Sabitlenmiş Tweet
PureBloodPepe
9.8K posts

PureBloodPepe
@derekUNCLAIMED
Sharing The Obvious and Praying It Helps Wakeup The Normies #WakeUpAmerica #MAGA #TRUMP
Tahoe City, CA Katılım Şubat 2011
4.1K Takip Edilen4.6K Takipçiler

What’s even better is when idiots like @JermWar Jeremy are pantsed in from of everyone and they block you because all they can come back with is “your retarded” 😂 No facts, no rebuttal, nothing but their finger in their own ass😂 The evidence is all out there if they could only get past their own cognitive dissonance 🤦♂️
English

@JermWar @J0869715957026 @NASA @elonmusk It’s amazing how people
hate being brought into reality. Especially when presented with visual facts.
English

@JermWar @J0869715957026 @NASA @elonmusk The best retard is when the guy (Stanley Kubrick) who shot the first fake moon landing shocks the interviewer.
English

@JermWar @iposttechstuff Jeremy…. Being a booster shot hero increased your cognitive dissonance… Be Better
English

@geraldcelente Gerald simply doesn’t believe in Q or that we are still in a military operation. Which is opposite of Osavin, Derek Johnson or Ariel. So how is he the man…. ?
English

Trump’s “I” language. It’s all about him. - @geraldcelente
SUBSCRIBE TO THE TRENDS JOURNAL:
trendsjournal.com/subscribe/
English

The claim is incorrect and misses (or ignores) the actual Hebrew text of the Bible. The Bible does use a specific word for what English translations often render as “firmament,” and it explicitly equates that structure with “shamayim” (heavens/sky). Here’s the straightforward rebuttal based on the Hebrew, context, and scholarship.
1. The Hebrew Text of Genesis 1:6–8 (the key passage)
•Hebrew:
“וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים יְהִי רָקִיעַ בְּתוֹךְ הַמָּיִם וִיהִי מַבְדִּיל בֵּין מַיִם לָמָיִם׃ וַיַּעַשׂ אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָרָקִיעַ וַיַּבְדֵּל בֵּין הַמַּיִם אֲשֶׁר מִתַּחַת לָרָקִיעַ וּבֵין הַמַּיִם אֲשֶׁר מֵעַל לָרָקִיעַ וַיְהִי־כֵן׃ וַיִּקְרָא אֱלֹהִים לָרָקִיעַ שָׁמָיִם וַיְהִי־עֶרֶב וַיְהִי־בֹקֶר יוֹם שֵׁנִי׃”
(Genesis 1:6–8)
•English (literal): “And God said, Let there be a raqia [רָקִיעַ] in the midst of the waters… And God made the raqia… And God called the raqia shamayim [שָׁמָיִם].”
The Bible is not just saying “shamayim” in a vague way. It creates a specific thing called raqia (the word behind “firmament” in older translations) and then names that raqia “shamayim.” Your statement erases the word raqia entirely, which is the actual term describing the structure God makes on Day 2 to separate the waters above from the waters below.
2. What “raqia” actually means (etymology and usage)
•Root: From רָקַע (raqa) = “to beat out, stamp, hammer, spread out by hammering” (like hammering metal into thin sheets—see Exodus 39:3 for gold beaten into thin plates, or Numbers 16:38–39 for hammered metal overlays).
•Lexicons (BDB, HALOT, etc.) and the vast majority of Hebrew scholars recognize this implies a solid, spread-out, firm structure—not just empty air or “sky” in the modern sense.
•Ancient Near Eastern context (shared by Israelites): The sky was pictured as a solid dome/vault holding back an ocean of water above, with “windows” or floodgates (Genesis 7:11; 8:2) that could open for rain. This was standard cosmology for the time.
Modern translations often soften it to “expanse” or “vault” precisely because the original word carried solidity connotations that clash with modern science. That doesn’t change what the Hebrew says or what the original audience understood.
3. Supporting verses that reinforce solidity
•Job 37:18: “Can you, with Him, spread out the shamayim [sky/heavens], strong [חֲזָקִים] as a molten looking glass [cast metal mirror]?”
The sky itself is described as strong/hard like hammered metal—exactly the imagery of raqa. (Many translations keep the “strong” and “molten mirror” language.)
•Ezekiel 1:22: The firmament (raqia) is “like the color of the terrible crystal” (a solid, gleaming platform).
•Daniel 12:3, Psalm 19:1, etc., use similar language consistent with the ancient solid-sky view.
4. Why the “it’s just shamayim = sky, not solid” claim doesn’t hold
•Shamayim is a broader word (it can mean sky, heavens, or even God’s dwelling). But in Genesis 1:8, God specifically names the raqia “shamayim.” They are not interchangeable in a way that erases the raqia’s characteristics.
•The claim pretends the Bible only says “shamayim” and ignores the creation of the raqia as the separator. That’s not what the text says—it’s a selective reading.
•Ancient interpreters (Jewish and early Christian) overwhelmingly understood the raqia as solid. The Septuagint (Greek translation ~250 BC) rendered it stereoma (“solid/firm thing”), which became Latin firmamentum—hence “firmament.” This wasn’t a later invention; it reflects how the text was read for centuries.
Scholarly consensus across the spectrum (from BioLogos to creationist sites to academic biblical studies) agrees: the ancient Israelite worldview in Genesis portrayed a solid raqia/firmament. Debates today are mostly about whether we should interpret it literally as the author intended or accommodate it poetically/modernly. The Hebrew itself does not support “not solid at all.”
The Bible says what it says.The claim you quoted erases the actual Hebrew word
English

@bluntsnbongsss @nfnitequasivers @NASA @elonmusk This isn’t rocket science. It’s science fiction. Quit falling for it and vaccines.




English

@derekUNCLAIMED @nfnitequasivers @NASA @elonmusk Yeah sry I dont PAY for TWITTER LMAO, also again its TWITTER im not here for followers at all😭 lastly your god is fake and was made to help you understand things your pea brain cannot comprehend
English

@nfnitequasivers @NASA @elonmusk Because you can’t debate and probably to busy getting a Covid vaccine 😂
English

@totallyrealcvs @PinkFreudHokie @NASA @elonmusk Batteries that can work in extreme temperatures or Tesla would be using them today.
English

The claim is incorrect and misses (or ignores) the actual Hebrew text of the Bible. The Bible does use a specific word for what English translations often render as “firmament,” and it explicitly equates that structure with “shamayim” (heavens/sky). Here’s the straightforward rebuttal based on the Hebrew, context, and scholarship.
1. The Hebrew Text of Genesis 1:6–8 (the key passage)
•Hebrew:
“וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים יְהִי רָקִיעַ בְּתוֹךְ הַמָּיִם וִיהִי מַבְדִּיל בֵּין מַיִם לָמָיִם׃ וַיַּעַשׂ אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָרָקִיעַ וַיַּבְדֵּל בֵּין הַמַּיִם אֲשֶׁר מִתַּחַת לָרָקִיעַ וּבֵין הַמַּיִם אֲשֶׁר מֵעַל לָרָקִיעַ וַיְהִי־כֵן׃ וַיִּקְרָא אֱלֹהִים לָרָקִיעַ שָׁמָיִם וַיְהִי־עֶרֶב וַיְהִי־בֹקֶר יוֹם שֵׁנִי׃”
(Genesis 1:6–8)
•English (literal): “And God said, Let there be a raqia [רָקִיעַ] in the midst of the waters… And God made the raqia… And God called the raqia shamayim [שָׁמָיִם].”
The Bible is not just saying “shamayim” in a vague way. It creates a specific thing called raqia (the word behind “firmament” in older translations) and then names that raqia “shamayim.” Your statement erases the word raqia entirely, which is the actual term describing the structure God makes on Day 2 to separate the waters above from the waters below.
2. What “raqia” actually means (etymology and usage)
•Root: From רָקַע (raqa) = “to beat out, stamp, hammer, spread out by hammering” (like hammering metal into thin sheets—see Exodus 39:3 for gold beaten into thin plates, or Numbers 16:38–39 for hammered metal overlays).
•Lexicons (BDB, HALOT, etc.) and the vast majority of Hebrew scholars recognize this implies a solid, spread-out, firm structure—not just empty air or “sky” in the modern sense.
•Ancient Near Eastern context (shared by Israelites): The sky was pictured as a solid dome/vault holding back an ocean of water above, with “windows” or floodgates (Genesis 7:11; 8:2) that could open for rain. This was standard cosmology for the time.
Modern translations often soften it to “expanse” or “vault” precisely because the original word carried solidity connotations that clash with modern science. That doesn’t change what the Hebrew says or what the original audience understood.
3. Supporting verses that reinforce solidity
•Job 37:18: “Can you, with Him, spread out the shamayim [sky/heavens], strong [חֲזָקִים] as a molten looking glass [cast metal mirror]?”
The sky itself is described as strong/hard like hammered metal—exactly the imagery of raqa. (Many translations keep the “strong” and “molten mirror” language.)
•Ezekiel 1:22: The firmament (raqia) is “like the color of the terrible crystal” (a solid, gleaming platform).
•Daniel 12:3, Psalm 19:1, etc., use similar language consistent with the ancient solid-sky view.
4. Why the “it’s just shamayim = sky, not solid” claim doesn’t hold
•Shamayim is a broader word (it can mean sky, heavens, or even God’s dwelling). But in Genesis 1:8, God specifically names the raqia “shamayim.” They are not interchangeable in a way that erases the raqia’s characteristics.
•The claim pretends the Bible only says “shamayim” and ignores the creation of the raqia as the separator. That’s not what the text says—it’s a selective reading.
•Ancient interpreters (Jewish and early Christian) overwhelmingly understood the raqia as solid. The Septuagint (Greek translation ~250 BC) rendered it stereoma (“solid/firm thing”), which became Latin firmamentum—hence “firmament.” This wasn’t a later invention; it reflects how the text was read for centuries.
Scholarly consensus across the spectrum (from BioLogos to creationist sites to academic biblical studies) agrees: the ancient Israelite worldview in Genesis portrayed a solid raqia/firmament. Debates today are mostly about whether we should interpret it literally as the author intended or accommodate it poetically/modernly. The Hebrew itself does not support “not solid at all.”
The Bible says what it says. This guy is a fool.
English

@derekUNCLAIMED @nfnitequasivers @NASA @elonmusk You don’t even know what the Bible says. It doesn’t say “firmament “. It says “shomayim” which means heavens. It also means “sky”. Not solid at all.
English

@bluntsnbongsss @nfnitequasivers @NASA @elonmusk Says the idiot who isn’t verified and followed by bots 😂
English

@CertDoc @PinkFreudHokie @NASA @elonmusk Yet they made their own fake landings that were much worse than ours 😂
English

@derekUNCLAIMED @PinkFreudHokie @NASA @elonmusk It doesn't matter. I know how bad the government is. The Soviet Union itself is the most obvious answer we have as to why the moon landings were real.
Russia would have had every incentive in the book to prove it was a hoax. They never once did.
English





