A Reddit member asks about theistic evolution

[EarlyActs]

“Religion and Science”

C.S. Lewis (Literature, Oxford, d.1963) in GOD IN THE DOCK, #7 abridged

[Only the coin-drawer analogy about fixed laws is pasted here]



“Miracles,” said my friend, “Oh, come. Science has knocked the bottom out of all that. We know that Nature is governed by fixed laws.”

“But, don't you see,” said I, “that science never could show that anything [was beyond Nature]?”

“Why on earth not?”

“Because science studies Nature. And the question is whether anything besides Nature exists—anything “outside.” How could you find that out by studying simply Nature?'

“Look here,” he said “Could this 'something outside' that you talk about make two and two five?”

“Well, no,” said I.

“All right. The idea of their being altered is as absurd as the idea of altering the laws of math.”

“Half a moment. Suppose you put a nickel into a drawer today and another in the same drawer tomorrow. Do the laws of arithmetic make it certain that you'll find 15 cents there the next day?”

“Of course, provided non one's been tampering with your drawer.”

“Ah, but that's the whole point,” I said. “The laws of arithmetic can tell you what you'll find, with absolute certainty, provided that there's no interference. If a thief has been at the drawer of course you'll get a different result. But the thief won't have broken the laws of math—only the laws of the land. Now, aren't the laws of Nature much in the same boat? Don't they all tell you what will happen provided there's no interference?...The laws will tell you how a billiard ball will travel on a smooth surface if you hit it in a particular way—but only provided no one interferes. If they do, you won't get what the scientist predicted.”

“No, of course not. He can't allow for monkey tricks like that.”

“Quite. And in the same way, if there was anything outside Nature, and if it interfered—then the events which the scientist expected wouldn't follow. That would be what we call a miracle. In one sense it wouldn't break the laws of Nature...But they can't tell you if something is going to interfere. I mean, it is not the expert at math who can tell you how likely someone is to interfere with the pennies in my drawer. A detective, or a psychologist, or a metaphysician would be better.”

 

[EarlyActs]

I am finding your posts very confusing. You seem to be mixing up a lot of unrelated ideas.

The word "Ouranos" is a greek word which is translated in our Bibles as heavens. It is not a Hebrew word and does not follow the same Hebrew grammatical formations. It refers to the solid dome above the earth on which many in the ancient world believed that the stars moved on. The Greeks believed this was the sky god. It is not in any way referring to the planet Uranus but it is the Greek god that the planet was named after. It has nothing to do with Orion.

The Greeks, like the rest of the ancient world had no ideas the stars were light years away from the earth.

I did read the BDB literary lexicon entries. There are about 500 references. In none of these was 'ouranos' used for a single planet or a Greek god. That's pretty significant, because many other gods are named. In fact, in I Cor 8:5, in the line about 'the socalled gods whether of heaven or earth,' (gods and heaven side by side) uses these terms 'deos' and 'ouranos.'

I also did not find 'orion' in BDB as an entry about a planet or group, except that it is very related to marking either a boundary (usual, Acts 17) or time (less often) and a course (I Clement 20:3). As that is the intended meaning of Day 1 (a prefix is added to 'orizo' in the LXX in Gen 1), to define day and night, it leaves open the possibility that this was how 'orion' came to be the name, and was the original dominant marker. (Next is to find out how early it would have shown if it was Day 1 starlight).

There are many times when more than one heaven is mentioned, but not so much in non-Chr lit. One curious fact: in Ephesians it is always plural.

One other feature of the use of 'ouranos' comes back to a pagan god but in the form of stars being idolatrous objects to follow. In Acts 7:42 the culprit is Saturn, but there are several OT references to other than that one.

It will take other reading, prob an OT lexicon, to find out if the 3-letter stem formation of vocabulary (mentioned in posts above) makes a connection between O/U--R--N and O--R--N (they are obviously close) and part of that is how a long i sound is made in Hebrew. Also did you know that general light (Day 1) is 'owr' so again, there is a 'headstart' on a connection to the 3 letter stem that would be used.

I hope also to find out what Larson (STAR OF BETHLEHEM doc) says about Orion.

 

[EarlyActs]

I was going to look up the BDB timeframe and I forgot but they do source Plato and Homer.

 

[Sereni-tea]

I know its Greek. I don't think you know the significance of the LXX yet. It was the chosen term by the LXX rabbis for 'shama.' The most prominent thing beyond our planets is the Orion constellation, and I will try to check the BDB lexicon soon to see if Orion is utterly dismissed in relation to 'ouranos.'

Btw, when 'ouranos' is used in 2P3, it means the outer universe, and 2, it is plural, in the same collective sense of our English 'heavens.' Why do that?

ouranos: heaven
Original Word: οὐρανός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: ouranos
Phonetic Spelling: (oo-ran-os')
Definition: heaven
Usage: heaven, (a) the visible heavens: the atmosphere, the sky, the starry heavens, (b) the spiritual heavens.

1. the vaulted expanse of the Sky with all the things visible in it;
2. "the region above the sidereal heavens, the seat of an order of things eternal and consummately perfect, where God dwells and the other heavenly beings" (The highest heaven is the dwelling-place of God)

In Genesis 1 we have the raqia which God called the shamayim.

For many ancient cultures this was a god - in Greek mythology it was Ouranus; in Egyptian mythology this was the goddess Nut.

In Genesis 1:
And God said, “Let there be an expanse [raqi'a] in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” And God made the expanse [raqi'a] and separated the waters that were under the expanse [raqi'a] from the waters that were above the expanse [raqi'a]. And it was so. And God called the expanse [raqi'a] Heaven [shamayim] .

The heaven/heavens/sky/skies is not a god. However the same concept of a solid dome over the earth (raqi'a) is in the Hebrew.

raqia: an extended surface, expanse
Original Word: רָקִיעַ
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: raqia
Phonetic Spelling: (raw-kee'-ah)
Definition: an extended surface, expanse

From BDB:
the vault of heaven, or 'firmament,' regarded by Hebrews as solid, and supporting 'waters' above it

From the word raqa:
raqa: to beat, stamp, beat out, spread out
Original Word: רָקַע
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: raqa
Phonetic Spelling: (raw-kah')
Definition: to beat, stamp, beat out, spread out

You are still assuming Genesis 1 is confined to 'ancient world beliefs.' Those came later, after the ordinary description of creation week, when the Adamic tribe knew that 'kavov' were not 'shama.' Or are you still of the mindset that if Gen 1-11 says someone said something, then it is obviously not what they said?

Why don't you tell me how you understand the word 'raqi'a' in Genesis 1?

Using the text's own inter-related commentary, the next thing they knew about the purpose of stars was the massive tally which would represent Abraham's seed through Christ, Gen 15. The 'shama' were already a sign of some kind about this; it is not that clear, yet as soon as another child is born, after her sons are gone, Eve believes she has given birth to the redemptive Seed. And a period when 'men called upon the name of the Lord' before the utter evil of Gen 6.

Genesis 1 describes the functions of the sun, moon and stars as we have already discussed. The rest of this is not relevant to the discussion.

Those pieces of information have much more to do with the purpose of the 'shama' than a dome that was believed in later.

The Greeks knew of great distances. Lewis cites Ptolemy in Almagest I, 5, saying he knew we were in a very remote nook of a huge universe, just barely a mathematical point. You can find this in 'Science and Religion' in GOD IN THE DOCK. The last segment of the 'conversation' with a fellow professor is exactly what you are saying. I have manually copied the 'coin-drawer' illustration, and will see if I can paste it here.

Ptolemy was 2nd century AD and again, not really relevant to this discussion. Neither is Lewis.

 

[Sereni-tea]

I did read the BDB literary lexicon entries. There are about 500 references. In none of these was 'ouranos' used for a single planet or a Greek god. That's pretty significant, because many other gods are named. In fact, in I Cor 8:5, in the line about 'the socalled gods whether of heaven or earth,' (gods and heaven side by side) uses these terms 'deos' and 'ouranos.'

Isn't the BDB a Hebrew/English lexicon? Why would it have a greek word in it?
Please see previous post.

I also did not find 'orion' in BDB as an entry about a planet or group, except that it is very related to marking either a boundary (usual, Acts 17) or time (less often) and a course (I Clement 20:3). As that is the intended meaning of Day 1 (a prefix is added to 'orizo' in the LXX in Gen 1), to define day and night, it leaves open the possibility that this was how 'orion' came to be the name, and was the original dominant marker. (Next is to find out how early it would have shown if it was Day 1 starlight).

kə·sîl is the Hebrew word for the Orion constellation.
The constellation Orion has many names in ancient cultures but Ouranus is not one of them. And while it might be interesting to trace through these mythologies, it is not really relevant.

Uranus was first identified as a planet in 1781AD and was named Uranus after the Greek god 70 years later.

You are making fanciful speculations when you try to link the constellation of Orion to the light on Day 1.
The closest star to us in the Orion constellation is 250 light years aways. Four of the stars are well over 1,000 light years away. How does that fit with your timescale?

There are many times when more than one heaven is mentioned, but not so much in non-Chr lit. One curious fact: in Ephesians it is always plural.

One other feature of the use of 'ouranos' comes back to a pagan god but in the form of stars being idolatrous objects to follow. In Acts 7:42 the culprit is Saturn, but there are several OT references to other than that one.

It will take other reading, prob an OT lexicon, to find out if the 3-letter stem formation of vocabulary (mentioned in posts above) makes a connection between O/U--R--N and O--R--N (they are obviously close) and part of that is how a long i sound is made in Hebrew. Also did you know that general light (Day 1) is 'owr' so again, there is a 'headstart' on a connection to the 3 letter stem that would be used.

I hope also to find out what Larson (STAR OF BETHLEHEM doc) says about Orion.

As I said, the 3-letter stem grammatical structure is dominant in the Hebrew language but not so much in other languages. The O/U-R-N is from the Greek word. As I said in Hebrew Ouranus is called Shamayim. If you are tying to link the Hebrew word for light (owr) to Orion, you will need to use the Hebrew word for Orion (kesil).

As I have said, it seems to me that you are mixing up different languages and ideas to try to find some support for your wild speculations. This is not the way to understand the text.

I am bowing out of this conversation. If you want to engage with me about the actual text of Genesis 1, I am happy to do so.

 

[EarlyActs]

ouranos: heaven
Original Word: οὐρανός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: ouranos
Phonetic Spelling: (oo-ran-os')
Definition: heaven
Usage: heaven, (a) the visible heavens: the atmosphere, the sky, the starry heavens, (b) the spiritual heavens.

1. the vaulted expanse of the Sky with all the things visible in it;
2. "the region above the sidereal heavens, the seat of an order of things eternal and consummately perfect, where God dwells and the other heavenly beings" (The highest heaven is the dwelling-place of God)

In Genesis 1 we have the raqia which God called the shamayim.

For many ancient cultures this was a god - in Greek mythology it was Ouranus; in Egyptian mythology this was the goddess Nut.

In Genesis 1:
And God said, “Let there be an expanse [raqi'a] in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” And God made the expanse [raqi'a] and separated the waters that were under the expanse [raqi'a] from the waters that were above the expanse [raqi'a]. And it was so. And God called the expanse [raqi'a] Heaven [shamayim] .

The heaven/heavens/sky/skies is not a god. However the same concept of a solid dome over the earth (raqi'a) is in the Hebrew.

raqia: an extended surface, expanse
Original Word: רָקִיעַ
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: raqia
Phonetic Spelling: (raw-kee'-ah)
Definition: an extended surface, expanse

From BDB:
the vault of heaven, or 'firmament,' regarded by Hebrews as solid, and supporting 'waters' above it

From the word raqa:
raqa: to beat, stamp, beat out, spread out
Original Word: רָקַע
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: raqa
Phonetic Spelling: (raw-kah')
Definition: to beat, stamp, beat out, spread out



Why don't you tell me how you understand the word 'raqi'a' in Genesis 1?



Genesis 1 describes the functions of the sun, moon and stars as we have already discussed. The rest of this is not relevant to the discussion.



Ptolemy was 2nd century AD and again, not really relevant to this discussion. Neither is Lewis.

Re ouranus in Gr myth
If it was a god why didn’t Stephen blast the Jewish leaders for worshipping it in Acts 7? Instead it was Saturn that he hit. Yet for 200 years ouranus was in their LXX as the match for Shama, and was not confused with Deos there. If it was commonly known as a god, Paul would have slammed it too.

How did your view not come up in 1 Cor 8:5? Gods and ouranos are not confused at all.

BAG (corrected) is a lit lexicon of early Chr lit but references all Greek usage. Yes BDF is only Hebrew.

You don’t see the commentary value of the LXX.

 

[EarlyActs]

re fanciful
Have you ever watched Orion rise? Here you have a word that has to do with setting boundaries, even of time, and you have a strong concept in the text that the purpose of the light on Day 1 was to set a boundary, and the group is the dominant feature over the northern sky each night. I'm confused what 'fanciful' means.

 

[EarlyActs]

re LYs
The distance of Orion's cluster is no problem and settles nicely. I'm now working on the C14 question here. The RATE project by Snelling revealed a surprising fact about how helium escapes and can date the earth materials as young as 6000, but C14 itself would only go back 23,000. That leaves some 17,000 as a range of time for Gen 1:2. Ie, the 'spreading' might have been as much as 17,000 before Day 1, but for the actual meaning of the arrival of light on Day 1 and its source.

 

[EarlyActs]

re raqia
As you will find in past posts, raqia is the range from our sky (birds fly in it) to that which moves in the level of stars: our planets and a few others like Orion. In 1:8 they are joined as the shama--raqia. The moving things form 'signs' and this was 'read' by the Adamic tribe, to communicate things other than time-frames, as the explanation says in Gen 1. ('semaya' LXX is not about time frames). Then in Gen 15, the kavov can be read, but it is only to express the tally of Abraham's seed through the Seed Christ, Gal 3 and Jn 8. "Abraham saw my day." Kavov did not have this role back in 1:14-16; they are simply there.

Larson explains how they communicated. As Ps 19 says it was not words, but there was communication.

The shama--raqia, not the kavov, is the subject of Gen 1. As shown from many other Genesis examples, the writer has a subject on which he give lots of detail, and mentions other things only in passing. Like these two realms.

I will look further into kesil, partly because of finding for the first time that it had the nickname of a fool, which is a first for me in several decades of looking into it. Orion Meaning - Bible Definition and References

An initial check with a couple astronomy sites does not support the fool idea. Having a both a sword and a spear, he is a hunter. is venus in orion constellation - Bing
As far as that goes, I'm not even sure where Nimrod gained a connotation as a fool.

But the 'evening star' connection is preserved and it matches the ordinary meaning of Day 1: that Day 1 began when it was marked, in the evening, and lasting until the following evening, marked the same way, sourcing the (unfamiliar to us) idea of evening as the start.

The LXX did not use kesil until Amos 8, but did use ouranos in Gen 1, without confusing it with deity, not even in the deferential sense ('I lift up my eyes to heaven'--but meaning God himself). The LXX also has the verb 'orizo' (with a prefix dia) for when there was a first marker of the first evening.

 

[EarlyActs]

re LYs
The distance of Orion's cluster is no problem and settles nicely. I'm now working on the C14 question here. The RATE project by Snelling revealed a surprising fact about how helium escapes and can date the earth materials as young as 6000, but C14 itself would only go back 23,000. That leaves some 17,000 as a range of time for Gen 1:2. Ie, the 'spreading' might have been as much as 17,000 before Day 1, but for the actual meaning of the arrival of light on Day 1 and its source.

a new presentation on c14 and helium by a geologist/paleontologist: Dr. M Ross: Rocks As Clocks

 

[Sereni-tea]

re raqia
As you will find in past posts, raqia is the range from our sky (birds fly in it) to that which moves in the level of stars: our planets and a few others like Orion. In 1:8 they are joined as the shama--raqia. The moving things form 'signs' and this was 'read' by the Adamic tribe, to communicate things other than time-frames, as the explanation says in Gen 1. ('semaya' LXX is not about time frames). Then in Gen 15, the kavov can be read, but it is only to express the tally of Abraham's seed through the Seed Christ, Gal 3 and Jn 8. "Abraham saw my day." Kavov did not have this role back in 1:14-16; they are simply there.

Larson explains how they communicated. As Ps 19 says it was not words, but there was communication.

The shama--raqia, not the kavov, is the subject of Gen 1. As shown from many other Genesis examples, the writer has a subject on which he give lots of detail, and mentions other things only in passing. Like these two realms.

I will look further into kesil, partly because of finding for the first time that it had the nickname of a fool, which is a first for me in several decades of looking into it. Orion Meaning - Bible Definition and References

An initial check with a couple astronomy sites does not support the fool idea. Having a both a sword and a spear, he is a hunter. is venus in orion constellation - Bing
As far as that goes, I'm not even sure where Nimrod gained a connotation as a fool.

But the 'evening star' connection is preserved and it matches the ordinary meaning of Day 1: that Day 1 began when it was marked, in the evening, and lasting until the following evening, marked the same way, sourcing the (unfamiliar to us) idea of evening as the start.

The LXX did not use kesil until Amos 8, but did use ouranos in Gen 1, without confusing it with deity, not even in the deferential sense ('I lift up my eyes to heaven'--but meaning God himself). The LXX also has the verb 'orizo' (with a prefix dia) for when there was a first marker of the first evening.

As I said, you posts are becoming more and more erratic. You are continuing to mix Hebrew and Greek. You seem to be making things up as you go and your Bing search suggests you have little understanding of planets and constellations.

I wish you all the best on your research but if you continue on the path you are on, I am not sure you will have much success.

 

[Arial]

a new presentation on c14 and helium by a geologist/paleontologist: Dr. M Ross: Rocks As Clocks

Videos belong in the video board. Link the video to that board.

 

[EarlyActs]

ouranos: heaven
Original Word: οὐρανός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: ouranos
Phonetic Spelling: (oo-ran-os')
Definition: heaven
Usage: heaven, (a) the visible heavens: the atmosphere, the sky, the starry heavens, (b) the spiritual heavens.

1. the vaulted expanse of the Sky with all the things visible in it;
2. "the region above the sidereal heavens, the seat of an order of things eternal and consummately perfect, where God dwells and the other heavenly beings" (The highest heaven is the dwelling-place of God)

In Genesis 1 we have the raqia which God called the shamayim.

For many ancient cultures this was a god - in Greek mythology it was Ouranus; in Egyptian mythology this was the goddess Nut.

In Genesis 1:
And God said, “Let there be an expanse [raqi'a] in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” And God made the expanse [raqi'a] and separated the waters that were under the expanse [raqi'a] from the waters that were above the expanse [raqi'a]. And it was so. And God called the expanse [raqi'a] Heaven [shamayim] .

The heaven/heavens/sky/skies is not a god. However the same concept of a solid dome over the earth (raqi'a) is in the Hebrew.

raqia: an extended surface, expanse
Original Word: רָקִיעַ
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: raqia
Phonetic Spelling: (raw-kee'-ah)
Definition: an extended surface, expanse

From BDB:
the vault of heaven, or 'firmament,' regarded by Hebrews as solid, and supporting 'waters' above it

From the word raqa:
raqa: to beat, stamp, beat out, spread out
Original Word: רָקַע
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: raqa
Phonetic Spelling: (raw-kah')
Definition: to beat, stamp, beat out, spread out



Why don't you tell me how you understand the word 'raqi'a' in Genesis 1?



Genesis 1 describes the functions of the sun, moon and stars as we have already discussed. The rest of this is not relevant to the discussion.



Ptolemy was 2nd century AD and again, not really relevant to this discussion. Neither is Lewis.

Re Ptolemy
So you think Ptolemy had no background that already indicated the universe was vast. My view is that the shama is local but the ancients already knew of the vastness of beyond it. The kavov are very distinct from the local objects.

 

[EarlyActs]

As I said, you posts are becoming more and more erratic. You are continuing to mix Hebrew and Greek. You seem to be making things up as you go and your Bing search suggests you have little understanding of planets and constellations.

I wish you all the best on your research but if you continue on the path you are on, I am not sure you will have much success.

The Bing link was to show the usual reference to Nimrod the hunter, not the fool. In 40 years of observation, the connotation of fool was nowhere in ancient reference until your reference, except an American talk show that ridicules certain people in the news as fools.

Hebrew and Greek are not being mixed, but the LXX is cited as a commentary far closer than either of us to the source, and for a peculiar word choice. Semaia in the Christian era is always a wonder, miracle, sign; it was not just time-marking. So that means the LXX rabbis were conscious that this was going on back in early days, which is why Larson and Spencer have their books/docs on 'reading' the stars in the ancient way.

As I mentioned before, I'm not yet certain you see the significance of LXX word choice.

What is your view of the fact that most of Genesis time (not record) has no contact with Egypt? It only starts when Abraham goes there, 2000 years later than the Adamic tribe.

 

[EarlyActs]

Videos belong in the video board. Link the video to that board.

I am a post-computer age writer. I have just looked for a few minutes for the video board and cannot find anything called a board here, nor video.

 

[Arial]

I am a post-computer age writer. I have just looked for a few minutes for the video board and cannot find anything called a board here, nor video.

Forum sub-topics are called boards. Click forums and scroll down til you find it, click again.

 

[EarlyActs]

Dr M Ross gave two important time limits recently in talks on post-cataclysm geology and general cosmology.

One was that C14 only has a span of 23K years. I have often heard of its half life; I don't recalling hearing of its overall span.

The other is his belief that objects not detected by the human eye were not 'life' as Gen 1 means. I am on the same page there with my belief about lifeless things since the 'spreading out.' I believe the 'spreading out' was an event like our BB friends mention but recent and directed by God to make the 'kavov' or distant universe, but not our local system called the 'shama' (using the stem in each case.)

 

[EarlyActs]

Forum sub-topics are called boards. Click forums and scroll down til you find it, click again.

Thanks for trying but it is not found. Nothing called boards was found. I enlarged my pixel count in case the drop down was not listing everything, but the forum list was the same and did not have that.

 

[Arial]

Thanks for trying but it is not found. Nothing called boards was found. I enlarged my pixel count in case the drop down was not listing everything, but the forum list was the same and did not have that.

It isn't called a board on the forum site it is just what it is.

Click "Forums"

Scroll down to: The Christian Walk section
The last one in that section is
Youtube/Favorite Videos/Music.

Now you can probably just click it from here. But that is where it is.

 

[EarlyActs]

It isn't called a board on the forum site it is just what it is.

Click "Forums"

Scroll down to: The Christian Walk section
The last one in that section is
Youtube/Favorite Videos/Music.

Now you can probably just click it from here. But that is where it is.

It isn't called a board on the forum site it is just what it is.

Click "Forums"

Scroll down to: The Christian Walk section
The last one in that section is
Youtube/Favorite Videos/Music.

Now you can probably just click it from here. But that is where it is.

The arrow of Forums was taking me elsewhere.

The site only wants 20 mins max. So nevermind.