A missing Link to Genesis 1:6 God said, “I command a dome to separate the water above it from the water below it.”

[Yorzhik]

Humankind has dug deeply into the earth in many locations.
Nowhere have they hit a "metal liner".

We've never gotten near the bottom of the granite crust, but it would sure seem like any metal liner would have been disintegrated like the tissue it would be (relative to the crust it was lining) when the crust moved even a little bit - and in the flood the crust moved a lot.

 

[Right Divider]

We've never gotten near the bottom of the granite crust,

The OP'er seemed to indicate that this "liner" was near the top.

but it would sure seem like any metal liner would have been disintegrated like the tissue it would be (relative to the crust it was lining) when the crust moved even a little bit - and in the flood the crust moved a lot.

One of the initial conditions of the flood was the bursting of the granite crust. A "metal liner" does not fit in with that scenario.

The whole "metal liner" was the "firmament" of Gen 1:6 is just ridiculous from start to finish.

 

[tieman55]

Humankind has dug deeply into the earth in many locations.
Nowhere have they hit a "metal liner".

It is important to understand that the proposed dome had water below it and land above it. It had equal pressure on both sides of that barrier. I noted this in my "compressive strength" analysis of maraging steel. The same alloy that makes up Hoba gains strength when compressed.

When the dome failed, all of the compressive strength was then and forever sheared into aggregate, so it is very unlikely that many portions as big as Hoba still exist.

From Deepai
Q. Are there any drilling records of finding iron/nickel layers in the 5000 to 10000 meter's depth?
A. Yes, there are several drilling records of finding iron-nickel layers in the 5,000-10,000 meter depth range. Here are a few examples:

1. Kola Superdeep Borehole (Russia): The Kola Superdeep Borehole drilled by the Soviet Union's Academy of Sciences in the 1970s and 1980s encountered layers of iron-rich rocks and minerals at depths between 9,000-10,000 meters. The hole also penetrated a nickel-bearing serpentinized peridotite layer at around 10,000 meters deep.
2. Mohn Ridge Drilling Project (Norway): During the Mohn Ridge Drilling Project in the 1990s, scientists drilled a hole to a depth of around 9,000 meters in the Mohn Ridge area of the Norwegian Sea. The project encountered a layer of iron-rich sediments and hydrothermal alteration at around 7,000-8,000 meters deep, which was thought to be related to the presence of hydrothermal fluids.
3. Ocean Drilling Program (ODP) Leg 139 (East Pacific Ocean): During ODP Leg 139 in the 1990s, scientists drilled a hole to a depth of around 9,000 meters in the East Pacific Ocean. The project encountered a layer of iron-nickel-rich rocks and minerals at around 8,000-9,000 meters deep, which were thought to be related to the presence of hydrothermal vents.
4. Deep Sea Drilling Project (DSDP) Site 504 (East Pacific Ocean): During DSDP Site 504 in the 1970s, scientists drilled a hole to a depth of around 7,000 meters in the East Pacific Ocean. The project encountered a layer of iron-rich sediments and hydrothermal alteration at around 5,500-6,500 meters deep, which was thought to be related to the presence of hydrothermal fluids.

These are just a few examples of drilling projects that have encountered iron-nickel layers in the 5,000-10,000 meter depth range. There are likely many other drilling records that have documented similar findings.

It's worth noting that these drilling projects were not specifically designed to target iron-nickel layers, but rather were focused on understanding the geological history and structure of the Earth's crust and mantle.

 

[Yorzhik]

The OP'er seemed to indicate that this "liner" was near the top.

Seems like he was saying it lined the fountains of the deep directly, which would put it at the top of the fountain chamber and the bottom of the crust, no? Would it make a difference?

One of the initial conditions of the flood was the bursting of the granite crust. A "metal liner" does not fit in with that scenario.

Why not? It would hardly be an obstacle.

The whole "metal liner" was the "firmament" of Gen 1:6 is just ridiculous from start to finish.

I don't care enough to re-read, but I read the OP as a metal liner on the firmament.

 

[Derf]

Nope. The firmament in Gen 1:6 is the crust of the earth.
Where the birds fly is "the firmament of the heaven".

Yeah, it's pretty confusing that the crust of the earth is called "heavens", and the firmament of the heavens is not the one under those heavens.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yeah, it's pretty confusing that the crust of the earth is called "heavens", and the firmament of the heavens is not the one under those heavens.

It's not confusing at all.

The "firmament" is the crust.

The "firmament of the heavens" is the sky. There is a clear delineation between the two in the text by the use of the phrase "of the heavens."

 

[Bladerunner]

The OP'er seemed to indicate that this "liner" was near the top.

One of the initial conditions of the flood was the bursting of the granite crust. A "metal liner" does not fit in with that scenario.

The whole "metal liner" was the "firmament" of Gen 1:6 is just ridiculous from start to finish.

Your right..the firmament was/is as a snow globe over the earth. through it doors opened and water that was above it fell on the earth during the that year. Of course the crust of the ocean also open up and gave her water to the flood.

 

[Yorzhik]

Your right..the firmament was/is as a snow globe over the earth. through it doors opened and water that was above it fell on the earth during the that year. Of course the crust of the ocean also open up and gave her water to the flood.

Well, you could interpret it that way, but I don't think God is that bad at communicating.

Then you have to deal with the science that should be consistent with reality, and what you say here is inconsistent with what we see in science. Do you actually know anything about the Hydroplate theory?

 

[Derf]

It's not confusing at all.

The "firmament" is the crust.

The "firmament of the heavens" is the sky. There is a clear delineation between the two in the text by the use of the phrase "of the heavens."

The firmament CALLED heaven is the earth. You guys keep leaving that part out. The story is about the creation of 2 things, the heavens and the earth. But somehow the firmament called heaven is really the earth, and the firmament that is not called heaven is the firmament of heaven.

And you don't think that's confusing?

 

[Bladerunner]

Well, you could interpret it that way, but I don't think God is that bad at communicating.

Then you have to deal with the science that should be consistent with reality, and what you say here is inconsistent with what we see in science. Do you actually know anything about the Hydroplate theory?

Yes I know about Dr. Brown..the atheist.

 

[Derf]

Yes I know about Dr. Brown..the atheist.

?

 

[Bladerunner]

?

Dr. Walt Brown's ---it his theory...or did you not know that?

 

[Derf]

Dr. Walt Brown's ---it his theory...or did you not know that?

I don't think he's an atheist, do you?

 

[Bladerunner]

I don't think he's an atheist, do you?

He believes in scientific creationism.....that is about as far from GOD as you can get.

 

[Derf]

He believes in scientific creationism.....that is about as far from GOD as you can get.

Why do you say that (the part about scientific creationism being far from God)?

 

[Bladerunner]

Why do you say that (the part about scientific creationism being far from God)?

Because he does not believe GODs WORD.....simple as that. He says in his theory that the continental plates were made at the time of the flood. NOT so.........So He wants to write His own Bible and not listen to God.

 

[Derf]

Because he does not believe GODs WORD.....simple as that. He says in his theory that the continental plates were made at the time of the flood. NOT so.........So He wants to write His own Bible and not listen to God.

And you have a passage in the bible that says the plates were made at a different time in history? Please tell me where to find it.

I don't see how describing a theory of how the world was made and how it changed at the flood is atheistic in any respect, unless it actually denies the existence of God. I don't believe Walt Brown, nor his theory, deny God's existence in any way at all.

 

[Bladerunner]

And you have a passage in the bible that says the plates were made at a different time in history? Please tell me where to find it.

Gen 10:25.."And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan." The flood happened in Gen 7. yet the earth was not divided up until Peleg.

I don't see how describing a theory of how the world was made and how it changed at thI could e flood is atheistic in any respect, unless it actually denies the existence of God. I don't believe Walt Brown, nor his theory, deny God's existence in any way at all.

I could say I have a theory of how the earth was formed, leaving out God's WORD or changing it to fit my view of creation.

 

[Derf]

Gen 10:25.."And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan." The flood happened in Gen 7. yet the earth was not divided up until Peleg.

I could say I have a theory of how the earth was formed, leaving out God's WORD or changing it to fit my view of creation.

None of which makes Walt Brown, or would make you, an atheist.

 

[JudgeRightly]

The firmament CALLED heaven is the earth. You guys keep leaving that part out.

We've never left that part out. I seem to recall trying to convince you of that fact a while back.

The story is about the creation of 2 things, the heavens and the earth. But somehow the firmament called heaven is really the earth, and the firmament that is not called heaven is the firmament of heaven.

And you don't think that's confusing?

The firmament God made in the midst of the waters the Spirit of God was hovering over in verse two is the crust of the earth. That firmament was called heaven.

God did not specifically make a "firmament of the heavens" because it's not something to be made, except through the creation of ground upon which to stand and look up from.

So no! It's not confusing at all. In fact, it makes FAR more sense than having the firmament be the sky and the firmament of the heavens be the sky... When they are clearly two different things, just based on the wording alone.

Just like I picked up the trunk, and put it in the trunk of my car...

So too God made a firmament in the midst of the waters, and put the stars in the firmament of the heavens.

The other clue is that God was not finished making on day two, given the lack of "and it was good," but which next is given at the end of day three.

You wouldn't call something good if you're not finished making it.

God made the crust of the earth on day two, and finished making the crust on day three, by having it settle, which caused the waters to gather in one place and which caused the dry land to appear.

In other words, God used physics to bring about His will for the seas to gather and for the dry land to appear.

How great is our God who used gravity to form the crust of the earth!!!