There are no waters above the sky. Why should I believe the rest of the bible?
>1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.>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.>3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
>4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.>5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.>6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.>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.>8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
>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:>15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.>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.>17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,>18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.>19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
>>18522425>>18522426>>18522427Kek nice plagiarism of Sumero-Akkadian mythologyGenesis Book 1, Line 2>”Now the earth was unformed and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters.”Enuma Elis Tablet 1, Lines 2-5>”When above the heaven had not yet been made”>”And below the earth had not yet been called by a name”>”When Apsu (the primordial embodiment of fresh water) primeval their begetter”>”And Tiamat (the primordial embodiment of salt water), she who gave birth to them all”>”Still mingled their waters together”Genesis Book 1, Lines 6-7>”And God said: 'Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.' “Enuma Elish Lines 135-136>”The lord (Marduk) rested, examining her (Tiamat’s) dead body (the seas)”>”To divide the abortion and create ingenious things therewith”Genesis Line 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.”Enuma Elis Tablet 4, Lines 137-140>”He (Marduk) split her (Tiamat, i.e. the seas) open like a mussel, into two”>”Half of her he set in place and formed the sky as a roof”>”He fixed the crossbar and posted guards”>”He commanded them not to let her waters escape”
sage and hide, do not throw pearls before swine
>>18522569>NOOOO DON'T READ THE BOOKYou are coping so hard.
>>18522566That's really interesting
>>18522422>There are no waters above the sky.Then how is the sky blue, moran
>>18522422Literally? I don't think you should. There are very few stories where literalism will be of any use whatsoever.>But how could anyone ever discern figurative and factual language, this has never been achieved!!!So when the author that tells you "I've literally seen this bro" (such as John) or authors that corroborate other authors' narratives (such as other Apostles) are likely recounting what they remember happening. When the author goes on some of the most poetic-symbolic rants ever put on paper, chances are it's not a record of empirical events.
>>18522422The bible in infallible in its teachings, not in literally everything.The people who wrote each chapter was divinely inspired to to teach divine truths.This doesn't mean that God Himself writes the bible.The human author still has to express those truths through his own language, culture, worldview, and understanding of the world.This is why it doesn't matter if the creation story is plagiarized.The importance relies on what is the text trying to teach about the divine truth.
>>18522422Key Catholic InterpretationsDivine Order Over Chaos: The ancient Israelites viewed the chaotic, deep waters as symbols of disorder and nothingness. The act of "separating" these waters demonstrates God's sovereignty over creation, bringing structure and harmony to the universe.Rejection of Literal Scientific Rigor: Catholics are taught by the Church (and historically by scholars like St. Augustine) that the biblical authors used the worldview and cosmology of their era to communicate spiritual truths. The text is not meant to be read as a literal physical description of a solid dome holding up a celestial ocean.Preparation for Life: The separation of the waters sets the stage for life to flourish on Earth. It illustrates God's loving providence, structuring the cosmos so that it is "good" and habitable for the creatures He would later create.Creation Ex Nihilo: This verse reinforces that creation is entirely the work of God. Matter does not pre-exist Him; rather, all things owe their design, nature, and existence solely to His will.
>>18522918>>18522925>>18522947They wrote it as a literal description of creation
>>18522953What relevance does a literal "plants appeared on the third day" have for the reader? Or for the rest of Genesis? The rest of Old Testament? The rest of the Bible? It doesn't. There is no good reason to insist on literalism.
>>18522972>>18522972The scribes who wrote the Torah had no conception of philosophy and intended for the text to be read literally. The fact is that all myths, both pagan and Abrahamic, were intended as literal history. “It’s ackshually an allegory” is just a post hoc reinterpretation that only comes into existence when a story becomes undeniably ahistorical. Up until the early modern era, all Christians believed Adam and Eve were real people and that there really was a global flood (otherwise Eusebius wouldn’t have spent so much time trying to reconcile the biblical flood with the Mesopotamian flood myth which yes, was indeed known to the Greco-Roman world and was detailed in the now-lost Babyloniaca by Berossus).
>>18522953Literally, Genesis 1:7 describes the physical separation of the primordial waters into two distinct layers to establish the sky. God formed an expanse (the "firmament" or sky) to divide the water covering the early earth, leaving half below the sky as seas and half suspended high above.In ancient Hebrew cosmology, this verse depicts a physical, solid dome (the firmament) acting as a barrier holding back a literal celestial ocean of water in the heavens.
>>18522996>In ancient Hebrew cosmology, this verse depicts a physical, solid dome (the firmament) acting as a barrier holding back a literal celestial ocean of water in the heavens.Yes, that is correct.
>>18522982>The scribes who wrote the Torah had no conception of philosophyThen I suppose the scribes were the first people to write a coherent philosophical-symbolic treatsie by accident. Is the literalistic bias and its anachronistic projection 2000 years back so dear to you that you will commit to this "accident"?>intended for the text to be read literallySource?>The fact is that all myths, both pagan and Abrahamic, were intended as literal history.Source?>“It’s ackshually an allegory”It's not an allegory. It's mythology. Allegory is what you get when you try to generalize a myth. >Up until the early modern era, all Christians believed Adam and Eve were real peopleDid they all insist on complete literalism?
>>18523001Yes, and?
>>18523001Is your argument that because we today, living with the benefit of scientific hindsight, no longer believe in outdated cosmologies like those used by ancient Hebrews and other Near East tribes that the Bible is therefore false?
>>18523019Basically yea. The bible gets almost everything wrong in terms of not just cosmology, but spirituality and philosophy in general. It is clearly not a divinely inspired text.
>>18523030With the exception of certain Evangelical groups, this isn't a problem for most Christians because they don't treat the Bible as if it were a literal scientific or historical text. Many Christians believe that the Bible contains theological and spiritual truths which require historical and symbolic interpretations. Even modern science is based on falsifying itself and "correcting errors", so by that rigid of a standard, we would need to throw out all of history, and even all of science up until 1 second ago.
>>18523037>most christians deny that the bible is divinely inspired so it's not a problemYea I know that most people are hypocrites and engage in cognitively dissonant behavior.
>>18523005It is not “philosophical-symbolic,” that is a post hoc reinterpretation. Again, the Torah scribes intended it as a literal account of the creation of the world and its earliest events. They believed there really was a flood and that Adam and Eve existed. All Christians and Jews believed this up until the early modern era, even Augustine believed in the existence of Adam and Eve.
>>18523005>Did they all insist on complete literalism?Yes, how would you react if someone said that Jesus’ is an allegory rather than a historical event?
>>18523058>It is not “philosophical-symbolic,”You keep making assertions about the text you have no way of establishing at all.>Again, the Torah scribes intended it as a literal accountAgain, source?>even Augustine believed in the existence of Adam and Eve.Augustine also famously argued that literalism isn't necessary.>>18523063>>Did they all insist on complete literalism?>YesNope. See above. Augustine argues explicitly in the City of God that Genesis 1 is not a literal account.>how would you react if someone said that Jesus’ is an allegory rather than a historical event?I would make 27 posts on an image board, asserting again and again that literalism is an inherent feature of the text no matter what.
>>18523075>Augustine argues explicitly in the City of God that Genesis 1 is not a literal account.He only views the meaning of day as allegorical. He still believed in the existence of Adam and Eve and that a flood really happened.Even today, you still treat ahistorical bullshit as literal given that you genuinely think Exodus happened and that Daniel was a real person.
>>18523113Correct, he read literally some places and non-literally in others. Ergo, he did not insist on literalism.
>>18522422Chaos serpent.Literally the Indo European Chaoskampf. They turned Baal Hadad thunder god into the One True God and ran with it.
>Unbelievers are also deceived by false documents which ascribe to history many thousand years, although we can calculate from Sacred Scripture that not 6,000 years have passed since the creation of man.Augustine. The City of God, translated by G. G. Walsh and G. Monahan (1952), Book 12, Chapter 11, p. 263. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press.
>this guy was literal sometimes>so you gotta be literal alwaysThought-provoking. Thanks.
>>18522422As you can see in this thread, christians are willing to just move the goalpost on a proof rather than accepting falsification. Any time you disprove something, they will just say>"that was never meant to be literal anyway"as a form of cope and denial.
>>18522953Did you not read my post?Yes, it is a literal description of creation.It is not important if it actually happened that way or not. The importance relies on the divine truth it is trying to reveal, through a human lense.
>>18523143Not to be a party pooper, but accepting that your interpretation was wrong ... is precisely falsification.
>>18523153I saw your post. It isn't a divine truth either precisely because it isn't a real description. Had the bible described evolution, for example, that would have been very good evidence that it was divinely inspired. But it just described standard near eastern cosmology which was already the belief at the time, and borrowed from the surrounding religions.
>>18523165And how is a man who lived about 3000 years ago supposed to know about all those things?It would have been dismissed as foolishness and thrown away. By ascribing into the popular culture of the time, it was able to survive into our days.Think of it this way. There's truths in the world that our feeble mind cannot comprehend just yet. Discoveries that are thousands of years away from our comprehension. If God comes and writes a book about all those things, would you believe? I assume you would disregard it as science fiction at best, but I don't think even our wildest imagination is even close to the secrets of the universe.
>>18522996You are already dead set on not taking Christians seriously but “sabbath was made for man and not man for sabbath” (ie 7 day creation which is honored by men was an idea created to alleviate them of overworking by the prophet Moses) implies many parts of Genesis are merely metaphorical and the creation myth in particular.
>>18522422I dunno have you been up there?
>>18523120>he did not insist on literalismIf you believe ANY of it is historical, then you believe in a form of literalism. The only way to truly allegorize the Bible would be to say that ALL OF IT, including the existence of Jesus, is allegorical.
Can a bible believer tell me how much of this "genealogy" of jesus is fabricated and how much is factual? Matthew 1This is the genealogy[a] of Jesus the Messiah[b] the son of David, the son of Abraham:2 Abraham was the father of Isaac,Isaac the father of Jacob,Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,3 Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar,Perez the father of Hezron,Hezron the father of Ram,4 Ram the father of Amminadab,Amminadab the father of Nahshon,Nahshon the father of Salmon,5 Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,Obed the father of Jesse,6 and Jesse the father of King David.David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife,7 Solomon the father of Rehoboam,Rehoboam the father of Abijah,Abijah the father of Asa,8 Asa the father of Jehoshaphat,Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram,Jehoram the father of Uzziah,9 Uzziah the father of Jotham,Jotham the father of Ahaz,Ahaz the father of Hezekiah,10 Hezekiah the father of Manasseh,Manasseh the father of Amon,Amon the father of Josiah,11 and Josiah the father of Jeconiah[c] and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon.12 After the exile to Babylon:Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,13 Zerubbabel the father of Abihud,Abihud the father of Eliakim,Eliakim the father of Azor,14 Azor the father of Zadok,Zadok the father of Akim,Akim the father of Elihud,15 Elihud the father of Eleazar,Eleazar the father of Matthan,Matthan the father of Jacob,16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah.
>>18523196>a form of literalismYeah, I'm a figurative literalist, you got me lol. If your only hope was to use the term "literalism", even if at the cost of redefining it, consider yourself succesful.
>>18522566>Sumero-Akkadian mythologyThey were the closest civilization to the tower of babel and the Hebrew nation, their creation and flood myths should be more similar.Yet one civilization is still alive and the other is dead. Tell me, what kind of god lets their worship and religion die out?
>>18522422>There are no waters above the sky.WHAT MAKES YOU CERTAIN ABOUT THAT?
>>18523717It's probably because you are a troglodyte who views the gods from the lens of a Marvel consoomer (including of course Jeebus himself).Deities are supreme immortal entities existing in higher planes. Humans attach themselves to the deities that have created them, and draw down power from them, freely shared. But just because humans lose connection with these deities and fail to draw power from them any longer, does not influence these deities the least bit.The gods are doing just as well today as they were in the past. It is humans that are doing worse. Followers of the all too human cult of Jeebus may beat their chests in triumph but all that has been achieved is a slump to base ignorance. Much ancient wisdom has been lost and destroyed, which could have been used to help everyone today. Oh well. Each man for himself now.
>>18522422Separating the waters below the firmament (oceans) from the waters above it (clouds). The firmament was the sky.
>>18523729>general statement ignoring actual Sumerian religionThe Sumerian gods created humans to serve divine needs. Humans were not the center of creation, but rather workers tasked with maintaining temples, offering sacrifices, and sustaining the gods’ cosmic order. This relationship was essential. Without humanity’s worship, the gods might grow displeased, allowing chaos to return. The gods were viewed as anthropomorphic beings who required humans to perform labor, offer sacrifices, and maintain temples to sustain their lavish lifestyle and prevent chaos. So tell me, according to their own religion, the so called gods needed humans to support them but then allowed this critical piece to stop existing? Do you really hate ancient Hebrews and Christianity so much that you are willing to support a dead religion that claimed planetary objects and wind/rain/oceans were gods and not natural phenomenon? Even the Old Testament calls this out as foolishness (those who worshipped created things) which, surprise, turned out to be right.
>Kuiper Belt>Oort Cloud>Gas giants>Ice giantsThere's much more water in outer space than exists on Earth. Technically this water is above the sky.
>>18522425>In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.This immediately demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of cosmic formation sequences that would embarrass a first-year astrophysics student.>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.A formless planet cannot possess a distinguishable surface with water already present. The accretion processes necessary for planetary formation require approximately 100 million years of gravitational consolidation before differentiation of materials could occur, with hydrosphere formation following crustal cooling.>And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.Yet the sun, moon and stars weren't created until the fourth day.
>>18522422>There are no waters above the skyYour argument is not off to a very good start.
>>18523750>The gods were viewed as anthropomorphic beings who required humans to perform labor, offer sacrifices, and maintain temples to sustain their lavish lifestyle and prevent chaos.The myths are allegories, not literal historical events. This has always been the case, the Greco-Babylonian priest Berossus himself explicitly said so in his now-lost work titled the Babyloniaca. Unlike Jews and Christians who only pivoted to allegory in the early modern era, ancient pagans already treated their myths as allegories.>Do you really hate ancient HebrewsJewish monotheism is retarded, so yes.
>>18524011>BerossusGuilty of presentism, an anachronistic introduction of present-day perspectives into the interpretation or depiction of historical events, often resulting in distorted analysis.>now lost workspeaks for itself
>>18523857Yes people back then thought rain came from the sky opening to the waters above it. How is this a gotcha? That's literally why they believed that
>>18523191>sabbath was made for man and not man for sabbath” (ie 7 day creation which is honored by men was an idea created to alleviate them of overworking by the prophet Mosesyou took ie to its extreme meaning of "I'll just say whatever and equate it to anything because I would like it to be that way">And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waterswhat is the use of that verse?Using occam's razor, in absence of context given by the author, this is meant to be taken literally
>>18522422You shouldn't. It's jewish horseshit.
Reminder that "firmament" and "raqia" do not mean "sky" or "heaven" or "atmosphere". Shamayim means "sky" or "heaven".It says "I will hammer out a dome (raqia) in the shamayim (sky/heaven)". Anyone claiming that "firmament" means sky or atmosphere or heaven is wrong.
>>18524196That is actually from the orthodox study Bible though. Orthodoxy in America at least which is the book’s audience, considers Genesis metaphorical based entirely on that Jesus citation about Sabbath having been created to serve man.
>>18524196>Using occam's razor, in absence of context given by the author, this is meant to be taken literallyThe context is that Gen 1 read literally is irreconcilable with Gen 2. Occam's razor seems to precisely exclude the literalist reading and I only have a very approximate idea of why you thought it led to literalism in the first place. Could you elaborate?
