Is Science Superior to the Bible?
the Bible teach that the sky is a solid dome?
HUMANIST'S CLAIM the Bible teaches the: Sky is
a Solid Dome Containing Windows
The Bible promotes
the idea that the sky is a solid dome covering the earth. In the creation account
given in the first chapter of Genesis, verse 17 says the Lord set the sun and
moon in the firmament to provide light for the earth. The Hebrew word
translated as firmament is raqia, which means hammered metal.
for the notion of a domed earth is found at Job 37:18 (where the sky is described
as like a molten lookingglass); Isaiah 40:22 (God stretcheth
out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in);
and Revelation 6:14 (And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled
Here is the reference:
Ecker, Ronald L., Dictionary of Science and Creationism (Buffalo: Prometheus Books,
1990), p. 56.
This is an interesting one. Part of what is said here
may be true. At one time some Bible scholars thought there was a clear ice canopy
around the earth prior to Noah's flood. Others disagreed, and as this was studied
no support was found in scripture nor science for an ice canopy. As with science,
hypothesis are proposed, they are studied, and then either accepted or rejected.
The ice canopy hypothesis has been rejected.
The humanist's assertion that
claims the Bible says the sky is presently a solid dome is totally false. Notice
in their assertion above they use the word "is," asserting that the
Bible teaches there IS now a solid dome around the earth. That is a false assertion
even for those who once believed there was an ice canopy over the earth... prior
to Noah's flood.
This really has me wondering about humanists. They,
or at least the humanist who wrote this article, seem to have no interest in truth.
As long as they can assert something that apparently attacks the Bible... that's
good enough. Truth or fiction, it makes no difference, as long as it attacks the
Bible. There is no interest in actually understanding the context, nor what the
Bible actually says, or having a real discussion based on facts.
if this is because they have no real facts or truth supporting their side... other
than the fact that our human desire is to be like God. We want to be in charge.
We want to make the rules and not be accountable to anyone... especially an all-knowing
God. Unfortunately for humanists (atheists and agnostics), human desires do not
change reality. God is real. So it is best to stop living in a fantasy world,
and deal with the reality of a perfect God, and what will happen when you stand
before Him to be judged.
Genesis 1:17 - Getting Hebrew Words Right
learning to not trust what the humanists say, so let's start with Genesis
1:17 and the Hebrew word translated as "firmament" in the King James.
Note that more recent translations use the English word "expanse" instead
of "firmament." In any case, what is the original Hebrew word?
is "raqiya," which is Strong's 7549. It is used nine times in Genesis
1:1-20. The Strong's definition is: "that which is fixed and steadfast,
rather than that which is solid." (Strong's KJV, 2001) Strong's further
refines the definition: "The firmament is that which is spread out or
stretched out, an expanse. Thus it is extended and fixed, or a fixed space."
humanists reference Ronald Ecker, an anti-Bible author. The word referenced in
the humanist's quote, "raqia" appears to be Strong's 7554, and it means
"spread out." It is the root Hebrew word of "raqiya,"
but it is not the word used in Genesis.
is a very reliable source we can turn to for a definition of "raqiya,"
God. In Genesis 1:8 we read:
And God called
the firmament [raqiya] Heaven
[shamayim]. So the definition is heaven, the Hebrew word "shamayim.".
Keep in mind that the Bible refers to three heavens. The atmosphere of the earth,
where birds fly and clouds float (the sky). Outer space were the sun, moon and
stars are located. And the abode of God. The context tells us which "heaven"
scripture is talking about in any specific verse. For our discussion, it is obvious
from God's definition that "firmament" cannot refer to a canopy over
the earth... metal, ice, or any other material.
the Bible is read in a straightforward logical way, a very clear understanding
of the firmament emerges. From the biblical writers perspective, it was
not a barrier between heaven and earth. It was rather, heaven itself. God
called the firmament, heaven. (Gen. 1:8) When we allow the Bible to define
its own terms, the mystery of the firmament disappears. No need for sophisticated
arguments from etymology or ancient cosmologies. The firmament is the heavens,
and the heavens are a vast open expanse that contained the clouds and luminaries.
- Quote from: Does Genesis teach solid-dome cosmology?, Talk
Genesis, May 26, 2016
Another good article is: The
Collapse of the Canopy Model, by Bodie Hodge (September 25, 2009).
Click on the above link for a discussion of Job 37:18.
give a short summary let's begin with a basic principle of Bible interpretation:
this verse is part of a statement Elihu made. While the Bible is infallible in
recording what Elihu said, what Elihu said is not infallible, nor necessarily
correct. In addition, the purpose of Elihu's speach is to declare Gods justice
and exhalt God, and to condemn Jobs attitude toward God. He is not making
a scientific statement. So we need to be careful about how we understand statements
such as this.
As we look specifically at what Elihu is saying, from the
context is appears he is talking about the clouds. The
book of Job was written soon after the flood, perhaps during the ice age. Elihu
describes the cloudy skies as a cast mirror likely as a metaphor.
Mirrors, at that time, were probably a bit cloudy and the logical connection is
not hard to see. -- Paraphrase from: Does Genesis teach solid-dome cosmology?,
Genesis, May 26, 2016
Look At Isaiah 40:22
It is He who sits above
the circle of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,
stretches out the heavens like a curtain
And spreads them out like a tent to
dwell in.- Isaiah 40:22 -
I can't even make the connection to a
domed earth from this. It is describing exactly what we see. The earth appears
like a circle, just as this verse says. And the universe is expanding... spreading
out... just like this verse says.
Is it the analogy to a tent that leads
humanists to think this verse is talking about a canopy? That makes no sense.
The analogy is to stretching out a tent, which is done in preparation to setting
it up. We're talking about a large tent made from animal skins, not the small,
lightweight, nylon tents we have today.
Finally Revelation 6:14
12 - I looked when He broke the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake;
and the sun became black as sackcloth made of hair, and the whole moon became
13 -and the stars of the sky fell to
the earth, as a fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by a great wind.
14 -The sky was split apart like a scroll when it is rolled up, and every mountain
and island were moved out of their places.
The context of Revelation 6:14
is that it is a prophecy of the destruction coming on the earth. The events in
Revelation 6 take place during the Seven Year Tribulation that happens just before
Christ returns. (At an unspecified time in the future.) Everything, the whole
universe, is literally falling apart... including the sky. This verse does not
imply the "sky" is a canopy and that canopy is coming apart. The prophecy
is that the physical disaster that happens will be so great, that it will appear
that even the sky is splitting. The universal destruction will be so great and
so terrifying, and so obviously coming from God, that...
- The kings of the earth and the great men and the commanders and the rich and
the strong and every slave and free man hid themselves in the caves and among
the rocks of the mountains;
16 - and
they *said to the mountains and to the rocks, Fall on us and hide us from
the presence of Him who sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;
- for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?
The Bible does not describe a canopy over the earth, and certainly not a metal
canopy. There was a hypothesis that there was once an ice canopy prior to Noah's
flood, but that has been shown to not be supported by either the Bible or science.
What's next? We're not moving on. The humanist have more to say
on this topic: This concept of the sky was
common in the ancient Near East and taken for granted by the Bible writers.
Based on the Bible, most of the early church fathers accepted the notion of the
firmament. The same position was supported by Cosmas, and thus was part of
orthodox Christian doctrine for several centuries.
doctrine also contained the related idea that the firmament has windows
which are opened by angels when God wants to send rain upon the earth. Cosmas
believed that when the windows are opened, some of the waters contained above
the firmament (which are mentioned at Genesis 1:17) fall to the earth. Cosmas
basis for this belief was the statement, at Genesis 7:11-12, that at the time
of the Noachian flood the windows of heaven were opened and the rain
Here are the references:
Ecker, pp. 69, 70.
 White, Vol. I, pp. 114-115.
See also Draper, pp. 62, 63.
 White, Vol. I, pp.
325, 326. See also Draper, p. 294.
 White, Vol.
I, p. 325.
What strikes me right off is that there are three references
to the discredited Andrew White. This should be interesting. Click
here to learn the truth...