E
- Status
H
heiscominginthe
Guest
Your dispute is not with me, but the Word of God.
H
heiscominginthe
Guest
You dispute the bible. It says there was water above the firmament. Give me your interpretation. I tell you it is as it says, water above our atmosphere/firmament.
H
heiscominginthe
Guest
BELIEVE the Word of God. Even before God created all the stars that light up in our sky, he created light and had it in place.
Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
OUR own sun and moon were not created until the forth day.
Genesis 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light on the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light on the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
J
Jacob_Fenton
Guest
Now I have no dispute with Our Lord Jesus Christ who is the Word. Yet I have a question from you: Can you tell me what Christians outside of the U.S. also understand these scriptures the same way you have been led to?
Please, I would really like to know what Christians outside of the U.S. understand the scriptures like this because from what I have been told by others, this understanding of the creation is an American Christian cultural phenomenon. If this is not so, who else agrees with you in other countries?
Please, I would really like to know what Christians outside of the U.S. understand the scriptures like this because from what I have been told by others, this understanding of the creation is an American Christian cultural phenomenon. If this is not so, who else agrees with you in other countries?
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Recession of the water to where? Where did it go?
M
matahari
Guest
Please, I would really like to know what Christians outside of the U.S. understand the scriptures like this because from what I have been told by others, this understanding of the creation is an American Christian cultural phenomenon. If this is not so, who else agrees with you in other countries?
There are some excellent Christian channels on satellite tv. in the UK. And, christians are having their eyes opened. Until a couple of years ago I hadn’t given much thought to Evolution v Creation . Like everyone else I had been indoctrinated for years to believe evolution. There have been some very informative programs by Ministries like AnswersinGenesis and others. The scientists are well qualified and they aim to help the layman understand the issues not talking " above your head" as many so-called experts do ! Quote of the week Evolution is dead, they just refuse to bury the corpse…
There are some excellent Christian channels on satellite tv. in the UK. And, christians are having their eyes opened. Until a couple of years ago I hadn’t given much thought to Evolution v Creation . Like everyone else I had been indoctrinated for years to believe evolution. There have been some very informative programs by Ministries like AnswersinGenesis and others. The scientists are well qualified and they aim to help the layman understand the issues not talking " above your head" as many so-called experts do ! Quote of the week Evolution is dead, they just refuse to bury the corpse…
T
Thing
Guest
Into the oceans and seas, of course.
R
rossum
Guest
The Hebrew word translated as “firmament” is “raqiya`”. This has the meaning of a solid dome, as in the sense of a beaten metal bowl. This is consistent with the standard ancient near east cosmology, where the sky was seen as a solid dome covering the flat earth. The same sense of solidity is also implied in the Bible, as at Job 37:18 “Can you beat out the vault of the skies, as he does, hard as a mirror of cast metal” and by the presence of “windows” [Genesis 7:11] to let water through.
Your interpretation as a gas seems to me to be inconsistent with the Bible. A gas does not need windows to let water through, nor can it be beaten out like metal. You might also want to read Noah’s Flood—what about all that water? (PDF), which is a creationist source. In particular the section about the problems with the Vapour Canopy model:Vardiman recognized a major difficulty with the canopy theory. The best canopy model still gives an intolerably high temperature at the surface of the Earth.
Rush and Vardiman have attempted a solution, but found that they had to drastically reduce the amount of water vapour in the canopy from a rain equivalent of 12 m (40 ft) to only 0.5 m (20 in.). Further modelling suggested that a maximum of 2 m of water could be held in such a canopy, even if all relevant factors were adjusted to the best possible values to maximize the amount of water stored. Such a reduced canopy would not significantly contribute to the 40 days and nights of rain at the beginning of the Flood.
Your interpretation seems inconsistent with the Bible, inconsistent with other Creationists and inconsistent with the world we see. I suggest that you find a better interpretation.
rossum
E
East_Anglican
Guest
There are some excellent Christian channels on satellite tv. in the UK. And, christians are having their eyes opened. Until a couple of years ago I hadn’t given much thought to Evolution v Creation . Like everyone else I had been indoctrinated for years to believe evolution. There have been some very informative programs by Ministries like AnswersinGenesis and others. The scientists are well qualified and they aim to help the layman understand the issues not talking " above your head" as many so-called experts do ! Quote of the week Evolution is dead, they just refuse to bury the corpse…
Most of the ‘scientists’ if not all are American and probably got their degrees (if any) from Ebay.
In certain Evangelical Protestant circles influenced by American Televangelists you find people who believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis and they are the kind of people who run the Christian T.V channels.
The Christians who believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis here also tend to be Dispensationalist and Zionist too. Both Dispensationalism and Christian Zionism came here from America.
I used to be all three of them things but Jesus lead me out.
T
Thing
Guest
I was amused to see that someone else had though up my explanation for the waters over the sky. I developed that idea of ice crystals in space in a 2 second blinding flash of inspiration while I was trying to think of a response to someones objection on this thread.
Nobody has yet refuted the ice crystal idea, and I look forward to the objections.
In that creationist article rossum mentions they made the basic mistake of believing that mount everest existed in Noahs day and that the flood waters could not have covered all the mountains.
However if you imagine that in Noahs day earths geography was very different. Adam and Eve earlier lived in a land which was one single land, I think, Noah inherited this land. The seas were shallow and sub-tropical, the land was flatish with small mountains - because the land was one the mountain-building plate tectonics had not kicked in.
So there was no reason to have tall mountains.
If all the water currently on earth was placed on the surface of a perfectly smooth earth sized planet then the water would cover the entire surface of the planet to a depth of 7924 feet deep. If say, half the water had been in space above the planet; and if the seas had been shallow tropical seas, and if the mountains were 2000/3000 feet high; then when the water in space fell onto earth the whole amount of water on earth would then have covered every mountain on earth.
After the flood the water in the seas was deeper than the water on land, and so, was much heavier. The areas of water covering the seas beds therefore sank under the weight of water.
This broke up the sea bed and continental plates. The weight of water pushing down and outwards raised the land area above the surface once more and pushed the plates apart, creating features like the mid-atlantic ridge and volcanism on the plate boundaries. And where the moving plates met again and collided they raised the high mountains we see today - which incidently, (to add a note of realism), often have coral fossils from shallow warm seas in their rock.
The water on land simply drained into the seas and oceans as they grew ever deeper under the increasing weight of the waters.
Voila !
O
Orogeny
Guest
Sure. Or Adam and Eve could have been aliens who brought the water with them from another galaxy. I suppose that if we are making silly guesses based on no evidence, scientific or scriptural, we can come up with all kinds of scenarios.I was amused to see that someone else had though up my explanation for the waters over the sky. I developed that idea of ice crystals in space in a 2 second blinding flash of inspiration while I was trying to think of a response to someones objection on this thread.
Nobody has yet refuted the ice crystal idea, and I look forward to the objections.
In that creationist article rossum mentions they made the basic mistake of believing that mount everest existed in Noahs day and that the flood waters could not have covered all the mountains.
However if you imagine that in Noahs day earths geography was very different. Adam and Eve earlier lived in a land which was one single land, I think, Noah inherited this land. The seas were shallow and sub-tropical, the land was flatish with small mountains - because the land was one the mountain-building plate tectonics had not kicked in.
So there was no reason to have tall mountains.
If all the water currently on earth was placed on the surface of a perfectly smooth earth sized planet then the water would cover the entire surface of the planet to a depth of 7924 feet deep. If say, half the water had been in space above the planet; and if the seas had been shallow tropical seas, and if the mountains were 2000/3000 feet high; then when the water in space fell onto earth the whole amount of water on earth would then have covered every mountain on earth.
After the flood the water in the seas was deeper than the water on land, and so, was much heavier. The areas of water covering the seas beds therefore sank under the weight of water.
This broke up the sea bed and continental plates. The weight of water pushing down and outwards raised the land area above the surface once more and pushed the plates apart, creating features like the mid-atlantic ridge and volcanism on the plate boundaries. And where the moving plates met again and collided they raised the high mountains we see today - which incidently, (to add a note of realism), often have coral fossils from shallow warm seas in their rock.
The water on land simply drained into the seas and oceans as they grew ever deeper under the increasing weight of the waters.
Voila !
Peace
Tim
T
Thing
Guest
Hmmm… well there is the theory that a mars sized planet crashed into earth ages ago; it possibly, my speculation, knocked half the water into orbit around the earth. Water ice and rock and metal particles might separate through some funky separation process due to the difference in mass of those materials. Lets say the rock and metals either flew away further into space because of their size or they became the moon or they fell to earth because they were more massive than ice particles, or a combination.
Lets say the tectonic plates drift apart because of the weight of water… instead or in combination with some as yet unknown type of magma currents under the crust and mantle?
A little bit of science in both and a little bit of speculation.
R
rossum
Guest
No, everything in the Bible up to Abraham happened on another planet. Remember that the Hebrew “eretz” means “planet” for all the flood literalists - the whole “eretz” was flooded which equates to the whole planet. However in Genesis 12:1 we read:Now the LORD said to Abram, "Go from your eretz and your kindred and your father’s house to the eretz that I will show you."So obviously God transported Abraham from his previous planet to a new one - the earth. We would not expect to find any evidence of the flood on earth because it happened on a different planet.
rossum
O
Orogeny
Guest
If that happened, it happened very, very early in earth’s history, well before there was any free water on the planet.
You can say that all you want, but you need to have a reason to do so and you haven’t give one yet other than to support the story of the flood. That is no science and all speculation.
Peace
Tim
O
Orogeny
Guest
R
rossum
Guest
T
Thing
Guest
You’re welcome!
H
heiscominginthe
Guest
Seems to me Adam did just as you in the garden of Eden.
- Status