Our lesson for today

[Phred]

Genesis 1

3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

Now, today we know what causes "day" and what causes "night". Day is a function of one side of a round earth facing the sun while night is a function of the other side of a round earth facing away from the sun and thus being in darkness. Unlike the ancient nomads that wrote this verse we clearly understand that without the sun there would be no day and no light. Yet, at this point in the story, God has yet to create the sun. So while he says, "let there be light" he doesn't bother to create a source for that light. So while that light comes from the sun today it didn't then. Day came from some other magic light.

What we see here is God creating light and then replacing the light with the light from the Sun as soon as he got around to creating it.

Why wouldn't God just create the sun first and allow it to generate the light that it does today? Clearly this was his plan all along as we see the result.

Looks to me like this was written by nomads with no clue that the sun and the light we call day were related.

 

[necroforest]

Because He was too lazy to create the Sun and wait 8 minutes for it to start lighting up the Earth?

 

[Allegory]

Clearly he was referring to the big bang when the universe had cooled enough for photons to exist but hot enough for all matter to glow.

 

[Loudmouth]

Why wouldn't God just create the sun first and allow it to generate the light that it does today? Clearly this was his plan all along as we see the result.

The first light was the work light. God was working late that day.

 

[Patashu]

Isn't this more suited for General Apologetics?

 

[BrainHertz]

The first light was the work light. God was working late that day.

That can't be right. Otherwise, it would start "and God said 'let there be a 12V lead-acid battery' and there was. And then...".

The work light had to run off of something, no?

 

[Allegory]

That can't be right. Otherwise, it would start "and God said 'let there be a 12V lead-acid battery' and there was. And then...".

The work light had to run off of something, no?

the power of his own self-content?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why wouldn't God just create the sun first and allow it to generate the light that it does today? Clearly this was his plan all along as we see the result.

I've addressed this point before.

IMO, He did it this way knowing that there would come a time when "scientists" would deny His creation, based on their own paradigms.

IOW, they would re-write Genesis 1 to fit their own godless theories.

Thus, He gave us light before the Sun, the earth before the Sun, whales before land animals, etc. as a powerful testimony of His mastery over nature.

 

[Blayz]

I've addressed this point before.

IMO, He did it this way knowing that there would come a time when "scientists" would deny His creation, based on their own paradigms.

IOW, they would re-write Genesis 1 to fit their own godless theories.

So he set us up to fail then.

What a pleasant diety.

 

[mhager]

I've addressed this point before.

IMO, He did it this way knowing that there would come a time when "scientists" would deny His creation, based on their own paradigms.

IOW, they would re-write Genesis 1 to fit their own godless theories.

Thus, He gave us light before the Sun, the earth before the Sun, whales before land animals, etc. as a powerful testimony of His mastery over nature.

Either that or maybe (just maybe) you're wrong. You might want to consider that option.

Just a little.

Just for a second.

 

[sashatheman]

I've addressed this point before.

IMO, He did it this way knowing that there would come a time when "scientists" would deny His creation, based on their own paradigms.

IOW, they would re-write Genesis 1 to fit their own godless theories.

Thus, He gave us light before the Sun, the earth before the Sun, whales before land animals, etc. as a powerful testimony of His mastery over nature.

What is more basic knowledge in the 21st century, then to know that the sun is responsible for the light, and that it determines the day and night. It's one of the basic observations.

it's more difficult to argue the sun before the earth, and the whales being created before land animals.

But when refering to day and night, and light without the sun, it is basic rational thought that is contradicted.

A question would be asked, why would God go out of his way to confuse and deceive humanity?

 

[FishFace]

I've addressed this point before.

IMO, He did it this way knowing that there would come a time when "scientists" would deny His creation, based on their own paradigms.

IOW, they would re-write Genesis 1 to fit their own godless theories.

Thus, He gave us light before the Sun, the earth before the Sun, whales before land animals, etc. as a powerful testimony of His mastery over nature.

Or the simple explanation: The book was written by people who didn't know s*** about astronomy. I mean, why would they?

 

[AV1611VET]

So he set us up to fail then.

Nope --- don't blame the Teacher if you didn't read the chapter.

 

[AV1611VET]

Either that or maybe (just maybe) you're wrong. You might want to consider that option.

Just a little.

Just for a second.

If I'm wrong --- then the Bible is too; and since the Author of the Bible is the One that judges us --- I can't lose.

 

[AV1611VET]

A question would be asked, why would God go out of his way to confuse and deceive humanity?

That's why He put it in writing, Sasha --- not to cloud the issue, but to clarify it.

 

[Vene]

That's why He put it in writing, Sasha --- not to cloud the issue, but to clarify it.

Believe it or not, there are those of us who take the words of an old book to be meaningless. Instead we look at what the physical world suggests. And if the book is right, then your god must have set up the world to look like it contradicts Genesis.

 

[AV1611VET]

Believe it or not, there are those of us who take the words of an old book to be meaningless. Instead we look at what the physical world suggests. And if the book is right, then your god must have set up the world to look like it contradicts Genesis.

Nope --- God "set it up" in Genesis 1 --- you're looking at a Genesis 3 universe.

 

[Molal]

Nope --- God "set it up" in Genesis 1 --- you're looking at a Genesis 3 universe.

So, AV - on what do you base your literal interpretation of Genesis? Do you use a similar basis when reading parables? How do you know what is a parable and what isn't?

 

[sashatheman]

That's why He put it in writing, Sasha --- not to cloud the issue, but to clarify it.

But that's why i don't accept genesis as literal.
It is because it doesn't clarify anything.

Would you agree, that day and night as we know it on Earth is due to the earth rotating around the Sun, that provides the light?

Anyway the better explanation i heard people use, was that the concepts of light is being created, and the concept of day and night. Rather then actually setting them.

 

[AV1611VET]

So, AV - on what do you base your literal interpretation of Genesis?

Jesus interpreted Genesis literally; and so should we.

Do you use a similar basis when reading parables?

In my opinion, the parables that Jesus told are true stories --- things He witnessed in His lifetime.

How do you know what is a parable and what isn't?

The Bible clearly alerts the reader to Its parables --- no guesswork involved.