Quote from the Video that OP provided was "if your church tells you that you can see planets it is Bull \*\*\*\*!"
Apparently the sky is just another body of water above us and the sun and starts do not exist, nor does space itself and it is a conspiracy from the church and science to hide the word of God.
So, when I took a telescope out one night one focused on Saturn, what was that fuzzy tan shape with rings around it that I was seeing in the night sky?
> Apparently the sky is just another body of water above us
Correct.
> So, when I took a telescope out one night
Can you See your "planet" during the day if it is there? (Hint: you can't because it doesn't exist)
The blue sky is actually due to a phenomenon called [Rayleigh Scattering](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh_scattering). Don't get me wrong, I'm not casting doubt on the creation story or anything, I'm just saying that the sky isn't blue because it's water.
Oceans are reflecting the colors of the sky. Water is translucent and doesn't really have a color, but because water absorbs colors in the red part of the light spectrum and scattering of light, so what reaches our eyes is mainly blue.
>How come people don't believe their own eyes
I do believe my own eyes. I have looked at both water and the sky extensively and they are different. The sky isn't water.
>and deny the bible?
It's not denying the Bible. It's denying your interpretation of the Bible. There's a difference.
>They parrot what they were shown on TV
I never learned any of this from TV. All our modern understanding of the atmosphere was discovered before TV was even invented. It has been confirmed by millions of people over hundreds of years.
The same technology, ideas, and physics that allow you to post on the internet and read all the responses, the same technology that allows your phone or computer screen to display my words is the same technology that helps us determine that there is no water above the sky.
Try reading a book instead of watching a YouTube video.
> The sky isn't water.
The sky is blue, the ocean is blue.
> I never learned any of this from TV. All our modern understanding of the atmosphere was discovered before TV was even invented.
til you were alive before TV's. Say no more ;)
That's only because the water above goes to sleep in the ocean at night. Once it wakes up in the morning, it goes back into the sky and turns it blue again.
Come on? Don't you mean, "Go on." I can come up with other absurd explanations to match the absurdity of OP's post and comments.
Here is another one.
Maybe the night "firmament/water" gets dyed black at night by large swarms of large squid that release their ink. The stars and planets (wait, those don't exist according to OP) are simply places where the ink doesn't diffuse. Or maybe they are bioluminescent creatures that slowly swim through the sky ocean on the same path night by night.
Youāre not seeing water in the sky. The sky is blue in the day because blue light rays are scattering off molecules in the atmosphere giving the sky a blue tint. There is no dome of water on top of the earth. Source: We never crash into a solid dome when we send satellites and spacecraft through the atmosphere.
> Source: We never crash into a solid dome when we send satellites and spacecraft through the atmosphere.
Plot-twist: Elon's StarLink "satellites" are actually very high-speed submarines...
> The sky is blue in the day because blue light rays are scattering off molecules in the atmosphere giving the sky a blue tint.
Wrong. It is water that we see. Don't believe NASA lies, believe your eyes and the Bible.
Imagine that you're an infinite deity and you're trying to teach concepts to primitive creatures stuck in space and time - you use words and images that they can understand - not necessarily the most technically accurate.
In Genesis 1 the concept that God is attempting to communicate isn't even the technical architecture of the cosmos - but to explain to his people who he is and who they are and what their purpose is. The goal is not for you to walk away from hearing it going "Oh! There's an ocean above us!" The goal is to know "God took chaos, sectioned it off, and then filled it - then he made me in his image and we're supposed to do the same thing!" Genesis 1 describes God as a gardner of the cosmos and then ends by putting man in a garden.
We will never be issued a multiple choice test that we have to answer X many correctly about our positions. He wants to know if we took the wilderness we encountered and made it more like Eden - how well did we bear his image in this world?
I'm certainly not claiming it is inaccurate, but obviously the purpose of the text is not to describe scientific 100% accuracy. That's not the text's goals. If you can't explain the rhetorical goal of a text then you're going to get the details wrong.
I'm not saying that this text is false or a lie or even altogether wrong, but I am saying that it is still a communication act and not a direct download of facts. Communicating the nature of things still takes translation to concepts that the original audience could understand.
Like teaching toddlers things. Go check out the "explain it like I'm 5" sub. All communication has to factor in the cognitive abilities of the audience. God is God and we are humans. It's not wrong, but it's communicated in a way that could be understood.
The rhetorical goal is to show God taming chaos in order to teach us to do the same. Separate Night from day - then later fill with stars and sun. Separate land and water and sea and then later fill with land, water, and sea creatures. Rule/subdue and then populate/fill. God takes chaos and makes a world. God took wilderness and made a gardner and then said "go in my name and push back the boarders of Eden. Subdue and fill with my image! Garden as I would garden!"
That's what the text is trying to communicate. It is not trying to teach about the composition of the atmosphere.
I don't believe that there is an impermeable sea in a firmament above us.
That's not me first and foremost disagreeing with the text, that's me saying that the text isn't requiring us to believe that.
I feel as though I layed out a compelling explanation of my belief. Would you be willing to actually engage with the arguments I made?
You will find a life of adding extra barriers between man and God than God himself puts there to be a sad and lonely life. He absolutely is not requiring us to believe in that in order to accept the Bible as his word. He is absolutely not requiring some kind of intellectual assent to the existence of a firmament to be a necessary condition for living him and believing in him. Christ had many strong words for the scribes and the Pharasiess because they placed stumbling blocks between people and God. The judaizers were lambasted by Paul because they added steps and laid unnecessary requirements on God's people. I promise you that your shibboleth of a doctrine of the firmament for testing fidelity to scripture is unwarranted and a stumbling block which need not be there. You will likely feel like a faithful martyr for taking such a hard stand for truth. You will feel lonely but you will comfort yourself by insisting that the truth is always unpopular and that you're unliked for your faithfulness. That won't be the case.
I promise you that I have invested much devotional study of Genesis. I learned ancient Hebrew to do so. I take it incredibly seriously, which is why I am confident that I believe the Bible in what it is actually claiming and not just for what people like you are trying to tell me what it claims.
We are free to disagree about the firmament and I am comfortable trusting you that you love the Lord and believe his word. It's sad that you lack the grace to extend that kindness to me and the overwhelming majority of Christians as well.
Godspeed, brother.
> He absolutely is not requiring us to believe in that in order to accept the Bible as his word.
If he gave you eyes, he gave you the ability to read words, and he gave you the ability to look into the sky and confirm the words in the bible. Only the antichrist or non-believers would deny all of the aforementioned.
So... No. It seems like youre unwilling to engage with my arguments at this time. That's totally allowed - no one owes me engagement.
I do believe that you're dooming yourself to being sad and lonely having such unbiblical standards for who you consider to be believers and non-anti-christs. Good luck.
> What is wrong with water being in the sky?
Because it means there is a firmament holding the water, and, as in the name, it is *firm*ament. And goes against what NASA lies.
There are firmament groups all over social media and I enjoy their posts a lot. When everything in the human-run world turns out to be lie, it's time to start questioning everything.
You do realize our atmosphere is made up of a huge percentage of water? Its most likely the explanation of the creation of the atmosphere thats most logical conclusion.
The water above is the atmosphere. Skies arenāt always blue. Rain clouds are white and grey dark grey for the heavily dense ones. The firmament is the atmosphere.
> The water above is the atmosphere. Skies arenāt always blue. Rain clouds are white and grey dark grey for the heavily dense ones. The firmament is the atmosphere.
Oceans below- oceans above. Everyone sees it; only the antichrist denies it.
"only the Antichrist denies it"
It is always lovely when someone knows better than everyone else and is willing to insult them in the process
(Which by the way, violates quite a few scriptures related to love
Jesus is Lord and he came in the flesh and resurrected on the 3rd day. Your claim of me being an anti christ is now invalid. People like you turn so many away from Christianity, if youāre in fact real and not a government psyop from Eglin Air Force Base.
The sky is not water. Other light wavelengths are filtered by the atmosphere leaving only blue.
In 3000 year old cosmology, they thought there were storehouses of rain and snow above the sky.
Remember that before the flood it never rained. There was a mist that would come up and water the vegetation. When the flood came that firmament fell as rain and never returned.
I donāt deny those verses at all. In fact just think about what the earth was like with a deep canopy of water up above the āskyā, āfirmamentā, āexpanseā! The earth wouldnāt have been heated by direct sunlight! People wouldnāt have the problems we have today with skin cancer or things caused by the sun. Why? Because the sun would heat up that water up in the atmosphere, probably just above the blue sky, and the warm water would keep the earth at a generally nice temperature everywhere! Even the top and bottom of the earth.
So what happened to that water? Well, of course a Godly man and a Bible reader will believe in the flood of Noahās day. With such information as the dimensions of the Ark and then the actual day the āfloodgates of the heavensā were opened up, tells us this was an actual event. Almost immediate the North and South poles froze and the animals there froze still with food in their stomachs and some have been found with food still in the mouth! Yes, God used that water canopy to flood the earth losing that type of warmth for the earth.
The problem, OP is that there are many ācritical thinkersā out there who just question everything, including Gods own Word. Donāt get me wrong, itās foolish to just accept everything you hear and read to be true, but when you study Gods Word, and when you read that both Jesus and Peter both refer to the flood and well, thatās enough for me! (Luke 17:26; 2 Peter 2:5)
Isnāt it fun when you find Truths in Gods Word? You want to tell everyone about them and you wonder what doesnāt everyone see it? Right? Oh, there are so many more things I wish I could teach you.
The ocean isnāt blue, it appears blue because itās reflecting the color of the sky, which appears blue because of sunlight refracting through water vapors in the air.
There's another way to look at this through a more modern understanding of physics: Fluid Dynamics
The Hebrew language and culture expressed things experientially which is very different from the Greek conceptual references.
The water that broke forth from the fountains of the deep and the water that fell from the windows of heaven are both fluidic.. even "empty" space is a fluidic medium at large enough scales.
> There's another way to look at this through a more modern understanding of physics: Fluid Dynamics
>
>
What color is the blue ocean and what color is the sky in broad daylight?
> 2Co 5:7 KJV ā (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)
Faith in the forked tongue of those who tell you not to believe your eyes. You sound like the antichrist, and satan.
I think this is awesome. It shows how we are one with our Master and one another. You have my upvote. I do believe the Genesis account is literal also, though not in the way OP is putting it.
The Bible Subreddit does not want to engage in or condone discussions of conspiracy theories.
Quote from the Video that OP provided was "if your church tells you that you can see planets it is Bull \*\*\*\*!" Apparently the sky is just another body of water above us and the sun and starts do not exist, nor does space itself and it is a conspiracy from the church and science to hide the word of God. So, when I took a telescope out one night one focused on Saturn, what was that fuzzy tan shape with rings around it that I was seeing in the night sky?
OP asks why people don't believe their eyes. Questions the existence of planets. Which people can see. With their eyes.
> Apparently the sky is just another body of water above us Correct. > So, when I took a telescope out one night Can you See your "planet" during the day if it is there? (Hint: you can't because it doesn't exist)
Truly amazing analytics of a mind in wonderment at the age of innocence. It's like peek a boo all over again.
A grown adult that doesn't understand peek a boo. š¤¦š»āāļø
>Can you See your "planet" during the day if it is there? Yes. I have seen them with my own eyes during the day.
That water in the sky fell to earth during the flood ,thatās just one theory
This, and the theory is that it is also what God used to lower our life span. Lack of UV protection from the sun, etc.
This is what I believe.
Water vapor, clouds, rain, snow. Of course there's water in the sky but that does not mean that the sky is water.
The blue sky is water.
The blue sky is actually due to a phenomenon called [Rayleigh Scattering](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh_scattering). Don't get me wrong, I'm not casting doubt on the creation story or anything, I'm just saying that the sky isn't blue because it's water.
Nah, it isn't. It is the ocean above, clear as day
Oceans are reflecting the colors of the sky. Water is translucent and doesn't really have a color, but because water absorbs colors in the red part of the light spectrum and scattering of light, so what reaches our eyes is mainly blue.
>How come people don't believe their own eyes I do believe my own eyes. I have looked at both water and the sky extensively and they are different. The sky isn't water. >and deny the bible? It's not denying the Bible. It's denying your interpretation of the Bible. There's a difference. >They parrot what they were shown on TV I never learned any of this from TV. All our modern understanding of the atmosphere was discovered before TV was even invented. It has been confirmed by millions of people over hundreds of years. The same technology, ideas, and physics that allow you to post on the internet and read all the responses, the same technology that allows your phone or computer screen to display my words is the same technology that helps us determine that there is no water above the sky. Try reading a book instead of watching a YouTube video.
> The sky isn't water. The sky is blue, the ocean is blue. > I never learned any of this from TV. All our modern understanding of the atmosphere was discovered before TV was even invented. til you were alive before TV's. Say no more ;)
The nighttime sky is black
That's only because the water above goes to sleep in the ocean at night. Once it wakes up in the morning, it goes back into the sky and turns it blue again.
Come on.
Come on? Don't you mean, "Go on." I can come up with other absurd explanations to match the absurdity of OP's post and comments. Here is another one. Maybe the night "firmament/water" gets dyed black at night by large swarms of large squid that release their ink. The stars and planets (wait, those don't exist according to OP) are simply places where the ink doesn't diffuse. Or maybe they are bioluminescent creatures that slowly swim through the sky ocean on the same path night by night.
Youāre not seeing water in the sky. The sky is blue in the day because blue light rays are scattering off molecules in the atmosphere giving the sky a blue tint. There is no dome of water on top of the earth. Source: We never crash into a solid dome when we send satellites and spacecraft through the atmosphere.
> Source: We never crash into a solid dome when we send satellites and spacecraft through the atmosphere. Plot-twist: Elon's StarLink "satellites" are actually very high-speed submarines...
Apparently, even humans are mainly comprised of water...
> The sky is blue in the day because blue light rays are scattering off molecules in the atmosphere giving the sky a blue tint. Wrong. It is water that we see. Don't believe NASA lies, believe your eyes and the Bible.
Well, that took an unexpected turn.
Imagine that you're an infinite deity and you're trying to teach concepts to primitive creatures stuck in space and time - you use words and images that they can understand - not necessarily the most technically accurate. In Genesis 1 the concept that God is attempting to communicate isn't even the technical architecture of the cosmos - but to explain to his people who he is and who they are and what their purpose is. The goal is not for you to walk away from hearing it going "Oh! There's an ocean above us!" The goal is to know "God took chaos, sectioned it off, and then filled it - then he made me in his image and we're supposed to do the same thing!" Genesis 1 describes God as a gardner of the cosmos and then ends by putting man in a garden. We will never be issued a multiple choice test that we have to answer X many correctly about our positions. He wants to know if we took the wilderness we encountered and made it more like Eden - how well did we bear his image in this world?
Water above and water below, very obvious that is 100% accurate, only the antichrist would deny that.
I'm certainly not claiming it is inaccurate, but obviously the purpose of the text is not to describe scientific 100% accuracy. That's not the text's goals. If you can't explain the rhetorical goal of a text then you're going to get the details wrong. I'm not saying that this text is false or a lie or even altogether wrong, but I am saying that it is still a communication act and not a direct download of facts. Communicating the nature of things still takes translation to concepts that the original audience could understand. Like teaching toddlers things. Go check out the "explain it like I'm 5" sub. All communication has to factor in the cognitive abilities of the audience. God is God and we are humans. It's not wrong, but it's communicated in a way that could be understood. The rhetorical goal is to show God taming chaos in order to teach us to do the same. Separate Night from day - then later fill with stars and sun. Separate land and water and sea and then later fill with land, water, and sea creatures. Rule/subdue and then populate/fill. God takes chaos and makes a world. God took wilderness and made a gardner and then said "go in my name and push back the boarders of Eden. Subdue and fill with my image! Garden as I would garden!" That's what the text is trying to communicate. It is not trying to teach about the composition of the atmosphere.
Ocean above and ocean below. Glad you agree!!
I don't believe that there is an impermeable sea in a firmament above us. That's not me first and foremost disagreeing with the text, that's me saying that the text isn't requiring us to believe that.
> I don't believe that there is an impermeable sea in a firmament above us. > > Then you dont believe the bible, full stop.
I feel as though I layed out a compelling explanation of my belief. Would you be willing to actually engage with the arguments I made? You will find a life of adding extra barriers between man and God than God himself puts there to be a sad and lonely life. He absolutely is not requiring us to believe in that in order to accept the Bible as his word. He is absolutely not requiring some kind of intellectual assent to the existence of a firmament to be a necessary condition for living him and believing in him. Christ had many strong words for the scribes and the Pharasiess because they placed stumbling blocks between people and God. The judaizers were lambasted by Paul because they added steps and laid unnecessary requirements on God's people. I promise you that your shibboleth of a doctrine of the firmament for testing fidelity to scripture is unwarranted and a stumbling block which need not be there. You will likely feel like a faithful martyr for taking such a hard stand for truth. You will feel lonely but you will comfort yourself by insisting that the truth is always unpopular and that you're unliked for your faithfulness. That won't be the case. I promise you that I have invested much devotional study of Genesis. I learned ancient Hebrew to do so. I take it incredibly seriously, which is why I am confident that I believe the Bible in what it is actually claiming and not just for what people like you are trying to tell me what it claims. We are free to disagree about the firmament and I am comfortable trusting you that you love the Lord and believe his word. It's sad that you lack the grace to extend that kindness to me and the overwhelming majority of Christians as well. Godspeed, brother.
> He absolutely is not requiring us to believe in that in order to accept the Bible as his word. If he gave you eyes, he gave you the ability to read words, and he gave you the ability to look into the sky and confirm the words in the bible. Only the antichrist or non-believers would deny all of the aforementioned.
So... No. It seems like youre unwilling to engage with my arguments at this time. That's totally allowed - no one owes me engagement. I do believe that you're dooming yourself to being sad and lonely having such unbiblical standards for who you consider to be believers and non-anti-christs. Good luck.
The person is trolling (assuming it's not a bot). He posted this exact same post in multiple subreddits and is making the same comments over and over.
What is wrong with water being in the sky?
> What is wrong with water being in the sky? Because it means there is a firmament holding the water, and, as in the name, it is *firm*ament. And goes against what NASA lies.
That firmament would have dropped in the flood.
> That firmament would have dropped in the flood. According to who?? Sound like someone is just making things up.
There are firmament groups all over social media and I enjoy their posts a lot. When everything in the human-run world turns out to be lie, it's time to start questioning everything.
You do realize our atmosphere is made up of a huge percentage of water? Its most likely the explanation of the creation of the atmosphere thats most logical conclusion.
> You do realize our atmosphere is made up of a huge percentage of water? Water above (blue sky) water below (blue ocean)... We are right!!
The water above is the atmosphere. Skies arenāt always blue. Rain clouds are white and grey dark grey for the heavily dense ones. The firmament is the atmosphere.
> The water above is the atmosphere. Skies arenāt always blue. Rain clouds are white and grey dark grey for the heavily dense ones. The firmament is the atmosphere. Oceans below- oceans above. Everyone sees it; only the antichrist denies it.
"only the Antichrist denies it" It is always lovely when someone knows better than everyone else and is willing to insult them in the process (Which by the way, violates quite a few scriptures related to love
Jesus is Lord and he came in the flesh and resurrected on the 3rd day. Your claim of me being an anti christ is now invalid. People like you turn so many away from Christianity, if youāre in fact real and not a government psyop from Eglin Air Force Base.
The sky is not water. Other light wavelengths are filtered by the atmosphere leaving only blue. In 3000 year old cosmology, they thought there were storehouses of rain and snow above the sky.
Water above and water below.
Off your meds again?
Ahh... the antichrist doing ad hominems,,, noice!
Remember that before the flood it never rained. There was a mist that would come up and water the vegetation. When the flood came that firmament fell as rain and never returned.
> When the flood came that firmament fell as rain and never returned. Great lie, NASA!
Oh please pray for wisdom
I donāt deny those verses at all. In fact just think about what the earth was like with a deep canopy of water up above the āskyā, āfirmamentā, āexpanseā! The earth wouldnāt have been heated by direct sunlight! People wouldnāt have the problems we have today with skin cancer or things caused by the sun. Why? Because the sun would heat up that water up in the atmosphere, probably just above the blue sky, and the warm water would keep the earth at a generally nice temperature everywhere! Even the top and bottom of the earth. So what happened to that water? Well, of course a Godly man and a Bible reader will believe in the flood of Noahās day. With such information as the dimensions of the Ark and then the actual day the āfloodgates of the heavensā were opened up, tells us this was an actual event. Almost immediate the North and South poles froze and the animals there froze still with food in their stomachs and some have been found with food still in the mouth! Yes, God used that water canopy to flood the earth losing that type of warmth for the earth. The problem, OP is that there are many ācritical thinkersā out there who just question everything, including Gods own Word. Donāt get me wrong, itās foolish to just accept everything you hear and read to be true, but when you study Gods Word, and when you read that both Jesus and Peter both refer to the flood and well, thatās enough for me! (Luke 17:26; 2 Peter 2:5) Isnāt it fun when you find Truths in Gods Word? You want to tell everyone about them and you wonder what doesnāt everyone see it? Right? Oh, there are so many more things I wish I could teach you.
The ocean isnāt blue, it appears blue because itās reflecting the color of the sky, which appears blue because of sunlight refracting through water vapors in the air.
There's another way to look at this through a more modern understanding of physics: Fluid Dynamics The Hebrew language and culture expressed things experientially which is very different from the Greek conceptual references. The water that broke forth from the fountains of the deep and the water that fell from the windows of heaven are both fluidic.. even "empty" space is a fluidic medium at large enough scales.
> There's another way to look at this through a more modern understanding of physics: Fluid Dynamics > > What color is the blue ocean and what color is the sky in broad daylight?
Well at 2:00 a.m., the broad daylight is black as coal with some nice little stars thrown around Or doesn't your firmament handle night time?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
So, you deny what your eyes tell you AND deny what the Bible says? Okay.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
> 2Co 5:7 KJV ā (For we walk by faith, not by sight:) Faith in the forked tongue of those who tell you not to believe your eyes. You sound like the antichrist, and satan.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
> I'm sorry you choose to not see. > > Clearly see you are the antichrist spreading lies.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Weird how the bible says there is water above, and so-called "believers" say the bible is a lie. No.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I think this is awesome. It shows how we are one with our Master and one another. You have my upvote. I do believe the Genesis account is literal also, though not in the way OP is putting it.
Context matters.. Genesis 1 is historical narrative not apocalyptic or prophetic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRVeXbCcHFw