My personal view of Hebrew cosmology

I don’t either, except for the question of whether verses 5 and 6 are connected to the doledot, giving a synopsis of conditions at the start of the previous account, or if they are the start of the second account. I don’t agree with Scofield on a lot but I do agree with him that 5 and 6 are connected to the first account. The name of God becomes more personal, but this is explained by Adam being the one who is supposed to have recorded the account of the heavens and the earth and then he is adding verses 4-6. He uses God’s name as well as title because that is how he knows God.

A functional water cycle would not prevent the loss of water from the atmosphere. See Where Venus’ Water Went.

1 Like

@Mark_Moore,

I don’t think you read my objection correctly. I said:
“How are you going to be able to cope with an Old Earth scenario if at the drop of a hat, you start inventing whole branches of Archaeo-Science?”

This sentence doesn’t say you don’t accept Old Earth … the sentence says you are not coping with Old Earth thinking.

In a prior post, you had written:

“Now one might quibble at the idea of the division of the waters above and those below on the grounds that clouds today are such a very small proportion of the earth’s water compared to her oceans. That is true today, but I don’t think it reasonable to suppose this was the case at the time described in Genesis 1:6-8. I should think that cloud cover would be much greater. Not only would the early earth still have a much thicker atmosphere, but until plants became common that atmosphere would contain more CO2 than now.”

The point of being an Old Earther is to acknowledge the body of science we have today.

And yet here you are, describing the Earth as shrouded in clouds… and that this was the source of the references for the Firmament.

But the firmament was blue … not white. And clouds are “mist(s)”, not “water(s)”.

As you well know, I am not “THE voice of authority” - - not here, or pretty much anywhere.

But I am an honest commenter. And all I see you doing is rationalizing why Genesis should be read the way Young Earther’s read it … with virtually no noticeable acknowledgment of the Old Earth science or evidence.

This is why you come to the BioLogos boards, right? To get the pro-Science view?

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.