User Tag List

Page 110 of 110 FirstFirst ... 1060100107108109110
Results 1,636 to 1,637 of 1637

Thread: Isn't it reasonable to doubt Young Earth Creationism?

  1. #1636
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    6,147
    Thanks
    18,872
    Thanked 5,449 Times in 3,445 Posts

    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147586
    Quote Originally Posted by Derf View Post
    Thanks! that is helpful. But it makes TWO gathering of waters, not just one.

    I can't guarantee such quick results for my visual.
    Keep in mind that that's only a 2D representation, and the "gathering of the waters" didn't happen until after he put the firmament in the midst of the waters.
    @Stripe it's amazing how similar that is to something Bryan Nickel sent me in a conversation I was a part of recently on a related matter. I've asked him if I can share it, and I'm waiting for a response.

  2. #1637
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    6,147
    Thanks
    18,872
    Thanked 5,449 Times in 3,445 Posts

    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147586
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    By the way, here is an image I made ages ago that describes what we believe. I've been meaning to improve it:



    One day...

    Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by Derf View Post
    Thanks! that is helpful. But it makes TWO gathering of waters, not just one.

    I can't guarantee such quick results for my visual.
    Quote Originally Posted by Derf View Post
    Never mind about the TWO waters. I understand what you're getting at.
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Keep in mind that that's only a 2D representation, and the "gathering of the waters" didn't happen until after he put the firmament in the midst of the waters.
    @Stripe it's amazing how similar that is to something Bryan Nickel sent me in a conversation I was a part of recently on a related matter. I've asked him if I can share it, and I'm waiting for a response.
    Just got permission from Bryan, so I'll post my initial question along with his response:

    Me:

    Watched your overview video (parts 1-6 combined) on the HPT recently (what an excellent video you made), and was wondering if you have a model for what the earth would have looked like prior to the flood, as far as Pangea is concerned...I'm having a hard time imagining where it would be and it's orientation on the pre-flood earth.



    Bryan (to me, Doug McBurney, and Bob Enyart, who I CC'd in my initial email):

    All,

    Good questions. Not all that easy to answer with certainty as far as what pre-flood earth would look like. But I'll explain why I don't show where Pangea was and why I show the graphics as I imagine in the videos. I have been working on something too that I'll show some screen shots of below. Someday it and your questions may result in a follow on video.

    Pangea basically means "all land" is the idea that all continents were once connected and concentrated on one side of the planet as one land mass...usually shown with the rest of the globe as an ocean. In this Pangea scenario the continents are assumed to be siting directly on the dry mantle rock. No water under them. No "great deep" as HPT shows. Continents from Pangea are then shown to be carried to their current positions by the circulation of the mantle as proposed by evolutionary Plate Tectonics. HPT is quite different from the Pangea concept. So I don't refer to anything as "Pangea" because it has become so tied to the faulty concepts of Plate Tectonics and AIG/ICR's Catastrophic Plate Tectonics. CPT calls it "Rodinia" (Russian for "motherland") for some reason. I guess one sounds more credentialed if you give it a mysterious sounding name. Walt shows that the Pangea arrangement has a lot of problems...Africa is too small, Central America doesn't exist, N. and S. America are inexplicably rotated ad-hoc into Africa and Europe, etc. You've watched my videos, so I'm sure you know HPT proposes an entirely different scenario where the entire globe (not just one side) is covered by a shell of granite that portions of...would become our continents of today. I will not re-describe this as the videos show much better...and again assuming you already know. If I've assumed wrong...let me know if you don't understand. In any case, that's why I don't really bother to show where Pangea/Rodinia was ...because I dont' think it (as arranged and presented) ever existed.

    Now for what I imagine pre-flood earth to have looked like if HPT is remotely correct. I show this in the video:



    The idea is that if there was only half as much water above the granite (earth/raqia) shell and that shell had warped down in many places when pillars made contact with the mantle, then there would be much more pre-flood surface land and many small seas in the depressed areas.....no dominating, wide oceans. And it is important to clarify that these pre-flood surface seas all rode ON TOP of the granite continental shell. Not adjacent to it as Pangea/Rodinia shows.

    So day 1 would look something like this...



    Then day 2, the pillars form, seas run into depressions, and dry land rises up out of the waters. Of course the scale is all exaggerated so we can see.



    How many seas? I don't know. I seem to have imagined 20-30 in the video graphic but that is just a notional guess. Maybe we should give them all latin/Greek names and then.... Ha! Depending on how the granite flexed down there could have been less, or 2x-3x more seas than I show.

    I've begun to work on a graphic to show the orientation of continents pre-flood along with the pre-flood north pole orientation but it is very much a work in progress.

    We are used to looking at earth in the following orientation w/ the north pole (red) up and equator (red line):



    However, pre-flood it would have been oriented more like this along the blue equator line:



    As you can see I've begun to show the rough path of the initial rupture of the granite shell (transparent tan) and initial erosion.

    I've yet to figure out how to get an image to show how current continent shapes would have been closer together so you'll have to use your imagination to

    see that N and S. America would have been a few hundred miles further east and Africa/Europe would have been a few hundred miles further West. Both staying inside the transparent tan pre-flood plate boundaries.


    Anyway, hope this helps and did not confuse.


    Bryan


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us