Analysis of Amos 9:11-15 as Prophecy

quote:

---

If you've ever done any gardening, tell me what happens to plants that require direct sunlight when you plant them on the north side of your house.

---

Well, now here we have finally caught one of the administrator/evolutionists in an act of bias. Maybe we could ask compmage or wj what would happen if they planted something requiring direct sunlight on the north side of their house.

Hi Buzz,This is an addendum to my previous message. I wanted to provide the evidence for the stars being visible before the flood. This link, titled Ice Age star map discovered, relates the discoveries of a couple prehistoric paintings depicting known star patterns: To briefly quote from it: --Percy

I'm not sure I would call this bias. Though I'm not a gardener, I'm thinking it would live quite happily. However, given that (in all likelyhood) the vast majority of posters on boards like this live in the northern hemisphere, I hardly think this is worth making a fuss about.One the other hand you could have been joking and I just didn't pick up on it...------------------
He hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife.
- Douglas Adams, The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy

truthlover responds to buzsaw:

quote:

---

Without Gen 1:7, there really is no reason to suppose a vapor canopy, as the flood is said to have come from the "fountains of the great deep," not from the waters above.

---

Not quite. Once again, the Bible contradicts itself in this regard:Genesis 7:11: In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.It seems the water came not only from the fountains of the great deep but also from heaven.Of course, this verse also seems to indicate that the waters from heaven were separated from the earth by windows. Thus, even if we go with this idea, the water isn't part of an earthly "vapor canopy" because the water isn't on earth...it's in heaven.Hmmm...maybe we can do a quick bit of equivocation on the Lord's Prayer here..."on earth as it is in heaven"...so if it's in heaven, then it's on earth, too.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Percipient responds to buzsaw:

quote:

---

quote:

---

You raise a good point, but the instructions given to Adam were that he was to eat the herbs of the field and the fruit of the trees. Then after the flood he was to eat the clean animals.

---

​

You're referring to Genesis 3:17-19 where God issues a curse that says man will toil in the earth and eat the plants of the field, but he does not prohibit Adam from eating meat, and neither does he mention clean and unclean animals. The first mention of clean and unclean only comes with Noah, and only in regard to how many of each type to save, nothing about to only eat clean animals after the flood.

---

And don't forget:"Clean" means "OK to eat."How on earth did Noah know which animals were clean and which were unclean if he had never eaten animals before? The Levitical rules don't show up for a long time after and god doesn't tell him.And more importantly, why on earth would Noah start to eat animals if he had never done it before? He was 600 years old at the time. What could possibly convince him to give up his vegetarian diet? His kids are around their century, too, so why would they switch? So we have a community of vegetarians who have been eating like this for decades...why would they start eating animals just because a flood came around?Given the fact that Abel was a shepherd, I think it's safe to say that humans were eating meat all the way back to Adam and Eve.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

I was joking, comp.Halfway through making my silly post, I realized that buzsaw lives in NY, so I didn't even have a valid joke, but I know we northern hemisphere types rarely think about southern hemisphere folks, so I thought I'd make the point, anyway.Sigh...too many of my jokes turn out that way. :-(

quote:

---

A prehistoric map of the night sky has been discovered on the walls of the famous painted caves at Lascaux in central France. The map, which is thought to date back 16,500 years, shows three bright stars known today as the Summer Triangle.
A map of the Pleiades star cluster has also been found among the Lascaux frescoes.

​

And another pattern of stars, drawn 14,000 years ago, has been identified in a cave in Spain.

---

1. These dates are assuming there was no flood.
2. If there was a flood it is my understanding that the dating methods would be flawed because of the unknown climate and conditions existing before the flood since the dating methods depend on the amount of certain elements in the atmosphere, earth and life at that time. As I have stated on other occasions the appearance of age would likely be the result of the different conditions.

Wouldn't the flood have crushed the caves, washed off the paint, or both? How could the paintings have survived a flood? Either it didn't happen, or something besides pre-flood atmospheric activity affects dates. Invoke a miracle if you like; the more reasonable answer is that there was no flood.

quote:

---

I'm relatively certain that the whole concept of a vapor canopy came from Gen 1:7, where we read that God divided the waters below from the waters above with a firmament in between. The "waters above" were said to be a vapor canopy providing this super climate you're thinking of.

---

It also comes from the other factors I've mentioned along with what you've cited. It's not based on your one factor.

quote:

---

The problem is that the waters above are divided from the waters below by the firmament which includes the stars, moon, and sun. If we accept conventional cosmology, which even most YEC's do, then that would place the waters above several billion light years away, not in the atmosphere.

---

1. The Bible wasn't written on the basis of conventional cosmology.
2. The text doesn't define the firmament, so the context is the best source of judgement here. It obviously wouldn't be in outer space.

As I stated if there was a flood, the dating methods would make it look much earlier than actuality. So I believe it is postflood.

quote:

---

Even if there were "visible evidence" of the flood, you have not established that the flood requires a vapor canopy. Therefore, even if Noah's flood were an established reality, it provides no evidence for a vapor canopy.

---

The "windows of heaven" being opened suggests it as well as the amount of water needed to cover even a relatively smooth earth. I Just dont think it all came from underground. The text plainly says it came from both.

quote:

---

It doesn't say this was the first rainbow, but only that God was establishing his rainbow in the clouds as a reminder of the covenant between himself and life.

---

The implication is clear from the purpose of it. It was the first rainbow.

quote:

---

In fact, we have evidence from ancient civilizations older than 5000 years that they could clearly see the sun, moon and stars. And there's the testimony of Genesis 1:14-19: And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years." If there had been a vapor canopy then pre-flood man could not have marked the seasons by the position of the rising and setting sun, nor navigated by the stars.

---

1. The sun and moon, at least likely could've been seen dimly.
2. No mention in Genesis for the purpose of navigation and the seasons, days and years would be determined by the dim sun and moon.

quote:

---

There is no evidence to support this, and this is a good time to mention that under a vapor canopy plants in particular would suffer from lack of sunlight. If you've ever done any gardening, tell me what happens to plants that require direct sunlight when you plant them on the north side of your house.

---

Apples and oranges. They would get enough filtered sunlight to grow, imo, and with a perfect year round climate.

quote:

---

Since there's no land under the Arctic ice, did you perhaps mean Antarctica? Perhaps you could elaborate on this. My understanding is that the tropical climate of Antarctica occurred maybe 250 million years ago, which puts it somewhat outside the era of the great flood.

---

As with the Black Sea, much of what's under water would've been land surface before the flood. Likely much smaller and more shallow oceans then.

Only if it was something that survived through the flood. It can't be, if your argument is that the flood alters dating evidence. How could a flood alter something that happened after the flood? You need something besides a flood to explain the dating discrepancy.

One final off-topic post.I noticed that adding a smiley makes it much easier for people to realise that you are trying to be funny. ------------------
He hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife.
- Douglas Adams, The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy

No, the other factors you mentioned would not lead anyone to conclude there used to be a vapor canopy, because there is no reason to suppose a vapor canopy would extend life or create a super climate. It is simple logic to think that a vapor canopy would create cloudy days every day, which is known to cause depression to humans and to prevent the growth of plants that need sun.The vapor canopy, however, was one way to try to explain why Gen 1 says there's water above the sky, so the people who used it thought, "Wow, everything would be different! Maybe it would explain the long lives of the patriarchs and provide water for the flood!"Unfortunately, it doesn't explain the long lives of the patriarchs, it only explains their cruel or bizarre behavior, because humans tend to get extremely depressed without sunshine. It also doesn't provide water for the flood, because that much water in the atmosphere would crush all life, as has already been explained to you. Why are you saying this? I completely agree that the Bible wasn't written on the basis of conventional cosmology. YOU think the Bible agrees with conventional cosmology. I think Genesis says there's a hard vaulted dome that is called the sky that has the sun, moon, and stars in it, with water stored on top of the dome to be poured out through holes to come down as rain. You're the one who thinks it's scientifically accurate and the writer of Genesis knew the sun was 93 million miles away. The text most certainly defines the firmament. It says it has the sun, moon, and stars in it and there's water above it. If that description is scientifically accurate, then the water obviously IS in outer space. The reason you and I agree the water is OBVIOUSLY not in outer space is because science has told us the sun is 93 million miles away, the moon 250,000 miles away, and the stars thousands or tens of thousands of light years away, and you and I agree with science that there's not water wrapped in a big sphere around those stars.Since you accept that science disproves what Genesis 1 says about a firmament, then I don't understand why you can't accept that science disproves the six days, on one of which that firmament was created.Or are you willing to stick with the Bible and say that the sun, moon, and stars are close enough to have water on top of them, and the sky is hard enough to hold the water up? If literal is good, let's take it all the way. There are people who do, you know, and they would consider you to be taking terrible liberties with the Bible in the name of "context," especially since whatever context you were referring to doesn't exist.

Thanks for the smiley tip, Comp.