Genesis 1

[hedrick]

It's a common modern view, that, to combine a modern version of an Augustine style special light source for days 1-3 with the big bang vaguely understood thrown in. My own view is simply a more considered one based on more details, that fits more things together with less assumptions and additions, but this is only because of the larger amount of information about Earth and the solar system and the Universe I've been though due to background and interests over decades.

My apologies. My mention the big bang obviously just added confusion. I mentioned the big bang simply to illustrate that it's perfectly sensible to talk about light as existing before the sun and moon. I do not advocate attempts to try and save the accuracy of Genesis by producing hybrids of a literal reading and what we know of the development of the universe.

I suspect that the author of Genesis envisions God as living in a realm of light, even before he created the sun and moon to give light to the earth. That seems like a reasonable answer to the OP's question about how Genesis could speak of the creation of light before the sun and moon.

 

[Halbhh]

I had no intent of producing some sort of hybrid between a literal reading of Genesis and what we know of the actual development of the universe.

I mentioned the big bang simply to illustrate that it's perfectly sensible to talk about light as existing before the sun and moon. I certainly do not think that the authors of Genesis envisioned the big bang as a source of light. I suspect, rather, that they did envision God as living in a realm of light, even before he created the sun and moon to give light to the earth.

There's a bit more you may find of interest in that post. The water world understanding lately arrived at in mainstream science is...so interesting, as it's precisely what the chapter has in it also...

It's not merely a theory you see, but based on significant evidence:
Early Earth was covered in a global ocean and had no mountains

Early Earth Was Almost Entirely Underwater, With Just A Few Islands - Universe Today

 

[hedrick]

There's a bit more you may find of interest in that post. The water world understanding lately arrived at in mainstream science is...so interesting, as it's precisely what the chapter has in it also...

There are too many issues with Genesis (indeed the early parts of the OT in general) involving both science and history. I don't advocate this kind of attempt at producing a hybrid between a historical reading of Genesis and what we know of the development of the universe.

I would read Genesis within the context where it was written, ancient near eastern religion. I see it as basically an answer to accounts such as the Babylonian creation story, which saw creation as a byproduct of wars between the gods. The OT view, in contrast to that, is that the one God set out intentionally to create the world, which is good, and which is a place for people who are responsible to the one God for their behavior.

 

[Halbhh]

There are too many issues with Genesis (indeed the early parts of the OT in general) involving both science and history. I don't advocate this kind of attempt at producing a hybrid between a historical reading of Genesis and what we know of the development of the universe.

That seems prudent to you, I'm sure, and reasonable. How many people both believe in God fully, but are very well informed broadly in astronomy/astrophysics/planetary stuff, so that they actually could competently compare the 2 sources while having both strong faith and extensive knowledge in those fields? Maybe a tiny portion possibly, one in 100,000 or even less. But as I already said to you above, I don't spend much time anymore trying to communicate how the 2 sources line up on a half dozen decisive details in general debates on internet forums, not any longer, because such forums are where people who love their own viewpoints deeply, above other things, come to battle for their favorite thing they love the most, their creationist theory they consider not theory, but Truth. I get it. I'm not masochistic, to subject myself to all sorts of disparagements, even at times slanders too, without any real benefit to anyone. I only tell people who are in crisis for their faith due to their finding wrong things in some variety of YEC, to help give them extra support for their faith in God. I'm willing to suffer the personal attacks, slanders, etc., if it can actually help someone. But not for when nothing much is at stake. If some individual's faith in God is being destroyed by learning the Earth is far older than 10,000 years after hearing the false idea is it young, then I can actually help. Then I'll take up my cross and suffer the personal attacks and slanders to let them know an old Earth fits scripture very well. But only if it actually does help someone in a way that matters. Only if I can help support and defend someone's faith in God.