Raqia debate : Psalm 148

Intro to Raqia debate with Drew Gasaway · Midrash part of Debate with Drew · Raqia : debate on 3 Baruch 3:5-8 · Raqia debate : Josephus (and Philo) · Raqia debate : Hezekiel 1:22 · Raqia debate : Psalm 148 · Raqia debate : Genesis Day 4

Below was part

of original status:

Drew Gasaway

Now we have next a Psalm of David that mentions the sun, moon, and stars and then waters above.

Psalm 148:3-4
"3 Praise him, sun and moon,
praise him, all you shining stars!
4 Praise him, you highest heavens,
and you waters above the heavens!"

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Psalm 148:3-4
"3 Praise him, sun and moon, praise him, all you shining stars!"

In other words, the heavenly bodies either are or are represented each by some living creature, exempli gratia an angel.

"4 Praise him, you highest heavens, and you waters above the heavens!"

Insofar as they are moved by angels around the earth each day, they can be said praising God when the angels moving them do so.

Waters "above the heavens" if not above all of them have been observed. Spectrography reveals interstellar matter as consisting of more H2 and H2O than any other molecules.

Comment by Biblical Spotlight

came before Drew posted below as a separate thread.

Drew Gasaway

Hans-Georg Lundahl there is no support in the text for your argument on Psalm 148:3-4 and the moon and sun aren't in the water which is a problem. The other things mentioned in that chapter are positioned differently.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

A Bible text is not a bare statement from those times, some are (if inspired in the actual sense of the word, not "inspired" as good poetry or even edifying such) bound to take on more meaning as some things are more understood.

If St. John was a prophet, he arguably knew who was going to have a gematria of 666 and what the name was. As it happens, we know his readers did not. It probably came as a surprise to him that Domitian had been succeeded by one - you could call him "M.NEPOYA!" - who as it happens had that gematria but was not the guy.

I do not know which of my comments you consider as having no support in the text.

Both have.

Angelic movers have support in tradition (and I know that better than you seeing your qualifications, mine include Latin and reading St. Thomas), and, here is the thing with concepts taking on more understanding, we know there are both H2O and H2 far up, and we know Moses had no separate word for Hydrogen and neither did King David. So, what word in Biblical Hebrew would designate Hydrogen? "Air" because it is a gas? Or "water" because if you mix it with oxygen and add a spark it shows it is instant water? Guess what "hydrogen" means in Greek?

There you have it. I do NOT have to prove that Hydrogen was present in the first readings and interplay between hagiographers and their earliest readers or listeners.

"and the moon and sun aren't in the water which is a problem."

You have no support in that text for calling it a problem.

"The other things mentioned in that chapter are positioned differently."

Mind giving an example, and telling why "positioning" would matter?