Where did the Water come from, where did it go to?

[Catherineanne]

So, tell me where I misunderstand the creation theory Genesis incorrectly.
If you think I am talking Non sense, do you perhaps have another theory apart from Immanuel Kant's Theory on the origins of the Universe based on Newtonian principles?
Or perhaps you should tell me where Nicola Stenno went wrong when he developed the geological column, geology, crystallization and dating of strata?
I mean Both the nebular theory of Kant as well as Geology of Nicola Stenno is the foundation on what science are constructed on.
And who should I believe?
You, or Newton, Kant and Stenno.

Or shall I rather leave you to choose?
What do you say, you or the worlds' greatest scientists?

When one of the world's greatest scientists asks me about this, I will tell them.

Meantime the Bible is not a scientific text book. Not even close.

 

[Daniel9v9]

This argument presuppose that God is somehow bound by creation, which is a fundamental error.

I make video games for a living. If I want to create a 3D world with water, I don't have to worry about how to get the water in the environment or what to do with it if there's too much. It's as simple as increasing or decreasing a single value. If I can do this effortlessly within the limitations of my tools, how much more can God change His own creation? It's true that He uses natural laws as means to do His will, but that's not to say He can't break these constructs.

 

[Job 33:6]

So, tell me where I misunderstand the creation theory Genesis incorrectly.
If you think I am talking Non sense, do you perhaps have another theory apart from Immanuel Kant's Theory on the origins of the Universe based on Newtonian principles?
Or perhaps you should tell me where Nicola Stenno went wrong when he developed the geological column, geology, crystallization and dating of strata?
I mean Both the nebular theory of Kant as well as Geology of Nicola Stenno is the foundation on what science are constructed on.
And who should I believe?
You, or Newton, Kant and Stenno.

Or shall I rather leave you to choose?
What do you say, you or the worlds' greatest scientists?

Here is a simple problem.

There is no mathematical way for entire continents to move the distances that they have, and to push one another up into the atmosphere, in such a brief time (150 days or less). Further, we would have to ask, how you would find things like cyclothems or repeated trans and regressive geologic features, with intermittent fracture systems formed in hard rock, and formed in rocks of various metamorphosed and non metamorphosed types, within.

The physics behind your proposal just doesnt make any sense.

 

[Reno Raines]

As someone who has studied, researched, and lectured on astro\geo physics in three different countires over the last decade I can say with no false modesty that, you sir, are incorrect.
Faith is one thing, poorly concieved fake science is quite another

 

[Piet Strydom]

Meantime the Bible is not a scientific text book. Not even close.

Oh, but I can not aggree more with your statement.
Indeed, the Bible is not a book of science, and I never claimed that it is.
What I do however claim is that anyone that dismisses the Bible as a contradiction with science, are making a huge mistake.
If one looks at Hawking, Guth, Neil de Grasse, Singer, Dawkins, and all their great atheist friends that don't bother to blaspheme against the God of the Bible and tries to belittle every Christian for believing in the Bible, then I will ask an alternative to the Biblical explanation.

Guess what then, they can not do it, they tell me they will only speak to scientists.
Please don't you also go that way.
Now, I dont want to teach scientists their jobs, for I am not educated enough to do so. But I investigated on their claims and found that the so called evidence they use to discard the Biblical explanation on how the Creator made the Universe, IS THE EXACT THEORIES THAT WAS TAKEN FROM THE BIBLE THAT WAS DEVELOPED INTO THEIR VERY SCIENCE THEY HOLD SO DEER. ONCE THEY REALIZE THAT CHRISTIANS HAVE THEIR SCIENCE IN WRITTEN FORM DATING MORE THAN 2 000 AGO, THEY ARE SILENT.

Again, all I do is to show Christians they dont have to be ashamed of their Bible and its contents, because Atheism has nothing to compare with it.
Greetings

 

[Piet Strydom]

I love your argument. And you are very sharp in your thinking indeed

This argument presuppose that God is somehow bound by creation, which is a fundamental error.

Yes, God can not be bound by creation and if I made it off as a naturalistic explanation on How the Universe and Solar system came together, then you are correct indeed.

What I did then was to play into the hands of the Atheist to supply him with a methodology that God was not needed to create everything.

However, this is not the intend of my theory.
What I did is to show the Atheist and Islamic scholar's accusation that ...
[Quote="Zakir Naik in his debate with Campbell in 2000]"The Author of the Bible could not have created the Universe, for He gave an explanation that does not correspond to science at all..."[/Quote]

Once the criticizer of the Bible sees that the Christian can answer them with the fact that the description given by the BIBLE ON THE ORIGINS OF THE UNIVERSE, THEY RUN!
No matter if the naturalistic explanation in the Bible might not be metaphysical, it remains a shock when the Atheist learns that their science comes from an ancient religious book.
They hate it!

 

[MyGivenNameIsKeith]

This argument presuppose that God is somehow bound by creation, which is a fundamental error.

I make video games for a living. If I want to create a 3D world with water, I don't have to worry about how to get the water in the environment or what to do with it if there's too much. It's as simple as increasing or decreasing a single value. If I can do this effortlessly within the limitations of my tools, how much more can God change His own creation? It's true that He uses natural laws as means to do His will, but that's not to say He can't break these constructs.

While it is easier to validate such an argument to fit models that we cannot explain, it is more probable that God used the constructs he made and then shaped them to the ends that he created them for, eliminating the need to add more stuff to it just because. I agree that God is not bound by the parameters that he set, nor by the creation which he made. But He knew he would need the material, so why wouldn't he make it when he made everything else? And his word is something we can trust and he had never changed his word. Which is why you can believe the very first verse of scripture. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. This includes everything he would ever need for the whole of creation. It doesn't say, God created some of the heavens and some of the earth. Earth isn't a video game, btw.

 

[Piet Strydom]

As someone who has studied, researched, and lectured on astro\geo physics in three different countires over the last decade I can say with no false modesty that, you sir, are incorrect.
Faith is one thing, poorly concieved fake science is quite another

From my point of view...
for someone who have been speaking to Christians, Atheists, Agnostics, Muslim scholars, and Scientists for 10 years on the nebular theory that was described by Kant with the use of Newton, and proven by Hubble; I can say with no false Modesty that I might be wrong, but...
Damn, the Atheists, and Muslims and Atheistic scientists ran away when I showed them their science came from the Bible.

It is hilarious to see, not only the shock on their faces, but the reply of "I never knew about this?!"
And the running away, that is the best payment I received.
Perhaps you would like to show me why you regard the nebular theory as fake science, or do you think that because a Christian believes in the Biblical explanation on how God created it all, he must be wrong.
Dear friend. If you do not believe in what the Bible claims as a revelation and history recorded by men about God, it is your problem.
From my side, I dont believe in God!
I dont have to believe in someone that I have evidence of his existence.
I dont only know Him, but have His Word in my hands.
Greetings.

 

[Piet Strydom]

While it is easier to validate such an argument to fit models that we cannot explain, it is more probable that God used the constructs he made and then shaped them to the ends that he created them for, eliminating the need to add more stuff to it just because. I agree that God is not bound by the parameters that he set, nor by the creation which he made. But He knew he would need the material, so why wouldn't he make it when he made everything else? And his word is something we can trust and he had never changed his word. Which is why you can believe the very first verse of scripture. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. This includes everything he would ever need for the whole of creation. It doesn't say, God created some of the heavens and some of the earth. Earth isn't a video game, btw.

And to further the logic.
Why did God not make other water when He made the Fish and Birds, or why did he not make new Mud when he made the Animals and Adam, or why did he not use Mud, but flesh from a previous creation to make Eve.
Well, personally I think that He had all right to use the matter He already had when he created the next thing.
Space dust, Nebular cloud, Gravity, proto planet, Mud Ball Earth, Atmosphere, land and Sea, animals and humans...all from the original matter God created in the beginning.
No problem.

 

[Daniel9v9]

While it is easier to validate such an argument to fit models that we cannot explain, it is more probable that God used the constructs he made and then shaped them to the ends that he created them for, eliminating the need to add more stuff to it just because. I agree that God is not bound by the parameters that he set, nor by the creation which he made. But He knew he would need the material, so why wouldn't he make it when he made everything else? And his word is something we can trust and he had never changed his word. Which is why you can believe the very first verse of scripture. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. This includes everything he would ever need for the whole of creation. It doesn't say, God created some of the heavens and some of the earth. Earth isn't a video game, btw.

I think you're missing my point. All I'm saying is that God can do anything. On the basis of this, we shouldn't have to worry about how something is possible, when in fact everything is possible for God.

Examples of this could be when God provided manna, or Jesus' feeding of the masses. Though perhaps some modern liberal scholars hold to scientific or natural explanations of these events, the traditional view is that the Bible presents them simply as supernatural. viz. Jesus didn't collect food himself, but he miraculously multiplied and provided what little they had. That is to say, we don't have to worry about how or where the provision came from, for they simply came from God. This is exactly my point: That while God does use nature for carrying out His will, He's most certainly not bound by nature, but can instead do the seemingly impossible; such as the ultimate miracle in delivering from death and sin, through Jesus Christ.

 

[dqhall]

If there is one biblical narrative within the Bible many scientists disagrees with, or even use as evidence that the Bible should be discarded on its explanation of science, it is definitely the Great Flood, or as it is better known, Noah's flood.

I mean, how is it possible that the whole earth was covered with water deeper than the highest mountain? Everest is 8850 meters above sea level and if the Earth was covered over its entire surface to more than 8850 meters, where is this water now? the earth contains thousands of times less water than what this description claims to have been.
So, where did this water come from, and where did it go to?

I saw many documentaries where scientists asked this question, and it is claimed that no one answered up until now.
Well, lets just say the Christian Bible believer was never given the chance to answer!

I will give my 5c worth, and hope to show everyone that it is not the Bible that is wrong, but the Atheist that interpreted something quite different from what the Bible says about the origins and history of the Earth.
And the Bible actually gives a solid scientific conclusion in its description of a global flood.

Noah's ark was not big enough to accommodate all the species of the world such as kangaroos, penguins, giraffes, porcupines, camels, grizzly bears, panda bears, 30,000,000 species of insects, turtles, lizards, pythons, prairie dogs, panthers, hippos, cave crickets, etc. There would not have been enough food to feed them all. Why would God kill off 99.99% of mankind, but keep lions, tigers, mosquitoes and biting flies? Are animals not holier than mankind? What are the results of single family inbreeding? It is incest. God did not write Genesis. The story of Noah is merely a tale. Geologists found more evidence of glaciers covering much of New England 12,000 years ago than for a global deluge. God is truth, this Noah story is not true.

 

[JoeP222w]

While there is ample scientific evidence that the entire earth was NOT flooded, there are also biblical and spiritual reasons this did not happen. I find it likely that a great flood DID occur--certainly one large enough to impress upon the primitive people who lived in Noah's age. Before man learned how vast the world is (and that it is round), would not a flood large enough to wash out a valley or settlement seem very large indeed? Oral histories featured in the old testament, handed down over the ages by mouth, very likely were based upon some factual events.
Jesus came to our world to reveal the great truth of a loving Father in Heaven and the brotherhood of man. Where in Jesus' teachings and revelations does one find an angry, brutal God, willing and capable of slaughtering every man, woman and child in a great flood? In the light of Jesus' teaching, we can see that God would never do such things. The story of Noah is a reflection of a more primitive understanding of God. Primitive man was awe-stricken by power--especially the apparent arbitrary, yet spectacular forces of nature. He was not yet ready to embrace the concept of a loving Father.

God does not change. You need to go back and read the Bible much more carefully. God has a righteous and holy wrath against sin. Jesus warned of the coming wrath.



Matthew 24:37-39 For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. (38) For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, (39) and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

Matthew 3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

Matthew 12:34-37 You brood of vipers! How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. (35) The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. (36) I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, (37) for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

Matthew 5:22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.

Matthew 5:29-30 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. (30) And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.

Matthew 7:21-23 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. (22) On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ (23) And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

Matthew 8:11-12 I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, (12) while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

Matthew 11:21-24 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. (22) But I tell you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for Tyre and Sidon than for you. (23) And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You will be brought down to Hades. For if the mighty works done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. (24) But I tell you that it will be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom than for you.”

Luke 13:3-5 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. (4) Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? (5) No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”


and many more passages...

 

[MyGivenNameIsKeith]

Many people who claim they can show how the earth was created and the process by which it is done, somehow have a day zero. This is the method you show. Biblically that is unsound.
Scripture on the other hand..
Day 1 is the beginning. In it God creates the heavens and the earth. In verse two we see "waters", however most assume that waters here is in a form we are familiar with, vapor, solid, liquid, plasma....
When in the same verse, the earth was "formless", beyond and before the established order of today. After all, he does separate the dry land and the seas from the same "material" in Genesis 1:9. One has to slow down to really appreciate the complexity of how he did what he did and grasp what is said.

On being more pertinent to the OP, might I point out, that until the flood (the Great Deluge, Noah's flood) it had not rained on earth?
There are lakes that did not form until after the flood.
Some of the waters that came from the flood, whether they be through the "windows of heaven" or the "fountains of the deep" were froze when those waters were assuaged. Some of this is evident with the ice at the north and south poles. It is not all-inclusive of course, as there are many other variations of water form throughout the earth. After all, when the rain cycles began, typically, water to some extent is in the sky, some on the ground, under the earth, etc. Even in Genesis 10:25 it could possibly be surmised that the continents were divided at this time, which was a result of the massive amount of water that had been upon the earth at once. This could have increased the number of places for water to go. Also keep in mind that trees, other plants, and animals contain water. For example, the human body is composed of 65% water. For 100 pounds of person, 65 pounds would be water.

 

[MyGivenNameIsKeith]

I think you're missing my point. All I'm saying is that God can do anything. On the basis of this, we shouldn't have to worry about how something is possible, when in fact everything is possible for God.

Examples of this could be when God provided manna, or Jesus' feeding of the masses. Though perhaps some modern liberal scholars hold to scientific or natural explanations of these events, the traditional view is that the Bible presents them simply as supernatural. viz. Jesus didn't collect food himself, but he miraculously multiplied and provided what little they had. That is to say, we don't have to worry about how or where the provision came from, for they simply came from God. This is exactly my point: That while God does use nature for carrying out His will, He's most certainly not bound by nature, but can instead do the seemingly impossible; such as the ultimate miracle in delivering from death and sin, through Jesus Christ.

All because God can do anything doesn't mean he sits in heaven with a magnifying glass frying ants and breaks his word just because he can.

 

[MyGivenNameIsKeith]

Noah's ark was not big enough to accommodate all the species of the world such as kangaroos, penguins, giraffes, porcupines, camels, grizzly bears, panda bears, 30,000,000 species of insects, turtles, lizards, pythons, prairie dogs, panthers, hippos, cave crickets, etc. There would not have been enough food to feed them all. Why would God kill off 99.99% of mankind, but keep lions, tigers, mosquitoes and biting flies? Are animals not holier than mankind? What are the results of single family inbreeding? It is incest. God did not write Genesis. The story of Noah is merely a tale. Geologists found more evidence of glaciers covering much of New England 12,000 years ago than for a global deluge. God is truth, this Noah story is not true.

And what did Jesus tell us? That we were to become as children? One thing that was never lost on me was the fact that children have such large imaginations. They can literally see how God is real. In much the same way, with an imagination, it isn't that hard to fathom how the ark housed the creatures of the planet that were to survive the flood. Rather than studying why it wasn't possible, try trusting what he said. Rely not on your own understanding. A good verse for context would be, "Be fruitful and multiply". You may not need 7.7 million different species on the ark as any non-believer would have you believe had to have happened. Just the seven pairs that would be the progenitors of several hundred species, etc... after all, dog, wolf, husky, etc... they could all be contained within a few pairs. Cats etc... I mean I am just spit-balling at this point, but you see how to some degree, it could be possible.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

So, where did this water come from, and where did it go to?

I've heard that one before. It's the demand that we prove that a miracle is not a miracle. I've got two good reasons for not answering it:

1) If we could find scientific evidence for where the water came from and where it went, and all of the processes involved, it would cease to be a miracle. The atheists would go from claiming that it never happened to claiming that it happened as a result of natural phenomena, and we merely concocted a religious story to explain it. It's a lose-lose situation, crafted ingeniously, not by people who want proof, but by people determined not to believe.

2) Any attempt at such an explanation would invite all kinds of twisted logic and bad science, like the garbage we've been fed all throughout our school years, courtesy of inventive Mr. Atheist. We have the crazy physics of how the radial motion of a universal explosion gives rise to the meticulous tangential motion of orbiting heavenly bodies. We have the insane explanation of how a rock engineered itself into a human life. Now, you want us to write a fable called, "Where did all the water go?" (sung to the tune of Where Have All the Flowers Gone, by Peter, Paul and Mary).

Nope. That's not my genre.

 

[Strider1002]

Uh, God can create water and take it away.
Why is this even a question?

 

[JacksBratt]

When one of the world's greatest scientists asks me about this, I will tell them.

Meantime the Bible is not a scientific text book. Not even close.

What do you and others mean by that?

"the bible is not a scientific text book"?

 

[sdowney717]

What do you and others mean by that?

"the bible is not a scientific text book"?

The idea that science is what man learns by observation. Whether he makes the right decision or a wrong one can not be known until new observations challenges the status quo of what is falsely called knowledge, and science alway supersedes scripture as to truth about the natural world which man observes. That observation though is faulty if the lens used to measure it is defective. God also sends delusions to believe lies because men refuse to love the truth and be saved.

 

[mindlight]

This argument presuppose that God is somehow bound by creation, which is a fundamental error.

I make video games for a living. If I want to create a 3D world with water, I don't have to worry about how to get the water in the environment or what to do with it if there's too much. It's as simple as increasing or decreasing a single value. If I can do this effortlessly within the limitations of my tools, how much more can God change His own creation? It's true that He uses natural laws as means to do His will, but that's not to say He can't break these constructs.

Anybody with a remote understanding of how clever and adaptable is the code of life knows that the One who wrote that code is capable of so much more than we give Him credit for. That without violating any of his laws.

If the bible sets a limit which current scientific understanding says is impossible the question is whether or not we trust the author of scripture and nature over the greatest minds of our generation.

No contest really!