Canopy Theory

   Just curious what the group believes about Genesis 1:7, in particular the “canopy theory” that postulates that the waters above the firmament formed a hard canopy of sorts, sort of like placing the Earth in a terrarium. 
   We do know that there were waters above the firmament (Genesis 1:7), but what form we are left to speculate, I think. Simply because of the temperature at that altitude it would have needed to be ice, but maybe not necessarily a hard shell, maybe an “ice fog” of sorts?

   I do assume that this is where much of the water for a global flood must have come from. Logically, if all the water in all the puddles,lakes, streams, ponds, rivers and seas on Earth evaporated suddenly and rained back down on the Earth for forty days and nights all it would do is refill all the puddles, lakes, streams, ponds, rivers and seas from whence they came, it would not be the source of a global flood. The water had to come from somewhere else, as in “the windows of heaven were opened”(Genesis 7:11). And obviously the fountains of the deep provided water also.

   There are many people who believe (I know that “many people believe” is proof of nothing) that this canopy explains the long life of the pre flood people (and presumably animals) and the enormous size of many fossil specimens we find today, plant and animal.

I wonder how this ozone layer was formed or whether it has any connection to the 'waters'.

It's been suggested that there was a water canopy similar to that which Venus has, and that this filtered out some of the harmful rays of the sun and prolonged pre-flood lifespans.

It's a plausible theory, but it's not really possible to prove either way.

   Yes, I suppose we won’t know on this side what exactly the canopy was , or what effect it may have had, but it is interesting to think about.

   I believe the pre flood world may have been radically different than most people believe.

   1) there was a tree that would give you wisdom by eating it’s fruit.

   2) the Tree of Life was there, that you could eat and live forever. Was it necessary to eat repeatedly, or a once and done thing as it appears the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was? The effects of that tree are inherited by us, would the effects of the Tree of Life been so? We know that this tree must have resided only in Eden, probably the Tree of Knowledge also.
   3) the serpent could talk (at least when it spoke to Eve she didn’t run away screaming like we would today). Was this a common thing?

   4) near 1000 year lifespans (969 for Methuselah, nothing says he was the oldest ever, just the oldest were told of in Scripture).

   5) if all life had these long time spans, how long did the animals live and how big did reptiles grow, who continue to grow their whole lives?

   6) and of course, the Giants.

  These and many other things to ponder. It’s very interesting and I guess on a basic level none of these things matter much to us in any immediate way. But on the other hand many of these thoughts do have bearing on doctrinal issues we  deal with today, such as the flood, the world laughing at Genesis 5, many of the fossils found today (how big did a three horned lizard get in 400 years? Triceratops big?). Anyway, it’s neat to ponder.

   Also the Cherubims and the flaming sword at the east side of Eden to keep men out. Presumably men must have seen them. If not, why would they have been needed?

Yes, the world was certainly different. We also see a scratch of radiation acceleration during the flood, thus giving us deep time when we date a rock. Due to high amounts of radiation, all genomes suffered a significant loss of information, resulting in loss of years. The radiation did not just stop after the flood. It continued for some hundred years, then became negligible. We do not notice a sudden drop in the life of the patriarchs. We see a gradual drop. In fact, Noah lived for 950 years, indicating that the loss of lifetime was due to a passive gene among his children.

   That actually makes more sense than the shorter life spans being directly caused by the loss of the canopy. The loss of it would result in immediate shortening of life spans if it was the direct cause, wouldn’t it?

If you lose the canopy, and don't bring it back gradually, you might have a problem. Natural selection will not work in 8 people. It needs more than a mere 8 people. It need millions.

The radiation actually stopped in the past. If it did not, then our 2020 lifespans will still be shortening.

The loss of canopy did not stop in the past. It's still missing now. Our 2020 lifespans will be down to maybe 6 months or something due to solar radiation. [guesswork] 

Now we know solar radiation is good for our Vitamin D's. It's not solar radiation that kept us losing years of life. It may be terrestrial nuclear radiation. This radiation was hot enough to let the fountains of the deep burst open. We know it was God's own doing.

2 Peter 3:5-6 New International Version (NIV)
5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being 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.

These verses destroy my ozone hypothesis

The only thing that humans depended upon was the canopy, for their lengthening of lifetime.

If they lose the canopy, they'll lose 800 years immediately, given it's the only thing that's keeping them alive.

But if the canopy somehow survived for some hundred years after the flood, thinning and thinning, it is very plausible.

Another theory that could explain the longer pre-flood lifespans is a genetic mutation that caused people to age faster.

There's a problem with that, in that the drop-off seems to be somewhat gradual rather than instantaneous with Noah and his sons.  But it's an alternate theory that has been proposed.

I think most creationists do not support the canopy theory any more.

I sort of doubt whether radioactive elements could distort our genes. Can it?

Nevermind.  Even my science textbook says so.

Great topic.  Henry Morris (often considered the "father" of modern creationism) was I believe the one who suggested the Water Vapor Canopy Theory (WVCT).  I remember being taught the WVCT theory growing up.  The WVCT has been largely abandoned by creationists today.  Scientific and Scriptural arguments have been advanced against it.

•Simply too many problems on the scientific side, which I won't take time to get into, unless anyone would like me to.

•@Kjvav you're absolutely correct to point out the WVC is insufficient to provide flood waters.  Most favor upwelling/uplift of ocean basins (associated w/"fountains of the deep").

•The view that a WVC could explain and/or is required in order to have longevity and "giants" is also recognized as scientifically untenable by most creationists

•Alternate views include simply an increase in mutations (for reducing lifespans), or that the long ages are purposeful hyperbole, emphasizing God's mercy (for example, Methusaleh the longest lived before flood sent displaying God's patience and long-suffering).  This finds support in ancient practice of the time that purposefully exaggerated kings' reigns (even up to 10,000 and 20,000 yrs!) to "prove" how much more powerful a king supposedly was compared to other kings.  If Genesis is intending to counter this practice, then it's showing how much greater God's mercy is by delaying onset of flood (*right or wrong, still kind of a cool thought)

•Biblically, some argue that "waters above" firmament must be at the edge of the universe since the sun, moon, and stars are *in* the firmament expanse which is below the "waters above"

•The difficulty with this view is that if the "waters above" are way out past all the galaxies at the edge of the universe where we can't even see them, then the "waters above" are pretty much meaningless to us

•The ancient Israelites would also not have understood the "waters above" to mean this but would have understood the "waters above" to be rain, and thus, a statement of God's provision of rain for water and to grow crops, etc.

•The (modern) difficulty with this is that it then puts the sun, moon, and stars in the firmament expanse below the rain (which is where people in ancient times actually thought the sun, moon, stars were); so a possible solution to that is that in Genesis God is communicating His provision and care through the common beliefs of that time.  If this view is incorrect, then it would seem to take us back to the top of the list again where we would have to rework through the problems and see if an alternate solution can be found

*Either way, yes, the WVCT has been largely abandoned by most creationists