Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) (sci.geo.meteorology) For the discussion of meteorology and related topics. |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rev 21.1 seems to mean that in the 'new time' there will be no more
sea. Perhaps he means just the great sea, but that couldn't dry up unless as isthmus formed across the straits of Gibraltar, as, in a past eon, when the Meditteranean actually was dry. Or maybe it was just a pleasant thought when he was living, or in confinement, on the Isle of Patmos, an island about the size of Manhattan in the Aegean Sea. Perhaps he means all the oceans of the world. It's an odd phrase; offhand, I can't recall any scripture in the jewish bible of which it might be consiered a 'fulfillment.' Where did he come up with this idea? Now various people are saying that global sea level rise, due to global warming and melting glaciers, will be anywhere from 20 feet to 200 or more feet over as much as a century. Since one can expect a government view to be the most modest one, I'll take the opposite, hypothetically: 500 or 600 feet in the next year - oh, well, make that 20 years - no sense in getting anyone upset. I am not interested right now in finding agreements or contradictions between Rev 21.1 and other scriptures, but in wondering how this scripture can be reconciled with ther anticipated rise in global sea levels? If the rise is only a few feet, then perhaps one could agree with Gen 9.15 "the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh," perhaps not even regionally in the vicinity of the Persian Gulf. Could one interpret Rev 21.1? How would this work? Perhaps magma will rise up and first contact the sea beds. Then it will evaporate all the oceans, and all the water will go into the atmosphere. There will then be no global flooding, no matter how much the glaciers melt. Then people will be entirely dependent on rainfall - Zech 14.17- but, paradoxically, it won't rain very much. Is there any meterological support for high humidity and no rain? Probably not. Perhaps all this moisture in the air will be a cause for global dimming - Isa 60.2 - although air pollution seems a sufficient cause. On a less biblical note, I wonder just where all the water in the oceans actually came from? When it rains, the sea levels don't rise, so it would seem logical to conclude that the oceans didn't fill up from rainfall. If there was "no more sea" I would miss watching the the surf roll in. Give me the old world order, boys! Perhaps the oceans will fill up again if rain falls. Hmmm...maybe it would rain again for 40 days - Gen 7.12 - but it would all run off into river channels and back into the ocean beds. G-d have a'mercy on the little fish. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Sea ice extent versus 1998 El Nino Year | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
[OT] Glacier-calving in Lakes Versus the Sea | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Global Polluters call Global Warming "Global Cooling" | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Crutzen's sulfur balloons versus AP's thistle seed Al Gores movie, An Unfortunate Circumstance.. (global warming) | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Yankees versus Global Warming | ne.weather.moderated (US North East Weather) |