Watch on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v5kje95-the-firmament.html
According to biblical cosmology, the “firmament” is a solid dome-like structure in the sky, created by God during the creation narrative in Genesis, that separates the waters above from the waters below on Earth, essentially acting as a barrier between the earthly realm and the heavens; in simpler terms, it’s often described as the “sky” as imagined as a physical barrier.
Genesis 1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
This means god created the heavens and then water and hovered above it in the sky
And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
This is the first light he created outside of the earth. It is not the sun because we will read later he again created another light and the moon.
And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
This means a barrier between the water and firmament that holds back the water which is what god was hovering in. The vault is air, ether or space.
And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.
Since the water settles in the path of less resistance and land formed above it, it would be a flat plane.
Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.
It seems pretty clear to me he created a biodome where there is no rain or clouds but instead rather 100% humidity day and night.
And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
Lights in the vault or sky or ether are the sun and moon and they represent our calendar days but not seasons. I believe seasons came after the flood. And after he created man, he made us vegetarians.
Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
Some say it is the physical laws that prevent us from leaving this 3rd dimension. Some believe it is blue ice what makes our blue sky. Some believe it is a body that is holding the water back. Some say the firmament is the temple of Christ. Some point to Psalm 148:4 which says Praise Him, you heavens of heavens, And your waters above the heavens! and In ancient Hebrew cosmology (how they understand the universe to be composed), they believed the raqia was solid, and holding back water which would occasionally be released by/through the raqia. ie. rain. The Bible says the birds fly in the firmament. It also says the stars were placed in the firmament. It also says the firmament separates the waters from the waters. So Ice dome over earth could easily be an ice shell around the whole planet. Could also be an ice shell at the end of space.
What would make the most sense to me is there was a canopy that held the water back which existed before the flood, which explains the seemingly hyperbaric environment we find fossilized as well as the lifespan of human beings being longer than it is now. We know this from a number of sources, one is ancient amber fossils, the oxygen level in bubbles in amber is much higher than what the atmosphere contains today. We also know the rate of decay of the earth’s magnetic field, and this means it was almost 25 times stronger than it is today, meaning that forces people lived under and the atmosphere itself was very different.
The bible reference to the waters above the earth and much higher oxygen levels point to a layer of something like thick clouds or even ice instead of the low oxygen, often cloud free sky we have since the flood. Which explains why all creatures were vegetarian before the flood, and the animals were given for food after the flood, we’re living in the ruins of a greenhouse where the roof was torn off and everything left is barely surviving.
While the biblical account of the Great Flood is often interpreted metaphorically or spiritually, some have proposed a more literal interpretation involving a physical barrier, the firmament. Here’s a case for this theory:
Biblical Interpretation:
- Waters Above the Firmament: Genesis 1:7 describes waters “above the firmament.” This suggests a vast reservoir of water suspended above the Earth.
- The Breaking of the Firmament: Some interpretations of Genesis 7 suggest that the “windows of heaven were opened” and the “fountains of the great deep were broken up,” potentially referring to a catastrophic rupture of the firmament.
Scientific Speculation:
- A Water Vapor Canopy: Some scientists have theorized that a water vapor canopy once surrounded the Earth, acting as a greenhouse and moderating climate.
- Catastrophic Release: A sudden rupture of this canopy could have released immense amounts of water, leading to global flooding.
- Rapid Fossilization: The rapid deposition of sediment and water, as suggested by such a catastrophic event, could explain the rapid fossilization of many organisms.
Challenges and Considerations:
- Scientific Consensus: The prevailing scientific consensus supports a more gradual geological process for the formation of fossils and the shaping of the Earth’s surface.
- Biblical Interpretation: Not all biblical scholars agree with the interpretation of the firmament as a physical barrier.
- Evidence: While there are intriguing theories, concrete scientific evidence to support this specific scenario is limited.
While the idea of a physical firmament and its catastrophic rupture is a fascinating one, it remains a speculative interpretation of biblical text. It’s important to approach such theories with a critical eye, considering both the biblical and scientific perspectives. Ultimately, the true nature of the Great Flood may remain a mystery.
Canopy Theory
For a few hundred years, many scholars believed in the Canopy theory. The canopy models gained popularity thanks to the work of Joseph Dillow, and many creationists have since researched various aspects of this scientific model. The canopy model was developed from an interpretation of the “waters above” in Genesis 1:6–7 when discussing the firmament (or expanse).
Then God said, “Let there be a firmament (expanse) in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” Thus God made the firmament (expanse), and divided the waters which were under the firmament (expanse) from the waters which were above the firmament (expanse); and it was so.
From these verses, scientific models were developed and modified to help deal with problems that arose. These models included ideas about the earth’s temperature, atmospheric color, as well as oxygen concentration (to attempt to explain ancient man’s longevity).
The proposed models have this canopy fading into history at the time of the Flood. Researchers thought it could have provided at least some of the water for the Flood and was associated with the “windows of heaven” mentioned along with the fountains of the great deep at the onset of the Flood (Genesis 7:11).
Currently, the pitfalls of the canopy model have grown to such an extent that most researchers have abandoned the model. For example, if a canopy existed and collapsed at the time of the Flood to supply the rainfall, the latent heat of condensation would have boiled the atmosphere! And a viable canopy would not have had enough water vapor in it to sustain 40 days and nights of torrential global rain.
Biblical Problems
Aside from the scientific analysis, there may be a much bigger issue at play: if the canopy really was part of earth’s atmosphere, then all the stars, sun, and moon would have been created within the earth’s atmosphere.
Why is this? A closer look at Genesis 1:14 reveals that the “waters above” may very well be much farther out—if they still exist today. The entirety of the stars, including our own sun (the greater light) and moon (lesser light) could not possibly be in our atmosphere, since they were made “in the expanse.”3
In Genesis 1, some have made distinction between the expanse in which the birds fly (Genesis 1:20) and the expanse in which the sun, moon, and stars were placed (Genesis 1:7). This is not a distinction that is necessary from the text. From the Hebrew, the birds are said to fly “across the face of the firmament of the heavens.” Looking up at a bird flying across the sky, it would be seen against the face of both the atmosphere and the space beyond the atmosphere—the “heavens.” The proponents of the canopy model must make a distinction between these two expanses to support their position, but this is an arbitrary assertion that is only necessary to support their view and is not described elsewhere in Scripture.4
Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament (expanse) of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the firmament (expanse) of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so.5
There is also another problem.
Praise Him, you heavens of heavens, And you waters above the heavens!
The psalmist wrote this in a post-Flood world in the context of other post-Flood aspects. So, it appears that the windows of heaven still exist at this point (see also 2 Kings 7:2, 19 and Malachi 3:10). And this is complemented by:
The fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were also stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained.
This verse merely points out that the two sources were stopped and restrained, not necessarily done away with. These two verses suggest that the windows of heaven remained after the Flood. The canopy model would have to explain when and how they suddenly dissipated, and without any basis for this in Scripture.
Temperatures
To answer the question about how the earth regulates its temperature without a canopy, consider that it may not have been that much different than the way it regulates it today—atmosphere and oceans. Although there may have been much water underground prior to the Flood, there was obviously enough at or near the surface to sustain immense amounts of sea life. We know this because nearly 95% of the fossil record consists of marine organisms. Was the earth’s surface around 70% water or not before the Flood? That is a question researchers still debate over.
A canopy, on the other hand, would cause major problems for the regulation of earth’s temperature. A canopy would trap and retain heat that would normally radiate to space.
Biblical Models
Answers in Genesis continues to encourage research and the development of scientific models. However, a good grasp of all biblical passages that are relevant to the topic must precede the scientific research and model. The canopy model may have a glimmer of hope still remaining, and I will leave that to the researchers, but both the biblical and scientific difficulties need to be addressed thoroughly.
I believe the canopy was not water vapor but a sort of crystalline or sponge like substance that was above the air. The firmament (raqiya) that was divinely made on Day Two is held to extend throughout space as a universal macrocosm expanse of lattice structure consisting of charged subatomic particles. These particles formed the structure that would later stabilize the universal arrangement of stellar bodies and various atomic elements. Recent analysis of astronomical polarization data demonstrates that the universe has an optical axis, and the universe appears to behave in a similar way as a crystal with optical activity.
Simultaneously, in order to focus the benefit of universal radiation, the firmament is held to be localized as a thin microcosm complex of crystalline structure suspended directly above Earth; this structure consisted of strong magnetic flux lines holding silicate sugilite, hydrogen, water molecules and possibly various metallic colloids in its force field. Water in Earth’s spherical mass was utilized in its solid form in making the localized crystalline firmament, and was simultaneously distributed throughout space in its various molecular forms in the establishing of the firmament as a universal expanse. Earth’s local crystalline canopy in its physical design would uniquely absorb and transfer the radiation of the stellar bodies that were later placed in the universal expanse. These stellar bodies were made to be an orchestrated symphony of mass, energy and radiation, specifically designed to benefit planet Earth and its inhabitants.
The firmament as a universal expanse, and its localized crystalline structure suspended above the Earth in the original pre-Flood creation, are viewed as one seamless whole in the concept and usage of the Hebrew word raqiya.
This crystalline firmament was destroyed ,which caused the entire earth to flood. Since water finds a path to less resistance, it all came together and destroyed everything which fossilised everything. Noah’s ark was not just a boat, but an actual temporary submarine waterproof boat. Even God had to close the door from the outside. It had no windows and it was made with a lot of pitch in every crevice.
It seems that at one time the entire earth enjoyed a warm tropical environment and there was enhanced oxygen in the atmosphere. There is evidence that the atmosphere enveloping the early earth was very different than it is today. It seems that at one time the entire earth enjoyed a warm tropical environment and there was enhanced oxygen in the atmosphere. Organisms would have grown larger than their modern counterparts and could also have lived longer. For example, massive fossilized trees in the Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument of Colorado appear to be much older than their tree rings would indicate they actually were (Oard, Michael, “The Florissant Redwood Trees Deposited from a Flood Log Mat,” Journal of Creation, 2019, p. 91.)
Many creationists have attributed this special primeval atmosphere to a water vapor canopy that was created by God on the second day, the “waters above the firmament” (Genesis 1:7). This theory holds that a “vast blanket of invisible water vapor, translucent to the light of the stars but productive of a marvelous greenhouse effect which maintained mild temperatures from pole to pole, thus preventing air-mass circulation and the resultant rainfall (Genesis 2:5). It would certainly have had the further effect of efficiently filtering harmful radiation from space, markedly reducing the rate of somatic mutations in living cells, and, as a consequence, drastically decreasing the rate of aging and death.” (Morris, Henry, Scientific Creationism, 1984, p. 211.) Citing evidence of denser atmosphere in the past, Morris postulated that this vapor layer could have dramatically increased the atmospheric pressure on the surface of the early earth, again contributing to a healthier environment (like a natural hyperbaric chamber). Later the canopy would have collapsed in the form of rain (the “windows of heaven” in Genesis 7:11), contributing to the Flood water, and resulting in the dramatic drop-off in longevity after the deluge.
Genesis 9 tells the story of how Noah planted a vineyard after the flood. He then became drunk from the fruit of it and lay in a stupor within his tent. This event is an aberration in the life of this godly man. Could it be that Noah was caught by surprise by how quickly he became inebriated? It seems that drinking at high altitude can lead to people becoming intoxicated more quickly. Perhaps living on the mountainous slopes of Ararat and breathing from the reduced post-Flood air pressure contributed to this situation, making it harder for Noah to “hold his drink.” While this is only speculation, the removal of the vapor canopy certainly could help explain this curious situation.
Some creationists emphasize other factors that may have caused the worldwide temperate conditions that existed before the Flood. They stress the evidence of far greater concentrations of carbon dioxide levels in the past and point out that the earth’s magnetic field was far stronger than today. This could have acted as the shield for cosmic radiation and produced the healthier environment. (Humphreys, Russel D., Starlight and Time, 1995, p. 63.) Creationist John Baumgardner suggested that the atmosphere surrounding the original earth was far thicker than it is today and that the exploding of the fountains of the great deep during the initial stages of the Genesis Flood stripped some of that original atmosphere away. Certain Bible scholars cite the language of the Psalm 148:4 as evidence against a vapor canopy. If the canopy had collapsed during the flood, they reason, why does the Psalmist still reference the waters above the firmament? But this poetic allusion could hark back to the original creation, or it could refer to some of the original water vapor (left over from the canopy) still in the outer reaches of our atmosphere. Computer modeling of a vapor canopy have shown that it is extremely effective as a thermal blanket, causing global warming. In fact, a canopy of significant size would result in extreme temperatures on Earth. This is a matter of ongoing creationist climate research.
For those Christians who doubt the pre-Flood existence of a water vapor canopy, the question remains: what exactly did God do on Day 2 of creation? Genesis Park concurs with creationist James D. Johansen when he states: “Day 2 creation focuses on the habitability of Earth and the basis for the Earth’s expanse that exists with the numerous properties required to support an abundant biological life. First, it is implied that water was created on Day 1 so it can be manipulated where it is located. An atmosphere is created. Second, water is moved to subterranean locations that can be called upon to support plant and animal life. Third, some water is transformed into water vapor and resides in the upper atmosphere, acting as a shield for Earth’s expanse. Water is transparent in the human spectrum, so seeing the space expanse is still available.” (Johansen, James D., “Human Brain Function Above All Other and the Creation Model,” Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Creationism, 2023, p. 293.)
It is interesting that scientists who would not subscribe to the water vapor canopy theory described above, have published articles that lend credence to portions of that theory. “Using evidence collected in South America and New Zealand, an international team of researchers has determined that climate changes – both warming and cooling patterns – during the late Pleistocene occurred rapidly and were global in scale. As giant iceberg armadas flooded the North Atlantic, alpine glaciers were simultaneously advancing across the Chilean Andes and Southern Alps of New Zealand. Thomas Lowell, associate professor of geology at the University of Cincinnati, and his colleagues published their findings in the September 15, 1995, issues of Science. …So, what did cause the climate changes? Lowell admits that he and his colleagues have no quick and easy answers. Possibly water vapors played a role. ‘A lot of water vapor in the atmosphere leads to a warmer climate,’ he states. ‘If there’s less vapor, temperatures become colder. Amounts of water vapor can change quickly, and the geological record indicates that climate changes could be very fast.’” (Anonymous, “Were Climate Changes Global During Ice Ages,” Geotimes,vol. 41, 1996, p.7, as cited in Morris, 1997, p. 305.) Additionally some scientists have been quite surprised to find water vapor in the freezing atmospheres of Jupiter, Uranus, Neptune and Saturn. (Dayton Daily News, April 8, 1998, p. 12A)
The water vapor canopy hypothesis would neatly explain yet another observed anomaly…too much water in Earth’s upper atmosphere. NASA satellites have confirmed far more hydroxyl in the hydrosphere than current models predict. The parent molecule of hydroxyl (OH) is water (H2O). Because ultraviolet radiation from the sun breaks down water in Earth’s upper atmosphere into hydroxyl and hydrogen, a large amount of water must have previously existed. Some have proposed a constant influx of mini-comets as a source for the mysterious water, but that theory has been strongly criticized as unworkable. (Matthews, Robert, New Scientist, July, 1997, pp. 26-27.)
It seems that another interesting feature of the early earth atmosphere was enhanced oxygen. Microscopic air bubbles trapped in fossilized tree resin were analyzed by Robert Berner of Yale and Gary Landis of the U.S. Geological Survey. The “gas bubbles enclosed in fossil amber may represent ancient air trapped at the time the original resin was exuded from its host tree” thus providing a glimpse into the ancient past (Berner, Landis, “Analysis of Gases in Fossil Amber, American Journal of Science 318:5, 2018, pp. 590-601.) The procedure involved clamping an amber sample “into a vacuum chamber of a quadrupole mass spectrometer, a device that identifies the chemical composition of a substance. As the machine slowly crushed the sample, the microscopic bubbles were released, exhaling up to 100 billion molecules. These breaths disclosed some surprising evidence: the ancient air contained 50 percent more oxygen than the air today.” Landis believes that the subsequent reduction in oxygen could have led to the dinosaur’s demise. (Discover, February, 1988, p. 12.)
Other studies of air bubbles in amber have found increased pressure as well as the greater oxygen levels. “One implication is that the atmospheric pressure of the Earth would have been much greater during the Cretaceous era, when the bubbles formed in the resin. A dense atmosphere could also explain how the ungainly pterosaur, with its stubby body and wing span of up to 11 meters, could have stayed airborne, he said. The spread of angiosperms, flowering plants, during the Cretaceous era could have caused the high oxygen levels reported by Berner and Landis, scientists said last week.” (Anderson, Ian, “Dinosaurs Breathed Air Rich in Oxygen,” New Scientist, vol. 116, 5 November 1987, No. 1585, p. 25.) A Yale study published in the March 3, 2000 issue of Science independently confirmed the high levels of oxygen present in the earth’s distant past. Some have even suggested that without such an atmosphere the relatively small lung capacity in certain dinosaurs could not have supplied their massive tissue with the needed oxygen.
In October 2006 Science Daily publicized a study led by Arizona State University staff entitled “Giant Insects Might Reign If Only There Was More Oxygen In The Air.” The article claims, “The delicate lady bug in your garden could be frighteningly large if only there was a greater concentration of oxygen in the air, a new study concludes. The study adds support to the theory that some insects were much larger during the late Paleozoic period because they had a much richer oxygen supply, said the study’s lead author Alexander Kaiser. The Paleozoic period…was a time of huge and abundant plant life and rather large insects — dragonflies had two-and-a-half-foot wing spans, for example. The air’s oxygen content was 35% during this period, compared to the 21% we breathe now, Kaiser said.” This research concurs with the biblical model of the early earth. In 2010 researchers at Arizona State University presented the results of experiments raising insects in various levels of atmospheric oxygen. Ten out of twelve varieties of insects studied decreased in size with lower oxygen. Some, like dragonflies, grew faster and became bigger in an enriched oxygen atmosphere (Science Daily, October 30, 2010.).
Some object strongly to using the scriptures to gain scientific insight into the natural world. While the Bible is not a science text, there are several clear lines of evidence that the Bible is God’s Word. If God’s word is truly inspired, it speaks accurately to all areas of knowledge: historical, political/economic, sociological, and scientific. The theory that there was a water vapor canopy surrounding the early earth was prominently presented by Isaac Vail in 1912 in a book The Canopy and Longevity of Life. A few years later George McCready Price also championed the idea of a canopy theory. The anti-evolutionist apologist Harry Rimmer embraced the Canopy in his 1936 work The Harmony of Science and Scripture, stating the Earth was surrounded by a “protecting lens of ice that made the whole world an Eden of tropical splendor.” But the canopy was widely popularized when featured in the 1961 landmark work of Whitcomb and Morris, The Genesis Flood. Morris cited scriptures like II Peter 3:5-6 to argue that the biblical answer for uniformitarian skeptics was the conditions of the early earth and the flood. The primeval earth was standing out of the water (ocean) and in the water (vapor canopy).
The theory reached a high point with the rigorous work of Joseph Dillow (The Waters Above: Earth’s Pre-Flood Vapor Canopy, Moody Press, 1982.) Thereafter a number of leading creationists became skeptical of the theory. Typically the work of Larry Vardiman is cited as evidence that the Vapor Canopy Model is untenable. Dr. Vardiman, a climatologist working at the Institute of Creation Research, did extensive computer modeling to determine the impact of a vapor canopy on earth’s climate. He discovered that a canopy, while technically sustainable, would be too effective as a thermal blanket. A canopy that contributed significantly to the flood waters would cause a runaway green house effect and make the surface of the earth extremely hot (Vardiman, Larry, “Sensitivity Studies on Vapor Canopy Temperature Profiles,”Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Creationism, R. E. Walsh (editor), pp. 607-618, 1998.). Genesis Park commissioned Dr. Vardiman to revisit the topic of the vapor canopy in 2012. The goal was to utilize up-to-date simulations, try a canopy higher above earth where it doesn’t have to maintain an energy balance with the lower atmosphere, explore the transfer of heat from the ocean to polar regions and the emission of energy to space, and increase the albedo at the top of the atmosphere by adding daytime clouds to the model. Albedo is the fraction of the incident sunlight that is reflected back into space. The possible impact of the Van Allen belts was also considered in this study. In the newer models, a smaller canopy (not a major contributor to the floodwaters) was found to be sustainable and hospitable.
The Waters Above the Firmament: An Exemplary Case of Faith-Reason Conflict by, Dino Boccaletti
The source, The Waters Above the Firmament: An Exemplary Case of Faith-Reason Conflict, examines how early Christian thinkers reconciled the biblical account of creation, specifically the existence of waters above the firmament, with prevailing scientific understanding, particularly the shape of the Earth. The text explores the diverse interpretations of the waters above the firmament by various figures throughout history, including Irenaeus, Origen, Basil the Great, Augustine, and Bede, while also considering the perspectives of medieval thinkers such as John Scotus Eriugena, Peter Abelard, and Thomas Aquinas. The text’s analysis highlights the evolving relationship between faith and reason, showcasing how interpretations of biblical texts have been shaped by both theological perspectives and the scientific knowledge of their time.
Exegesis of the Firmament and the Waters Above in Genesis 1:6-8
This briefing document reviews the main themes and most important ideas regarding the interpretation of the biblical account of the creation of the firmament and the “waters above” in Genesis 1:6-8. It covers a wide range of historical theological and philosophical perspectives from the 3rd to the 17th centuries.
Key Verse:
And God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” 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. (Genesis 1:6-8 KJV)
Main Themes:
- The Nature of the Firmament: The exact nature of the “firmament” has been a subject of debate for centuries. Some interpretations:
- Solid dome: Early commentators often envisioned a solid, physical dome separating the waters above from the world below.
- Celestial sphere: Later interpretations, influenced by Greek cosmology, understood it as the celestial sphere containing the stars and planets.
- Atmosphere: Some viewed the firmament as the earth’s atmosphere, with the waters above being clouds.
- The Waters Above the Firmament: The nature and purpose of the “waters above” have also been interpreted in various ways:
- Literal waters: Some took this as a literal description of a vast body of water above the heavens.
- Spiritual beings: Others interpreted the waters as symbolic of spiritual beings like angels.
- Temperance of celestial heat: Some, influenced by Aristotelian physics, suggested the waters served to moderate the heat of the celestial bodies.
- Source of the Flood: A few proposed they were the source of the waters for Noah’s Flood.
Key Figures and Their Interpretations:
- Early Church Fathers:
- Origen (3rd century): Interpreted the waters above as symbolic of spiritual realities, representing the higher realm of God’s presence.
- Lactantius (4th century): Criticized those who worshipped celestial bodies and emphasized the superiority of God, the Creator, over His creation.
- Ambrose (4th century): Defended the scriptural account of waters above the heavens, even when challenged by those who considered it physically impossible.
- Augustine (4th-5th centuries): Acknowledged the difficulties in interpreting the passage literally but ultimately upheld the authority of Scripture over human reason. He suggested several possible interpretations, including the waters representing formless matter and the firmament as a metaphorical separation.
- Medieval Commentators:
- Isidore of Seville (7th century): Emphasized the order and distinction of God’s creation, noting the firmament’s role in supporting the waters above.
- Bede (8th century): Suggested the upper waters were either saved for the Flood or, more plausibly, suspended to temper the fire of the stars. He also acknowledged the symbolic interpretations but emphasized the literal truth of the text.
- John Scotus Eriugena (9th century): Proposed a threefold division of creation: corporeal, spiritual, and a middle ground, placing the waters above within this framework.
- Peter Abelard (12th century): Favored a physical explanation, suggesting the waters above were held in place by the rarity and subtlety of the air and fire.
- Thierry of Chartres and William of Conches (12th century): Interpreted the “waters above” as clouds of water vapor in the atmosphere.
- Alexander Neckam (12th-13th centuries): Connected the waters below to baptismal waters, signifying the church’s foundation.
- Bartholomew of England (13th century): Cited Bede’s view of the upper waters tempering celestial heat but also considered Alexander Neckam’s symbolic interpretation of the waters as representing a higher, spiritual state.
- Thomas of Cantimpré (13th century): Echoed previous debates about the nature of the firmament and the waters above, drawing upon various sources and authorities.
- Robert Grosseteste (13th century): Engaged with the differing opinions on the firmament’s nature and location, emphasizing Augustine’s argument for the possibility of waters existing above.
- Renaissance and Reformation Thinkers:
- Nicholas of Cusa (15th century): Argued against a strictly literal interpretation of Genesis, emphasizing the need for allegorical and symbolic understanding.
- Martin Luther (16th century): Believed the firmament referred to the entire cosmos, including the air and celestial spheres, and while acknowledging the mystery of the waters above, he upheld the authority of Scripture.
- John Calvin (16th century): Identified the firmament with the expanse of air and the waters above with clouds, emphasizing the literal and didactic nature of the Genesis account for all people.
- Benedictus Pererius (16th century): Argued that the term “firmament” should be understood as the entire expanse of space up to the stars, with the waters above referring to atmospheric phenomena.
- David Pareus (16th-17th centuries): Interpreted the firmament as encompassing the entire universe, with the waters above being the clouds suspended in the air.
- Cornelius à Lapide (17th century): Proposed the “waters above” symbolized either the angelic realm or God’s grace.
- Marin Mersenne (17th century): Offered various interpretations of the firmament, including a solid barrier for the waters, a symbolic boundary, and an incorruptible realm. He ultimately left the question open.
Quotes:
- Augustine: “…we must beware of giving the impression that our sacred writers held such views, and so, to the great detriment of those for whose salvation we labor, make the word of God, through the folly of its interpreters, a laughing-stock in the eyes of those outside the faith.” (De Genesi ad Litteram, I, 19)
- John Calvin: “We see the clouds suspended in the air threatening our heads as though they would leave us no room to breathe. Those who deny that this is done by the wonderful providence of God are foolishly puffed up with the vanity of their own minds.” (Commentary on Genesis)
- Martin Luther: “Wherefore I here hold my own mind and judgment in captivity, and bow to the Word; although I cannot comprehend it.” (In Primum Librum…)
- Robert Grosseteste: “The authority of this Scripture is greater than all the capacity of human ingenuity.” (Hexaemeron)
Conclusion:
The interpretation of the firmament and the “waters above” in Genesis 1:6-8 has been a source of much discussion and debate throughout history. While the specific interpretations have varied, a common thread is the struggle to reconcile scientific understanding with the authority of Scripture. Some favored literal readings, while others embraced allegorical or symbolic interpretations. Ultimately, this ongoing dialogue reflects the enduring challenge of understanding the relationship between faith and reason.
sources
http://www.creationevidence.org/evidence/crystillane_canopy_theory.php