My Flood Hypothesis: Definitely a Global Cataclysm!

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Huckleberry

Senior Member
Aug 25, 2013
1,698
96
48
#1
I posted this in a different thread, but thought it deserved its own.
I also made a few spelling and typo corrections, though I'm sure I missed some.

To understand the Flood, one must understand the Earth's condition prior to it. The world is mostly covered in water now, but it was not always so. Most of the world's water used to be underground and above the atmosphere. There was a lot lot lot more land area then. Also, the Earth was not tilted on its axis as it is now. There were not four seasons in a year such as we experience.


The world was created with one main river that sprang from the ground at or near the highest point on Earth, the land called Eden. This main river flowed into the God's Garden, where it separated into four headwaters. It didn't rain in the world; everything was watered by the rivers and a mist that came out of the ground. The waters eventually went back into the Earth, and were circulated back to where they sprang forth from the ground in Eden; most of the world's water was underground at any given moment.


There was a great amount of water vapor above the atmosphere. This “canopy”, as it is generally referred to, diffused sunlight and filtered out the sun's harmful radiation. It probably compressed the atmosphere making it more oxygen rich by volume. In this world-wide “high pressure system” it was perpetually springtime. There were no storms or high winds. The canopy made the world conducive to the great size and longevity of its occupants. Real nice place to live compared to the flooded out wreck that was to come.


The Earth's crust was not then separated into “plates” like it is now. It was basically a solid shell floating on a subterranean ocean. There were no earthquakes or volcanoes. No floods, tornadoes, or typhoons.


There was a planet called Phaëton which orbited the Sun between Mars and Jupiter. It was destroyed. The cause of its destruction is unknown, but the effects are evident all over the solar system: The asteroid belt; the outer planets' rings; the devastated surfaces of bodies such as Mercury and our own moon; and the countless comets which orbit the sun. And the Great Flood.


Earth took a direct hit. The canopy was penetrated, and a giant piece, or pieces, of Phaëton landed and broke up the crust like a piece of shattering glass. The world was hit so hard that its orbit was affected. The axis was severely tilted, and began to wobbled as a spinning top would if hit with a rock. The Earth quaked and erupted on an unimaginable scale. Water was shooting out of the ground all over the place up into the stratosphere. The atmospheric temperature dropped quickly and significantly. The disrupted canopy began to condense and fall to Earth as a torrential downpour for the next forty days. The poles were covered in ice quickly and completely, and the ice extended far towards the middle latitudes.


So then the world was completely covered in water, much of it frozen, and the crust was broken up and had big empty pockets beneath it where thewater was. Naturally, the crust collapsed into those pockets and water filled the basins. As the basins collapsed, the crusts along their perimeters was pushed up to form the mountain ranges of theworld. There's something else beneath the crust: magma. The newly broken up and collapsed crust was then in closer proximity to the mantle and volcanoes began erupting around the world.


The world underwent a cataclysmic upheaval the likes of which we cannot fully fathom. Even after the flood waters had gone down, the world continued to dramatically change. During the period right after theFlood, the newly shaped continents were not completely separated from each other. The aforementioned polar icecaps were quickly starting to melt, and as they did, the waters came up again, and over a period of, say maybe, a couple of hundred years, the continents were largely isolated from each other. Highly diverse and unique synergistic ecosystems began to develop around the world. The survivors of these events must have been awe struck, to say the least, at what had happened to the world, and they made sure to teach their children about what happened, and why.
 

Huckleberry

Senior Member
Aug 25, 2013
1,698
96
48
#2
It's been almost four years.
Time for a bump.gif
 

Johnny_B

Senior Member
Mar 18, 2017
1,954
64
48
#3
No Scripture no read.
 
B

BeyondET

Guest
#4
John 12:19
19Then the Pharisees said to one another, “You can see that this is doing you no good. Look how the whole world has gone after Him!”
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
#5
Most of the world's water used to be underground and above the atmosphere.
1. Evidence for this?

There was a lot lot lot more land area then.
2. Evidence for this?


Also, the Earth was not tilted on its axis as it is now. There were not four seasons in a year such as we experience.
3. Evidence for this?


The world was created with one main river that sprang from the ground at or near the highest point on Earth, the land called Eden.
4. Evidence for this?

It didn't rain in the world; everything was watered by the rivers and a mist that came out of the ground. The waters eventually went back into the Earth, and were circulated back to where they sprang forth from the ground in Eden; most of the world's water was underground at any given moment.
5. Evidence for this?


There was a great amount of water vapor above the atmosphere. This “canopy”, as it is generally referred to, diffused sunlight and filtered out the sun's harmful radiation. It probably compressed the atmosphere making it more oxygen rich by volume. In this world-wide “high pressure system” it was perpetually springtime. There were no storms or high winds. The canopy made the world conducive to the great size and longevity of its occupants. Real nice place to live compared to the flooded out wreck that was to come.
6. Evidence for this?

Note... its really hard for birds to fly in the waters.


The Earth's crust was not then separated into “plates” like it is now. It was basically a solid shell floating on a subterranean ocean. There were no earthquakes or volcanoes. No floods, tornadoes, or typhoons.
7. Evidence for this?

There was a planet called Phaëton...And the Great Flood.
8. Evidence for this hypothetical planet to cause the Great Flood or to have anything with it?

Earth took a direct hit. The canopy was penetrated, and a giant piece, or pieces, of Phaëton landed and broke up the crust like a piece of shattering glass. The world was hit so hard that its orbit was affected. The axis was severely tilted, and began to wobbled as a spinning top would if hit with a rock. The Earth quaked and erupted on an unimaginable scale. Water was shooting out of the ground all over the place up into the stratosphere. The atmospheric temperature dropped quickly and significantly. The disrupted canopy began to condense and fall to Earth as a torrential downpour for the next forty days. The poles were covered in ice quickly and completely, and the ice extended far towards the middle latitudes.
9. Any evidence for anything of this?

10. When did such a cataclysmic global flood occur? Which year before Christ?
 
B

BeyondET

Guest
#6
Planet Phaeton what tha, I must of missed that. lol
 

Grandpa

Senior Member
Jun 24, 2011
11,551
3,190
113
#7
Seems plausible from the limited evidence we have.

I don't know how you can really prove any of it.
 

JosephsDreams

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2015
4,313
467
83
#8
I posted this in a different thread, but thought it deserved its own.
I also made a few spelling and typo corrections, though I'm sure I missed some.

To understand the Flood, one must understand the Earth's condition prior to it. The world is mostly covered in water now, but it was not always so. Most of the world's water used to be underground and above the atmosphere. There was a lot lot lot more land area then. Also, the Earth was not tilted on its axis as it is now. There were not four seasons in a year such as we experience.


The world was created with one main river that sprang from the ground at or near the highest point on Earth, the land called Eden. This main river flowed into the God's Garden, where it separated into four headwaters. It didn't rain in the world; everything was watered by the rivers and a mist that came out of the ground. The waters eventually went back into the Earth, and were circulated back to where they sprang forth from the ground in Eden; most of the world's water was underground at any given moment.


There was a great amount of water vapor above the atmosphere. This “canopy”, as it is generally referred to, diffused sunlight and filtered out the sun's harmful radiation. It probably compressed the atmosphere making it more oxygen rich by volume. In this world-wide “high pressure system” it was perpetually springtime. There were no storms or high winds. The canopy made the world conducive to the great size and longevity of its occupants. Real nice place to live compared to the flooded out wreck that was to come.


The Earth's crust was not then separated into “plates” like it is now. It was basically a solid shell floating on a subterranean ocean. There were no earthquakes or volcanoes. No floods, tornadoes, or typhoons.


There was a planet called Phaëton which orbited the Sun between Mars and Jupiter. It was destroyed. The cause of its destruction is unknown, but the effects are evident all over the solar system: The asteroid belt; the outer planets' rings; the devastated surfaces of bodies such as Mercury and our own moon; and the countless comets which orbit the sun. And the Great Flood.


Earth took a direct hit. The canopy was penetrated, and a giant piece, or pieces, of Phaëton landed and broke up the crust like a piece of shattering glass. The world was hit so hard that its orbit was affected. The axis was severely tilted, and began to wobbled as a spinning top would if hit with a rock. The Earth quaked and erupted on an unimaginable scale. Water was shooting out of the ground all over the place up into the stratosphere. The atmospheric temperature dropped quickly and significantly. The disrupted canopy began to condense and fall to Earth as a torrential downpour for the next forty days. The poles were covered in ice quickly and completely, and the ice extended far towards the middle latitudes.


So then the world was completely covered in water, much of it frozen, and the crust was broken up and had big empty pockets beneath it where thewater was. Naturally, the crust collapsed into those pockets and water filled the basins. As the basins collapsed, the crusts along their perimeters was pushed up to form the mountain ranges of theworld. There's something else beneath the crust: magma. The newly broken up and collapsed crust was then in closer proximity to the mantle and volcanoes began erupting around the world.


The world underwent a cataclysmic upheaval the likes of which we cannot fully fathom. Even after the flood waters had gone down, the world continued to dramatically change. During the period right after theFlood, the newly shaped continents were not completely separated from each other. The aforementioned polar icecaps were quickly starting to melt, and as they did, the waters came up again, and over a period of, say maybe, a couple of hundred years, the continents were largely isolated from each other. Highly diverse and unique synergistic ecosystems began to develop around the world. The survivors of these events must have been awe struck, to say the least, at what had happened to the world, and they made sure to teach their children about what happened, and why.
I have studied the pre flood world dynamics. I agree wioth a fair portion of what you are putting forth.
But whats your point? Are you just making general comments, or do you have a specific agenda with something?
 

JosephsDreams

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2015
4,313
467
83
#9
1. Evidence for this?


2. Evidence for this?



3. Evidence for this?



4. Evidence for this?


5. Evidence for this?



6. Evidence for this?

Note... its really hard for birds to fly in the waters.



7. Evidence for this?


8. Evidence for this hypothetical planet to cause the Great Flood or to have anything with it?


9. Any evidence for anything of this?


10. When did such a cataclysmic global flood occur? Which year before Christ?
Would you consider the bible as evidence if I answered some of these with things the Bible pointed out or quotes from it?
Also, would you consider carbon certain geographical precepts evidence?
Last, would you consider certain palaeontological evidence?
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
#10
Would you consider the bible as evidence if I answered some of these with things the Bible pointed out or quotes from it?
Also, would you consider carbon certain geographical precepts evidence?
Last, would you consider certain palaeontological evidence?
Well, it depends on how good your evidences will be...

The most important is the 10th question.
 

JosephsDreams

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2015
4,313
467
83
#11
1. Evidence for this?


2. Evidence for this?



3. Evidence for this?



4. Evidence for this?


5. Evidence for this?



6. Evidence for this?

Note... its really hard for birds to fly in the waters.



7. Evidence for this?


8. Evidence for this hypothetical planet to cause the Great Flood or to have anything with it?


9. Any evidence for anything of this?

10. When did such a cataclysmic global flood occur? Which year before Christ?
Also, anyone who knew the Bible relatively well would know the answers to numbers 4, 5 and 10. Especially number 10. That one is simple math.
 
B

BeyondET

Guest
#12
Indeed I liked to here some thoughts about the whole world. Is this verse below figurative or literal in meaning the whole world.

John 12:19
19Then the Pharisees said to one another, “You can see that this is doing you no good. Look how the whole world has gone after Him!”
 

JosephsDreams

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2015
4,313
467
83
#13
Well, it depends on how good your evidences will be...

The most important is the 10th question.
I am not going to answer you. If I ask you if the Bible would be sufficient evidence and you say that "it depends" then I can not take you anywhere. Either you do not know the Bible and/or are a very cynical nonscientific person. Either of those is a waste of my precious God ordained time here in this vibrational plane.
 

Sagart

Senior Member
May 7, 2017
366
29
28
#14
The ancient Hebrew people believed that the earth was a flat disk covered by a dome that separated “the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome.” (Gen. 1:7). Today, however, the large majority of Christian evangelicals deny this fact because they do not like the implications of it. I have read and re-read their arguments, and their arguments manifest either an unfortunate ignorance of the facts, or a willful, deliberate rejection of the facts. Some of them go so far as to falsely claim that the translation ‘dome’ in our Hebrew-English lexicons and commentaries on the Hebrew text of Genesis is based upon the translation of רָקִיעַ in the Latin Vulgate even though we have rock-solid proof that that is not the case. Moreover, their claim that the waters that were “above” the רָקִיעַ were the moisture in the earth’s atmosphere ignores the fact that the earth’s atmosphere, even at as high of a temperature of 150° F., could not hold even one millionth of the necessary water. Therefore, in order for the flood story to be true, the earth would necessarily have been flat and covered with a dome strong enough to hold the immense weight of the water.

Furthermore, it is absurd (if not dishonest) for anyone to claim that they hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible while spiritualizing the “the windows of the heavens” (Genesis 7:11) and all of the many places in both the Old and New Testaments that describe the earth as flat rather than spherical.


For the view of a conservative but learned evangelical Christian (he staunchly believes in the infallibility of Scripture) regarding the word רָקִיעַ as used in Genesis, please see the following,

https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/te...s/text/articles-books/seely-firmament-wtj.htm
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
#15
I am not going to answer you. If I ask you if the Bible would be sufficient evidence and you say that "it depends" then I can not take you anywhere. Either you do not know the Bible and/or are a very cynical nonscientific person. Either of those is a waste of my precious God ordained time here in this vibrational plane.
You dont have to. My questions were not directed at you, anyway.
 

JosephsDreams

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2015
4,313
467
83
#16
The ancient Hebrew people believed that the earth was a flat disk covered by a dome that separated “the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome.” (Gen. 1:7). Today, however, the large majority of Christian evangelicals deny this fact because they do not like the implications of it. I have read and re-read their arguments, and their arguments manifest either an unfortunate ignorance of the facts, or a willful, deliberate rejection of the facts. Some of them go so far as to falsely claim that the translation ‘dome’ in our Hebrew-English lexicons and commentaries on the Hebrew text of Genesis is based upon the translation of רָקִיעַ in the Latin Vulgate even though we have rock-solid proof that that is not the case. Moreover, their claim that the waters that were “above” the רָקִיעַ were the moisture in the earth’s atmosphere ignores the fact that the earth’s atmosphere, even at as high of a temperature of 150° F., could not hold even one millionth of the necessary water. Therefore, in order for the flood story to be true, the earth would necessarily have been flat and covered with a dome strong enough to hold the immense weight of the water.

Furthermore, it is absurd (if not dishonest) for anyone to claim that they hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible while spiritualizing the “the windows of the heavens” (Genesis 7:11) and all of the many places in both the Old and New Testaments that describe the earth as flat rather than spherical.


For the view of a conservative but learned evangelical Christian (he staunchly believes in the infallibility of Scripture) regarding the word רָקִיעַ as used in Genesis, please see the following,

https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/te...s/text/articles-books/seely-firmament-wtj.htm
You're not being logical. So because the ancient Israelites interpreted something incorrectly you believe the whole flood story is cockeyed?
Where do you get your logic from?
 

Sagart

Senior Member
May 7, 2017
366
29
28
#17
You're not being logical. So because the ancient Israelites interpreted something incorrectly you believe the whole flood story is cockeyed?
Where do you get your logic from?
The Bible.
 

Sagart

Senior Member
May 7, 2017
366
29
28
#18
You're not being logical. So because the ancient Israelites interpreted something incorrectly you believe the whole flood story is cockeyed?
Where do you get your logic from?
The Scriptures reflect the languages, customs, and cultures of the peoples whom God chose to write them. Please read the article to which I provided a link if you really want to know my logic.
 
B

BeyondET

Guest
#19
The ancient Hebrew people believed that the earth was a flat disk covered by a dome that separated “the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome.” (Gen. 1:7). Today, however, the large majority of Christian evangelicals deny this fact because they do not like the implications of it. I have read and re-read their arguments, and their arguments manifest either an unfortunate ignorance of the facts, or a willful, deliberate rejection of the facts. Some of them go so far as to falsely claim that the translation ‘dome’ in our Hebrew-English lexicons and commentaries on the Hebrew text of Genesis is based upon the translation of רָקִיעַ in the Latin Vulgate even though we have rock-solid proof that that is not the case. Moreover, their claim that the waters that were “above” the רָקִיעַ were the moisture in the earth’s atmosphere ignores the fact that the earth’s atmosphere, even at as high of a temperature of 150° F., could not hold even one millionth of the necessary water. Therefore, in order for the flood story to be true, the earth would necessarily have been flat and covered with a dome strong enough to hold the immense weight of the water.

Furthermore, it is absurd (if not dishonest) for anyone to claim that they hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible while spiritualizing the “the windows of the heavens” (Genesis 7:11) and all of the many places in both the Old and New Testaments that describe the earth as flat rather than spherical.


For the view of a conservative but learned evangelical Christian (he staunchly believes in the infallibility of Scripture) regarding the word רָקִיעַ as used in Genesis, please see the following,

https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/te...s/text/articles-books/seely-firmament-wtj.htm
Well I'm still viewing both sides on the topic of the flood was it figurative or literal, rightly dues where the may as to the whole world being flooded can happen very easily, the whole earth waters including fresh or salt or in ice caps or within the earth all of it is just a puddle compared to the size of earth, it is 3,958 miles to the center of the earth, thus the thickness/width of the earth is 7,916 miles across, the deepest part of any ocean on the surface of earth is just a mere 7 miles deep "the maranta trench" hardly scratching the surface of earth. it may appear to be a lot of water on the surface, it is no doubt but our planet laughs at that it's nothing compared to the size of earth. The circumference of Earth at the equator is about 24,874 miles (40,030 km), but from pole-to-pole the meridional circumference of Earth is only 24,860 miles (40,008 km) around. This shape, caused by the flattening at the poles, is called an oblate spheroid.

In other words add a circle and a round and you get a sphere.
 

Marano

Senior Member
Dec 7, 2011
398
32
28
29
#20
I agree with a lot of what you said, but where did you get the idea for that lost planet from?