Go Back   Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums > General Discussions > Christianity

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-15-2013, 04:24 AM
Vizion's Avatar
Vizion Vizion is offline
Hughes fanboy
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,214
Thumbs up How God Flooded the Earth

The Hydroplate Theory. Makes total sense to me.

Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zkrJG4XUeo
__________________


Please consider England in your prayers!

http://www.intercessuk.org/iuk3/
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-15-2013, 03:51 PM
NateR's Avatar
NateR NateR is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,299
Default

Cool video and it seems like a pretty solid theory. I've never believed the claims that the Grand Canyon was formed over millions of years and it seemed especially implausible after the Mount St. Helen eruption in 1980 created a similar (but much smaller) formation within just three days.

The thing about the meteorites is pretty crazy. I'm not saying it's untrue, it's just not something I would have expected.

Such a dramatic worldwide event would also explain why mammoths were flash frozen with tropical plants still in their stomach.

Plus, the global flood explains a lot about the fossil record. The conditions for an animal to fossilize need to be created instantaneously, it's not something that can happen over millions of years. And there was always the question of why so many dinosaur fossils have their heads thrown back and mouths wide open like they were struggling when they died... they were drowning while being crushed under tons of water and mud.

The worldwide flood goes a long way to explain so much about the world we live in, even the stratification of the earth's crust. However, scientists refuse to even entertain the theory because they don't want to give any credence whatsoever to the Bible.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-17-2013, 08:31 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 16,909
Default

I thought it was supposed to be an ice age glacial melt...Its funny that this is one of the old testiment stories to be so desputed...and yet, the one which is affirmed by the most secular and historic sources...not only that there was a flood thats recorded in all parts of the inhabited world....but also that there was an idiotically advanced culture pre that point in history...much of the evidence for that still exists, and not only that, it still exists under water!

I would say two things regarding the video...Firstly, the Bible clearly states the flood came from rain water. However...in other parts of the bible, there is a phrase used that makes no sence...about fountains of the deep being locked up, and also about waters that cover the seas

He also uses the words "Centuries" when he talks about pressure build up...so this probably isnt young earth theory at its best

There is just one other thing to note...isnt it strange that the earth has tranches, like marinas and the Grand Canyon...and so does Mars
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-17-2013, 09:08 PM
TENNESSEAN's Avatar
TENNESSEAN TENNESSEAN is offline
LESS TALK MORE ACTION
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 429
Default

Interesting! Thanks for posting it.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-18-2013, 12:13 AM
adamt adamt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,511
Default

well tyburn, a century is 100 years and noah was at least 600 when the flood happened

also if the water shot out of the cracks it would fall back as rain

also, i think the glaciers were from flood waters freezing, not the other way around

anyways, this is my theory to a 'T', i just never had a name for it

i think it is amazing how things happened, here in iowa we have the loess hills, they are made up of loess silt soil, the only other place it is found is in china, it is obvious to me that this is the particular silt that was left in a certain area as the water drained away, the same way it happens on my farm after a flood except on a much huger scale


i also imagine that if someone took this theory to it's complete scientific and geological conclusion you could accurately predict oil deposits, diamond deposits and gold deposits

i also think that the land masses had a floating effect, it wasn't the water draining off as much as the land coming to the surface of the water.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-18-2013, 01:49 AM
NateR's Avatar
NateR NateR is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyburn View Post
However...in other parts of the bible, there is a phrase used that makes no sence...about fountains of the deep being locked up, and also about waters that cover the seas
Well the Bible is the perfect and infallible Word of GOD, so we just have to remember that the Bible is smarter than all of us combined. So if something in the Bible seems like it doesn't make any sense, it's usually because you're just not smart enough to understand it yet and you may never be smart enough to understand it completely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyburn View Post
He also uses the words "Centuries" when he talks about pressure build up...so this probably isnt young earth theory at its best
There were roughly 1900 years between the Creation and the Flood going by the geneologies listed in Genesis. So that's 19 centuries.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-18-2013, 07:10 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 16,909
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adamt View Post
well tyburn, a century is 100 years and noah was at least 600 when the flood happened

also if the water shot out of the cracks it would fall back as rain

also, i think the glaciers were from flood waters freezing, not the other way around

anyways, this is my theory to a 'T', i just never had a name for it

i think it is amazing how things happened, here in iowa we have the loess hills, they are made up of loess silt soil, the only other place it is found is in china, it is obvious to me that this is the particular silt that was left in a certain area as the water drained away, the same way it happens on my farm after a flood except on a much huger scale


i also imagine that if someone took this theory to it's complete scientific and geological conclusion you could accurately predict oil deposits, diamond deposits and gold deposits

i also think that the land masses had a floating effect, it wasn't the water draining off as much as the land coming to the surface of the water.
See its not my theory...and i'll tell you the point it went crackpot to me...it was the talk about the meteors. Knowing what I know about astronomy I know that the earth cant be the source of that much falling matter....you only need to see the asteroid belt in a geostationary orbit to know that the amount of rubble that isnt going anywhere but round and round is more then the earth could produce if the entire planet had been distroyed....the other inaccuracy is that bacteria found on asteroids is so rare, that scientists who are complete athiests, do not believe the amount could infect the earth and be the cause of life...they would rather it appeared from cooincidence of liquids...then arrived whole on a rock. If they dont jump at the easiest theory of the origins of life from an atheistic approach because they consider it too rare...I wouldnt be using it as my prime example.

For someone to believe that, when the evidence isnt logical...tells me the extent of which he can believe what is not probable....and how do I know he hasnt applied that to his other theories.

To me...that ruined it...the moment he tried to justify his theory using asteroids with life on them...coz whilst I dont know much about sizemology...I do know enough about astronomy to know that his asteroid presumption doesnt fly.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-18-2013, 07:31 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 16,909
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NateR View Post
1) Well the Bible is the perfect and infallible Word of GOD, so we just have to remember that the Bible is smarter than all of us combined. So if something in the Bible seems like it doesn't make any sense, it's usually because you're just not smart enough to understand it yet and you may never be smart enough to understand it completely.



2) There were roughly 1900 years between the Creation and the Flood going by the geneologies listed in Genesis. So that's 19 centuries.
1) Im not disputing that "the fountains of the deep" exist...What I am desputing is that this apparent layer of water in the crust, with the ability to burst like a volcano, due to tidal pressure build up, is what the Bible means by the term "Fountains of the deep"

The truth is, we dont know what that is describing...and whilst it COULD be a description of a water volcano...it might also mean something else entirely...a bit like the term "as the waters cover the sea" well...what could that mean, how can you cover with water, something already of water? one could argue, thats a Tsunami...a wave of water that covers the sea near the coast...but I wouldnt be certain that the bible was refering to that, just because it matches the description, when a great many possibilities are out there.

I personally, am not inclined to believe the theory just because if one can believe such a glaring astronomical falsity as used in that video...I dont see how we can relay on the fact that they wouldnt make the same falsity in regards to the seizmological prepositions. Although I am not learned enough to know that...to me it raises a high chance that this person isnt reliable...and therefore I can not adopt this position

2) The problem with this whole argument is that athiestic Scientists can never see a world with GOD as creator...and the Christians can never see GOD in creation.

The easy answer is to say that GOD didnt mean it like that...Athiests point out that Genesis has MORE THEN ONE version of the same Creation and it differs, and the Christians can tend to think that like Revelation, the Creation accounts are figurative and not litteral.

I take an interesting approach...because I happen to believe that as a Historical text, Genesis should be taken litterally....and yet I also have no problem with stuff happening "before" Creation.

The reason is because I think that "Creation" was took place in the Spiritual Realm...in THE SAME WAY, that "Salvation" happened. Therefore Dinosaurs can appear BEFORE Adam...Just as Moses can be Saved before Christ.

Why...Because both are Eternal! As Christ and his Salvation work Backwards from one chronological point, to cover History both before and after the event...why not Creation? Why cant creation go backwards into History just as it goes forwards...stemming from one chronological event?

Just as Moses was credited with Righteousness, before the Chronological point at which Salvation was available...so Dinosaurs can be credited with Creation, BEFORE the Chronological point at which Creation was avilable

Why?

Because the author of both Creation (Life) and Salvation (Eternal Life) has been Timeless.

When you remove the barriers caused by time...you see that its possible for someone to be saved in an age of death, just as something can exist in an age before creation.


Thankyou...and good night
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-18-2013, 11:12 PM
NateR's Avatar
NateR NateR is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyburn View Post
2) The problem with this whole argument is that athiestic Scientists can never see a world with GOD as creator...and the Christians can never see GOD in creation.

The easy answer is to say that GOD didnt mean it like that...Athiests point out that Genesis has MORE THEN ONE version of the same Creation and it differs, and the Christians can tend to think that like Revelation, the Creation accounts are figurative and not litteral.

I take an interesting approach...because I happen to believe that as a Historical text, Genesis should be taken litterally....and yet I also have no problem with stuff happening "before" Creation.

The reason is because I think that "Creation" was took place in the Spiritual Realm...in THE SAME WAY, that "Salvation" happened. Therefore Dinosaurs can appear BEFORE Adam...Just as Moses can be Saved before Christ.

Why...Because both are Eternal! As Christ and his Salvation work Backwards from one chronological point, to cover History both before and after the event...why not Creation? Why cant creation go backwards into History just as it goes forwards...stemming from one chronological event?

Just as Moses was credited with Righteousness, before the Chronological point at which Salvation was available...so Dinosaurs can be credited with Creation, BEFORE the Chronological point at which Creation was avilable

Why?

Because the author of both Creation (Life) and Salvation (Eternal Life) has been Timeless.

When you remove the barriers caused by time...you see that its possible for someone to be saved in an age of death, just as something can exist in an age before creation.


Thankyou...and good night
While I do agree that a scientist who refuses to acknowledge the existence of GOD is going to be severely hampered when examining the evidence of Creation, I think our limited understanding of time could explain why science sees billions of years when GOD says it only took days.

Since time is not a constant in the universe, I believe that the 6 days of Creation in the biblical account and the 14-20 billion years of creation from science are actually the same period of time. So, from our perspective, those 6 days would have seemed like billions of years, when they really only lasted 6 days from GOD's perspective.

There is also evidence that dinosaurs existed right alongside humans, but since it doesn't fit the current Evolutionary narrative, science ignores that evidence.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-19-2013, 07:06 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 16,909
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NateR View Post
While I do agree that a scientist who refuses to acknowledge the existence of GOD is going to be severely hampered when examining the evidence of Creation, I think our limited understanding of time could explain why science sees billions of years when GOD says it only took days.

Since time is not a constant in the universe, I believe that the 6 days of Creation in the biblical account and the 14-20 billion years of creation from science are actually the same period of time. So, from our perspective, those 6 days would have seemed like billions of years, when they really only lasted 6 days from GOD's perspective.

There is also evidence that dinosaurs existed right alongside humans, but since it doesn't fit the current Evolutionary narrative, science ignores that evidence.
The problem with that...and its a view I held for a long time also

...is that Genesis doesnt just define the periods of time as days...but as parts of days...Morning, and Evening. It is as if every effort is made to highlight the point that these were not seven period of time...or seven days from GODs point of view...but that they were seven, litteral, blocks of time, with a morning and an evening...

You've also changed your stance on this...during the time of MacT you were a strict creationalist...who told me that it wasnt seven periods of time, but seven, twenty four hour days

I have to say either your theory, or my theory would work completely. However, I was eager to actually somehow have a Seven Day Creation, just like there was a Proper Three Days for Salvation. I was eager to have a theory that would say, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the Creative process occured in precisely Seven Days.

People accuse my theory of not being biblical...but all I do is take the principles surrounding the power of the ressurection BEFORE Christ in Chronology...and apply the same thing to Creation...for me, they are part of the same thing. Life (Love) and Death (Judgement) Saint Paul even speaks about Christ as being like the Second Adam...as if its a Second Genesis period, because the intended life which was spoilt in the Fall has been restored.

Although Christ died in a generally accepted year...and Christians acknowledge that there was a "Before" Christ...and thus a "Before" Salvation...and yet, they also adhere to the theology that those who had enough faith could be saved.

That has to mean that the process of Salvation goes BACKWARDS as well as forwards. I merely say the same is true for Life, as well as Eternal Life. The reason a lot of Christians Struggle with that is because the Creative Proccess has visible manifestations...being Credited with Righteousness does not...therefore its easy to miss the power and dependance of those Credited with righteousness, on the Cross reaching backwards through chronology for them. They miss the power of it, because they cant "see" its work...and they can not believe the process of creation could happen backwards because its 100percent visible...and to believe that, you would have to believe that the power involved in creation was astronomically large

I have no problem with that, because my entire theology is dependant on the Cross of Christ for Salvation. If GOD could kill a piece of himself, to unify a spoilt creation, whilst keeping himself Holy and perfect, and then ressurect that piece of himself after it has paid the price for sin in abundance. There is no greater power then that...so I feel that suggesting that Creation springs in the middle of chronology and works both forwards and backwards...well...surely thats a doddle and pale by comparison. To me, thats just using biblical principles...no there isnt a scripture reference that says it...but its a logical outcome of philosophy when applying the same principles of Restoration, to Creation...to me, they are parts of the same process...and that is the Ultimate Process...life, creation, love, restoration, all that is Light and of GOD....and the absence of life, the Death of Creation, Judgement, Damnation, all that is darkness and not of GOD.

Holiness and Sin...that in a nutshell is it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.