. Folks have a tendency to 'dumb down' Genesis and make it look like an idiot wrote it when in fact, the information is simply over their ability to grasp it.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I said I study. So in defence on the Tanakh, I attempt to resolve the so called contradictions or problematic. So any Rabbinical literature that explains the verses. That's the reason for this post. Ex Niliho - yes, unless you don't believe in an eternal God.

You said ...

I study the Rabbinical literature and the Tanakh.

What Rabbinical literature have you studied?

 

[Darren0803]

You apparently have no clue what a scientific theory is. There is more evidence for evolution than Gravity.

Please show me the errors and state a scientific fact.