Source of biblical flood water?

quote:

---

Thats the width of the Atlantic, from Africa to S. America - The distance the plates have moved.

​

Right, apparently. But say that was wrong...

​

Ahh, an evil conspiricy of athesist cartographers? Could be... Although I flew over it last year, and certainly looked big.

---

I was talking about moved in the flood violently there. Not the distance to europe!
In other words, how much heat would the thin pancake plate moving 100 miles on a lot of water generate?

quote:

---

So, move just 20,000,000,000, trillion tons of rock, that have been floating like a cork up till then?

---

Walty has them on pillars for support. The pillars broke and basically the water came up. So, yes, how much heat from a 100 mile slide, friction reduced by water, say 90%?

quote:

---

The heat in the earth is from radioactive decay - it drives tectonic activity, not vice versa

---

Bingo. Now I have something I can disagree with you on in earnest. That is a result of assuming decay rates now applied to the deep past. So, I assume then, since that is not the case, the heat came from somewhere else! That is the underlying reason I am trying to see how much heat is here, and how much sliding it took to get it!

that's 3,000,000 years. "fast" in the geological time scale, i agree. but make sure you know what you're citing. yeah, 3 million or so. oh. my. god. PLEASE. pleasepleaseplease take a geology class. please. you will enjoy it, i promise.india, as you may not know, is a separate continent. at the time of the dinosaurs, it was down by antarctica. then, somewhat "recently" this continent came shooting up north, and plowed into southern asai. so one area of the surface went from deep ocean, to shallow inland sea, do mountain range within a matter of 3 million years or so.you're not challenging a damned thing here. that's plate tectonics. where's the metamorphic rock? i dunno. could it be the stuff that was flat, and is now pointy? funny, cause that's what zechariah says. must be referring to a different guy who rides into jerusalem on a camel.

quote:

---

Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? [psalm 22]

​

Mat 27:50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

---

quote:

---

Mar 15:34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? [psalm 22]

​

Mar 15:37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.

---

quote:

---

Luk 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost. [no psalm 22]

---

quote:

---

Jhn 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. [no psalm 22]

---

now, i know you might say that say he said two things. but can't have said all three. luke reports he dies right after saying "father into your hands..." and john says he dies right after "it is finished." while ONE of these could conceivably be the thing he says in a loud voice that mark and matthew mention, the can't BOTH be. considering, especially that luke and john fail to mention psalm 22. which i think is a beautiful reference. so, one of these has to be wrong. which is it? in john. yes. john makes him out to be a liar. a man cannot be god. actually, i could conceivably deny he existed. there's no proof that he did. the jesus in the bible is not even consistent, let alone seeming to be an actual historic figure. the josephus entry is a well known forgery, and he was of so little consequence to the romans they didn't even see fit to record his death. so there's nothing that says he did existed.as well as that, ANOTHER jewish messiah roughly fitting his description WAS recorded as being executed a whiles before jesus's lifetime. his name is apollonius. said and did roughly the same things. and we have a record of him. we have a record of the messiah who laid seige to jerusalem, and failed. we have lots of records of lots of false messiahs. why not the real one?no, you see, i BELIEVE he was a real person. there's a difference between faith and knowledge. nobody knows if christ really existed. i'm saying it. and i'm not anti-christ, no matter the impression you may have gotten earlier. (i'll discuss my sense of humor when you can explain the joke in my signature) yeah, hey. i agree. but john doesn't. nor does paul. this is not a persecution complex. heck, i'm not even jewish. this is a historically documented fact that john belongs to set of documents reflecting the anti-jewish doctrines of the early christian church, from the period where they sought to differentiate themselves from judaism.it is also a historically documented fact that these texts have been used to justify antisemitism on a mass scale.

---

אָרַח

then why have them moving at all? if we're just gonna do a short distance, and pretend that god is trying to trick us and created it all half way, why move it at all? except that such a construction is contrary to basic geology, not to mention the bible.

quote:

---

Gen 1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

---

planets aren't as good as suns, but when you collect enough mass, it basically makes a big fission reactor. all the pressure at a certain point starts cramming molecules together, to the degree that the even though the magma in the earth is HOT enough to liquid, it forms a solid core because it doesn't have enough room to move its molecules about.but basically. pressure makes heat. friction makes heat. pressure makes radioactive decay. radioactive decay make heat too. see a trend going on here?the heat lets the crustal plates slide around on a pocket of molten rock. the friction of the plates makes more heat. the internal circulation of the mantle pushes some up. that drives plates apart. when the plates run into each other, some go under. that drives the mantle around. starting to get the picture?

---

אָרַח

depends. it sort of works in a cycle. the convection currents in the mantle push some magma up, which spreads the plates. the subducted plates on the other end help drive the mantle. and boundaries do create heat, which becomes volcanic activity/earthquakes.

---

אָרַח

(Deep breath)
I was talking about the amount of energy you would need to put into something the size of a large tectonic plate to make it move any any noticable speed.As an aside, why would a supreme being but a continent on legs? Although, after the platypus, I'm prepared to admit He may have sampled some of his finer mushrooms.

---

Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself
Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.

Well I was trying to keep things simple. But we've now got onto continents on legs. I wish I'd listened to my mother more often...

---

Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself
Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.

Interesting idea. However, the rates of decay are boringly constant. Always have been, always will be. Changing them would require some serious tinking with the fabric of the universe. (mucking about with the strength of the weak nuclear force, don'cha know). If you want to have radioactivity producing less heat, you'd also have to live without the sun.

---

Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself
Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.

well, that's ok. god didn't create the sun until the fourth day, and the plants got on just fine without it for a day or two. the book has daylight before the sun. how seriously are we supposed to take its opinion of the natural world? and why keep adding on ad hoc assumptions and what-if-we-just-change-everything's just to get it all to magically line up with a book that can't even agree with itself?after a certain point, we're no longer talking about the real world here.

---

אָרַח

I am curious as to where you obtained the knowledge you have displayed this far in this thread. Are there any particular references that you have read in the past that helped you come to your conclusions? What were these so that others might enjoy them.In particular, where did you get your information about the early church and the motiviations behind the Gospel of John?Are there any references about the history of Christianity in general that you can recommend?Thanks,

---

FOX has a pretty good system they have cooked up. 10 mil people watch the show on the network, FOX. Then 5 mil, different people, tune into FOX News to get outraged by it. I just hope that those good, God fearing people at FOX continue to battle those morally bankrupt people at FOX.
-- Lewis Black, The Daily Show

The history of the various John books, The Gospel, I, II & III John are an interesting look into the formation of Christianity. But it's getting way OT here. We've started a few threads on the subject but it usually ends up with me, Arach, Brian and one or two others talking to ourselves.If you'd like to persue the subject, you can try another PNT or find one of the existing threads. They're usually very short with one of us posting something and another going Yup.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

that's 3,000,000 years. "fast" in the geological time scale, i agree. but make sure you know what you're citing.

​

At the location of the Himalayas, millions of years ago was an enormous body of water. "

​

yeah, 3 million or so.

---

Well, dates I don't find impessive, based on present processes, like decay. Basically meaningless. The sun for example will burn out with today's rates, but it is going to last forever, so we know that process will change.
So, how do we know it was that long ago, aside from radioactive decay? Fossils? Ha. Nothing more than a migration pattern of most mammals, and men, and plants out from Eden, I'd guess, some things showing up later in the record, as they got there! So, fossils, and decay aside, what you got?! That's why I like to stck to the actual known facts. It was in water. period.

quote:

---

the "Ammonites" lost their natural habitat, or a body of water and became extinct.

---

Well, gee, some little thingies lost their old habitat, what would we expect with uplift, and flood, etc? Business as usual?

quote:

---

india, as you may not know, is a separate continent. at the time of the dinosaurs, it was down by antarctica. then, somewhat "recently" this continent came shooting up north, and plowed into southern asai. so one area of the surface went from deep ocean, to shallow inland sea, do mountain range within a matter of 3 million years or so.

---

Interpretaion of the facts, there, nothing else but opinion, based on old age reasoning. But no need to pick it apart, I already posed a couple dozies for you.

quote:

---

where's the metamorphic rock?

---

"In other words, the compression event thickened portions of hydroplates and created mountains.." In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - References and Notes
So, here he has the plate on water sliding, with the heat in areas as the friction brings it to a stop. The soft stuff, like in the continent itself, was compressed (horizonilally), so it thickened and some ranges were pushed up. So the metamrphic rock is where it should be, where the rubber met the road. The soft old seabeds, or whatever that raised as Rockies or Himalayas, were not volcanos, or something, just paushed up soft water logged, or covered (at least in some stage of the flood).
I admit, on the fossils and the dating I do feel confident, but on the precise method, and scope of tectonic violence and sliding, I am still looking for answers. But this general scenario seems pretty solid?

quote:

---

i know you might say that say he said two things. but can't have said all three

---

Why not!? It doesn't make that long a sentence! Put it together, maybe you'll see it makes sense, here then would be the last words, from your post."Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? It is finished, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." !!!!!

quote:

---

. this is a historically documented fact that john belongs to set of documents reflecting the anti-jewish doctrines of the early christian church, from the period where they sought to differentiate themselves from judaism.

---

Who 'documented' this? Personally I believe that the records were attempted to be expunged after Jesus died, and the veil of the temple was torn, revealing the ark was not there any more. Christian legend says it was sewed back up to try to hide the fact. This is why I think all records of the ark existing within hundreds of years were destroyed, as if it was some big mystery! Rev 19:11 I think it was, or somewhere in there, says it is in heaven, I think it was taken there when God's Son was killed, showing that He now is the only way to approach God. I also think that is why records of Jesus are pretty scarce. We do know that these same authorities tried to pay people to lie about the ressurection, and used false witnesses, so they were very capable, as well as well positioned to do this. But, hey I'd like to see someone disprove that one.

quote:

---

(i'll discuss my sense of humor when you can explain the joke in my signature)

---

If you want people to laugh at your jokes, you need to try to relate. At least it is a one liner!

quote:

---

the book has daylight before the sun. how seriously are we supposed to take its opinion of the natural world?

---

The book, unlike limited science, deals with a spiritual reality as well as a physical one! If it did not, and light was always like ours, how could it travel to distant stars so Adam could see it's light? Us, too, if it was 6000 years ago, as most stars are further than that. It illustrates that life can and will go on before our physical only universe appeared, and after it dissappears forever, and we again have a combined world of spititual and physical.

And just where did you get that tidbit?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Interesting idea. However, the rates of decay are boringly constant

---

Of course, I think most of us know that they have been constant since they came to be. They came to be after the fall, when the spiritual was seperated from the physical, and the process we were left with, in the physical here was a decay process. Before that, joined with a spiritual, the process was not a physical only decay process at all, but a different process altogether. One where things would last forever rather than die, and decay.

quote:

---

Always have been, always will be. Changing them would require some serious tinking with the fabric of the universe

---

Of course. The fabric of the physical universe is a temporary thing anyhow, only here since the split, and will cease to be as the new heaven and earth are revealed, or merged, when things again will be in their proper complete everlasting state. [quote]

quote:

---

If you want to have radioactivity producing less heat, you'd also have to live without the sun.

---

No problem! The sun will still be here in the new heavens. Like a pretty decoration, that lasts forever, but people in the golden city of God will have no need at all for it for heat or light. Different process altigether here, as I said.

Well, the bible does mention how the scribes and pharisees used false witnesses. It also mentions how they attempted to have people lie about the ressurection. There are a few other indications of their nature even out of the mouth of Jesus in there as well. The ark is said to be in heaven in Revelations. (I know some try to say it must be some symbolism or something, and not real, but I disagree).
The rest I got from logic, reading, thinking, etc. Since it seemed to amuse you, here's another tidbit.
I believe an exact replica of the original ark was made in Solomon's day. I think it was the one that ended up in Ethiopia, not, of course the original. I believe the reports of some who say it was secretly airlifted to Israel, back in the operation where they took black jews from Ethiopia to Israel. I think it is in hiding there, and would not be surprised if they use it in the new temple there, and maybe even claim it to be the real thing!? Hope not, but I am a cynic on some things. It would even carbon date to the right aprox time!