30 Aug 13
Originally posted by menace71Yes it did. There was obviously a lot of water underground that God had released. I often wonder how that changed the surface of the earth with the release of millions of tons of water out of those aquafers and then with the unimaginable tonnage of water that came from the sky.
A lot of the water came from underground and that is biblical
Manny
30 Aug 13
Originally posted by Rajk999It's just a word that is used in describing the seperating of the waters that once covered the earth before God created man and it is a fair description. The point is it was cleary described the Bible in Genesis when it says "God seperated the waters from the waters" and it was after this seperation that land appeared.
What canopy? The Bible says nothing about a canopy in the first place.
And again....it rained for 40 days without stopping which would obviously mean there was a huge amount of moisture in the atmoshpere. You could not have that much moisture in the atmosphere without having it in the form of very thick clouds.
So calling it a covering of water or a canopy of water would not a wrong statement.
30 Aug 13
Originally posted by galveston75Moisture in the atmosphere is not a canopy.
It's just a word that is used in describing the seperating of the waters that once covered the earth before God created man and it is a fair description. The point is it was cleary described the Bible in Genesis when it says "God seperated the waters from the waters" and it was after this seperation that land appeared.
And again....it rained for 40 da ...[text shortened]... louds.
So calling it a covering of water or a canopy of water would not a wrong statement.
The word canopy has different connotations from just the separation of waters.
So the Bible says the waters were separated.
You renamed one of the waters, canopy.
From canopy you go to cloud cover.
From cloud cover you continue on to thick cloud covering the whole planet.
From there you conclude that the sun moon and stars are blocked out.
And you continue to speculate and assume with other foolish statements.
30 Aug 13
1 edit
Originally posted by Rajk999Canopy is just a word and the issue is not what wording I use. The issue is what is in the Bible and it cleary describes two waters or areas of water. One on the surface of the earth with all the springs included and the other is in the local atmosphere.
Moisture in the atmosphere is not a canopy.
The word canopy has different connotations from just the separation of waters.
So the Bible says the waters were separated.
You renamed one of the waters, canopy.
From canopy you go to cloud cover.
From cloud cover you continue on to thick cloud covering the whole planet.
From there you conclude that the sun ...[text shortened]... stars are blocked out.
And you continue to speculate and assume with other foolish statements.
The only reason I'm using different wordings with you is to try and find one that might work for you. I guess none do apparently.
And I never said that one could not see thru this water layer, "another attempt here", as yes on some not so cluody days you can see the shape of the sun and moon and maybe a star or two.
But if it's a big deal to you and you just want to argue about what the bible says, I'm not interested.
It actually seems quite simple to me as one uses his thinking power to see what it no doubt looked like if one was there in person.
The bible never said the water layer had ever been removed or disapperead from when it was first put up there by God. So common sense would say it was still there and is the same water layer that God used to flood the earth.
Simple? If not show me by scripture where it was not the same, had not always been there, and that it did indeed rain before the flood when man was on earth those 2000 years??????
30 Aug 13
Originally posted by galveston75You are such a blooming idiot its incredible.
Canopy is just a word and the issue is not what wording I use. The issue is what is in the Bible and it cleary describes two waters or areas of water. One on the surface of the earth with all the springs included and the other is in the local atmosphere.
The only reason I'm using different wordings with you is to try and find one that might work for y ...[text shortened]... , and that it did indeed rain before the flood when man was on earth those 2000 years??????
Canopy is a word that you cannot use. The Bible describes two waters and its not a canopy.. you fool.
31 Aug 13
Originally posted by Rajk999Will I like the word canopy and will still us it when I speak about this subject. If you don't like it, don't read my postings about the dreaded "CANOPY"...
You are such a blooming idiot its incredible.
Canopy is a word that you cannot use. The Bible describes two waters and its not a canopy.. you fool.
31 Aug 13
Originally posted by Rajk9992 Peter 2:5
This is the kind of comment that rightly leads the unbelieving public to conclude that Christians don't know what they talking... And you cannot blame them. The Bible says no such thing.
The bible said the people were evil and God decided that he had no choice but to destroy everything and start afresh with Noah and family.
and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly
Manny
PS a preacher of righteousness
31 Aug 13
1 edit
It is sheer speculation but Noah did not live in a vacuum he lived on the earth and it took him 100 years to build the Ark.....I'm sure people came to him in that time and asked him what the *** was he doing? He probably would of said "God told me to build this ship because He is going to destroy the world"!. This would be a form of preaching. Knowing the character of our God if any man would have repented God would saved that soul but obviously no one did.
Manny
31 Aug 13
Originally posted by galveston75My apologies for the hash language. Of course you can change the words in the Bible to suit you but then you are not better really that others who you condemn for using words like trinity, triune, etc etc.
Will I like the word canopy and will still us it when I speak about this subject. If you don't like it, don't read my postings about the dreaded "CANOPY"...
31 Aug 13
Originally posted by Rajk999I hope you are sincere and if you are thanks. And the word canopy is just a description to help and explain just as the Bible does with many things to help us understand.
My apologies for the hash language. Of course you can change the words in the Bible to suit you but then you are not better really that others who you condemn for using words like trinity, triune, etc etc.
The word trinity is a supposed doctrine that some believe and base their entire belief on and the implications of that belief could have the possible approval or disaproval by God.
Me saying the "world was surrounded by a canopy of water" would not have that same importance. If one cannot use a descriptive word as examples to help others understand then there are many such uses all thru the Bible and they would have to be removed also.
I hope you see the differance....
31 Aug 13
Originally posted by menace71Yes it cleary doesn't use the word canopy which I've admitted. But remember that rain had to come from something which we know has to be a cloud. That's the way it works as we see everyday on this planet.
I don't know about a canopy and the bible does not clearly state anyway. It does speak of a mist that would rise up and water the ground however
Manny
And not being an expert, far from it, but is it possible that 40 days of a "torent" could possibly come from the water vapor that normally exist in the atmosphere that we have now?
If someone could come up with some proof that it could, I'm open to learn.
But one cannot forget that water that God seperated was a real thing. And that huge amount of water up in the atmosphere of this planet was a very convenient water sourse to use for the flood.
So no where does the Bible say that seperated water in the sky above the earth had been removed or done away with by God sometime before the flood. It had to still be there and was used to cause the flood.
31 Aug 13
Originally posted by menace71Yeah your probably right. I'm sure many came to see him building this crazy looking boat thingy and had many comments about it. I'm sure most thought he was super crazy.
It is sheer speculation but Noah did not live in a vacuum he lived on the earth and it took him 100 years to build the Ark.....I'm sure people came to him in that time and asked him what the *** was he doing? He probably would of said "God told me to build this ship because He is going to destroy the world"!. This would be a form of preaching. Knowing the c ...[text shortened]... d if any man would have repented God would saved that soul but obviously no one did.
Manny
I'm sure it was tuff on him and his family to hear that daily and it shows the faith he had in Jehovah.
I wonder how one would react today if God told us to do something that wasn't the normal, out of place and not in agreement with the rest of society?