Water Canopy? Huh? (page 7)

TheSilence

there is only scriptures to go by right now.....

if one completely discounts science. We wouldn't want to go by that.

~Note for the sarcasm impaired... the above statement is dripping.

Jackie

Pistoff

This is a great read:

http://www.jehovahswitnessblog.com/2010/11/leaving-jehovahs-witnesses-part-1.html

In it the author describes his long correspondence with the um, brains at the WT writing department.

strymeckirules - interesting point, although I personally don't believe that Peter was referring to a water canopy, but I'm no bible scholar or expert. However, perhaps I'm wrong. In that case, does this mean that Peter believed in the water canopy doctrine?

TotallyADD - This really shook my "faith". Most JWs simply don't pay any attention to this infamous WT doctrine, for whatever reason. But just because you ignore something, doesn't make it go away. It is hypocritical for JWs to attack Trinitarians for "twisting the scriptures" when they teach a belief in a water canopy that isn't even mentioned in the Bible (unless I'm wrong about 2 Peter 3: 1-7).

Morbidzbaby

2 Peter 3:5,6 are probably the particular passages that strymeckirules was talking about. It says in the NWT:

For, according to their wish, this fact escapes their notice, that there were heavens from of old and an earth standing compactly out of water and in the midst of water by the word of God; 6 and by those [means] the world of that time suffered destruction when it was deluged with water.

The NIV states this for the same verses:

5. But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed.

Merriam-Webster online defines "MIDST" as:

1 : the interior or central part or point :middle <in the midst of the forest> 2 : a position of proximity to the members of a group <a traitor in our midst > 3 : the condition of being surrounded or beset <in the midst of his troubles> 4 : a period of time about the middle of a continuing act or condition <in the midst of a meal> The only above definition that applies to the NWT would be #1. Definition #3 doesn't apply to inanimate objects it seems. It looks like it applies more to ideas or happenings involving a person or group, considering the example given. None of the others apply either. SO the NWT would read:

For, according to their wish, this fact escapes their notice, that there were heavens from of old and an earth standing compactly out of water and in the middle of water by the word of God; 6 and by those [means] the world of that time suffered destruction when it was deluged with water.

This is accurate, in my view, because landmasses ARE in the middle of water and DO stand OUT of water. But this wouldn't apply to a "water canopy" suspended over the earth. That's not "in the midst". And when I say "accurate", I mean to say that it's what makes the most sense for these passages...not that I believe the bible is accurate scientifically.

The NIV is a little more perplexing because it states "out of water and by water". Does it mean "by" as in water was involved in it's creation? Or does it simply mean "by" as in "near or next to"? I tend to think that, going by the NWT, it is the latter. If the flood story were true, this would be accurate because the rain supposedly would have overflowed all of the oceans, rivers, and streams...thus, as both translations point out, the world would have been destroyed "by THOSE MEANS" or "by THESE waters".

But that's just my take on it...

Morbidzbaby

This dang format is pissing me off... There should be spaces in there after the dictionary definitions and the line after that beginning with "SO"... GAH! I've tried fixing it so it reads easier, but it won't take...keeps scrunching them up again. So I apologize if the thought doesn't flow freely in that section...

Lunatic Faith

Great thread! This has always been one of those teachings that didn't make sense, but I found it interesting so I believed in it. But I always wondered why Jehovah would have put that canopy up there unless he was planning on deluging the world and killing his creation. Since the Bible teaches that would be unjust on God's part then he must have made a mistake by putting that up there. Like an experiment gone wrong, which also flies in the face of everything JW"s believe.

I remember bringing this up to my brother once and he said Jehovah put it there temporarily to help spread the garden worldwide (greenhouse effect) and then he probably planned on gradually diminishing it. I thought the explanation made a small amount of sense, but how the hell could anyone see the moon and stars. Behind such a canopy they couldn't be considered 'lesser luminaries', they would have been flat out invisible!

I have heard the friends argue as to whether another water canopy would be established in paradise. I remember thinking about how depressed people get in places like Seattle when the cloud cover only occasionally lifts. How are we supposed to be gloriously happy when blue skies, the moon and stars are only a distant memory. How depressing!

Mr. Falcon

It's cool Morbidz, good research. That's the general feeling I got from those scripture, regardless of which translation is used. There isn't really and tangible, clear mention of any sort of "canopy". Part of the problem I have is that this is "adding to the Scriptures" something that is forbidden.

For example, let's just play Devil's advocate here for a moment and assume that the Flood did indeed happen. If you believe that God performs miracles and such then why can't God make it miracously just rain a deluge? Throughout the Bible he made it rain fire, split the earth open and other destructive acts, so why couldn't he just make it rain? The bible says that he made it rain 40 days and 40 nights. Don't say nuthin' bout no canopy.

To me, the idea that a canopy of water existed around the earth would mean that rain was never meant to be and that it came about as a means to kill mankind. Rain was invented to kill mankind. Marinate on that.

ProdigalSon

The Bible does have a reasonable explanation for where the flood waters came from..... the watery deep.

"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." -Genesis 7:11.

"...... when he strengthened the fountains of the deep." -Proverbs 8:28

So what the Bible is saying is that in the youngest stages of the earth, the oceans were under pressure and sealed under the land masses. The floodwaters came when the earth expanded and the crust cracked, and the sealed water below shot high into the atmosphere and came down as a deluging rain. In the video below, it is demonstrated that all the continents fitted together perfectly on a smaller earth. That would also explain how the largest dinosaurs could function without collapsing under their own weight, or how those gigantic bulky insects could fly.... a smaller earth = less gravity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ

Atlantis was deluged between 11,000 and 13,000 years ago.... quite a bit before the Bible story but we know it was plagiarized from older myths and deluge accounts.....

Mr. Falcon

I remember bringing this up to my brother once and he said Jehovah put it there temporarily to help spread the garden worldwide (greenhouse effect) and then he probably planned on gradually diminishing it.

I love the ideas that JWs come up with when they speculate about things like this. Just making things up. The hell with what the Bible actually says... I say that this or that is going to occur! Isn't that relying on human philosophy instead of God's Word? So human philosophy is okay in some circumstances but it is apostate thinking in other situations. Whatever.

Mr. Falcon

windows of heaven were opened." -Genesis 7:11.

Could this be referring to the "water canopy"?

Water Canopy? Huh?

Share this