Do oceans of water in mantle rock prove the flood?

God makes everything happen, but He normally doesn't use miraculous means.

ABE:

Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

/ABE

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

What is described is presented as physical phenomena that happen to be different from the current situation, physical and natural nevertheless.

Have you forgotten that you don't know any physics?

but nevertheless it is presented as natural and physical and not supernatural.

Well, no. Unless you want to designate all of God's actions as natural, there is no such implication in the Biblical text that things just followed the rules of nature.

God announces that he is going to destroy most of the living beings on earth with a Flood, and then you assume that he did absolutely nothing and the Flood just happened naturally.

There is nothing in the Biblical account that is inconsistent with God taking supernatural action, and every implication that things happened under God's direction and timing. That's particularly true about the timing and events causing the Flood.

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Your quote does not say how God does any of those things. Surely you saw that lack before you posted it, so I'm wondering why you bothered.

Further you say this: "God makes everything happen, but He normally doesn't use miraculous means."

I take this to mean that you understand there are exceptions to the non miraculous means rule in the Bible.

Nobody has ever suggested that there are "oceans" of water in the Sun, or a great "reservoir" of water there, but this is what is said about the mineral-bound WATER in the deep rocks of the earth.

I will if you like.

There are oceans of water in the sun, a great reservoir of water.

This is false, but then it's false when lazy journalists say it about the ringwoodite, so there you go. Now someone's said it. Apparently for the purposes of creationism, all that matters is whether someone's said it, not whether it's true.

Also nobody has ever suggested that the Flood waters went anywhere but back into the ocean basins.

Er, yes they have. For example, some people have suggested that it went into the ringwoodite in the mantle. Now, if we're not going to worry about how it got there, why not say it went to the Sun?

You apparently have some kind of agenda to muddy up the discussion as much as possible.

I'm actually trying to clarify your thinking. I know the process is painful. It's painful for me too. It's like trying to squeeze water from a stone.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

There is nothing supernatural stated or implied in the Biblical account of the physical phenomena involving the Flood. What is described is presented as physical phenomena that happen to be different from the current situation, physical and natural nevertheless. What the "fountains of the deep" means is not at all clear to me, and possibly nobody who has interpreted it gets it right, but nevertheless it is presented as natural and physical and not supernatural.

That is correct and should be one big reason to discount the Biblical Flood stories as being factual.

"Data that supports the flood." Oh yawn, this gets tedious. Bazillions of fossils are, ya know, VERY consistent with the idea of a worldwide Flood that killed, ya know, bazillions of living things [abe: And buried them en masse under conditions ideal for fossilization too, wetness and pressure. /abe]. Yeah you can interpret them in a different way but just on the face of it they are fantasic evidence for such an event. Yawn, sigh. And the strata themselves, those different kinds of sediments laid down one on top of another, are awfully like something that water does with sediments, ya know, yawn, sigh. And the idea of "oceans" of water in any form at all sure does suggest,-- suggest mind you, only "suggest" -- oceans of water that once were. Sigh. Yawn. Hiccup.

It does not matter how many times you repeat a falsehood, it is still false.

In fact, the ordering of those fossils and the reality of the geology totally disprove there was ever a natural event like Biblical Floods as every honest scientist for the last 100 to 150 years knows.

You can keep repeating falsehoods but until you can present the natural mechanisms that explain the data seen you are just plain wrong.

Edited by jar, : exp0lain ---> explain

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

They all look like they were laid down at the same time.

To you perhaps.

To those who are not blinded by old tribal myths, the geological strata and the fossils they contain are easily read as the record of billions of years.

Evidence of this has been presented to you in many different threads here.

But then, you have stated on more than one occasion that evidence doesn't matter if it goes against your belief.

That's sad. They say, "A mind is a terrible thing to waste." You could be the poster child for that saying, and the saddest thing is that you've done it to yourself.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

Porosity writes: And still yet, you need to prove the ringwoodite stored 400 miles below the Earth’s surface (that is not liquid, ice or vapor)- split from hydroxyl radical, bound into a mineral crystal, made it to the surface in liquid form. And then went back to a mineral crystal structure through 400 miles of solid rock!

My point is that it's no use even trying to prove that. It doesn't get you any closer to proving the Flood.

Faith writes: God makes everything happen, but He normally doesn't use miraculous means. quote: Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

I think that quite clearly suggests that He does use miraculous means. Did He just flip a switch or strike a match? No, He used some method that is not available to us.

They all look like they were laid down at the same time. To you perhaps.

To you too, if you're being honest. There is no sign of any difference in wear and tear from bottom to top of the column, some billions of years according to you guys.

To those who are not blinded by old tribal myths, the geological strata and the fossils they contain are easily read as the record of billions of years.

Not "easily." It takes some fancy interpretive work to deny the obvious, which is that there is no sign of a difference between the "older" and the "recent" or of any kind of what is considered to be normal activity during those long long periods of time.

Evidence of this has been presented to you in many different threads here.

Which of course I've answered.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

As I said, there is nothing that ever happens that is not God's doing, but very few things He does are truly miraculous and those are clearly designated in the scripture, which the events of the Flood are not. When the "fountains of the deep" are mentioned there is no hint of there being anything miraculous about their existence or their being released. Now, when the scripture says that God closed the door to the ark after Noah and company were all inside you could take that as an unusual intervention. Otherwise you can suppose that everything you experience every day has God's hand in it.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

But I'm not talking about getting water OUT of the stone, the whole idea is that it went INTO the stone.

And nobody has yet accounted for why the stories about this discovery keep talking about "oceans" of water and a huge "reservoir" of water if all they mean is the "water" that exists on the sun, about which nobody ever speaks of "oceans" or "reservoirs." Kindly answer the question. "Lazy journalists" doesn't do it, they obviously got it from the scientists working on it.

The question is Why mention water at all if it's really just a mineral they are talking about?

Faith writes: God makes everything happen, but He normally doesn't use miraculous means.

Just to be clear, god causing the world to be flooded above the highest mountain was not a miracle?

God makes everything happen, but He normally doesn't use miraculous means.

I do not understand the difference. If god performs some action and he is divine, as indicated by most doctrines, than any action he performs would be considered miraculous.

And how precisely are you drawing the distinction?

The vast majority of events do not violate any natural laws, although God is in all of them. It's only those that violate natural laws that are called miraculous, such as causing the sun to move backwards or bringing someone who had died back to life or turning water into wine.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Just to be clear, god causing the world to be flooded above the highest mountain was not a miracle?

No. Scripture implies a natural source for the water, not a miraculous source.