God’s Mighty Expanse (ever wonder what the BIBLE says about COSMOLOGY?)

CMI ^ | 26 February 2009 | D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D.

[GodGunsGuts]

God’s mighty expanse

by D. Russell Humphreys

Published: 26 February 2009(GMT+10)

Psalm 150:1, the first verse of the last psalm, contains a phrase that has always intrigued me:

… Praise Him in his mighty expanse. (NAS), or

… praise him in the firmament of his power. (KJV)

God made the expanse (firmament) on the second day and called it “heavens” (Genesis 1:8, plural from literal Hebrew). Later, on the fourth day, He populated the expanse with the sun, moon and stars (Genesis 1:14-19). So the expanse is not the heavenly bodies, but rather the space that contains the heavenly bodies. Normally people think of interstellar space, and also the space in which we ourselves exist, as an empty nothingness. Saying that an emptiness is strong would be rather odd. Praise God in His mighty nothing? So what does God mean here?

Scripture itself gives a clue: it looks like the expanse (firmament, heavens, space) is an actual material that we cannot perceive as we move through it and it moves through us. For example, it can be stretched out (Job 9:8 and 16 other Old Testament verses as discussed in reference 1), torn (Isaiah 64:1), worn out like a garment (Psalm 102:26), shaken (Hebrews 12:26, Haggai 2:6, Isaiah 13:13), burnt up (2 Peter 3:12), split apart like a scroll (Revelation 6:14), and rolled up like a mantle (Hebrews 1:12) or a scroll (Isaiah 34:4), see Figure 1.

Figure 1. Rolling up the heavens like a scroll (Isaiah 34:4).

Many physics theories and experiments seem to require that space be a real material:

1. The observed “displacement” electric current of James Clerk Maxwell, the greatest theoretical physicist (and a fine creationist) of the 19th century. (Maxwell based his theory on the experimental work of another great creationist scientist, Michael Faraday.) With that idea he was able to predict the existence of radio waves, and to lay the foundations of all 20th-century devices using electricity and magnetism.

2. Einstein’s theories of special and general relativity not only stem from Maxwell’s work, but at bottom they only make sense if space (and time) is some kind of “stuff,” as Einstein finally acknowledged in a little-known speech in 1920.2 The famous limit for the speeds of light and particles, c, could only work if there were a real material to enforce the speed limit. (Why should there be a limit if space were completely empty?) Space could be “warped” or “bent” only if it were actual solid matter.

3. The esoteric but well-verified quantum field theory starts with the premise that space is filled with the particles of a non-perceivable material (the “quantum vacuum”) that is very dense. According to the theory, this material exists in and around all visible-matter particles and transmits the forces between them, thus enabling visible matter to exist. Experiments stemming from quantum field theory show that electrons in atoms influence the space around them and in turn are influenced by it (“vacuum polarization”). In the 1930s, quantum theorist P.A.M. Dirac correctly predicted the existence of antimatter on the basis of his theory that required all space to be filled with a “sea” of electrons. The quantum theory of solids offers a way to understand how space could be very dense but not felt or seen, in the same way that free electrons can move through a perfect crystal without any hindrance.

These and other physics clues suggest that the material, which from the biblical clues I call the “fabric” of space, is an elastic solid, like a very rigid and enormously massive crystal. That could be why the Hebrew word for the expanse (raqia), and the Greek and Latin translations of it (stereoma and firmamentum) all have some connection with solidity and firmness, as does the English word, “firmament” used (coined?) by the King James translators.3

Strangely, academic materialists have tried to ignore the physics clues that space is a material, probably for religious and philosophical reasons. They even ignored Einstein’s 1920 recantation (see second item above) of his 1905 denial of the 19th-century idea of an “ether” (or “aether”) meant to propagate light waves. The academics have made the word “ether” politically incorrect.

Now that it looks as if the ether idea merely needed a bit more sophistication, physicists use many code words for it, such as various combinations of: “spacetime,” “continuum,” “manifold,” “quantum vacuum,” “the Vacuum,” “substratum,” “Dirac sea,” “plenum,” and “medium,”—all to avoid using the word “ether.” This verbal beating-around-the-bush amuses me. It prevents academics from explaining relativity and quantum mechanics in simple, visualizable terms that solve the various paradoxes. I suspect the academic experts on relativity and quantum theories prefer to keep them arcane and perplexing (to other academics as well), because the mystery makes them the high priests of a secular religion for which the public needs interpreters.

Putting aside the foibles of academia, my main point is that the expanse (firmament) is a real material that God made early in Creation Week. It is invisible and very clear, since we can observe through it for cosmic distances. Though we can’t perceive it directly, our new knowledge of its massiveness and strength shows forth the glory of its mighty Creator.

Related articles

• Starlight Wars: Starlight and Time withstands attacks

Further reading

• Astronomy and Astrophysics Questions and Answers

 

References

1. You can find more details about the ideas here, along with scientific references, in pages 66–68 and 84 of my little book on creation cosmology, Starlight and Time [Master Books, 1994], available from the CMI online bookstore at </store_redirect.php?sku=10-2-043>. Return to text.
2. Ref. , p. 84 Return to text.
3. Probably derived from the Latin Vulgate’s word for the expanse, i.e. firmamentum. Return to text.

[GodGunsGuts]

Ping!

[MHGinTN]

Placemarker ... are we about to have a discussion on the where/when?

[MHGinTN]

pingalingaling

[GodGunsGuts]

Just thought people might be curious about the YEC interpretation of the Bible’s cosmological statements.

[boomop1]

My faith is the only thing that matters, we worry for naut as the God of all is always there to hear our plea, bless and praise the Lord God almighty let Bozo obama be a temporary flea, meaningless and ignorant of reality.

[MHGinTN]

I enjoyed reading it!

[GodGunsGuts]

I’m glad. I find this stuff absolutely fascinating!

[GodGunsGuts]

For some reason I thought you guys might be interested in this. All the best—GGG

[SubMareener]

If you are really interested in a scientific examination of God's Word, then take a look at Stan Tenen's body of work at the The Meru Foundation.

"We have discovered an extraordinary and unexpected geometric metaphor in the letter sequence of B’reshit (the Hebrew text of Genesis), a text which underlies and is held in common by the spiritual traditions of the ancient world. This metaphor models embryonic growth and self-organization. It applies to all whole systems, including those as seemingly diverse as meditational practices and the mathematics fundamental to physics and cosmology.

The metaphor also serves to explain the origin of and reason for traditional claims of sacred status for particular alphabets and texts, and it demonstrates a level of commonality among teachings in different traditions based on the self-aware nature of our consciousness and the self-propagating nature of life. We have found that the letters of the Hebrew (and, later, likely the Greek and Arabic) alphabet, because of the unique means of their generation, represent fundamental directions in a hyperdimensional space. This makes them ideal as elements of a natural algebra for theoretical physics. It also identifies the letters of the alphabet with the perspectives of conscious focus that are the inherent elements of our self-awareness and of our inner meditational and emotional reality.

We believe that such an alphabet, based on the geometric metaphor we have identified, can specify physical and psychological states simultaneously. Physicist Nick Herbert in his discussion at the end of his book, Quantum Reality, Beyond the New Physics, states: "One of the greatest scientific achievements imaginable would be the discovery of an explicit relationship between the waveform alphabets of quantum theory and certain human states of consciousness." Used with the author’s permission; ©1985 Anchor Press/Doubleday, p. 249." More..

[BobS]

I heard that between stars there is very fast moving gas. That makes sense because solar systems are orbiting with everything else with mass around the galaxy's gravitational center.

Now, what's going on between galaxies? I would think not much is left there anymore. Microwave background is all around and is what happened a long time ago.

I don't think we are going to find out what is in the space between galaxies or what it's doing, if anything, for a while.

[GodGunsGuts]

Sounds interesting. I’ll check it out. Thanks—GGG

[tflabo]

After reading the eternal Words of the Creator the IQ seems to spike a few points higher on the sensor scale.

[GodGunsGuts]

I know what you mean. There are all these passages in the Bible relating to creation, cosmology, etc, that I used to just gloss over. Now I stop and ponder with a true sense of wonder.

[MHGinTN]

I’m currently into a manuscript title ‘That’s In The Bible?’ I’ve chosen several passages of fascinating phenomena through which to build interest in reading the Bible for the astonishing things in it accessible to the lay reader, like the Daniel Chapter 5 surreal scene, or the floating iron axehead, and of course, the astonishing revelations in the resurrection.

[GodGunsGuts]

Sounds fascinating. Is there anywhere I can go to get a preview?

[BobS]

God basically said to explore our surroundings (with one big rule in Genesis).

So we do explore and measure the physical world. Even Einstein said God exists after spending the latter part of his life at Princeton U looking for the Unified Field Theory. Nobody can get there from here. Even with 11 dimensions wandering into sub-particle neighborhoods.

[count-your-change]

Humphreys? At least he good for a few laughs but no much else.

[GodGunsGuts]

Humphreys is one of my favorites. Have you seen his video, Starlight and Time?

PS I’m not ignoring your previous post. I just haven’t had the time to sit down and go through all your Bible verses.

All the best—GGG

[BlueDragon]

One of the questions I hear about that physicists have been asking themselves, and have a difficult time *proving* an answer for is; how fast does gravity travel?

The most usual answer is instantaneously, since time lags might have showed up by now?

Just think...if that is true, that gravity travels vast expanses within no discernible elapsed time...then what the heck is going on? Is the aether a fabric? Ok, your article claims it as one. That might not be a bad idea to hold to help orient one's thinking. It may also be made to fit with the idea of "dark matter", which supposedly comprises what --- something like 98% of the universe? --- unless many other calculations are very, very wrong?

I wonder every now and then what ever happened to Gravity Probe B? Every time I looked it up, it seemed like "not much", which made me suspect something went wrong with it, like they were not able to fully stabilize the orbit (or something?), which would jinx the measurements --- or --- I don't know, inconclusive returns maybe?. Perhaps someone will come along and tell us the proper answers, to that one...I'm a bit too tired at the moment to go search for it. Besides, my many other searches in the past few years yielded underwhelming results. I couldn't tell if the frame skewing, frame dragging question was answered --- though if memory serves, something of the geodetic effect supposedly was.

But they sure didn't make much noise about it. Just a little blip, then nothing. I would have expected a bit more crowing, since the project was only the oldest-longest in planning space shot ever to come to eventual launch.

[LiteKeeper]

They have got to be kidding!

[GodGunsGuts]

I had never heard of Gravity Probe B until you brought it up. I searched for it on google with the added word “creation” and this popped up. It’s a bit dated, but I thought you might be interested. I haven’t read it yet, but I will now since you seem to be so fascinated by the potential implications. All the best—GGG

http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5794/

[count-your-change]

I know you’re a busy man slaying all those dragons of Darwinism. I been sorting through the chaff for a few grains of sense in those threads but they’er few and difficult to find. Oh well, Darwinism had its day. Time to put it in the attic with Java man.

Humphreys just has zero credibility with me. For example this gem of deliberate misunderstanding:

“Scripture itself gives a clue: it looks like the expanse (firmament, heavens, space) is an actual material that we cannot perceive as we move through it and it moves through us. For example, it can be stretched out (Job 9:8 and 16 other Old Testament verses as discussed in reference 1), torn (Isaiah 64:1), worn out like a garment (Psalm 102:26), shaken (Hebrews 12:26, Haggai 2:6, Isaiah 13:13), burnt up (2 Peter 3:12), split apart like a scroll (Revelation 6:14), and rolled up like a mantle (Hebrews 1:12) or a scroll (Isaiah 34:4), see Figure 1.”

“Scripture itself gives a clue: it looks like the expanse (firmament, heavens, space) is an actual material...”

No it doesn’t, as the rankest student recognizes metaphor when they read things like that. The Scripures says God walks around, has hands, eyes, a heart, a wife, a throne, etc. yet
no person with any understanding of Scripture would take such descriptions as literal as does Humphreys above with similar Scriptures.

His idea of “material” that we cannot percieve as it moves through us and we through it sounds like “The Force” from Star Wars.

And he adds this enlightening explanation:

“These and other physics clues suggest that the material, which from the biblical clues I call the “fabric” of space, is an elastic solid, like a very rigid and enormously massive crystal. That could be why the Hebrew word for the expanse (raqia), and the Greek and Latin translations of it (stereoma and firmamentum) all have some connection with solidity and firmness, as does the English word, “firmament” used (coined?) by the King James translators.3 “

Again he’s blowing smoke. Here is what the Hebrew word for firmament means:

“raqiya`
raw-kee’-ah
from ‘raqa`’ (7554); properly, an expanse, i.e. the firmament or (apparently) visible arch of the sky:—firmament.

And here is what the Greek word he qoutes, stereoma, means:

“4733
sterewma
stereoma
ster-eh’-o-mah
from stereow - stereoo 4732; something established, i.e. (abstractly) confirmation (stability):—stedfastness.”

Nothing there would lead one to think either was an invisible solid material. Humphreys simply makes up stuff as he goes along. So no, I won’t waste my time on the rest of his nonsense.

” from the biblical clues I call the “fabric” of space, is an elastic solid, like a very rigid and enormously massive crystal.” Maybe its frozen water.

[jesseam]

I was in Roswell in 1947 and saw the debris fom the ufo. From that time I have realized that our cosmos is not just home to us but to many other civilizations that can get to here from wherever they come from. I am a Roman Catholic and realized that God is the master of the Universe. I was quite pleased when the Vatican proclaimed that belief in extraterrestrial civilizations is consistent with belief in God and the Holy Trinity. Seeing is believing

[GodGunsGuts]

Say hi to Art Bell for me. LOL

[GodGunsGuts]

I read most of one of his books many moons ago. I've been meaning to pick up one of his more recent books, but it keeps slipping my mind. Although, I did notice that some YECs have some problems with his work, but I have never taken the time to figure out why. But seeing how you're like the fifth or sixth person who has recommended him to me, I guess I'm gonna have to get off the dime.

All the best (and Shalom!)—GGG

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[LeGrande]

One of the questions I hear about that physicists have been asking themselves, and have a difficult time *proving* an answer for is; how fast does gravity travel?

The most usual answer is instantaneously, since time lags might have showed up by now?

The gravity field propagates at the speed of light but established field effects are instantaneous. The problem with testing gravity is that it is such a weak force compared to the other forces and we have no shielding against it. Our instrumentation just isn't up to the task. It may take a near Earth catastrophe to get good solid evidence.

[hosepipe]

A young earth or old earth could be linear thinking..
Meaning the earth is/could be both young and old at the same "time"..

Time may be an illusion to human senses.. and qualia..
Time could be multi-dimensional like gravity.. warping space.. or even reality..

[Alamo-Girl]

Indeed, relativity!

Posters rarely finish their sentences:

The universe is over 13 billion years old from our space/time coordinates.

The universe is 7 days old from the inception space/time coordinates.

Relativity shows that it isn't an either/or.

[uptoolate]

I found this a rather interesting read a while back:

http://www.icr.org/articles/print/3472/

[hosepipe]

Whatever she said...

[GourmetDan]

"These and other physics clues suggest that the material, which from the biblical clues I call the “fabric” of space, is an elastic solid, like a very rigid and enormously massive crystal. That could be why the Hebrew word for the expanse (raqia), and the Greek and Latin translations of it (stereoma and firmamentum) all have some connection with solidity and firmness, as does the English word, “firmament” used (coined?) by the King James translators."

A comparison of nuclear density to Planck density demonstrates the utter truth of the use of the term 'firmament'.

"This [planck density] is a unit which is very large, about equivalent to 10^23 solar masses squeezed into the space of a single atomic nucleus."

[Alamo-Girl]

LOLOL!

[count-your-change]

This sounds like Jewish mysticism and kabbalah tarted up in fancy rags.

[count-your-change]

This an example of Tene’s “body of work” from the Meru web site:

“SECRETS OF THE HEBREW LETTERS

by Cynthia Gage for Atlantis Rising, Issue #13, November 1997

By fusing mathematics and Jewish mysticism, Tenen has demonstrated that the first verse of Genesis in the Hebrew Bible generates a mathematical Torus. When a particular portion is removed from this ‘doughnut’, its shape mirrors the human hand. Tenen claims the Hebrew alphabet is based on the human hand, because it represents the function of differentiating self from other, inside from outside. “The alphabet links the inner world of the mind with the outer world of experience, just as our hands do,” he says. “And,” he continues, “The first letter of the book of Genesis -Bet- means ‘house’, something that distinguishes inside from outside; this is the most basic distinction you can make at any level of consciousness.”
www.meru.org/Press/Atlantisrising.html”

But wait! There’s more! Check out the web site.

[count-your-change]

“can get to here from wherever they come from.”

Why yes, everyone got here from where they came from. Its tough to get here from anywhere else.

The UFO didn’t crash, Will Smith was flying it in Independence Day, but only tell your twelve best friends!

[count-your-change]

Please explain more of this utter truth.

[GourmetDan]

"Please explain more of this utter truth."

First, you must demonstrate an ability to comprehend truth.

[count-your-change]

That’s easy enough. You have no idea what you’re talking about. Now about this utter truth thing.

[MHGinTN]

Instead of making a condescending ass of yourself, why not just be frank and tell the poster you think he/she is lying about being at Roswell in 1947? You will not get affirmation by peeing on your fellow freepers.

[count-your-change]

First of all you have no business calling anyone names with petty insults, practice what you preach.
Secondly, whether anyone was at Roswell or not is irrelevant if there was no UFO to wreck.
Third, why are you so thin skinned on someone else's behalf?

[GourmetDan]

"That’s easy enough. You have no idea what you’re talking about. Now about this utter truth thing."

I just had a feeling you wouldn't be able to comprehend the utter truth of the statement "This [planck density] is a unit which is very large, about equivalent to 10^23 solar masses squeezed into the space of a single atomic nucleus" as it relates to the use of the term 'raqia' or 'firmament' for supposedly 'empty' space.

[count-your-change]

I can go to Wikipedia too.

The upper quote is from there, the lower is yours:

This is a unit which is very large, about equivalent to 1023 (10 to the 23rd.) solar masses squeezed into the space of a single atomic nucleus. At one unit of Planck time after the Big Bang, the mass density of the universe is thought to have been approximately one unit of Planck density.

“This [planck density] is a unit which is very large, about equivalent to 10^23 solar masses squeezed into the space of a single atomic nucleus.”

Further here is meaning of the word “raqiya”:

“raqiya`
raw-kee’-ah
from ‘raqa`’ (7554); properly, an expanse, i.e. the firmament or (apparently) visible arch of the sky:—firmament.”

You'll have to make the connection between Planck's density and the sky.

[GourmetDan]

"I can go to Wikipedia too."

Well, since that was the reason I provided the link, I guess I don't know why you think this is such an accomplishment?

"You'll have to make the connection between Planck's density and the sky."

Now see, you are already hopelessly confused. The article wasn't talking about the sky and neither was I.

[count-your-change]

No link, just a quote, and sky is the meaning of firmament as in ‘stars in the sky’ as it is used in Scripture which is what the article was talking about.

“Putting aside the foibles of academia, my main point is that the expanse (firmament) is a real material that God made early in Creation Week.”

Humphreys’ main point is his use of the word firmament.

I provided the meaning of firmament as agreed to by common dictionaries.

Humphreys is trying to use physics to prove his erroneous understanding of firmament as a solid substance and then again erroneously apply it to the Bible.

[Invisible Ninja]

Yeah, young earth creationists do have a problem with his work, but they don’t look at it long enough to see the the profound insight of it. I was a YEC until I saw this. The reference point in Genesis I is told from God’s perspective, not man’s. Man’s perspective picks up in Genesis 5, “Zeh HaSefer HaToledot Adam” - This is the book of the Generations of Adam. Adam lived 130 years, and begat Seth. Seth begat, etc.” So, the human time frame picks up in Gen 5. The first six days are looking forward in time. Reference point is extremely critical in the Theory of Relativity, especially when the universe is expanding from the size of a “mustard seed” to 180 million billion light years across...I did a teaching on this, if you have Powerpoint you can see it here:
http://www.beithaderekh.org/torah/Teachings/bresheet5769.ppt

Shalom b’Shem Yeshua

[Fichori]

“Man’s perspective picks up in Genesis 5” [excerpt]

Exodus comes after Genesis 5.

So, even if we abide by the absurd assumption that anything before Genesis 5 is not written in mans perspective, we still have Exodus.

¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it [is] a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that [ye] may know that I [am] the LORD that doth sanctify you.

Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it [is] holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth [any] work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.

Six days may work be done; but in the seventh [is] the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth [any] work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, [for] a perpetual covenant.

It [is] a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.

¶ And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.

Exdodus 31:12-18

The original Hebrew text literally says, six days.

They days of work and the days of Creation are identical in the Hebrew.

God, with his finger, wrote six days and the Israelites understood those to be literal 24 hour days.

Considering the fact that God was on speaking terms with Moses, if they had misunderstood, God would have corrected them.

If they had misunderstood and God had not corrected them, he would have lied.


No wiggle room.