Bible-Creation-Evolution

[Nathan Poe]

Note how the Sun and Moon are not named in Genesis 1. They are just called 'lights'.

What people often overlook is that in the earliest pagan religions all around the world - the sun or moon are venerated and named. You will find for example Sun or moon deities throughout virtually all ancient world mythologies - yet it is completely absent in Genesis 1.

Therefore those atheists who repeatedly are claiming Genesis borrowed from pagan egyptian or mesopotamian myths are completely wrong. If Genesis 1 was pagan in origin the sun and moon would be named.

Excellent point --

Unless, of course, the Jews already had their monotheism up and running, and thus decided to eliminate polytheistic references from the myths they lifted from other cultures.

That would explain some of the inconsistencies in the two Hebrew creation myths, wouldn't it?

 

[Assyrian]

Genesis does not mention 'the sun'.

'The sun' is a type of Jesus Christ:

Malachi 4:2 But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.

Future references in prophecy about the 'great light' would, of course, link the reader back to the Creation event, as well as forward to Jesus Christ, the Light of the world & Sun of righteousness.

Genesis 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Isaiah 9:2 The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.

Matthew 4:16 The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.

Acts 22:6 And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me.

Interesting... so why does Genesis say two great lights? Who is the other one? Glad you are looking for metaphorical meanings in Genesis though.

 

[Mr Dave]

Note how the Sun and Moon are not named in Genesis 1. They are just called 'lights'.

What people often overlook is that in the earliest pagan religions all around the world - the sun or moon are venerated and named. You will find for example Sun or moon deities throughout virtually all ancient world mythologies - yet it is completely absent in Genesis 1.

Therefore those atheists who repeatedly are claiming Genesis borrowed from pagan egyptian or mesopotamian myths are completely wrong. If Genesis 1 was pagan in origin the sun and moon would be named.

Orrrrrr.....

They borrowed the ideas, because that was a cultural thing to speak like that and knew that these stories abounded in other tribes/groups and by mentioning them, all would have immediately recognised the links, but their usage has been subverted - they are relegated to the 4th day, as you say they are not named etc... they are important (I don't think anyone would deny the importance of the sun and the moon to life), but absolutely not to be worshipped nor considered gods themselves.


Doctor Who has to fight the Sycorax. Anyone watching would recognise that the idea for The Sycorax has been borrowed from Shakespeare's The Tempest. That does not mean that Doctor Who is a Shakespearean creation.

 

[AV1611VET]

Interesting... so why does Genesis say two great lights? Who is the other one?

Edited: Oops! Sorry! Wrong answer!

The greater light is Jesus Christ -- the lesser light is the Church.

There is another wonderful picture presented to us in these verses concerning the greater and lesser lights that God created on the fourth day. It is a picture that God reminds you of every day and every night. The sun, God created to govern the day, and the moon, He created to rule the night. Now, it is important to remember as you romantically gaze at the beauty of the moon that it has no light of its own. It receives its light from the sun and the amount of the moon we see lit up is a reflection of how much of it has been exposed to the sun. I'm sure you know where this is going! The sun is a type of the Son! He is the true light of the world.

The moon, that dark dusty old thing that only looks any good when the sun shines on it is the church (you and me!)
We also need to remember that two things get in the way of the moon being able to shine in all the sun's glory... The earth can get between the sun and the moon so that no light shines on the moon. This is the effect of worldliness that gets between the believer and Jesus Christ. Or the moon can get between the sun and the earth blocking out the light of the sun. This is when the church preaches herself and not Jesus as the answer. Again, this is a most wonderful picture that God has placed as a perpetual reminder of Jesus' importance and place in your life!

SOURCE

 

[mzungu]

Jesus Christ ... after He took our sins upon Himself and became the sin-bearer for us.

If he took our sins then does that mean that we are sinless?

 

[AV1611VET]

If he took our sins then does that mean that we are sinless?

Sorry ... I messed that up.

It's fixed now.

And to answer your question: yes and no.

No, we are not sinless; but sin is not imputed to the believer for our eternal destiny.

Romans 4:8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

This is known as the doctrine of imputation.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Edited: Oops! Sorry! Wrong answer!

The greater light is Jesus Christ -- the lesser light is the Church.

SOURCE

Well, there's a convenient shoehorning of a creation myth for self-glorification.

The degree to which Christians hijacked the Jewish faith for their own purposes never caeses to amaze me.

 

[Tiberius]

1611AV, you have completely ignored the points I made in THIS post. I'd appreciate it if you could address them please.

And Vet, regarding your suggestion that the greater light is Jesus and the lesser light is the church (as in Genesis 1:16), how do you explain Genesis 1:14, which clearly states that these lights are intended to divide day from night and differentiate the seasons and years (and also apparently to act as signs; a Biblical support for astrology)?

 

[AV1611VET]

And Vet, regarding your suggestion that the greater light is Jesus and the lesser light is the church (as in Genesis 1:16), how do you explain Genesis 1:14, which clearly states that these lights are intended to divide day from night and differentiate the seasons and years...

They are types -- 3-dimensional word pictures (or events), so to speak -- which means that they are actual things that can be used to explain some deep Truth.

Lambs are real animals, but they are symbolic of the human race; the human race is the lambs' antitype.

The greatest single type in the Bible is the Tabernacle in the Wilderness, where everything in it is a picture of Jesus Christ.

The outer fence, for example, was held up by 60 fence posts.

At the top of each post was a block of silver, made from offerings of 1/2 shekels of silver.

60 one-half shekels correspond to the 30 pieces of silver that Jesus was betrayed for.

The boards, which were made of [acacia] wood overlaid with gold, speak of Jesus' dual nature:

1. a root out of a dry ground -- (the acacia tree grows in the desert)
2. gold symbolizes deity

... (and also apparently to act as signs; a Biblical support for astrology)?

No -- astrology is forbidden in Deuteronomy 18 -- (I think it is).

Astrology is Satan's cheap imitation for God's signs and wonders in the Heavens.

 

[mzungu]

They are types -- 3-dimensional word pictures (or events), so to speak -- which means that they are actual things that can be used to explain some deep Truth.

Lambs are real animals, but they are symbolic of the human race; the human race is the lambs' antitype.

The greatest single type in the Bible is the Tabernacle in the Wilderness, where everything in it is a picture of Jesus Christ.

The outer fence, for example, was held up by 60 fence posts.

At the top of each post was a block of silver, made from offerings of 1/2 shekels of silver.

60 one-half shekels correspond to the 30 pieces of silver that Jesus was betrayed for.

The boards, which were made of [acacia] wood overlaid with gold, speak of Jesus' dual nature:

1. a root out of a dry ground -- (the acacia tree grows in the desert)
2. gold symbolizes deity

No -- astrology is forbidden in Deuteronomy 18 -- (I think it is).

Astrology is Satan's cheap imitation for God's signs and wonders in the Heavens.

AV you do realise that your posts only go to strengthen what I have been saying all along; That religion is a spiritual thing and is based on faith and faith alone. There is no need to feel threatened by science especially when your faith is so strong: Corinthians 16:13 Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be men of courage; be strong. Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong.

 

[AV1611VET]

AV you do realise that your posts only go to strengthen what I have been saying all along; That religion is a spiritual thing and is based on faith and faith alone. There is no need to feel threatened by science especially when your faith is so strong: Corinthians 16:13 Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be men of courage; be strong. Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong.

Why, thank you, my friend!

Good advice -- as usual!

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Astrology is Satan's cheap imitation for God's signs and wonders in the Heavens.

Yet astrology gets it right some of the time.

 

[Naraoia]

Yet astrology gets it right some of the time.

Much like a stopped clock

 

[Assyrian]

Edited: Oops! Sorry! Wrong answer!

The greater light is Jesus Christ -- the lesser light is the Church.

Gen 1:14 And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years. So the purpose of the church is to mark out holy days and festival? Isn't that a bit high church for you and me AV?
The next bit is even more disturbing... God calls the church the lesser light to rule the night Gen 1:16? sounds kind of gothic to me

SOURCE

I do like the idea of the eclipse and the world getting in the way. It would make a good sermon illustration, but not so great as an exegesis of the text, it is a bit anachronistic reading a modern understanding of eclipses into a very ancient text, especially when there isn't a hint of the idea in the text itself.

 

[1611AV]

Gen 1:14 And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years. So the purpose of the church is to mark out holy days and festival? Isn't that a bit high church for you and me AV?
The next bit is even more disturbing... God calls the church the lesser light to rule the night Gen 1:16? sounds kind of gothic to me

I do like the idea of the eclipse and the world getting in the way. It would make a good sermon illustration, but not so great as an exegesis of the text, it is a bit anachronistic reading a modern understanding of eclipses into a very ancient text, especially when there isn't a hint of the idea in the text itself.

Jeremiah 31:35 Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts is his name:

Psalms 104:19 He appointed the moon for SEASONS: the sun knoweth his going down.


Luke 21:25 And there shall be SIGNS in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Jeremiah 31:35 Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts is his name:

Psalms 104:19 He appointed the moon for SEASONS: the sun knoweth his going down.


Luke 21:25 And there shall be SIGNS in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;

For the sake of argument, why do you think god created the sextillion unobservable stars? Many of which their light will never reach us before they burn out?

 

[AV1611VET]

Gen 1:14 And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years. So the purpose of the church is to mark out holy days and festival?

Did Judas betray Jesus for 60 fence posts?

What say we keep the literal meaning literal; and the figurative meaning figurative, eh?

ETA:

And by the way, Assyrian, you're the one who argues voraciously for a figurative Genesis 1 -- how's come we're explaining these lights to you?

And don't think I'm not noticing that you now want to argue against the figurative interpretation as well.

 

[Nostromo]

Are you a literalist or not?

 

[1611AV]

For the sake of argument, why do you think god created the sextillion unobservable stars? Many of which their light will never reach us before they burn out?

First for his glory! Only He can number them exactly. Not only that but has named each one. It give us awe of the height of his Throne.

1 Corinthians 15:41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the STARS: for one star differeth from another star in glory.

Psalms 148:3 Praise ye him, sun and moon: praise him, all ye STARS of light.

Psalms 147:4 He telleth the number of the STARS; he calleth them all by their names.

Genesis 15:5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the STARS, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.

Psalms 8:3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the STARS, which thou hast ordained;

Job 22:12 Is not God in the height of heaven? and behold the height of the STARS, how high they are!

Notice what Satan says in his heart in Isaiah 14:13

12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

13For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you a literalist or not?

Indeed I am -- are you?

Does being a literalist mean you can't accept such terminology as 'sunrise' and 'flying squirrels'?