[_ Old Earth _] Gen 1 ?. The "1st light", 3 days before the sun

[dad]

Re: Gen 1 ?. The "1st light", 3 days before the s

Most everyone who believes in a literal 6 day Genesis creation talks about how there was no sun (our star) for the first 3 days, which was created on the 4th day, but that God was the source of light.

What exactly was that source of light, and where was it situated? ...

We don't know.

We can say that it was not the present light we know, such as starlight and sunlight.

I wonder why this is important? Is it because some thing a fixed light is needed to mark morning and evening?

 

[Barbarian]

Had to be the sun; mornings and evenings are, by definition, dependent on the sun.

Hence the intractability of Genesis for a literal interpretation.

 

[dad]

Had to be the sun; mornings and evenings are, by definition, dependent on the sun.

Hence the intractability of Genesis for a literal interpretation.

The morning and evening as we know it are defined that way. Can you provide some proof that this was also the case before man walked the earth??
It almost sounds as if you think God didn't know what a day, or morning was without a created sun?

 

[Orion]

I guess my point is, if there was going to be a sun there in three days (for light upon the earth), why not create it in the very beginning instead of this other "light" that really wasn't even necessary for God (again, who wouldn't need to have light to 'see' what he was doing)? :-?

 

[dad]

I guess my point is, if there was going to be a sun there in three days (for light upon the earth), why not create it in the very beginning instead of this other "light" that really wasn't even necessary for God (again, who wouldn't need to have light to 'see' what he was doing)? :-?

Oh, ha. I never really thought it was all that needed for Him. I simply think of it as the former light. A different light than we have today. The kind of light that allowed starlight to get to earth real fast. (after the stars were made, of course, at the same time as the sun)
In heaven also, we shall have this different light.

 

[Orion]

Oh, ha. I never really thought it was all that needed for Him. I simply think of it as the former light. A different light than we have today. The kind of light that allowed starlight to get to earth real fast. (after the stars were made, of course, at the same time as the sun)
In heaven also, we shall have this different light.

Whether or not there was "different light" before, it still doesn't state the source of this light. The Christian community at large just assumes that this light is God, but it doesn't state that at all. So conjecture, in this case, can't be backed up. What it seems to conclude is that the days were not necessarily documented in a linear fashion.

 

[dad]

Whether or not there was "different light" before, it still doesn't state the source of this light. The Christian community at large just assumes that this light is God, but it doesn't state that at all. So conjecture, in this case, can't be backed up. What it seems to conclude is that the days were not necessarily documented in a linear fashion.

Linear fashion?? I think it is obvious that one day followed the next. Creation week was laid out just that way! Day 1, then 2, etc! God knew what a day was, He didn't need out clocks, or sun, etc. Presently we mark a morning and evening by the sun, but not then, before it was made.
There was a light, yes. It is generally assumed by many that light marked the days, and mornings, etc. But why??? Because of our present frame of reference!
If there was a different light, it may have existed as well as, in addition to the days, and mornings. Or, maybe the light from God was what it means, as many assume. Notice it says that the spirit of god 'hovered' over the earth?
("moved" -- (Piel) to hover) The movement could have coincided with the mornings, and days. Either way, it is no problem.

 

[Barbarian]

The morning and evening as we know it are defined that way.

Once you start redefining what words mean, then anything at all is possible. But that's not the way you get to the truth, is it?

Can you provide some proof that this was also the case before man walked the earth??

I think God meant what He said. Revising His word seems like a bad idea to me.

It almost sounds as if you think God didn't know what a day, or morning was without a created sun?

I was just thinking that about you. I think He did mean "morning" and "evening." That's what He said. You seem unwilling to accept what He said.

 

[Orion]

Well, I'm under the belief that not every single word was directly from the mouth of God and that the first several stories in Genesis read more like stories told to children. And, . . . where man is involved, you'll usually see things messed up,. . .misinterpreted, . . interpreted for someone's benefit, etc.

I don't believe that all we see was created only 6,000 - 10,000 years ago.

 

[dad]

Once you start redefining what words mean, then anything at all is possible. But that's not the way you get to the truth, is it?

What makes this present universe, and it's light, was what was here at creation week, or even after, for that matter?? Once you prove that as the truth, then we can build on that. Meanwhile, you have no clue as to what the truth is.

I think God meant what He said. Revising His word seems like a bad idea to me.

So, where did He say that it was the same light, and that all mornings, and evenings, and days were to be measured only by the newly created sun?? Nice try.

I was just thinking that about you. I think He did mean "morning" and "evening." That's what He said. You seem unwilling to accept what He said.

Morning is a time of day. Are you suggesting it then was something else?? You would need to support that claim. Sounds like nonsense to me.

 

[dad]

Well, I'm under the belief that not every single word was directly from the mouth of God and that the first several stories in Genesis read more like stories told to children. And, . . . where man is involved, you'll usually see things messed up,. . .misinterpreted, . . interpreted for someone's benefit, etc.

I don't believe that all we see was created only 6,000 - 10,000 years ago.

So, it is all His word, precisely, but the week was not really a week, morning and evening not really a morning, and evening, and I suppose a garden was not really a garden?? How about a flood that killed all men? Was that real??

Nothing messed up about Genesis at all. Your assumptions of what the past and future were like are messed up. Work on that.

 

[Orion]

So, it is all His word, precisely, but the week was not really a week, morning and evening not really a morning, and evening, and I suppose a garden was not really a garden??

How do you know that those words came precisely from God? Where did the writers of the original manuscripts, which eventually found themselves in Canon, state that God gave them every single word and/or story that they put to parchment?

How about a flood that killed all men? Was that real??

Do I think there was an actual global flood? Evidence point away from a global flood, not towards it. There may have been a Noah flood, but it would have only been isolated in a general area, such as the Black Sea incident 6,000 (or so) years ago. But if the flood had BEEN global, sediment would have been sorted much different than it actually is. There is no "flood sorting" that would produce only the fossils of specific creatures at one level, and not above a certain defining line. You could ONLY have sorting of a completely random nature. T-rex above the present horse, for example, and vice versa, or on the same, or both of them above domesticated dog, all below a sabre tooth tiger. :-? This has not been the case. Paleontologist wouldn't have all these layers and periods that they talk about if fossils were hydrologically (and randomly) sorted.

Nothing messed up about Genesis at all. Your assumptions of what the past and future were like are messed up. Work on that.

Men messing things up?? Oh yeah!! I would not doubt that it happened at all. Men are carnal and often selfish. What better way to get what you want than to scare the lowly with some sort of religiosity? I'm not speaking about Genesis, necessarily.

 

[Gabbylittleangel]

Hey Orion,

Are you a Christian?

 

[dad]

How do you know that those words came precisely from God?

How do you know they didn't? Hey, why not!?

Where did the writers of the original manuscripts, which eventually found themselves in Canon, state that God gave them every single word and/or story that they put to parchment?

Some of the writers made it very clear that their stuff was from God. Do you have some evidence that the stuff we believers passed around and preserved faithfully was not written by who we thought it was???

Do I think there was an actual global flood? Evidence point away from a global flood, not towards it.

I disagree totally.

There may have been a Noah flood, but it would have only been isolated in a general area, such as the Black Sea incident 6,000 (or so) years ago.

No, that is a story based on a lot of assumptions, none of which can be proven.

But if the flood had BEEN global, sediment would have been sorted much different than it actually is.

False, and also rife with assumption. Do you assume that there was a rapid continental seperation, that caused mountain building, uplift, and etc?? What uniform layer, where do you think ought to be there?

There is no "flood sorting" that would produce only the fossils of specific creatures at one level, and not above a certain defining line.

I am not a flood geology type of guy, so who cares??

You could ONLY have sorting of a completely random nature.

False in the extreme. We could have had most creatures created in Eden, and plants, and fish. As they left there, and migrated outwards, they added to the fossil record, nothing random about it.

T-rex above the present horse, for example, and vice versa, or on the same, or both of them above domesticated dog, all below a sabre tooth tiger.

The present horses seem to have gotten into the record after the dinos. As one of Eden's creatures, why how would we not expect that they would eventually show up???

This has not been the case. Paleontologist wouldn't have all these layers and periods that they talk about if fossils were hydrologically (and randomly) sorted.

True, which is why I do NOT attribute it all to the flood.

Men messing things up?? Oh yeah!! I would not doubt that it happened at all.

If you knew the Almighty or His son you would realize, I hope, that He can take care of business. Especially His own business. He wanted us to have His word, and we have it.

Men are carnal and often selfish. What better way to get what you want than to scare the lowly with some sort of religiosity? I'm not speaking about Genesis, necessarily.

Pipe dreams of motives of mere men, attributing to them, with no evidence, things that were higher than them.

 

[Barbarian]

So if one's beliefs can only be supported by imagining that the words in Scripture don't mean what they say, then any new doctrine, such as YE creationism, can be accomodated.

Still seems like a bad idea to me.

 

[dad]

So if one's beliefs can only be supported by imagining that the words in Scripture don't mean what they say, then any new doctrine, such as YE creationism, can be accomodated.

Still seems like a bad idea to me.

That is better than no support, as you would have if you claimed a certain state of the future. See, science can't go there, any more than Buzz Lightyear can. God lives there, and is there, and can talk all about it in the bible. Accept your limitations. Work with them, don't just continue to make stuff up!

 

[Barbarian]

That's the beauty of reserving judgement, dad. If you do that, you won't have to make up stuff any more.

It's OK not to know. But if you let your imagination take you, then you'll never be able to distinguish truth from fantasy.

 

[Orion]

Dad, I am not going to respond to every single comment you made to my post. I'll just speak in an overall capacity.

I'm not sure where you believe the layers of fossils originate from, if you don't hold to the "hydrologic flood sorting" that many Christians hold to. Facts are, there are layers that show specific animal types that were there in one level, something happens (like the K-T extinction event), and they aren't there anymore. It is what makes scientists think that an earth shaking event happened that killed off the dinosaurs. We're talking 65 million years ago. Because light is pretty much fixed, as is the course of linear time, and our understanding of radioactive decay, it is tough to state anything to the contrary of the earth being OLD in the extreme. Everything that is testable points to an ancient earth and even more ancient universe.

Believing that any constant was somehow different (in the past), in order to make a theory valid, is a poor way to make any point.

 

[dad]

That's the beauty of reserving judgement, dad. If you do that, you won't have to make up stuff any more.

It's OK not to know. But if you let your imagination take you, then you'll never be able to distinguish truth from fantasy.

The fantasy future that so called science speaks of with crashing galaxies, utter destruction, and burned out stars, and chaos is precisely that. Likewise the past state that is assumed to be the same as the present, upon which all past stories are based, is pure fantasy.
They should have reserved judgement and sais 'I don't know'.

 

[dad]

Dad, I am not going to respond to every single comment you made to my post. I'll just speak in an overall capacity.

I'm not sure where you believe the layers of fossils originate from, if you don't hold to the "hydrologic flood sorting" that many Christians hold to.

Creatures created mostly in Eden, including man. Some were made for the earth at large, likely to help get it suitable one day for us to spread out from Eden.
Man sinned, and fell, and the plan was changed, we got the boot, and had a planet that was not really all that habitable. By then, trilobites, or etc were already starting to die, and in the fossil record. We spread out, and the succession of life that followed reflects that in the record. Most of it, then, would be pre flood.

Facts are, there are layers that show specific animal types that were there in one level, something happens (like the K-T extinction event), and they aren't there anymore. It is what makes scientists think that an earth shaking event happened that killed off the dinosaurs. We're talking 65 million years ago.

No, you aren't, you only think you are. Layers, yes, millions of years, no.

Because light is pretty much fixed, as is the course of linear time, and our understanding of radioactive decay, it is tough to state anything to the contrary of the earth being OLD in the extreme. Everything that is testable points to an ancient earth and even more ancient universe.

In heaven, and the new heavens coming, we will no longer see our present decay, and light as we know it. It will be a different state universe, one that is eternal. All we can test is present light, or decay, etc, not that in the far future, which the bible says will be totally different. Neither can we test the state of the universe in Eden, only the present. None of the present rules apply if the state of the universe was different, of course. Science cannot say one way or the other, so all you can do is assume a same state, and build up a fantasy world on that.

Believing that any constant was somehow different (in the past), in order to make a theory valid, is a poor way to make any point.

All constants are different in heaven, and the new universe. This temporary state, upon which you base everything will pass away. If the past also was different, you would have no way of knowing. You just assume. Nothing at all more. No science. Hardly anything to brag about.