the bible does not teach that the sun was created on the 4th day...
Gen 1:16-19
God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
Gen 1:16-19
God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
I disagree with your statement. TD
look for the text say the "sun" was made..........it does not say that the sun was made.
what does it say was made?.........LOL
also notice the part that says the stars was "made" was added....it does not actually say the stars was made on the forth day.....
so when does the bible say the sun and the moon and all the stars as well as all the things in space were made?................the answer is genesis 1:1
a lot of bible students are taught by their teachers that "God made the sun on the 4th day"....but if the bible student were to actually go read the text for the 4th day , they would see that "This is not what the text says..."
The problem is that if you just take the Text as written, then you totally destroy all the Young Earth arguments....
Yes, its true.
If you just read and believe the Genesis text as we see it written in the bible you don't find any issues with their being an Old earth,,,or any disagreements with Evolution....nor any reason for Bible students to worry that they need to invent all kinds of anti-science concepts like the "sourceless light"
most if not all the arguments that bible students hear about the great "Genesis /Evolution" debate are actually a debate between good science on the one hand, and false teachings about what the bible says on the other.
What Im saying is this:
If we as Bible students just read the Text of Scripture as it is written, then we will never need to fear science, never need to think the Bible stands against the teachings of Evolution, never live in fear that our children are learning bad things in school....
So what does the bible say?
It says that the first thing God made in the beginning was_________?
The answer is that the very first thing God made in the beginning was the "Heavens"
Now there are a few different meanings to the word "heavens" to be sure in the Bible....and Im not here to force you to believe that the term "heavens" must mean only one thing here at Genesis 1:1.
But I am here to tell you that among the many different ways to correctly understand the word "heavens" that one of these correct meanings is the idea for the sun, the moon, and all the things up in the sky like stars and planets, and asteroids and black holes, and etc, etc, etc....all that stuff out there in space.
This fits correctly with what Science teaches by the way...
So right here in the Bible we find an accurate account of how the universe was made.
No need to invent a "sourceless light".........no need to have the Genesis "day" be any different in its nature and cause than any other day.
Now the word 'day" is also important to see how both Science and Genesis walk in agreement.....but I shall deal with that in a later comment.
I agree with what you say about not believing in a "sourceless light." But here is where we differ in interpretation:
Gen. 1:1 is a general introductory statement to what is said in ch. 1; and ch. 1 is introductory to ch 2 and beyond. Therefore, when it says "God created the heavens and the earth," this is a brief introduction to how it was done in ch. 1.
Furthermore, "the great lights" mentioned on day 4 has to be the sun and moon, since the same context says "he made the stars also." Most everyone who has a common-sense approach to Gen. 1 agrees with this idea, therefore if you are wanting to correct everyone else with your idea, the burden of proof is on you to show by exegesis just exactly what those great lights are, if indeed you don't believe them to be the sun and the moon.
You argue that day 4 doesn't say "sun", but neither does it say "sun" in verse 1 either!! It appears to me that you're just nitpicking at words. Give us a hermeneutic that proves what the great lights are. You can see that my interpretation is based on context and what historic orthodox Christian teaching has given us. If you want to change this idea, you need to do a lot more work on it. TD
I agree with what you say about not believing in a "sourceless light." But here is where we differ in interpretation:
Gen. 1:1 is a general introductory statement to what is said in ch. 1; and ch. 1 is introductory to ch 2 and beyond. Therefore, when it says "God created the heavens and the earth," this is a brief introduction to how it was done in ch. 1.
Where does it say in the Bible that Genesis 1:1 is only an introduction?.......
is that idea in the Bible or did some guy make it up because it agreed with some other things that he agrees with but that are also not in the bible?
if you can find me any verse in the Bible that teaches what you said about Genesis 1:1 I will have a look.
But if all you got to support that idea is the fact that it agrees with what you want the bible to have said?.......then you are alone on that.
I believe there is a far better way to read the bible that does not require adding things and discounting verses as being only an "introduction"
The better way is to just read the Text as it is written....and believe it as written.
Thats all......
Just read and believe.
No need to invent things to add to the text, no need to make some verses meaningless...no need to add concepts that flay in the face of science.
Last edited by alanmolstad; 08-17-2014 at 02:37 PM.
Furthermore, "the great lights" mentioned on day 4 has to be the sun and moon, since the same context says "he made the stars also."
But friend, the Text does not actually say that !
Go look it up,,,check it out...*
The text does not say that God "made" the stars also on the 4th day!
What this means is that if you support the idea that the "greater light has to be the sun with the idea that God made the stars also on the 4th day, but that in truth the Bible does not say that the stars were made on the 4th day, then your whole support for the 'sun and moon" stuff falls like a House Of Cards!
You argue that day 4 doesn't say "sun", but neither does it say "sun" in verse 1 either!!
But I have never said that God ONLY made the sun on the 1st day!
Have I ever said that the sun was the only thing made on the 1st day?.......
So what did God make on the first day according to the text?.....
The answer is?......EVERYTHING!
Thats right, God made everything in the cosmos on the 1st day...from not only our own star the sun, but also all the billions and uncountable billions of galaxies that are themselves filled with uncountable billions and billions of stars and worlds and moons and rocks, and dust and giant gas bodies, and black holes that all the other things that our science is yet to discover!
All created here in Genesis 1:1......all given the correct ***le too by the way.
For the word the Bible uses is the really only correct word it could use to describe just how much God created at this first moment of creation!>>>>>>>>"Heavens"!
In the beginning God created........_________, what?
Give us a hermeneutic that proves what the great lights are. ....
"Hermeneutics" = is the theory of text interpretation, especially the interpretation of biblical texts.
Here you go Tdidymas....
The "light" of the 1st day is the very same "light" talked about on the 4th day.
The light is the same.....
So if the light is the very same light that we have already talked about on the 1st day, what is so different now on the 4th?
The answer is found in what we read about the light on the 4th day..
Thats all we have to do to learn the answer...Just read the text!
It's than simple.
Just read the text as it appears and dont feel the need to twist the text into saying things that dont appear .
For what we read is that there is now a "greater" light...and a "lessor" light.
So the light of the 4th day and the 1st day is the same light, but the "AMOUNT" of light seen on the earth is now changed!
The source is still the same source.
The source for the light on the 1st day is the same source on the 4th day, AND (You are going to want to pay attention to this next part).......and its the very same source for the same light we see today!
The source for the Light never changed from Genesis 1:1 to today . The source is still the same.
But on the 4th day we do now find that the "AMOUNT" of light is said to now have changed.
Last edited by alanmolstad; 08-18-2014 at 04:30 AM.
I think this is a nice way to understand the Genesis text that does not require a person add to the word of God, nor take away things, make other things meaningless, etc.
Its a lot more easy just to read the text as it appears and believe it....
"Hermeneutics" = is the theory of text interpretation, especially the interpretation of biblical texts.
Here you go Tdidymas....
The "light" of the 1st day is the very same "light" talked about on the 4th day.
The light is the same.....
So if the light is the very same light that we have already talked about on the 1st day, what is so different now on the 4th?
The answer is found in what we read about the light on the 4th day..
Thats all we have to do to learn the answer...Just read the text!
It's than simple.
Just read the text as it appears and dont feel the need to twist the text into saying things that dont appear .
For what we read is that there is now a "greater" light...and a "lessor" light.
So the light of the 4th day and the 1st day is the same light, but the "AMOUNT" of light seen on the earth is now changed!
The source is still the same source.
The source for the light on the 1st day is the same source on the 4th day, AND (You are going to want to pay attention to this next part).......and its the very same source for the same light we see today!
The source for the Light never changed from Genesis 1:1 to today . The source is still the same.
But on the 4th day we do now find that the "AMOUNT" of light is said to now have changed.
This answer I have to say is one of my best to this issue of the lights of the 4th day.
I may have to copy/paste it on a few forums Im a member of?
Hi Alan, You said: "a lot of bible students are taught by their teachers that "God made the sun on the 4th day"....but if the bible student were to actually go read the text for the 4th day , they would see that "This is not what the text says..."
The problem is that if you just take the Text as written, then you totally destroy all the Young Earth arguments....
Yes, its true.
If you just read and believe the Genesis text as we see it written in the bible you don't find any issues with their being an Old earth,,,or any disagreements with Evolution....nor any reason for Bible students to worry that they need to invent all kinds of anti-science concepts like the "sourceless light"
Ok, so looking at the text from the King James Version,
14And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
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.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
We know today that all it takes to have a day-night cycle is a rotating Earth and light coming from one direction. The Bible tells us clearly that God created light on the first day, as well as the Earth. Thus we can deduce that the Earth was already rotating in space relative to this created light. This was not a "sourceless" light, the Creator was the source.
God can, of course, create light without a secondary source. We are told that in the new heavens and Earth there will be no need for sun or moon (Rev 21:23). In Genesis, God even defines a day and a night in terms of light or its absence.
On the fourth day the system we have now was ins***uted as the Earth’s temporary lights (until the new heaven and earth) were made (vs. 16), so the diffused light from the first day was no longer needed. I don't see this explanation adding to or changing the text, nor is it anti-science.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by alanmolstad
TD
