How did light come before the Sun?

[Kurieuo]

Off topic posts moved to http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 6842#16842 (Does God remember our sins?)

Kurieuo

[meforevidence]

I use the Septuagint more than any other text for Old Testament study because it is the oldest complete Old Testament we have and is more consistent.

If you do read the septuagint, you will see that the word(s) for "light" are actually two separate words. The first one mean "fire" or "torch/flame" The second word used for the sun and the moon mean "illuminery"

see: http://www.septuagint-interlinear-greek ... enesis.pdf

You have to purchase the Old Testament Greek Lexicon but you can read and download the whole OT LXX in PDF. You still can see there are two different words used.

[waynes world]

I think you made a good point and we forget that we have the "lesser light" as well as the "greater light" phrases in the 4th day. I might suggest that may be dealing with a different type of light than the light we see in the 3rd verse of Genesis One. I wonder if the Hebrew would confirm that. Also, the day started at sundown not at sunrise. Thats the way it still is in Israel and I don't see why creation would have been any different.

[waynes world]

Here are a few problems that I have with the idea that the sun was created on the 4thday.
For one thing the account says there was "evening and morning.'" the argument that God provided the light just doesn't fly because evening and morning is not possible with that. The sun is needed to provide evening and morning. Also what would keep the earth from drifting into space without the sun's gravitational pull? Wouldn't all life freeze without the sun? No it makes more sense to read Genesis 1 as saying the sun and the stars were created "In the beginning" and all that happened on the 4th day was that the light from the sun had appeared on the earth for the first time. Until then there might have been a think mist that might have covered the earth. We need to realize that we weren't there when the creation happened.

[Marcosll]

I don't think we can take Genesis seriously. So much has been lost in time and translation.

How would a simple mind back then be able to comprehend creation of the universe? If someone was divinely shown creation he would have a hard time writing it down in his primitive language. We cannot be certain it is an accurate account. Trying to rebuild the words now with what we know is futile.

[Canuckster1127]

I don't think we can take Genesis seriously. So much has been lost in time and translation.

How would a simple mind back then be able to comprehend creation of the universe? If someone was divinely shown creation he would have a hard time writing it down in his primitive language. We cannot be certain it is an accurate account. Trying to rebuild the words now with what we know is futile.

I disagree with that.

1. It's certainly valid to note that Genesis is not a 21st century science text.
2. Time and translation issues are a legitimate concern as well, but there are plenty of resources available for the person who wishes to do their homework and backgroundw ork to put things into context.
3. I think we have to put it in the context that the original hearers/readers received it to understand what it is saying.

Simply writing it off however, sacrifices inspiration and inerrency.

I don't believe the Genesis account is solely a metaphore. I believe, within the constraints of the language and culture of the people to whom it was given, it is a remarkable account that portrays the creation event and attributes to God His full participation and direction of the event.

I do think it is valid to place it in the context of the entire 5 books of the Law and note the timing. Genesis was written by Moses (I believe that) probably during the Exodus. What Moses by God's direction was doing, I believe is providing His people, Israel, with a tracing of the history of the world narrowing down to the deliverence of the Nation in order to provide a National identity and preserve as well the events that demonstrated God's power and faithfulness. I don't believe the primary purpose was to provide a technical creation account for the benefit of 21st century Americans. Therefore, attempting to move that account in a strictly literalistic manner into western based linear progression is a very poor basis to use in approaching the text.

We can discuss this more if you wish. Let me know where you're having issues with it.

[Silvertusk]

Hi, this is my first day on these forums. I am a Christian, but there is this one thing that puzzles me about the creation story.

On the first day it states that God created light. And called the light day, and the dark night. But, then on the fourth day, it states that the Sun, moon and stars are created. How does that work?

The Sun and the Stars where there from "Day 1" - but because of the atmosphere was still thick and didn't become transparent until photosynthesis and volcanic activity and taken a real hold of it and cleared it out, the Sun and the stars was not visible till "Day 4". Instead what the early earth had was an atmosphere that was 100% overcast but still let light in.

Silvertusk

[waynes world]

I have that book and find it to be very helpful although some of it seems technical to me. He says that both the young and old earth vews are correct and there is therefore no conflict at all. I do like that idea.