Our Sun is part of a Binary Star System: Fascinating to see what ancient religions understood

Halbhh said:

I know this was a long time ago we were discussing this, but actually most people I meet seem to have bought the modern notion that the light of verse 3 was the big bang (and many never think it could be our own sun), but that fun sounding and delightful idea the light is the big bang is just a mistaken idea.

No big deal -- mistaken ideas are the norm, and not even really important usually.

If you care personally though for yourself, I strongly recommend to not be attached to any version/theory, and to let that light=big bang idea go in the trashcan with hundreds of other theories, because it does not fit the text, meaning all the verses (instead of only a select isolated verse). We should all let go of ideas that don't fit the text.

I don't think it's even important though whether we get our understanding of mere physical small details right, or rather it is not important if we don't place faith in such theories.

Neither is it of any importance for other people usually what we each think about small details not given in scripture, until a moment when we are talking to the less common seeker to whom it really matters, someone trying to find out if God exists, and a mere mistaken idea then being insisted to be the Truth (a small details physics about Genesis 1 we have as Truth with a capital T!!?? No!!) and that insistence then blocks them from seeking God -- then it can matter! Because if someone misrepresents their ideas (like verse 3 light = big bang) as being Truth with a capital T, that or any other theory (and some even daring to do the significant evil of asserting that those who don't think the idea is right are 'calling God a liar' -- a serious sin), this seems to a seeker to represent what Christianity may be (since the seeker usually has not read a gospel), and that blocks the seeker from God, by the obvious contradictions to reality the wrong idea implies. Instead of the Good News, a mere theory of Genesis 1 as the key to salvation!!?? And then a seeker blocked from God (for a time at least), unless He decides to help the seeker realize it's merely a claim from some mistaken individual.

But otherwise, most people even good readers cannot expect to ever know small details of creation that align to all (instead of only a few of) the verses I think. How can they? They would need very extensive reading in mainstream science even just in astrophysics, for instance. How many have done that? 0.0001%? While I can fit all the verses to modern planetary formation theory without any troubles, helpfully remembering Moses didn't know precisely what he was seeing in the vision (though there are brief narrations from God to help create a partial understanding instead of total lack of understanding for him), the way the verses fit perfectly to details from science theories is something at that only I'd guess 1% or less of people might care about, also. So, it's ideas that can only matter to a few to begin with. But meanwhile, we have those preaching their mere theories, without understanding, as Truth, no less. Perhaps they will be excused because they do not understand what they are doing, but I wonder.

Click to expand...

Halbhh said:

The 4th day, when the Sun and Moon and Stars appear, is a central part of what this answer is about below.

It will help to know I don't even ignore 1 verse.

But rely on every verse, and all the words, all.

I'm so sorry I didn't have post #59 fully finished the right way the first time! Really.

This answer is especially focused on putting together the time before day 1 on Earth, and day 1 on Earth, and especially day 4, where God tells us the Sun, Moon and Stars are good for us, pleasant for our use.

How do they fit together? Answer: perfectly and simply.

"In the beginning God created the heavens (the Universe) and the Earth" meaning of course all the Universe and the baby Earth.

The just made Earth was in darkness at first (as the text tells us). Verse 2. (see scripture verses below)

Then light comes that isn't the big bang certainly (because the big bang was the creation of the Unverse, which has already occured before verse 3.

What about that 'light' onto Earth in particular being referred to on the first special day of creation for Earth?

That light (verse 3, 4) created a morning and evening -- which means a source of light shining onto the Earth from one side, with the rotating Earth then causing a night and day cycle. This is simply the simplest way to suppose these unstated aspects about the light.

So in verse 1 we see the creation of the Universe (thus any big bang of course), and then later in verse 3 we see the first light onto the forming Earth (not only dim star light, but a brighter light) which makes sense to be from the sun beginning the day/night cycle (clouds hide the heavens from the surface of Earth point of view though early on), but these kinds of mere geometry and physics details aren't the key message of the text, which is instead the reality that God created all that is, our home here also, and "it was very good" for us as our home. The message includes centrally that all that is is "very good" for us.

God could have made an Earth in an empty void of space, with only a diffuse constant light all the time, for example. But that was not what He did we can see in the text, but instead He made a light that caused morning, day, evening, and night, as we read.

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

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.

So this view is simply in keeping with the text, understanding that in the vision given Moses, the heavens were not at first visible at first, so we can presume they are obscured by cloudiness from the point of view which is from the surface of Earth, even though the day/night cycle has fully started, perfectly, meaning the sun is shining onto Earth, which is rotating, as it always has.

I've started to think this kind of debate though kills faith for those seeking God who have not yet found Him.

Because most people that post on it have a specific view based on some assumptions not in Genesis, which also contradict what people feel are known facts.

So, most people are explaining it in a way that makes it appear as if Genesis contradicts known stuff in science.

What's the gain in that?

Answer: for those seeking to find God, gain faith -- no gain at all.

They need the gospel message instead.

Click to expand...

Halbhh said:

I know this was a long time ago we were discussing this, but actually most people I meet seem to have bought the modern notion that the light of verse 3 was the big bang (and many never think it could be our own sun), but that fun sounding and delightful idea the light is the big bang is just a mistaken idea.

No big deal -- mistaken ideas are the norm, and not even really important usually.

If you care personally though for yourself, I strongly recommend to not be attached to any version/theory, and to let that light=big bang idea go in the trashcan with hundreds of other theories, because it does not fit the text, meaning all the verses (instead of only a select isolated verse). We should all let go of ideas that don't fit the text.

I don't think it's even important though whether we get our understanding of mere physical small details right, or rather it is not important if we don't place faith in such theories.

Neither is it of any importance for other people usually what we each think about small details not given in scripture, until a moment when we are talking to the less common seeker to whom it really matters, someone trying to find out if God exists, and a mere mistaken idea then being insisted to be the Truth (a small details physics about Genesis 1 we have as Truth with a capital T!!?? No!!) and that insistence then blocks them from seeking God -- then it can matter! Because if someone misrepresents their ideas (like verse 3 light = big bang) as being Truth with a capital T, that or any other theory (and some even daring to do the significant evil of asserting that those who don't think the idea is right are 'calling God a liar' -- a serious sin), this seems to a seeker to represent what Christianity may be (since the seeker usually has not read a gospel), and that blocks the seeker from God, by the obvious contradictions to reality the wrong idea implies. Instead of the Good News, a mere theory of Genesis 1 as the key to salvation!!?? And then a seeker blocked from God (for a time at least), unless He decides to help the seeker realize it's merely a claim from some mistaken individual.

But otherwise, most people even good readers cannot expect to ever know small details of creation that align to all (instead of only a few of) the verses I think. How can they? They would need very extensive reading in mainstream science even just in astrophysics, for instance. How many have done that? 0.0001%? While I can fit all the verses to modern planetary formation theory without any troubles, helpfully remembering Moses didn't know precisely what he was seeing in the vision (though there are brief narrations from God to help create a partial understanding instead of total lack of understanding for him), the way the verses fit perfectly to details from science theories is something at that only I'd guess 1% or less of people might care about, also. So, it's ideas that can only matter to a few to begin with. But meanwhile, we have those preaching their mere theories, without understanding, as Truth, no less. Perhaps they will be excused because they do not understand what they are doing, but I wonder.

Click to expand...

Halbhh said:

The 4th day, when the Sun and Moon and Stars appear, is a central part of what this answer is about below.

It will help to know I don't even ignore 1 verse.

But rely on every verse, and all the words, all.

I'm so sorry I didn't have post #59 fully finished the right way the first time! Really.

This answer is especially focused on putting together the time before day 1 on Earth, and day 1 on Earth, and especially day 4, where God tells us the Sun, Moon and Stars are good for us, pleasant for our use.

How do they fit together? Answer: perfectly and simply.

"In the beginning God created the heavens (the Universe) and the Earth" meaning of course all the Universe and the baby Earth.

The just made Earth was in darkness at first (as the text tells us). Verse 2. (see scripture verses below)

Then light comes that isn't the big bang certainly (because the big bang was the creation of the Unverse, which has already occured before verse 3.

What about that 'light' onto Earth in particular being referred to on the first special day of creation for Earth?

That light (verse 3, 4) created a morning and evening -- which means a source of light shining onto the Earth from one side, with the rotating Earth then causing a night and day cycle. This is simply the simplest way to suppose these unstated aspects about the light.

So in verse 1 we see the creation of the Universe (thus any big bang of course), and then later in verse 3 we see the first light onto the forming Earth (not only dim star light, but a brighter light) which makes sense to be from the sun beginning the day/night cycle (clouds hide the heavens from the surface of Earth point of view though early on), but these kinds of mere geometry and physics details aren't the key message of the text, which is instead the reality that God created all that is, our home here also, and "it was very good" for us as our home. The message includes centrally that all that is is "very good" for us.

God could have made an Earth in an empty void of space, with only a diffuse constant light all the time, for example. But that was not what He did we can see in the text, but instead He made a light that caused morning, day, evening, and night, as we read.

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

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.

So this view is simply in keeping with the text, understanding that in the vision given Moses, the heavens were not at first visible at first, so we can presume they are obscured by cloudiness from the point of view which is from the surface of Earth, even though the day/night cycle has fully started, perfectly, meaning the sun is shining onto Earth, which is rotating, as it always has.

I've started to think this kind of debate though kills faith for those seeking God who have not yet found Him.

Because most people that post on it have a specific view based on some assumptions not in Genesis, which also contradict what people feel are known facts.

So, most people are explaining it in a way that makes it appear as if Genesis contradicts known stuff in science.

What's the gain in that?

Answer: for those seeking to find God, gain faith -- no gain at all.

They need the gospel message instead.

Click to expand...