Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:56 pm

Posted by apolok on 03/19/2015

Flat Earth Advanced lecture - The secrets of the Dome

# Thread Update:
I want to mention that this is not my discovery.
I first saw this in December 2014 on a blog that has articles about the flat earth hoax.
here is the link to the original article:
www.waykiwayki.com/2014/12/flat-earth-galactic-centre-and-ancient.html

And to the persons that accuse me of "fear propaganda" - you are right! Seriously, I understand.
It is a hard thing to be told that we might have the same fate as our ancestors, who were killed in a "global sacrifice" and that we live "inside the murder scene". #

In the flat earth community we have the big question: Why would they lie about the shape? Why ........?

Well.... my fellow researchers, in this article you will find out the answer to this big question.

When we study ancient records, we find that all past civilizations were familiar with the solid dome of the sky. I repeat - all civilizations. Advanced or less advanced, from Egypt to Amazon tribes, they all knew.
nasa and the governments want us to believe that this were just myths and legends. They mock the ancient Egyptians when it comes to their cosmology, but they stand in awe of their building techniques and advanced mathematics.

So how did ancient people come to knew about the solid sky dome?
One version is that in ancient times advanced civilizations crossed Antarctica and discovered the dome. Or maybe back then Antarctica had a warmer climate and people lived near the dome -there is some evidence like ancient maps that depict Antarctica coastline ice free. We don't know if this was also the case further inland.

I suggest we try another approach and look at the ancient records for the answer.
We see that the dome is mentioned in the creation myths and legends.
Any advanced truth seeker knows that what modern society calls myths and legends are in fact ancient history.
95% percent of the accurate ancient records were stolen , hidden and burned by the Vatican murderers.
And all we are left with is the orally transmitted records (oral traditions/oral lore), which were distorted during the passing of the ages and also intentionally, mainly by religious authorities.

When we look at the creation stories, at the legends of Zeus, of Odin, at the Maya myths and all the others - this are all descriptions of devastating celestial events, which were later transformed into mythology and the celestial bodies were given names and human-like characters.
And in this way everything was hidden in plain sight.

We just add the flat earth to any of this myths. It will fit like a glove, and everything will make sense, and the story will once again become what it was in ancient times "an eyewitness account".

"OURANOS (or Uranus) was the primeval god (protogenos) of the sky. The Greeks imagined the sky as a solid dome of brass, decorated with stars, whose edges descended to rest upon the outermost limits of the flat earth. Ouranos was the literal sky, just as his consort Gaia was the earth."

"In Egyptian mythology, Nut was the goddess of the sky. Her body made a protective layer over the Earth.
As the sky goddess, Nut was shown arching over Geb (earth god)."

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Nut

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Nut

www.secretsinplainsight.com/wp-content/uploads/Nut.jpg

The creation story is the earliest record that any civilization has and the sky dome is mentioned hand in hand with the creation "his~story". So this is very important to take into consideration, and you will see why as we go on.

As I mentioned at the beginning of the article, this is an advanced lecture. So I assume that the reader is already familiar with the works of researchers like Immanuel Velikovsky - Worlds in Collision, Graham Hancock - Fingerprints of the Gods, etc.
I say this because in order to comprehend what is next, the reader must be well-acquainted in the destructive and cataclysmic events that happened just a few thousand years ago.
Our "friends" at nasa are telling us that the cataclysmic events happened 65 millions years ago, but should we believe them?
I suggest we let the nasa bedtime stories for the round earthers.
We, the flat earthers must do what we do best: Look At the Evidence.

We will see that when we combine the knowledge of the recent cataclysmic events with the knowledge of the flat earth, it will take us to a place of deep truths and understanding. From the "marriage" of this two well kept secrets we will have in front of us the "MOTHER OF ALL SECRETS".

So let us proceed:

When we look at high altitude balloon footage it can be clearly seen that the sun doesn't cast its light on the sky dome.
The light of the sun only comes downwards, just like from a spotlight.

Our Ancestors knew about the Dome from the dawn of their civilization.
They somehow saw it. But how is this possible?

The answer is simple - they told us how.
And not only that, they also told us that pieces of the solid sky dome, came down from the sky and caused great destruction on the surface.

So first thing first - how did they saw it?

It was illuminated during an event, caused by the intrusion of another celestial body. A celestial body that has it's own light, but which had and still has another purpose. This "foreign" body is not built like a light bulb, because it's "job" has nothing to do with sustaining life on Earth. It has a more darker function.
Also above the dome there is magma, "a mixture of molten or semi-molten rock, volatiles and solids that is found beneath the surface of the Earth" and it seems that also above the Earth. In this article you will find 2 YouTube videos and you will see the solidified magma rock balls.
This "rock balls" fell on the surface during the cataclysm. Some of them ( the ones that are almost perfect spherical shape) fell in the flood waters.

When we study the "Tunguska event" from a flat earth perspective we will find the exact phenomenon, but only of a smaller scale and a short duration( we were lucky this time).
In that day of 30 June 1908 in Siberia we see the same event happening. They say it was an "asteroid or comet" but this is just another nasa fairytale lie.

In the link below we find some very interesting eyewitness reports.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event#Selected_eyewitness_reports

"I suddenly saw that directly to the north, over Onkoul's Tunguska Road, the sky split in two and fire appeared high and wide over the forest [as Semenov showed, about 50 degrees up—expedition note]. The split in the sky grew larger, and the entire northern side was covered with fire. At that moment I became so hot that I couldn't bear it, as if my shirt was on fire; from the northern side, where the fire was, came strong heat. I wanted to tear off my shirt and throw it down, but then the sky shut closed, and a strong thump sounded, and I was thrown a few metres."

"In the north Karelinski village [200 verst north of Kirensk] the peasants saw to the north west, rather high above the horizon, some strangely bright (impossible to look at) bluish-white heavenly body, which for 10 minutes moved downwards. The body appeared as a "pipe", i.e., a cylinder."

"Then I saw a wonder: trees were falling, the branches were on fire, it became mighty bright, how can I say this, as if there was a second sun, my eyes were hurting, I even closed them. It was like what the Russians call lightning. And immediately there was a loud thunderclap. This was the second thunder. The morning was sunny, there were no clouds, our Sun was shining brightly as usual, and suddenly there came a second one!"

In ancient times something very awful happened. It was so devastating and frightening that it remained in all of humanity's ancient written and oral traditions.
They witnessed and event so traumatic that it scarred them for life. So powerful was this event that all the survivors decided to do their best to warn the future generations. The Zodiac had a different purpose back then, it was invented as a method to predict the reappearance of this celestial intruder.

This foreign celestial body was known as:
Typhon in the Roman empire
Destroyer in Egypt
Frightener in the Celtic nations
Shiva in India
Angra Mainyu in ancient Persian empire (Iran)
.....the list is long

and let us not forget the Bible:

2 Peter 3:10 "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up"
Isaiah 51:6 "Lift up your eyes to the heavens, look at the earth beneath; the heavens will vanish like smoke, the earth will wear out like a garment and its inhabitants die like flies. "

This image (angra mainyu - persian deity) depicts very well what ancient people must've thought when they saw this celestial destroyer.
The masses were already brainwashed that "the gods will punish them" just like they do with humanity today, scaring us with "comets" from "outer space". And they love to play in our faces with the names of their ancient religion gods, like the names of the planets and etc, or with huge alien ship that awaits to invade our "planet" and destroy it. They feed us all kinds of horror stories to make us fear and worship it.

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' ANGRA_MAINYU_by_leahcorrine

th06.deviantart.net/fs35/PRE/i/2008/305/f/b/ANGRA_MAINYU_by_leahcorrine.jpg

Also in nordic mythology we find that at Ragnarök - " The sky splits into two. From the split, the "sons of Muspell" ride forth. Surtr rides first, surrounded by flames, his sword brighter than the sun. High says that "Muspell's sons" will ride across Bifröst, described in Gylfaginning as a rainbow bridge, and that the bridge will then break."

So we see that Bifröst is a rainbow bridge in the sky. And at Ragnarök (nordic legend apocalypse) the gods and monsters (celestial bodies) will have a fight over this bridge.
And the bridge will then break.

There is thread on ifers.boards.net titled "Why telescopes have a dome?!", please allow me to address that topic.

The vault of the sky is built like a Telescope Observatory Dome and it also has an opening which is now closed, and hasn't been opened for at least 3600 years.
When it will be opened again it will be a sad day for humanity and for all species that live in this ....... in this cage.

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Obs14

grcoonline.org/photos/obs14.jpg

But how does this celestial dome opening works?

The sun, moon, planets and constellations are the "reset clock" of the flat earth mechanism. This is why the ancients were always watching the skies with so much dedication. They knew...... they knew......and we have failed them.
Humanity has spent the last 2000 years chasing the wild gooses of the heliocentric lie.

My fellow reader, first let me tell you what were those strange sounds that were heard all over the world in the last years. Before every destruction the sun begins to lose its circuit path and by doing that it heats new portions of the earth that were never heated before with such intensity, and the sky dome is affected.
It has a lot to do also with pressure. The movement of the sun and moon generates pressure which pushes on the surface of the earth (this is how tides form on our flat earth). But this pressure also affects the dome.
And because of that, the materials of the dome (granite, metals and crystals like the libyan desert glass , etc ) begin to expand and they create that scary metallic sound.

The majority of the so called trumpet sounds are not fake, are not made by the government, and unfortunately they are real and the ancient people left us records about them. They warned us that when we will hear trumpet-like sounds we will be close to a great cataclysm. But the psychopaths that control the world transformed them into legends and burned the true eyewitness accounts.

"the Nordic god Heimdall, whose blasts on his trumpet announce the onset of Ragnarok, the Norse equivalent of Armageddon."

When the sun rose two days earlier in Greenland in 2011 it was the year with the most intense convulsions of the sky vault (trumpet sounds).

When the sun deviates from his path, the derangement caused in the vault produces the so called fireballs (a.k.a falling stars). And there is a crazy amount of them in the last period, also the alarmingly increase in earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and extreme weather , the magnetic north has shifted and the rising and setting sun are in the wrong directions.

Our ancestors warned us about "the day the sun stood still" :

"In the ancient Chinese writings there is a legend of a long day. The Incas of Peru and the Aztecs of Mexico have a like record, and there is a Babylonian and a Persian legend of a day that was miraculously extended. Another section of China contributes an account of the day that was miraculously prolonged, in the reign of Emperor Yeo.

"The Old Testament describes an event over Palestine, when the Hebrew tribes were led into the battle of Beth-Horon by Joshua."

"And he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day."

"The sun over Gibeon was in the forenoon sky. It would have been night or very early morning in the Western hemisphere."

"There is a Mexican tradition, recorded in the Nahua-Indian in the Annals of Cuauhtitlan, that once in the remote past the night did not end for a long time. Friar Bernardino de Sahagun, a Spanish scholar who came to the New World a generation after Columbus, wrote that the American aborigines told of a great catastrophe, in which the sun had risen only a little way above the horizon, and then stood still.
The Choctaw Indians say that when the land was in darkness a bright light appeared in the north, “but it was mountain-high waves, coming nearer”; the Peruvians say that the ocean left the shore and inundated the continent; the Chinese annals say that in the reign of the Emperor Yahou a great tidal wave broke over the mountains into the Chinese Empire and flooded the land for decades. "

"Pomponius Mela, a Latin author of the first century. wrote: 'The Egyptians pride themselves on being the most ancient people in the world. In their authentic annals...one may read that since they have been in existence, the course of the stars has changed direction four times, and the sun has set twice in the part of the sky where it rises today.' [ Worlds in Collision, p.119 ]
The Magical Papyrus Harris speaks of a cosmic upheaval of fire and water when 'the south becomes north, and the earth turns over.' [ Worlds in Collision, p.120 ]
"In the Papyrus Ipuwer it is similarly stated that 'the land turns round [over] as does a potter's wheel,' and 'Earth turns upside down.' [ Worlds in Collision, p.121 ] "

The missing link to all this signs is the flat earth. Our ancestors carved in stone, in metal plates, wrote on leather, on clay tablets, were persecuted and burned alive, and all this because they were trying to warn us. No wonder the psychopaths(nasa and all their precursors) put so much effort in the "mother of all lies".

The surface of our planet is full of boulders of rock(from the sky dome), of megalithic man made structures reduced to ruins, of marine fossils on mountain peaks and still humanity finds comfort in "it happens at intervals of 65 million years". The real data suggest that it happens at intervals of around 3600 and 5000 years and all the evidence put together points that this place we call earth is nothing more than a "sacrificial dome" and it is controlled by ..... [for this one I will need your help(the flat earth researchers), and together maybe we can find the answer before it is to late]

Here are two great videos with evidence for the incredible scale of the cataclysmic events.
unfortunately the creator of these videos doesn't know about the flat earth, and he tries so hard to fit the geological evidences of destruction with the round earth cosmology and with the fake ancient alien astronauts theory.

The cataclysmic events are recorded also in so many historical sources. And are well covered in the work of good researchers that I mentioned before, Immanuel Velikovsky, Graham Hancock.
I suggested these two researchers because in their books they indicate what are the original sources of the information used to write the book.
They indicate ancient papyrus and all kinds of sources, one example is the Ipuwer papyrus.
All the eyewitness accounts that escaped the vatican burning are very valuable. It is amazing on how accurate they are and how well everything fits together when we add the flat earth. This discovery is based on :study of all destruction events found in historical sources and also in myths/stories/legends, geological evidences (and their young age 3600 to 5000 years), and the flat earth.

Again I want to emphasize that the cataclysmic events described in the ancient records are the source for all the religions and myths. These events were recorded by all the survivors from the entire earth.

In norse mythology this foreign body/ the celestial destroyer is called - Surtr, in early greek legends - Cronus, in the bible - God, in koran - Allah, in hinduism - Shiva,...etc. They make humanity to fear it, to venerate it, to say prayers to it, this is so sick . They want to make sure that when it will appear again, our hearts will be frozen with terror.

So.... just like Matthew Boylan, the guy with the stand up comedy about the flat earth says "let's have a perception test" :

My fellow reader let me ask you - what do you see when you look at the Milky way ? What does it look like to you? Is it a galaxy, million miles away? Or what is it?

Please look at some videos of the milky way and try to judge with your own eyes (there are some good videos on YouTube, or maybe you live in an area without light pollution and you can observe it). Look at it as if you have never seen it before and like you knew nothing about it (empty your mind and contemplate the shape of it ) - this is what I did. And the more I looked at it and the deeper I went with my research, the more frightened I became at her image.

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' MilkyroadMan_landolfi

www.kui.name/images/APOD/2009/milkyroadMan_landolfi.jpg

Unfortunately the Milky way is exactly what it looks like ...... It is a crack(fissure) in the vault of the sky and the celestial destroyer (a.k.a marduk, tiamat, god, allah, typhon, etc, etc) is situated above the so called " milky way galactic bulge". That light we see at the center of the milky way is from this device. It seems that also a new sun comes out from that place and during this "cosmic birth", huge torrents of water fall from the sky.

Genesis 1:6-8 says, “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."

Psalm 11:4 - LORD is in his holy temple; the LORD is on his heavenly throne. He observes everyone on earth; his eyes examine them.

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' HEAVEN

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' HEAVEN

www.edwardtbabinski.us/images/HEAVEN.JPG

And this thing ( this device/mechanism) enters in the dome opening (the Dark Rift of the milky way) destroys the earth, and a part of it falls on the earth. And after that the lid of this geo-mechanical cage is closed.
No wonder the mayans were obsessed with the dark rift (because they knew what sits behind it).

"The Dark Rift has many Mayan mythic identities. It is the Black Road, the Road to the Underworld. A crevice in the branches of the Cosmic Tree (the Milky Way). The mouth of the Cosmic Monster (a jaguar or snake with tree-like features). The birth canal of the Cosmic Mother"

The Mayans tried to warn us and they also told us that the earth is flat.

A very good article: www.academia.edu/3288410/Galactic_Center_in_Ancient_Myth

"Bifrost, the rainbow, was the bridge leading from the Earth, called Midgard, to Asgard, the home of the gods. Only the gods could cross this bridge, which was guarded by the god Heimdall. This bridge has also been associated with the Milky Way.
It was believed that a great battle between good and evil would end in the destruction of the gods. During the battle, Bifrost shattered due to the weight of the monsters.
In the story, all the gods and everything on Earth perished under the sea. However, Earth rose from the waters and life began again."

Tiamat is a chaos monster from the Mesopotamian religion :
"Slicing Tiamat in half, he made from her ribs the vault of heaven and earth. Her weeping eyes became the source of the Tigris and the Euphrates, her tail became the Milky Way."

"The Kaurna Aboriginal People of the Adelaide Plains in South Australia see the band of the Milky Way as a river in the skyworld...... In addition, the dark patches are where a dangerous creature known as a yura lives."

So when this device enters it moves over the earth at the speed of the milky way for 6 days (it is the same speed that the sun has along the ecliptic).
"A fiery dragon will cross the sky Six times before the Earth shall die ...”(Mother Shipton prophecy).

It's funny how they say "God created the world in 6 days" allow me to rephrase it "God destroyed the world in 6 days"
The psychopaths mention this opening of the sky also in the bible: "The heavens receded like a scroll being rolled up". The book of revelation is nothing more than a description of the destruction this device makes. Vatican had at their disposal all the ancient records when they wrote the bible.

Note: "our friends" who stole the real eyewitness accounts and then transformed them into myths did a very clever and mischievous thing:
One must be very careful when he reads all ancient myths and stories including the bible, because the good deity is often the same as the bad deity.

"Take your sickle and reap, because the time to reap has come, for the harvest of the earth is ripe." So he that was seated on the cloud swung his sickle over the earth, and the earth was harvested. (Revelation 14:14-16 NIV)

"time to reap has come, for the harvest of the earth is ripe." This is scary, they wait until the earth has many souls on it ( people and animals) and then this device is activated. Please watch this trailer: Jupiter Ascending - Official Trailer 3 , it is made by the creators of matrix trilogy - hmmm, these bastards know something.

milky way is bifrost and the dome sky is yggdrasil from the norse mythology, and in the vedic tradition it is mount meru. It is hidden everywhere, in all the mythology. And all the gods that do the battle in all this legends are the sun, moon and the planets, and the destroyer.
Also in the bible is the same story, Jesus is the sun and his father is the destroyer.

As we already know by now, this destruction is the most studied subject and there is overwhelming evidence for it.
What I presented in this article is the mother of all secrets. It is up to us, the flat earthers to warn the world.
The controllers want us to argue over maps, etc and like this good researchers waste their energy with professional skeptics(a.k.a CIA) instead of looking at the many layers of - The story behind "the story behind the flat earth".

The chemtrails connection:
From all the evidence I have, my strong opinion is that with the help of chemtrails they are delaying the destruction mechanism so that they can complete their false bible prophecies (with the rfid chip and everything else).
And they do this by controlling the sun's movement with the help of electromagnetic waves.

This idea about the delaying of the cataclysm is just a theory. But as you already know there is something deeper behind the reason of chemtrails.
The fact that we are affected by the poisonous particles and by the amplified emf soup it creates, and by the lack of proper sun light, is just a bonus for the controllers. And also the idea that they are covering the skies so that we don't see nibru or the second sun, fails because there are some days when it is very windy at high altitudes and the sky is cleared , and nothing could be seen. One thing we know for sure is that the spraying is done always under the sun's path. When the sun moves over a new area, already a carpet of chemtrails awaits for it. And by this they play with the balance of earth's negative charge and the positive charge from above. Maybe we can change our theory and maybe they are not delaying, maybe they are causing it - but this last idea fails because I bet they didn't have chemtrails at the previous cataclysmic events. As you know they seem very hurried in the last period with all their agendas, like something is pushing them to move faster. And this made me think about the chemtrails connection. And if this theory is real then it means the opening of the skies can be stooped. All we need is another method, more eco-friendly.

This "fairy tale cosmology" of the round earth has blinded so many good researchers who saw and tried to elucidate the mysteries behind the myths and legends (they understood that there are some real events behind them). I study their work and it makes me so sad that they failed to see it. Whenever they were getting close to the truth they were faced with the flat earth and ignored it. Graham Hancock talks with so much respect of the ancient Egyptians but when it comes to their cosmology he believes they were wrong. He betrays them and he believes the criminal organization called nasa - this is so sad(or maybe he knows the truth but he doesn't share it with us). If the researchers didn't listen to nasa we would have found the truth earlier and humanity would have stood a chance. So now the burden falls on our shoulders and maybe we can do something about it.

My fellow flat earth researchers why do you believe you feel that interior urge to warn and inform the public?
Maybe we somehow know it, and from here comes the motivation to expose this LIE.

In the last 6 months the flat earth movement has gone "wild". The content is getting better and better. And because of that I give a big shout out to the flat earth researchers.

I know...... it seems unbelievable what I just presented here. But my fellow truth seekers please take a step back and realize that it is not me who is telling all this stuff. This "stuff" , this ancient knowledge ,this sacred warning was left for us by all the survivors of the previous two cataclysmic events.

comparison pictures 1
Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Fissure-de-la-colle-14145120

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Fissure-de-la-colle-14145120

thumbs.dreamstime.com/x/fissure-de-la-colle-14145120.jpg
news.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/article_images/sn-milkyway.jpg

comparison pictures 2
Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' 3509673674_f1e9be62bf_z

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' 3509673674_f1e9be62bf_z

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Vista-milky-way-millions-stars

www.mathgon.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/3509673674_f1e9be62bf_z.jpg
i.space.com/images/i/000/023/100/original/vista-milky-way-millions-stars.jpg?1351027188

Please try to prove me wrong. I also tried, but I couldn't find any way out of this rabbit hole. And the more you will research, the connection between the flat earth dome opening and cataclysmic events will become clearer and clearer.

Regards

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:57 pm

Posted by thinkforyourself on 05/12/2015

May 11, 2015 19:50:16 GMT Alexwww said:

I can't believe that I finally found something that answers many of my questions about the cataclysmic events.
You guys are doing a great job on this forum, the information from all threads is just amazing.
In the last few years I studied anything I could find about the worldwide cataclysmic events,
but nothing comes this close at explaining the process.

So could it really be? that this rift in the sky be the cause of worldwide floods and cataclysm?

It definitely seems likely that a devastating event occurred thousands of years ago, and that the rift formed as a result. From the sound of the Tunguska event, it seems like the rift can still cause devastation.

It is interesting that in both cases, a second sun was mentioned by the witnesses. It seems like a second sun disappeared in the past, and that it was seen again during the Tunguska event.

If the rift is still powerful enough to cause the devastation seen at Tunguska, it seems that it could could be responsible for other devastating events, but I have yet to see any evidence of this.

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:58 pm

Posted by thinkforyourself on 07/03/2015
Here is Waykiwayki's video on this topic:

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:58 pm

Posted by schpankme on 07/04/2015

Jul 3, 2015 10:46:32 GMT thinkforyourself said:
Here is Waykiwayki's video on this topic:

waykiwayki said, @ 9:24 of the video, "The Space Shuttle's got reinforced carbon on its nose and wings, maybe this
is some type of battering-ram, for the density 100 km (328,000 feet)up?"

Maybe someone can tell me how Freemasons made it to an altitude of 100 km, above the face of the Earth?

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:59 pm

Posted by thinkforyourself on 07/04/2015

Jul 3, 2015 19:45:34 GMT schpankme said:
Jul 3, 2015 10:46:32 GMT thinkforyourself said:
Here is Waykiwayki's video on this topic:

waykiwayki said, @ 9:24 of the video, "The Space Shuttle's got reinforced carbon on its nose and wings, maybe this
is some type of battering-ram, for the density 100 km (328,000 feet)up?"

Maybe someone can tell me how Freemasons made it to an altitude of 100 km, above the face of the Earth?

Yes, that is a very good point Schpankme. Doesn't Waykiwayki know about the NASA fraud?

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:00 pm

Posted by waykiwayki on 07/05/2015
Thanks Schpankme for watching the video and pointing that out.

What I wanted to say is that maybe at the top of its flight, the shuttle arrives under the 100 km 'barrier' (which is maybe lower than 100km), this was the idea that i wanted to mention.

And maybe this is why they reinforced the nose and bottom, to protect, or to 'batter through' whatever is going on there.

I also believe NASA have never went been above 100km, as I've not seen evidence to suggest so. They've probably not got anywhere near that height!

But again, thanks for pointing this out, and for giving me the opportunity to make a clarification.

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:00 pm

Posted by schpankme on 07/05/2015

Jul 5, 2015 5:55:53 GMT waykiwayki said:

I also believe NASA have never went been above 100km

I don't see any proof for NASA actually launching the Space Shuttle.

I don't see proof for anything flying above 120,000 feet (36,576 m).

Resume for Thomas Keith Glennan:

Graduated from Sheffield Scientific School of Yale University in 1927, with a degree in electrical engineering.

After graduation he was employed by the "sound motion picture industry".

Assistant general service superintendent for Electrical Research Products Company, a subsidiary of Western Electric Company.

Studio manager of Paramount Pictures, Inc., and Samuel Goldwyn Studios.

Administrator and then as Director of the U.S. Navy's Underwater Sound Laboratories at New London, Connecticut (Columbia University Division of War Research).

Executive of the Ansco Corp., Binghamton, New York.

Member of the Atomic Energy Commission.

Member of the Board, National Science Foundation and the Council on Financial Aid to Education.

First Administrator for NASA (August 19, 1958 to January 20, 1961).

That's right, the first NASA administrator was a Sound Expert, who worked for the Motion Picture Industry (Hollywood).

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:02 pm

Posted by smj on 07/06/2015

here's my favorite t. keith quote...

"When the apollo 11 astronauts landed on the moon on 20 July 1969, I was glued to a television screen at the Bohemian Grove north of San Francisco and was as thrilled and emotionally moved as anyone could be." - T. Keith Glennan

when t. keith was in the talkie business working for at&t through erpi he was rivals with some dude named joe kennedy. joe was pushing the talkies thru rko and pathe. joe was the quintessential hustler we're told...

"Kennedy began learning about the market in 1919 when he joined the Boston office of the Hayden Stone investment house. In 1926 he moved to New York City where he began to develop in earnest an interest in film. Kennedy produced some features, but more importantly he spurred a wave of consolidation that produced RKO and made him millions. Then Kennedy merged RKO with Pathé and, in a move typical of the era, made more millions while reducing less fortunate investors to penury"

www.sechistorical.org/museum/galleries/kennedy/lastDays_c.php
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathé_Exchange

joe teamed up with rca, which was really the military...

Seeking a customer for Photophone, in late 1927 David Sarnoff, then general manager of RCA, approached Joseph P. Kennedy about using the system for Kennedy's modest-sized studio, Film Booking Offices of America (FBO). Negotiations resulted in General Electric acquiring a substantial interest in FBO—Sarnoff had apparently already conceived of a plan for the company to attain a central position in the film industry, maximizing Photophone revenue. Next on the agenda was securing a string of exhibition venues like those the leading Hollywood production companies owned. Kennedy began investigating the possibility of such a purchase. Around that time, the large Keith-Albee-Orpheum (KAO) circuit of theaters, built around the then-fading medium of live vaudeville, was attempting a transition to the movie business. In mid-1927, the filmmaking operations of Pathé Exchange and Cecil B. De Mille's Producers Distributing Corporation (PDC) had united under KAO's control. Early in 1928, KAO general manager John J. Murdock, who had assumed the presidency of Pathé, turned to Kennedy as an adviser in consolidating the studio with De Mille's company, PDC. This was the relationship Sarnoff and Kennedy sought.[2][3]

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RKO_Pictures

sarnoff wasn't in charge; the military was of course; and they didn't hide it because nobody looks. owen young was on the german reparations committee for fuck's sake...

"The incorporation of the assets of Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company of America (including David Sarnoff,[7]) the Pan-American Telegraph Company, and those already controlled by the United States Navy led to a new publicly held company formed by General Electric (which owned a controlling interest) on October 17, 1919.[8] The following cooperation among RCA, General Electric, the United Fruit Company, the Westinghouse Electric Corporation, and American Telephone & Telegraph (AT&T) brought about innovations in high-power radio technology, and also the founding of the National Broadcasting Company (NBC) in the US. The Army and the Navy granted RCA the former American Marconi radio terminals that had been confiscated during the War. Admiral Bullard received a seat on the Board of Directors of RCA for his efforts in establishing RCA. The result was federally-created monopolies in radio for GE and the Westinghouse Corporation and in telephone systems for the American Telephone & Telegraph Company."

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RCA
oa.upm.es/8971/1/INVE_MEM_2010_83812.pdf
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owen_D._Young

kennedy donated a shit ton of pathe footage to nelson rockefeller's mommy's institute of the muses we are told...

www.moma.org/momaorg/shared/pdfs/docs/press_archives/634/releases/MOMA_1940_0065_1940-09-26_40926-57.pdf?2010

... which is only natural seeing as the moma is military as well...

"We also find the Rockefellers behind Modernism, and the Independent admits it.

Pre-eminent among these was Nelson Rockefeller, whose mother had co-founded the Museum of Modern Art [MOMA] in New York. As president of what he called "Mummy's museum", Rockefeller was one of the biggest backers of Abstract Expressionism (which he called "free enterprise painting"). His museum was contracted to the Congress for Cultural Freedom to organise and curate most of its important art shows.

There you have it. Remember, the Congress of Cultural Freedom is the CIA (see two quotes above). So we have published proof from a mainstream London newspaper that Rockefeller conspired with the CIA to promote Modernism, and he did it prior to the Cold War. If Abstract Expressionism were only being promoted as part of the Cold War, then why were the Rockefellers supporting Modernism as far back as 1929? MOMA was founded in 1929, and there was no Cold War in 1929. Russia wasn't even an enemy in 1929. Russia was an ally up until the end of WW2. The Independent contradicts itself in its own article, which is indication it is trying to spin the story even as it “leaks” it.

Also notice that Rockefeller calls Abstract Expressionism “free enterprise painting.” This is classic Newspeak. Since Abstract Expressionism is being promoted by the CIA, it is the opposite of free enterprise painting. It is contracted propaganda. Abstract Expressionism is CIA painting, and there is nothing “free enterprise” about the CIA. The CIA is and always has been about control.

And we get more astonishing information, poorly spun:

William Paley, the president of CBS broadcasting and a founding father of the CIA, sat on the members' board of the museum's [MOMA's] International Programme. John Hay Whitney, who had served in the agency's wartime predecessor, the OSS, was its chairman. And Tom Braden, first chief of the CIA's International Organisations Division, was executive secretary of the museum in 1949.
Wow, so MOMA is really the CIA's museum. We are never told that over here in the States, are we? It is also worth looking at Tom Braden's quote in this article:
We wanted to unite all the people who were writers, who were musicians, who were artists, to demonstrate that the West and the United States was devoted to freedom of expression and to intellectual achievement, without any rigid barriers as to what you must write, and what you must say, and what you must do, and what you must paint, which was what was going on in the Soviet Union. I think it was the most important division that the agency had, and I think that it played an enormous role in the Cold War."

mileswmathis.com/beat.pdf

braden wrote what became the tv show 'eight is enough' and he was a host of cross-fire on cnn of course...

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Braden

here's jack on his daddy's old newsreel movie company coming thru live and full of shit on our first communications satellite 'telstar'...

and yes, its that telstar for all you footballers out there...

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adidas_Telstar
fakeologist.com/2015/06/13/self-authenticating-evidentiary-basis/

here's bobby's spokesman, frank fabian mankiewicz- dude's name was fabian for feck's sake, solemnly announcing his assasination...

... frank's dad was herman mankiewicz, the famous screenwriter who co-wrote citzen kane. citizen kane was released by rko of course.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Mankiewicz

p.s. bill paley was married to babe paley, the daughter of harvey fuckin cushing, harvey cushing was john lawrence's mentor.

so let's not forget that leo szilard started the first reactor with fermi; there's a big ass accelerator at fermi lab of course- fermi is a 'nother story but I don't feel like swimming in the fermi sea right now, in ci cago and he gave ernest 'the atom smasher' the idea for the cyclotron. ernest's little bro, john, invented nuclear medicine we're told using his brothers sweet new gadget. john got in on the hustle after his mentor, harvey cushing, advised him to...

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_fermion

"John and Ernest returned to Harvard to consult John's esteemed mentor there, Harvey Cushing, the country's most eminent brain surgeon. He was dazzled by what they reported. "This field of radiation is something big," he concluded. "I think medicine now is at a threshold like the one when I was a young doctor at the time that bacteriology was discovered." In 1937, John Lawrence moved to Berkeley to build a research program in nuclear medicine. With the help of Ernest, he raised the money to build the Donner Laboratory, of which he ultimately became the director. The Donner Laboratory remains on the campus to this day, an important link between the campus and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory."

chancellor.berkeley.edu/chancellors/berdahl/speeches/the-lawrence-legacy

...and because the hustle is narrow but deep harvey's daughter, babe, was a famous socialite of course. she was married to the CIA/CBS hustler mentioned above, paley, and they are both buried in cold spring harbor- which is hilarious if you've paid attention to the narrative.

p.s.s. there's nothing to worry about cern or the diamond light source. they don't experiment on particles at those places; they do social experiments on the clowns that work there. i'm sure you've heard of the calutron girls?

fakeologist.com/forums/topic/the-nuclear-family/
www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=452&p=2395417&hilit=Calutron#p2395417

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:02 pm

Posted by Garner on 07/23/2015
Oculus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia › wiki › Oculus
Mobile-friendly - An oculus (plural oculi, from Latin oculus, eye) is a circular opening in the centre of a dome or in a wall.

Oculus Rift lol

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:03 pm

Posted by csp on 07/23/2015

Jul 23, 2015 9:22:05 GMT Garner said:
Oculus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia › wiki › Oculus
Mobile-friendly - An oculus (plural oculi, from Latin oculus, eye) is a circular opening in the centre of a dome or in a wall.

Oculus Rift lol

Wow, great pick up - and they are going to use it to trap kids further into their bull shit lies.

Also note the numerology around Robert F Kennedy death:

died at 1:44 = 9

on 6/6/1968 = 666

age 42 = 6

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:03 pm

Posted by incorporated on 07/28/2015
Incredible subject. I have not even thought about the rift. I'd love to see more video's and articles on it.

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:04 pm

Posted by aleksandar2015 on 08/04/2015

Aug 1, 2015 19:47:45 GMT thesekininja said:

thought this was interesting and worth a look

I dont know when this laser test took place in Japan but I found the same thing on yt in Argentina few days ago. If this is the same thing, then there is definitely a Dome.

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:04 pm

Posted by seven1 on 08/11/2015
Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' George_washington_zpsdeifppun

First president and Freemason George Washington's "vision" at Valley Forge in 1777 directly references trumpets, flooding and fire from the sky. I believe the Freemasons have kept the "playbook" for this earth secret for many centuries if not millennia. The secrets of the dome and cyclical destruction among other secret knowledge only known to the elite are communicated to the common man through symbolism and specifically through movies and television, and maybe even this tidbit from Washington himself.

Here is an exerpt from Washington's vision:

..." `Son of the Republic' said the same mysterious voice as before, `look and learn,' At that moment I beheld a dark, shadowy being, like an angel, standing, or rather floating in mid-air, between Europe and America. Dipping water out of the ocean in the hollow of each hand, he sprinkled some upon America with his right hand, while with his left hand he cast some on Europe. Immediately a cloud raised from these countries, and joined in mid-ocean. For a while it remained stationary, and then moved slowly westward, until it enveloped America in its murky folds. Sharp flashes of lightning gleamed through it at intervals, and I heard the smothered groans and cries of the American people.

"A second time the angel dipped water from the ocean, and sprinkled it out as before. The dark cloud was then drawn back to the ocean, in whose heaving billows it sank from view. A third time I heard the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn,' I cast my eyes upon America and beheld villages and towns and cities springing up one after another until the whole land from the Atlantic to the Pacific was dotted with them.

"Again, I heard the mysterious voice say, `Son of the Republic, the end of the century cometh, look and learn.' At this the dark shadowy angel turned his face southward, and from Africa I saw an ill-omened spectre approach our land. It flitted slowly over every town and city of the latter. The inhabitants presently set themselves in battle array against each other. As I continued looking I a saw bright angel, on whose brow rested a crown of light, on which was traced the word `Union,' bearing the American flag which he placed between the divided nation, and said, `Remember ye are brethren.' Instantly, the inhabitants, casting from them their weapons became friends once more, and united around the National Standard.

"And again I heard the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' At this the dark, shadowy angel placed a trumpet to his mouth, and blew three distinct blasts; and taking water from the ocean, he sprinkled it upon Europe, Asia and Africa. Then my eyes beheld a fearful scene: from each of these countries arose thick, black clouds that were soon joined into one. Throughout this mass there gleamed a dark red light by which I saw hordes of armed men, who, moving with the cloud, marched by land and sailed by sea to America. Our country was enveloped in this volume of cloud, and I saw these vast armies devastate the whole country and burn the villages, towns and cities that I beheld springing up. As my ears listened to the thundering of the cannon, clashing of swords, and the shouts and cries of millions in mortal combat, I heard again the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' When the voice had ceased, the dark shadowy angel placed his trumpet once more to his mouth, and blew a long and fearful blast.

"Instantly a light as of a thousand suns shone down from above me, and pierced and broke into fragments the dark cloud which enveloped America. At the same moment the angel upon whose head still shone the word Union, and who bore our national flag in one hand and a sword in the other, descended from the heavens attended by legions of white spirits. These immediately joined the inhabitants of America, who I perceived were well nigh overcome, but who immediately taking courage again, closed up their broken ranks and renewed the battle.

"Again, amid the fearful noise of the conflict, I heard the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' As the voice ceased, the shadowy angel for the last time dipped water from the ocean and sprinkled it upon America. Instantly the dark cloud rolled back, together with the armies it had brought, leaving the inhabitants of the land victorious!...

"The power to destroy a thing is the absolute control over it." Muad'dib from Frank Herberts DUNE

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:05 pm

Posted by waykiwayki on 08/11/2015
A new documentary including info that furthers this thread's subject matter.

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:06 pm

Posted by icedrink58 on 08/15/2015

Just wanted to add....surely it cannot be a mere coincidence that the three main elements in meteors (iron, nickel & cobalt) just happen to be the three elements that are ferromagnetic.

So....hm...the dome seems to be magnetic when i think about it. Might there be a (physical) connection between Mount Meru (magnetic north) and the dome? Just speculating.

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:07 pm

Posted by belial on 08/18/2015
These trumpet noises make it pretty hard to argue with a dome. I'm not convinced they know when the sky's gonna crack though. If their chemtrails are meant to slow the cataclysm then they probably have no clue, they're just hoping for the best haha

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:07 pm

Posted by seven1 on 08/27/2015
It's clear that our stars rotate around our flat plane with polaris centered over the north pole, it's also clear that our stars follow a very precise cyclical movement. Stars aren't magic, they have to be based on some physical process, and it has been suggested that sonoluminescence may be the mechanism of that process. What about the totality of the movement of the sky? There must be some physical process which that is based on. Do stars "disappear" when they reach the edge of the Antarctic flat plane or does the whole mechanism keep rotating?

While obviously not definitive proof I find the evidence in the Visions of Ezekiel highly interesting in their description of the possible mechanism of the Firmament. Ezekiels description of aWheel inside a Wheel sounds an awful lot like a gyroscope, and his description of the Cherubim could possibly be the devices propelling this mechanism.

Are iron meteorites broken pieces of the framework of a colossal gyroscope?

Does an iron/nickel framework hold a glass dome in place?

Are the four wheels the "corners" of the earth?

Some pretty wild stuff to think about

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Smiley

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Hqdefault_zpsjkfofsrm

Here are excerpts of Ezekiel 1 from the Septuagint.

Vision of Four Cherubim

And I looked, and, behold, a sweeping wind came from the north, and a great cloud on it, and there was brightness round about it, and gleaming fire, and in the midst of it as it were the appearance of amber in the midst of the fire, and brightness in it. And in the midst as it were the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance; the likeness of a man was upon them. And each one had four faces, and each one had four wings. And their legs were straight; and their feet were winged, and there were sparks, like gleaming brass, and their wings were light. And the hand of a man was under their wings on their four sides. And the faces of them four turned not when they went; they went everyone straight forward. And the likeness of their faces was the face of a man, and the face of a lion on the right of the four; and the face of a calf on the left of the four; and the face of an eagle to the four. And the four had their wings spread out above; each one had two joined to one another, and two covered their bodies. And each one went straight forward: wherever the spirit was going they went, and turned not back. And in the midst of the living creatures there was an appearance as of burning coals of fire, as an appearance of lamps turning among the living creatures; and the brightness of fire, and out of the fire came forth lightning

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Cherubim_ezekiel_zpstqrcjvlf

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Cherubim_ezekiel_zpstqrcjvlf

Vision of the Four Wheels

And I looked, and, behold, the four had each one wheel on the ground near the living creatures. And the appearance of the wheels was as the appearance of beryl: and the four had one likeness: and their work was as it were a wheel in a wheel. They went on their four sides: they turned not as they went; neither did their backs turn: and they were high: and I beheld them, and the backs of them four were full of eyes round about. And when the living creatures went, the wheels went by them: and when the living creatures lifted themselves off the earth, the wheels were lifted off. Wherever the cloud happened to be, there was the spirit ready to go: the wheels went and were lifted up with them; because the spirit of life was in the wheels. When those went, the wheels went; and when those stood, the wheels stood; and when those lifted themselves off the earth, they were lifted off with them: for the spirit of life was in the wheels.

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Ezekiel__s_fusion_wheels_by_solark-d4wmquf_zpsg9xydewz

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Ezekiel__s_fusion_wheels_by_solark-d4wmquf_zpsg9xydewz

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' WHEEL-WITHIN-WHEEL_zpsyczziosl

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' WingWheel_zpscrmd9mjk

Vision of the Divine Glory

And the likeness over the heads of the living creatures was as a firmament, as the appearance of crystal, spread out over their wings above. And their wings were spread out under the firmament, reaching one to the other; two wings to each, covering their bodies. And I heard the sound of their wings when they went, as the sound of much water: and when they stood, their wings were let down. And lo! a voice from above the firmament

that was over their head, there was as the appearance of a sapphire stone, and the likeness of a throne upon it: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as an appearance of a man above. And I saw as it were the resemblance of amber from the appearance of the loins and upwards, and from the appearance of the loins and under I saw an appearance of fire, and the brightness thereof round about. As the appearance of the bow when it is in the cloud in days of rain, so was the form of brightness round about.

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Ezekiels-vision_zpscffkpt3e

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Ezekiels-vision_zpscffkpt3e

Hollywood likes to mix in a little bit of truth hidden in plain sight in movies.

Is this a reference to Ezekiels Wheel in 2001: Space Odyssey?

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' 2001-satellite_zpshzspshfd

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' 2001-satellite_zpshzspshfd

Maybe the "Galaxy" on Orion's belt in Men in Black is a wink to the wheels as well

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Orionbelt_zpsz8dbxi44

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome' Orionbelt_zpsz8dbxi44

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:08 pm

Posted by susie on 09/19/2015

Interesting video that brings up a lot of dome reference.

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:10 pm

Posted by wyatt7mills on 09/19/2015

Jul 23, 2015 9:22:05 GMT Garner said:
Oculus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia › wiki › Oculus
Mobile-friendly - An oculus (plural oculi, from Latin oculus, eye) is a circular opening in the centre of a dome or in a wall.

Oculus Rift lol

I just did a quick google search of "Oculus Rift" and found this right away, "Here's The Final Oculus Rift, Coming In Early 2016" about a virtual reality headset on gizmodo... I hope that's just a big fat coincidence and not a coded warning... Random speculation and paranoia on my part, maybe, but the "d-evil's" in the details... gizmodo.com/heres-the-final-oculus-rift-coming-in-early-2016-1710650824

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:10 pm

Posted by susie on 09/20/2015

Lybian Desert Glass- Dome fragments?

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:11 pm

Posted by susie on 09/20/2015
I know Skiba is a bible beater but he has good references concerning the Firmament here.

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:12 pm

Posted by susie on 10/02/2015

Dome science??
Lots of maps on this too. Some we dont have posted.

Tesla information, Lightning, HAARP. It's all in here also.

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:13 pm

Posted by susie on 10/05/2015

The Firmament Documentary

WOW look at that lightning hit the dome!

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:14 pm

Posted by susie on 10/07/2015
faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/otesources/01-genesis/text/articles-books/seely-firmament-wtj.htm

The Westminster Theological Journal 53 (1991) 227-40
Copyright

1991 by Westminster Theological Seminary, cited with permission;
digitally prepared for use by Gordon College.

WTJ 53 (1991) 227-240

THE FIRMAMENT AND THE WATER ABOVE
Part I: The Meaning of raqiac in Gen 1:6-8

PAUL H. SEELY

STANDARD Hebrew lexica and a number of modern biblical scholars
have defined the raqiac (fyqr, "firmament") of Gen 1:6-8 as a solid dome
over the earth.1 Conservative scholars from Calvin on down to the present,
however, have defined it as an atmospheric expanse.2 Some conservatives
have taken special pains to reject the concept of a solid dome on the basis
that the Bible also refers to the heavens as a tent or curtain and that refer-
ences to windows and pillars of heaven are obviously poetic.3 The word
raqiac, they say, simply means "expanse." They say the understanding of
raqiac as a solid firmament rests on the Vulgate's translation, firmamentum;
and that translation rests in turn on the LXX's translation sterewhich simply reflected the Greek view of the heavens at the time the trans-
lators did their work.4 The raqiac defined as an atmospheric expanse is the
historical view according to modern conservatives; and the modern view of
the raqiac as a solid dome is simply the result of forcing biblical poetic
language into agreement with a concept found in the Babylonian epic
Enuma Elish.5
The historical evidence, however, which we will set forth in concrete
detail, shows that the raqiac was originally conceived of as being solid and
not a merely atmospheric expanse. The grammatical evidence from the
OT, which we shall examine later, reflects and confirms this conception of

1 E.g., commentaries on Genesis by S. P. Driver, H. Gunkel, J. Skinner, G. von Rad, C.
Westermann.
2 J. Calvin, Genesis (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948) 78-79. From the eighteenth century,
e.g., A. Clarke, The Old Testament (New York: Hunt & Eaton, n.d.) 1.31. From the nineteenth
century, e.g., G. Bush, Notes on the Book of Genesis, (New York: Ivison, Phinney, 1860) 33; R. S.
Candlish, Commentary on Genesis (1868; repr. Grand Rapids: Zondervan) 25. From this century,
e.g., C. E Keil and E Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament, The Pentateuch (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949) 1.52; A. R. Fausset and D. Brown, A Commentary on the Old and New
Testaments (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948) 5; H. L. Ellison and D. E Payne, "Genesis," in
The International Bible Commentary (ed. E E Bruce; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979) 115.
3 E.g., C. E Keil and E Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary; H. L. Ellison and D. E Payne,
Genesis, C. Gaenssle, "A Look at Current Biblical Cosmologies," CTM 23 (1952) 738-49.
4 E.g., L. Haines on Genesis in the Wesleyan Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1967) 26; R. L. Harris, "Bible and Cosmology," Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society 5
(1962) 11-17; W. C. Kaiser, Jr., "The Literary Form of Genesis 1-11," in New Perspectives on
the Old Testament (ed. J. B. Payne; Waco: Word, 1970) 57.
5 Kaiser. Literary Form. 52-57.

228 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

solidity. The basic historical fact that defines the meaning of raqiac in Gene-
sis 1 is simply this: all peoples in the ancient world thought of the sky as
solid. This concept did not begin with the Greeks.
The question, however, arises in the modern mind, schooled as it is in the
almost infinite nature of sky and space: Did scientifically naive peoples
really believe in a solid sky, or were they just employing a mythological or
poetic concept? Or were they, perhaps, just using phenomenal language
with no attending belief that the sky actually was a solid object? That is,
were they referring to the mere appearance of the sky as a solid dome but
able to distinguish between that appearance and the reality?
The answer to these questions, as we shall see more clearly below, is that
scientifically naive peoples employed their concept of a solid sky in their
mythology, but that they nevertheless thought of the solid sky as an integral
part of their physical universe. And it is precisely because ancient peoples
were scientifically naive that they did not distinguish between the appear-
ance of the sky and their scientific concept of the sky. They had no reason
to doubt what their eyes told them was true, namely, that the stars above
them were fixed in a solid dome and that the sky literally touched the earth
at the horizon. So, they equated appearance with reality and concluded
that the sky must be a solid physical part of the universe just as much as
the earth itself.
Levy-Bruhl, commenting on the beliefs of scientifically naive peoples and
quoting from original reports, wrote,

Their cosmography as far as we know anything about it, was practically of one
type up 'til the time of the white man's arrival upon the scene. That of the Borneo
Dayaks may furnish us with some idea of it. "They. . . consider the earth to be
a flat surface, whilst the heavens are a dome, a kind of glass shade which covers
the earth, and comes in contact with it at the horizon. They therefore believe
that, traveling straight on, always in the same direction, one comes at last, with-
out any metaphor, to touch the sky with one's fingers." . . . It is the same thing
in the Mortlock Islands. ". . . in reply to our question as to what land lay beyond
these islands, the native drew a line to the west of them and explained in a very
clear and simple way that yonder, beyond the Paloas Islands, the dome of the sky
was too close to the earth to permit navigation; the utmost that could be done was
to crawl along the ground or swim in the sea." . . . Among the Melanesians of the
Loyalty Group, "to the mind of the Lifuan, the horizon was a tangible object at
no great distance. Many of the natives thought that if they could only reach it
they would be able to climb up to the sky."
Such an impression is not peculiar to the races of the Southern Pacific. It is to
be met with in South Africa. "Heaven is for them (the Thonga) an immense solid
vault which rests upon the earth. The point where heaven touches the earth is
called bugimamusi . . . the place where the women can lean their pestles against
the vault."6

6 L. Levy-Bruhl, Primitive Mentality (Boston: Beacon. 1966) 53-55.

THE FIRMAMENT AND THE WATER ABOVE 229

Among primitive African peoples various stories reflect their belief in a
solid sky. The Ngombe say that when the two creatures who hold the sky
up with poles get tired, "the sky will fall down." The Nyimang say that
long ago the sky was so close to earth that the women could not stir their
porridge properly with their long stirrers; so one day "one woman got
angry and lifting the stirrer pierced the sky with the upper end."7
The Dogon tell of an ancient ancestor who came down from heaven
"standing on a square piece of heaven. . . . A thick piece? Yes, as thick as
a house. It was ten cubits high with stairs on each side facing the four
cardinal points."8
On the other side of the world, among American Indians, the sky was
also conceived of as a solid dome. As Levy-Bruhl wrote,

In North America, in Indian belief, the earth is a circular disc usually surrounded
on all sides by water and the sky is a solid concave hemisphere coming down at
the horizon to the level of the earth. In Cherokee and other Indian myths the sky
is continually lifting up and coming down again to the earth like the upper blade
of a pair of scissors. The sun which lives outside the hemisphere slips between the
earth and the sky-line in the morning when there is a momentary slit, and it
returns from the Western side in the evening in the same fashion.9

This idea of the sky lifting up and down, opening and closing a space
"between the rim of the sky and the earth" is widespread among North
American Indians, some of them believing that this bellows-like movement
of the sky caused wind. A number of Siberian tribes believe the opening of
the sky allows migratory birds to fly out of this world in the winter and live
"on the other side of the celestial vault" until spring. But birds which do
not hurry "are caught and crushed between the rocks of the sky and the
earth" when the sky closes down.10
Another common American Indian idea reflecting the solidity of the sky
is the story of a hero who gained access to the sky by shooting an arrow into
it and then another arrow into the first arrow and so on until he had an
arrow "ladder" by which he could climb up to the sky. There are similar
stories to this from all around the world. In a Chuckchee story a hero throws
a needle upwards ''as a dart, so that it fastens in the sky"; then he climbs
up a thread hanging from the needle. In Australia it is not an arrow or a
needle, but a lance that "fastens itself in the celestial vault."11
Still another element reflecting the solidity of the sky is the idea of a
window or hole in the sky. This idea is so widespread that one observer

7 S. Feldman, African Myths and Tales (New York: Dell, 1963) 39-40.
8 B. Sproul, Primal Myths (New York: Harper & Row, 1969) 61.
9 Levy-Bruhl, Primitive, 353-55.
10 G. Hau, Asiatic Influences in American Folklore (Copenhagen: I Kommission hos Munks-
gaard) 78-79. cr. Sproul, Primal, 197.
11 Hatt, Asiatic, 78-79.

230 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

concluded it was "a general human trait."12 The Seneca, for example, told
of a woman who fell through a hole in the sky bringing some soil of the sky
with her which she had clenched in her hands while trying "to hold on to
the edge of the hole" before she fell.13 The Navaho in their story of creation
not only mention a hole in the sky but specifically describe the solidity of
the sky:

They went in circles upward 'til they reached the sky. It was smooth. [They were
told of a hole in the sky.] They entered the hole and went through it up to the
surface [of the second world above]. When they reached the sky [of the second
world] they found it like the sky of the first world, smooth and hard with no
opening.14

The Cherokee clearly state that the "sky vault . . . is of solid rock."15
In the far northern reaches of Europe and the Soviet Union the primitive
peoples there also give evidence of belief in a solid sky. The Lapps say that
the North Star is a nail which supports the sky, but in the last days when
Arcturus shoots down the North Star with an arrow "the heavens will fall
crushing the earth and setting fire to everything."16
In Siberia the Yakuts say the outer edge of the earth touches the rim of
a hemi-spherical sky and that "a certain hero rode out once to the place
where earth and sky touched."17 In some districts the Buriats "conceive the
sky to be shaped like a great overturned cauldron, rising and falling in
constant motion. In rising, an opening forms between the sky and the edge
of the earth. A hero who happened at such a time to place his arrow
between the edge of the earth and the rim of the sky was enabled thus to
penetrate outside the world."18
Other stories could be cited, but it is sufficiently clear that scientifically
naive peoples around the world from the Pacific Islands to North America,
from Siberia to Africa, have perceived the sky as a solid inverted bowl
touching the earth at the horizon. Nor is this common conception of a
firmament merely myth, metaphor, or phenomenal language. It is an in-
tegral part of their scientific view of the universe. It is within the context

12 Ibid.
13 Ibid.
14 C. Long, Alpha: The Myths of Creation (Chico: Scholars Press, 1963) 46-48. Sproul (Primal)
also mentions an Islamic commentary which tells of boring "a hole in the sky" and an Eskimo
story of a bird which pecks "a hole in the sky."
15 H. B. Alexander, The Mythology of All Races. Vol. 10: North America (repr. New York:
Cooper Square, 1964) 60.
16 U. Holmberg, The Mythology of All Races. Vol. 4: Finno-Ugric, Siberia (repr. New York:
Cooper Square, 1964) 221-22. Cf. the Aztec story of the sky falling down from a violent rain,
in Hatt, Asiatic, 50. The Koran speaks of God holding up the heavens "so that they do not
fall on to the earth" (22.64).
17 Hatt, Asiatic, 63.
18 Holmberg, Mythology, 308.

THE FIRMAMENT AND THE WATER ABOVE 231

of geography, astronomy, and natural science that they really believe that
if they would travel far enough they could "touch the sky with one's fin-
gers," that migrating birds live "on the other side of the celestial vault,"
that an arrow or lance could "fasten in the sky," that the sky can have "a
hole in it," that at the horizon "the dome of the sky is too close to earth to
permit navigation," that where the sky touches the earth you can "lean a
pestle against it" or "climb up it," that the sky is "smooth and hard. . .
of solid rock, . . . as thick as a house," that the sky can "fall down" and
someday "will fall down crushing the earth."
Equally important, this perception of the firmament is not selective. It is
almost completely universal. True, there are occasional variations on the
solid dome conception, such as several worlds piled up on top of each other,
each with its own firmament; but I know of no evidence that any scientific-
ally naive people anywhere on earth believed that the firmament was just
empty space or atmosphere. The only exception to this is the Chinese and
that not until AD 200. Apart from a scientific education, it is just too natural
for people to think of the sky as something solid. So true is this that it is
generally regarded by scholars as "the usual primitive conception."19 One
scholar goes so far as to call it "a general human belief."20

I. The Ancient Eastern View of the Sky

Since scientifically naive peoples naturally conceive of the sky as solid, it
is no surprise that the records we have from the ancient East echo the same
viewpoint. Thus one observer of ancient Japan reports that the sky was
thought of as "an actual place, not more ethereal than the earth. ..but
a high plane situated above Japan and communicating with Japan by a
bridge or ladder. . . . An arrow shot from earth could reach heaven and
make a hole in it."21
Joseph Needham tells us the Chinese had three cosmological views, but
the most ancient one perceived the earth as an upside down bowl with the
heavens over it as another upside down bowl, the sky having simply a
greater diameter than the earth. The sun and moon were attached to the
vault of heaven, which rotated from left to right carrying the heavenly
bodies with it.22 Chinese stories mention heaven and earth being separated
from each other, tell us that the sky was once much nearer to earth than it

19 Freund, Myths of Creation (New York: Washington Square, 1965) 204. cr. Levy-Bruhl,
Primitive, 353, and Feldman, African, 40. ;11:')
20 Hatt, Asiatic, 50.
21 Ibid., 54 n. 2.
22 J. Needham, "The Cosmology or Early China," in Ancient Cosmologies (ed. C. Blacker and
M. Loewe; London: George Allen & Unwin, 1975) 87, 90-92.

232 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

is today, and speak of the place "where heaven and earth meet," ideas
which, if interpreted within their historical context, indicate they believed
in a solid sky.23
Interestingly, around AD 200 a school of thought arose in China that
posited that the sky was empty space. This is to my knowledge the first and
only time that anyone in the ancient Eastern world thought of the sky as
not being solid. So novel was this idea even to the West that as late as the
sixteenth century a Jesuit missionary to China wrote home saying the idea
that the sky is not solid is "one of the absurdities of the Chinese"!24
In India the earliest cosmology is found in the Rig Veda, a document
from the middle of the second millennium BC. It contains a number of
passages which show that Indians of that time believed in a solid firma-
ment. In one creation hymn an unnamed god is mentioned "by whom the
dome of the sky was propped up" (10.121.5; cf. 1.154.1 and 2.12.2). An-
other hymn asks, "What was the wood. . . from which they carved the sky
and the earth?" (10.81.4). Another says, "Firm is the sky and firm is the
earth" (10.173.4). Several hymns mention people who "climb up to the
sky" (8.14.14; 2.12.12; 1.85.7). Several hymns mention the separation of
heaven and earth. One says Varona "pushed away the dome of the sky"
(7.86.1; cf. 10.82.1).25
Equally important, the hymns of the Rig Veda distinguish the firmament
from the "middle realm of space," i.e., the space between the earth and the
firmament (10.190.3; 8.14.7). Indeed, the "realm of space" and the "sky"
were created from two different sources (10.90.14). The atmosphere is also
distinguished from the solid firmament (2.12.2; 10.139).26 As W. N. Brown
concluded, the universe of the Rig Veda "was considered to be composed
of the earth surface, the atmospheric region, and the sky surface."27
The Sumerologist Samuel Noah Kramer described the cosmology of the
Sumerians, the founders of the first civilization, in similar terms. The earth,
they thought, was a flat disc; heaven, a hollow sphere enclosed at top and
bottom by a solid surface in the shape of a vault.28 Sumerian literature, like
the Rig Veda, distinguished between the firmament and the atmosphere.
The Sumerians made this distinction by attributing to their air god, Enlil,
the original act of separating heaven from earth. Hence Kramer noted the
Sumerians believed that between heaven and earth was a substance called
lil or wind which "corresponds roughly to our 'atmosphere,' " while they

23 Wing-Tsit Chan, Sourcebook in Chinese Philosophy (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1963) 247-48; Hatt, Asiatic, 54 n. 1.
24 Needham, "Cosmology," 90-92.
25 The Rig Veda (trans. W. O'Flaherty; New York: Penguin, 1981) 28, 35, 64, 160, 161, 165,
26 (solidity of the sky); 36, 213 (separation of heaven and earth).
26 Ibid., 31, 34, 159, 160; Sproul, Primal, 182-83.
27 W. N. Brown, "The Creation Myth of the Rig Veda," JAOS 62 (1942) 85.
28 S. N. Kramer, History Begins at Sumer (New York: Doubleday, 1959) 77.

THE FIRMAMENT AND THE WATER ABOVE 233

thought of the firmament as solid, possibly composed of tin since the Sumer-
ian word for tin is literally "metal of heaven."29
We have no description of the Hittite cosmology, but we do know they
thought of the sky as solid, for a recovered text speaks of a time when they
"severed the heaven from the earth with a cleaver."30
The Egyptian Pyramid Texts (ca. 2000 BC) seem to speak of the sky as
being made of metal.31 Max Muller accepted this idea and went on to say
the Egyptians apparently believed the firmament was made specifically of
iron. He says, "This conception of a metal dome explains some expressions
of later times, such as the name of iron, be-ni-pet ('sky metal'), or the later
word for 'thunder,' khru-bai (literally, 'sound of the metal') i.e., thunder was
evidently explained as the beating of the giant sheets of metal which consti-
tuted the sky."32
Whatever the case may be as to exactly what material the ancient Egyp-
tians thought the sky was made of, they certainly believed it was solid. A
number of texts speak of the time when the sky was literally separated from
the earth. Pyramid Text 1208c specifically mentions the time "when the sky
was separated from the earth," and, although this was a historic event of
creation, Text 854c seems to imply that the sky was separated from the
earth daily in order to let the sun enter (a concept reminiscent of American
Indian ideas).
Text 1156c mentions that "his (Shu's) right arm supports the sky"; and
2013a says, "Thou art a god who supports the sky."33 Various of the Coffin
Texts (ca. 2050 to 1800 BC) reiterate these ideas of the sky needing support,
e.g., spells 160, 366, 378, and 664. Pyramid Text 1040c more prosaically
points to the two mountain ranges on the east and west sides of the Nile as
the "two supports of the sky." In either case the fact that the sky needed
supporting clearly shows that the Egyptians thought of it as solid; and Text
299a implies that if the supporting arms of Shu were hacked off, the sky
would fall. Also clearly showing that the Egyptians thought of the sky as
solid is the fact that they like the Sumerians and Indians in the Rig Veda
distinguished between the sky (firmament) and the atmosphere. The sky

29 Ibid., 70, 83. cr. S. N. Kramer, Sumerian Mythology (rev. ed: Philadelphia: University or
Pennsylvania, 1972) 40.
30 ANET, 125.
31 Adolph Ennan, The Ancient Egyptians (New York: Harper & Row, 1966) 5. S. A. B. Mercer
understands the text (305) as being more figurative than literal (The Pyramid Texts in Translation
and Commentary [3 vols.; New York: Longmans, Green, 1952]); but see J. K. Hoffmeier, "Some
Thoughts on Genesis 1 & 2 and Egyptian Cosmology," JANES 15 (1983) 45. Cr. RGG (3d ed.)
3.330.
32 W. M. Muller, The Mythology of All Races. Vol. 12: Egyptian (repr. New York: Cooper
Square, 1964) 35. Cr. E. A. W. Budge, The Book of the Dead (New York: Dover, 1967 repr.) ci,
ciii; and Hoffmeier, "Some Thoughts."
33 Cf. ANET; 33 n. 2. The Deir el-Bahri papyrus picture can be seen in IDB 2.57.

234 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

was personified by one goddess, Nut, while the air which upheld the sky was
personified by an entirely different deity, Shu.34
In Babylonian thought the solidity of the firmament is most clearly seen
in Tablet IV of Enuma Elish, particularly in lines 137-38 where Marduk,
having killed Tiamat, "split her in half like a shellfish, and from one half
made and covered the heavens." Or, as Heidel translated the passage, with
half of Tiamat Marduk "formed the sky as a roof."35 The solidity of the sky
is also seen in Tablet V:9-11 where Marduk "opened gates on both sides"
so that the sun could pass through morning and evening; and then "In her
belly he placed the zenith" (i.e., the Pole star).36
This brings us to the historical meaning of raqiac in Genesis 1. Everyone
agrees that raqiac means "sky," but modern conservatives deny the mean-
ing "solid sky" or "literal firmament." But on what basis can it be denied
that the Hebrews believed the sky was solid? Scientifically naive peoples
everywhere have believed the sky was solid, and there is no reason to believe
the Hebrews were any less scientifically naive than their neighbors. Since,
from a cultural standpoint, the Hebrews' pre-Solomonic architecture and
pottery were "vastly inferior" to that of their neighbors, one might gather
that the early Hebrews were possibly more scientifically naive than their
neighbors, but certainly not less so.37 Similarly, the fact that it was not the
Hebrews but their neighbors who led the technological advance from the
use of bronze to the use of iron (cf. Josh 17:18; Judg 1:19) suggests, if
anything, that the Hebrews were more scientifically naive than their neigh-
bors. It certainly does not suggest that they were less so. Nor do we know
of any evidence from biblical times that suggests the Hebrews were ever
more scientifically sophisticated than their neighbors.38 Accordingly, it
seems most probable that so far as the physical nature of the sky is con-
cerned, the Hebrews, as a typical scientifically naive people, believed the
raqiac was solid.
The voice of the past would also have had a strong influence upon the
thinking of the Hebrews as it has on all peoples and especially ancient
peoples for whom the voice of the past was the voice of authority. For the

34 S. Morenz, Egyptian Religion (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1960) 173-74. Cf. J. A.
Wilson, "The Nature of the Universe," in Before Philosophy (ed. H. and H. A. Frankfort;
Baltimore: Penguin, 1963) 55. For texts speaking of the sky being "separated" from the earth
and "supported" see Mercer, The Pyramid Texts, 299a, 854c, 952d, 1040c, 1101c, 1156c, 1208c,
1528a, 1778b, 2013a, 2091a; and R. O. Faulkner, The Ancient Egyptian Coffin Texts (3 vols.;
Wanninster: Aris & Phillips, 1973) spells 61, 160, 366, 378, 664, and 948. For a picture and
a statue of Shu separating and supponing the sky, see ANEP, 183-84, and E. Hornung,
Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt (trans. J. Baines; Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1982) 68
and n. 36.
35 A. Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951) 42.
36 ANET; 67. B. Landsberger and J. V. K. Wilson, "The Fifth Tablet of Enuma Elish,"
JNES 20 (1961) 173. M. K. Wakeman, God's Battle with the Sea Monster (Leiden: Brill, 1973) 21.
37 M. Burrows, What Mean These Stones? (New York: Meridian, 1957) 99, 140-41, 166-8.
38 See n. 41 and cf. P. Seely, Inerrant Wisdom (Portland, OR: Evangelical Reform, 1989) 1-9.

THE FIRMAMENT AND THE WATER ABOVE 235

Hebrews the voice of the past was the voice of the patriarchs and Abraham
in particular, men who most likely held the Babylonian view of the sky as
solid. The Babylonian background of Genesis 1-11 can scarcely be missed,
and if one were to date that background it appears to come from the time
of the patriarchs.39 Taken within its historical context, then, the probability
again is that the raqiac in Genesis 1 was understood to be solid.
At the same time Egyptian influence should not be totally disregarded.40
Not only did the Hebrews spend several centuries in Egypt, but Moses,
through whom much of the higher theology came (and who wrote Genesis
1 according to conservative thought), was schooled in the thinking of the
Egyptians. That schooling would certainly have included the assumption
that the sky was solid, a belief that forty years of living with a primitive
tribe (according to Exod 2:15) would only have strengthened. And, of
course, the Hebrews had a continuing relationship with Egypt throughout
their history. With this Egyptian background in mind we must again say
that probably the raqiac of Genesis 1 should be defined as solid.
It is true that Genesis 1 is free of the mythological and polytheistic
religious concepts of the ancient Near East. Indeed it may well be anti-
mythological. But, as Bruce Waltke noted when commenting on the higher
theology of Israel as it is found in Genesis 1, the religious knowledge of Israel
stands in contrast to Israel's scientific knowledge.41 In addition, the reli-
gious knowledge of Israel, though clearly superior to that of its neighbors,
was expressed through the religious cultural forms of the time. Temple,
priesthood, and sacrifices, for example, were common to all ancient Near
Eastern religions.42 It should not surprise us then to find the religious
knowledge of Israel also being expressed through the merely scientific forms
of the time.43
Considering that the Hebrews were a scientifically naive people who
would accordingly believe the raqiac was solid, that both their Babylonian
and their Egyptian background would influence them to believe the raqiac
was solid, and that they naturally accepted the concepts of the peoples
around them so long as they were not theologically offensive, I believe we
have every reason to think that both the writer and original readers of
Genesis 1 believed the raqiac was solid. The historical meaning of raqiac in
Gen 1:6-8 is, accordingly, "a solid sky."

39 K. A. Kitchen, The Bible in Its World (London: InterVarsity, 1977) 35-36. W. G. Lambert,
"A New Look at the Babylonian Background or Genesis" JTS 16 (1965) 300. W. F. Albright,
Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan (Garden City: Anchor, 1969) 91.
40 Hoffmeier, Some Thoughts, 45. cr. C. Westermann, Genesis 1-11 (Minneapolis: Augsburg,
1984) 22-47.
41 B. Waltke, Creation and Chaos (Portland, OR: Western Conservative Baptist Seminary,
1974) 46.
42 H. Frankfort, The Problem of the Similarity in Ancient Near Eastern Religions (Oxford: Clar-
endon, 1951). Also M. Smith, "The Common Theology or the Ancient Near East," JBL 71
(1952) 135-47.
43 Cf. Seely. Inerrant Wisdom. 1-43.

236 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

Only by taking Genesis l out of its historical context could one say that
raqiac means merely "an atmospheric expanse" or, as the more sophisti-
cated conservatives say, "just phenomenal language." In the ancient world
the sky was not just phenomenal. The ancients did not just refer to the
appearance of the sky as being solid. They concluded from the appearance
that the sky really was solid, and they then employed this conclusion in
their thinking about astronomy, geography, and natural science. The raqiac
was for them a literal physical part of the universe, just as solid as the earth
itself. Solidity is an integral part of its historical meaning.
When the original readers of Genesis 1 read the word raqiac they thought
of a solid sky. And so did virtually everyone else up to the time of the
Renaissance! After the time of Christ there were occasional dissenters, but
by and large Jews and Christians, Greeks and barbarians all believed the
firmament was solid.
Jews speculated as to what material the firmament was made of: clay or
copper or iron (3 Apoc. Bar. 3.7). They differentiated between the firmament
and the empty space or air between it and the earth (Gen. Rab. 4.3.a; 2 Apoc.
Bar. 21.4). They tried to figure out how thick it was by employing biblical
interpretation (Gen. Rab. 4.5.2). Most tellingly they even tried to calculate
scientifically the thickness of the firmament (Pesab. 49a).
Christians speculated as to whether it was made of earth, air, fire, or
water (the basic elements of Greek science). Origen called the firmament
"without doubt firm and solid" (First Homily on Genesis, FC 71). Ambrose,
commenting on Gen 1:6, said, "the specific solidity of this exterior firma-
ment is meant" (Hexameron, FC 42.60). Augustine said the word firmament
was used "to indicate not that it is motionless but that it is solid and that
it constitutes an impassable boundary between the waters above and the
waters below" (The Literal Meaning of Genesis, ACW 41.1.61).
Greeks from Anaximenes to Aristotle set forth as scientific fact that the
firmament was made of a crystalline substance to which "the stars are fixed
like nails."44 This idea was passed on for centuries via Ptolemy's Almagest.
The barbarians meanwhile worried about the sky falling on them if they
did not keep their promises!45
Astonishing as it may seem to the modern mind, with very rare excep-
tions the idea that the sky is not solid is a distinctly modern one. Historical
evidence shows that virtually everyone in the ancient world believed in a
solid firmament. Accordingly it is highly probable that the historical mean-
ing of raqiac in Genesis 1 is a solid firmament. Certainly anyone denying the
solidity of the raqiac in Genesis 1 bears a heavy burden of proof. It seems
to me that nothing short of a clear statement to the contrary made by an
OT writer could allow one in good conscience to set aside this clear his-
torical meaning.

44 P. Wheelwright, The Presocratics (New York: Odyssey, 1966) 63, 153. Aristotle, De caela 2.8
and 3,1.

THE FIRMAMENT AND THE WATER ABOVE 237

II. The Biblical-Grammatical Meaning of raqiac

Does any statement or phrase appear in the OT which clearly states or
implies that the raqiac is not solid? Does anything in Genesis 1 state or imply
the raqiac was not (or was) solid? The fact that it was named "heaven(s)"
in Gen 1:8 and birds fly in the heaven(s) (Deut 4: 17) seems to imply the
raqiac was not solid. But the word samayim (heaven) is broader in meaning
than raqiac. It encompasses not only the raqiac (v. 8; Ps 19:6; 148:4) but the
space above the raqiac (Ps 2:4; 11:4; 139: as well as the space below (Ps
8:8; 79:2). Hence birds fly in the heavens, but never in the raqiac. Rather,
birds fly upon the face or in front of the raqiac (Gen 1:20).
This phrase upon the face (surface) or in front of the raqiac is important in
that it implies the raqiac was neither space nor atmosphere. For birds do not
fly upon the surface or in front of space or air, but rather in space or air. This
distinction is illustrated in the case of fish, which no one would say swim
upon the surface or in front of the water (Gen 7: 18) but rather in the water (cr.
Exod 7: 18, 21).
Gen 1:17 also testifies that the raqiac is not air or atmosphere for it says
that God placed the stars (and probably the sun and moon) "in the raqiac
or the heavens." But the stars are not located in the air or atmosphere. So
we know the raqiac (in which 1:17 locates them) cannot be air or atmo-
sphere. Even if 1:17 is construed as phenomenal language, the raqiac still
cannot be air or atmosphere. For the stars do not look like they are located
in the air or atmosphere. Rather (as anyone can tell on a clear night away
from city lights) they look like they are embedded in a solid vault which is
exactly why scientifically naive peoples believe in a solid vault, and why
1:17, in accordance with that belief, says God placed the stars in the raqiac.
Gen 1:14-17 is such a clear proof that the raqiac is not air or atmosphere
that some conservatives have tried to dissociate the raqiac in vv. 14-17 from
the raqiac in vv. 6-8. But the statement in v. 14, "Let there be lights in the
firmament or heaven," immediately raises the question, What "firmament
of heaven"? To which the context immediately replies, the firmament of vv.
6-8 which was called heaven. The contextual identity of the two firma-
ments is really beyond question. Taken in context it is impossible to say the
raqiac of vv. 6-8 was just air or atmosphere.
On the contrary. For when God divided the light from the darkness (two
intangibles) nothing was made. But in order to divide the tangible upper
ocean from the lower ocean the raqiac was made (hWf). The combination or
dividing two tangibles (as opposed to intangibles) with something that was
made (hWf), a verb which often means "manufacture," implies a tangible,
i.e., solid divider. It would be unnatural to use hWf to say that God made
space. Nor is it a particularly apt word for saying God made air. If a
nonsolid divider had been in mind for separating the primeval ocean, the
idea could have been communicated in a much more natural way. It could
have been simply said that God put room (Mvqm) or space (Hvr ) as in Gen.
238 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

32:16 (17), or space (qvHr) as in Josh 3:4, between the two bodies of water.
If air (a word never appearing in the OT) had been in mind as the divider,
Hvr ("wind") could have been used, as in Exod 14:21, or hmwn ("breath")
as in Gen 2:7; Ps 150:6.
If the writer wanted to communicate the idea of a nonsolid divider, his
choice of the word raqiac was particularly unfortunate since its verbal cog-
nate raqac ("stamp, beat, spread out") is used of hammering metal into thin
plates (Exod 39:3) and hence suggests that a raqiac was something ham-
mered out, an idea consonant with both Egyptian and Sumerian views of
the sky. In addition a Phoenician cognate (mrqc) means "plating."46
Conservative writers usually try to avoid this implication of solidity by
stressing the meaning "expanse" or "thinness" for raqiac and pointing out
that Isaiah also speaks of the sky as a curtain or tent (Isa 40:22) or scroll (Isa
34:4). But in Isa 42:5 the earth is called an "expanse" (raqiac) without in
any way implying that it is not solid. So even if the raqiac in Genesis is
translated "expanse," this in no way implies that it is not solid. And even
though gold can be beaten very thin, it never loses its solidity.
As for Isaiah, he never says God made a curtain or tent or scroll as Genesis
says God made a raqiac. Rather he says the sky is like a curtain or tent or
scroll. His statements are always poetic similes, but Gen 1:7 is not a simile
(nor is it just phenomenal language). Gen 1:7 makes a prosaic statement
about the creation of a part of the universe, a part just as physical as the
earth, sea, sun, or moon. The statements in Genesis and Isaiah are not
really comparable.
We see then that Gen 1:17 and 1:20 testify that the raqiac is not air or
atmosphere. The verbal cognate of raqiac, as well as the use of the verb hWf
("made"), in 1:7 imply the raqiac was solid. More important, the purpose
and function of the raqiac imply its solidity, for it functions as a horizontal
dam (cf. 7:11; 8:2; Ps 148:4), holding back a mighty heavenly ocean. The
water above the firmament is not clouds as some rationalize (and we shall
delineate this fact more fully in Part II), for while the sun, moon, and stars
are in the raqiac (v. 14), the waters of the upper primeval ocean are above the
raqiac (v. 7).47 This ocean over the raqiac, indeed resting upon it (Gen 7:11;
8:2; Ps 148:4), tells us quite clearly that the firmament is a physical part of the
universe. It is not just phenomenal language as it might have been if Genesis
were a modern Western book. Rather it is an ancient Near Eastern concept
similar to if not related to that found in Enuma Elish Tablets IV and V
As for the rest of the OT, the word raqiac is used a number of times but
usually in contexts that do not help us define the word any further than
saying it means "sky." But in Ezekiel 1 the nature of a firmament is de-
scribed. This is the clearest description of a raqiac found in the OT. It was

46 E. J. Young, Studies in Genesis One (Philadelphia: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1964) 90 n.
94.
47 Ibid.

THE FIRMAMENT AND THE WATER ABOVE 239

a divider of some kind over the heads of four cherubim (vv. 22-25), and on
top of it was a throne with a man on it (v. 26). As to the composition of this
firmament, it looked like "terrible crystal or ice."
Inasmuch as the throne mentioned was apparently sitting on this firma-
ment (cf. Exod 24:10) and the firmament looked like crystal or ice, it is
apparent that the firmament is solid and is certainly not mere atmosphere
or space or simply phenomenal language. Nor does anyone to my knowl-
edge doubt that it was solid. Even conservatives admit the firmament in
Ezekiel 1 is solid. Having then this clear definition of a raqiac as a solid
divider, one is hermeneutically bound to interpret the raqiac in Genesis as
solid unless there is some clear reason to differentiate the one from the other.
As it turns out there is no reason to differentiate the raqiac in Ezekiel 1
from the raqiac in Genesis 1. On the contrary, there is good reason to
identify the one with the other. For we can see in Ezekiel that above the
firmament is the throne of God in glory (vv. 26-28) just as above the
firmament of heaven described in Genesis is the throne of God in glory (1
Kgs 22:19; Ps 2:4; 11:4; 103:19; Isa 6:1; 14:13; 66:1). Also the firmament in
Ezekiel looked like it was made of crystal, exactly the substance that prim-
itive peoples believed the sky was made of.48 These two similarities between
the firmament in Ezekiel and the firmament in Genesis could hardly be
coincidental. The firmament in Ezekiel 1 must be related to the firmament
in Genesis 1, and a number of commentators have made the identifica-
tion.49 Eichrodt, for example, calls the firmament in Ezekiel a "copy of that
vault of heaven." The NT confirms the virtual identity of the firmament in
Ezekiel and the firmament in Genesis by combining them into one image
(Rev 4:6; 15:2).50
We ought then on both biblical and hermeneutical grounds to interpret
the nature of the raqiac in Genesis 1 by the clear definition of raqiac which
we have in Ezekiel 1, and all the more so since the language of Genesis 1
suggests solidity in the first place and no usage of raqiac anywhere states or
even implies that it was not a solid object. This latter point bears repeating:
there is not a single piece of evidence in the OT to support the conservative
belief that the raqiac was not solid.51 The historical meaning of raqiac, so far

48 See nn. 46, 51, and M. Eliade, Shamanum (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964)
13J-39.
49 See commentaries on Ezekiel by W. Brownlee, W. Eichrodt, C. E Keil, H. May, and W.
Zimmerli. See also b. Hag. 12b.
50 Note the "sea"(Genesis 1) and the "eyes" (Ezekiel 1) in Rev 4:6. See also commentaries
on Revelation, especially by R. H. Charles. It might also be noted that although Exod 24: 10
does not use the word raqiac, it testifies to the solidity of the firmament as well as to the idea
that it was crystalline by saying that the "pavement" under God's feet was "like the material
or substance of heaven in transparency."
51 The conservative interpretation (if an interpretation that rejects the historical-gram-
matical meaning of Scripture can be called conservative) rests on two arbitrary assumptions.
One, that ancient men would conceive of the sky the same way modern men do (cf. J. Orr,

240 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

from being overthrown by the grammatical evidence, is confirmed by it.
The historical-grammatical meaning of raqiac in Gen 1:6-8 is very clearly
a literally solid firmament.
It is to the credit of E. J. Young that, although believing in biblical
inerrancy as much as any other conservative, he alone did not alter or
rationalize the historical-grammatical meaning of raqiac. In his Studies in
Genesis One he defined raqiac as "that which is hammered, beaten out" and
noted that "the LXX stererenderings."52
Additionally and finally, the historical-grammatical meaning of raqiac
possibly illustrates the words of B. B. Warfield, who said as he defined
biblical inerrancy, that an inspired writer could

share the ordinary opinions of his day in certain matters lying outside the scope
of his teachings, as, for example, with reference to the form of the earth, or its
relation to the sun; and, it is not inconceivable that the form of his language when
incidentally adverting to such matters, might occasionally play into the hands of
such a presumption.53

Certainly the historical-grammatical meaning of raqiac is "the ordinary
opinion of the writer's day." Certainly also it is not the purpose of Gen 1: 7
to teach us the physical nature of the sky, but to reveal the creator of the
sky. Consequently, the reference to the solid firmament "lies outside the
scope of the writer's teachings" and the verse is still infallibly true.

1544 S.B. 34th Ave.
Portland, Oregon 97214

in principle by C. Gaenssle, "A Look"). Two, that God would not speak in Scripture to ancient
men in terms of the ordinary opinions of their own day (cf. article 12 from the International
Council on Biblical Inerrancy's Nineteen Articles in R. C. Sproul, Explaining Inerrancy, ICBI
1980, 28-27). Both assumptions are contrary to Scripture (cf. Seely, Inerrant Wisdom).
52 Young, Studies, 90 n. 94.
53. B. B. Warfield, "The Real Problem of Inspiration," in The Inspiration and Authority
of the Bible (Philadelphia, Presbyterian & Reformed, 1948) 166-67.

This material is cited with gracious permission from:
Westminster Theological Seminary
2960 W. Church Rd.
Glenside, PA 19038
www.wts.edu
Please report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at: thildebrandt@gordon.edu

by Thinkforyourself Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:18 pm

Posted by susie on 10/08/2015

by Sponsored content

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'

Re: Flat Earth Advanced Lecture: 'The Secrets Of The Dome'