[geocentrism] Re: Adam and Eve
- From: "PETER CHARLTON" <peter.nambo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 23:06:12 -0000
The Flood waters came not from the seas, but from the waters that where above
the expanse, that is the water canopy, thats why its not there any more, thats
why human lifespans in the Bible suddenly went down from 900 years to 120
years, thats why one minute there where warm grasslands, and the next
quickfrozen so that the dead animals did not even have the chance to rot.
The scripture I previously quoted from Psalms also conveys the image of the
waters that where standing above the very mountains by the word of God.
Actually Allen, if we where together talking over a beer, you would call this
an exchange of ideas rather than an argument, :-)
Pete
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 9:34 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Adam and Eve
Oh yea one other thing ..If you are going to argue that the condition of the
earth staining in and out of the waters persisted on day 2, 3, etc.. after the
waters were divided from the land in to seas ..DAY 2 v6"Let there be a
firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the
waters".v7." and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the
waters which were above the firmament: .Day 3.v9 "Let the waters under the
heavens be brought together into one place (earth!) and let the dry land
appear." And it came to be so.10. And God called the dry land Earth; and the
gathering together of the waters called he Seas:.If day 3 describes/ includes
the condition of the earth standing "in and out of the water" ..Then how in the
world does any of that identify where the flood waters came from.....They had
seas before the flood and we have seas today !?
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Me in blue....
PETER CHARLTON <peter.nambo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Day one the waters where all on the earth, then God seperated the
waters that should be above the sky from the seas that should be below the sky,
I dont see how it shows the waters above the expanse where only in place on day
1 because it plainly states the waters came to be above the expance on day 2,
exactly..that is the point the earth was no longer sanding in the water and out
of the water that was the conditionof day 1 not day 2 and 3 and 4 ect.....day
two they were separated..below and above .which is a condition that is differnt
then staning in and out ...they were separted from the condition of staninging
in and out..that is the whole point of v 2 's separtaion of the
waters.....???...why would God spend a whole day seperating the waters if it
was just for the one day?Come on really why would God take 6 days instead of 1
day..all he has to do is speak it..? why is not a reason the issue is how he
did it not why....?.....look at the verse on day 2
7. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under
the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the
morning were the second day.
The waters were not separated untill the 2nd day wich by definition
changes the condition that existed prior to day two, on day on.."Let there be a
firmament in the midst of the waters, .the earth sanding in and out of the
waters"...did you notice there was no firmimnt untill day 2 only a formless
earth....standing in and out of the waters..the key "it was without
form".v2.......day 2 God created the firmiment via whcich the waters were
separated ..the condition of day one did not exist on day two. logicaly nor
scripturaly...
6 And God went on to say: "Let an expanse come to be in between the
waters and let a dividing occur between the waters and the waters." 7 Then God
proceeded to make the expanse and to make a division between the waters that
should be beneath the expanse and the waters that should be above the expanse.
And it came to be so. 8 And God began to call the expanse Heaven. And there
came to be evening and there came to be morning, a second day.
9 And God went on to say: "Let the waters under the heavens be brought
together into one place and let the dry land appear." And it came to be so. 10
And God began calling the dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the
waters he called Seas.
As for your previous e-mail where you say,"
5. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God
the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the
water:
6. Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water,
perished:
yes they were destryoed by water the means of the distruction. You are
confusing a sequence of events with the method of destrution which was water
not the condiont of the water itself....?. It does not say that the earth
was still standing in and out of the waters prior to the flood after day 2 and
even if by some wild imagination you construded that the flood itself was the
earth standing in and out of the waters..then you deffet your own argument for
the flood did not exist for nearly 1600 years before the flood...so if the
flood is what you are caling standing in and out of the waters then the
condition of the flood would have had to existed since day 1 of creation...!?
these verse outline a chonology of events from creation to the flood,
not the source of the flood waters...!?"
I consider the fact the waters above the expanse being mentioned in
verse 5 and then verse 6 saying the world was overflowed with water IS showing
these where the source of the flod else why mention it in this portion of
scripture?
And you said
if it were true that day one condition existed untill the time of the
flood you would also have to accept then that there were no annimals at the
time of the flood either..???
Why would I have to accept no aminals?, .........If you are going to
ignore the condition change from day one to day two then where in 2peter3
allows any room for the changes of the earth with plants & animals...you cannot
hold that postion and be consistiaint with the construct of your own
argument......BECUASE THE CONDITION OF THE EARTH STANDING IN AND OUT OF THE
WATERS IS SPECIFIC TO AND can only be demontrated without assumption to TO DAY
ONE...DAY TWO &THREE, EVERYTHING CHANGED WITH THE WATER AND THE EARTH...... THE
FIRMEMENT WAS CREATED AND SPECIFICALY DIVIDED /CAHNGED THAT CONDITION OF THE
EARTH STANING IN AND OUT OF BECUSE IT WAS FORMLESS.......after God seperated
the original waters that covered the earth in the first verse of Genisis by
creating the water mantle, verse 9 says the waters that where beneath the
expanse where brought together to form seas and dry land appeared, the animals
would live on the dry land, the waters that where still in place above the sky
wouldnt harm them, in fact it would protect them from the UV rays of the Sun
and cause a greenhouse effect ensuring the whole Earth was a uniform
temperature, hence the remains of tropical rainforest under the ice caps.
Exactly!... if all those things took place as you just described,... how is the
earth standing in and out of the waters that were removed/ divided and separted
via the expanse and seas !!!? each day of the creation naritive describes a
sequence of events that change the relation ship in this case water to earth,
You are attempting to force an imparitive on the condition of the earth that is
nowhere found in scripture wihout assuming it is true first and then
'interpreting" very verses that "support that view" to mean the very thing you
assumed, external of any and all nessesary inference ....?
Day ones condiont was changed via day two & 3.....period! Just like all
subsequent days changed the condtions untill the 7th day when all was
completed....The creation naritve is about the changes that took place on those
six days......The Flood is yet another change that took place again ~1600 years
latter..!?
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 6:43 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Adam and Eve
staning in the waters and out of the waters in Genisins as well as 2
peter 3 only applies untill day 2&3 ..what dont you understand..it was on thoes
days that it was separated out..? 2peter 3 is a sequence, it starts at creation
and goes to the flood but incudes all 6 days of creation not that day one of
creation was the same enviroment as the time of the flood..!? Day 2&3 the
condition that existed on day one with the earth stanind in and out of the
waters does not exist anymore .!?
PETER CHARLTON <peter.nambo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sorry Allen, Iam not sure what you are saying?
The way I see 2nd Peter 3 is that its likening the last days before
Christs 2nd coming, as to the last days of the pre-flood world at the time of
Noah, nothing to do with creation, but that the waters where still above the
firmanent until used by God to bring destruction upon a world of ungodly men.
2PET 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last
days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
2PET 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since
the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of
the creation.
2PET 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word
of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in
the water:
2PET 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with
water, perished:
So I cannot see the point you are making about contridicting the
Genisis accouint?, I consider it supports the Genisis accouint of the waters
that where above the firmanent untill the day God used them to bring the flood.
Pete
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 4:54 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Adam and Eve
Peter,
this verse is restating the creation account in order to the
flood it is not about the flood exclusivly thus you cannot make the argument
without assuming it is saying somthing about the preflood world...1 differntly
then the Genisis account and 2. without contridicting that very genisis account
PETER CHARLTON <peter.nambo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
2nd Peter 3 says the "Standing in the midst of water was the
source of the flood, "5 For, according to their wish, this fact escapes their
notice, that there were heavens from of old and an earth standing compactly out
of water and in the midst of water by the word of God; 6 and by those [means]
the world of that time suffered destruction when it was deluged with water."
A water mantle being in place one minute, then falling to Earth
would account for the very many animals, mammoths and the like, that have been
found frozen solid, but fresh enough to eat when thawed, with green grass still
in thier mouths, something happened instantly to turn warm grasslands into
frozen wastes before flesh even had a chance to decay.
Likewise the remains of tropical rainforests beneath the ice
caps.
The first appearence of a rainbow after the flood when
presumably the light from the sun would have appeared differantly, no longer
passing through a water canopy.
The change in the lifetime of man from around 900 years old, to
around 120 being now exposed to the full radiation spectrum of the sun, no
longer shielded by a water canopy.
Iam unfamiliar with the expanding earth theory so will look
this up and see if said model can explain the above points, better than the
Biblical given account.
Pete
Other related posts:
