Evolution's Bottom Line

[Opethian]

Opethian made a funny. What then was the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night created on the 4th day?

Well light has to have a source, it doesn't just come flying out of nothing, so this is either a mistake in the bible, or somehow god created light in flight (that rhymes, I made another funniez!:areyoucra ).

 

[Fade]

Did you miss a week of high school physics, Alexander?
Gravity is an extradimensional dent in spacetime caused by the mass of the Earth (or any other mass, of course). Objects "fall" to Earth as they slide down the gravitational incline.
You can picture this in two dimensions as a bowling ball resting on a trampoline, but our 3-D minds cannot picture the phenomonon as it actually occurs in multiple dimensions.

Nope, gravity is the measure of a serious situation.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Well light has to have a source, it doesn't just come flying out of nothing, so this is either a mistake in the bible, or somehow god created light in flight (that rhymes, I made another funniez!:areyoucra ).

You're a funny guy. So, just why does light have to be from the sun? You also failed to answer the rest of my question. What was the greater light to rule the day that was made on the 4th day in Genesis?

 

[Opethian]

You're a funny guy. So, just why does light have to be from the sun? You also failed to answer the rest of my question. What was the greater light to rule the day that was made on the 4th day in Genesis?

Well I thought it would be obvious that this 4th day creation implies the greater light to be the sun and the lesser light the moon. The problem is then, if god created light on the first day, where did this light come from if it didn't come from the sun or the moon?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Well I thought it would be obvious that this 4th day creation implies the greater light to be the sun and the lesser light the moon. The problem is then, if god created light on the first day, where did this light come from if it didn't come from the sun or the moon?

finally, back on track. you'll notice that I started this line in response to Zsa1973's comment (#4). So the sun wasn't created on the first day which put's that comment in disarray.

As to where the light came from, it didn't come from anywhere, it was created.

But seriously, try this: http://dialogue.adventist.org/articles/14_3_davidson_e.htm

 

[gnostic]

Hi, I ask one thing if I may? Gravity was one of the things mentioned. Can anyone tell what gravity is, and what it is maid of?

Mass, alexander. Mass. Gravity is made by the gravitational force of the mass.

What do you think created the magnetic fields so that the compass point at the "magnetic north", alexander?

The earth's core contained different many heavy elements, including iron. With magna moving above the earth's core, it cause the rubbing action or friction to magnetize the core. It sort of like magnetizing iron nail with some rough cloth. The iron become a magnet for a short period of time.

Grab some physics and earth science textbooks.

Do you seriously believed God created gravity?

 

[gnostic]

As to where the light came from, it didn't come from anywhere, it was created.

If light was simply created on the 1st day, then why on earth did God need the Sun or the Moon anyway?

He created so there are day and night, but doesn't the sun do that anyway?

The 4th day say only that the sun (and moon) was to create the seasons, but not to create night and day, but ignore the sun would do that in the first place.

It is typically illogical to have no sun but light, and then create the sun later. So what happened to this created light? Where did it vanish to? After this light was created, there are no mention of what happened to this so-called light.

 

[Valjean]

Obviously God used a shop-light and generator the first couple days till He got the main power system hooked up.

 

[Opethian]

Errors like this in the bible only add to the unbelievability of the bible and the incredibly large probability that it is just a nice work of fiction. Obviously the man who wrote this part of the bible didn't know the way light works yet which caused his faulty reasoning. If the bible was the word of an omniscient god, it would not contain errors like that.

 

[gnostic]

Day 1: Light (the sun forms)
2: Waters separate forming on earth
3: Water recedes allowing land to come forth, plant life begins as we know it
4: Stars become visible on the face of the earth

The Genesis clearly state that the sun and moon was formed on the 4th day, not the 1st. It only stated it created light to divide night from day; again not the sun.

I still find it implausible to have night and day without the sun being created until the 4th day.

 

[rocketman]

Errors like this in the bible only add to the unbelievability of the bible and the incredibly large probability that it is just a nice work of fiction. Obviously the man who wrote this part of the bible didn't know the way light works yet which caused his faulty reasoning. If the bible was the word of an omniscient god, it would not contain errors like that.

I was reading genesis 1 and I noticed verse 15 :

"and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth"

Therefore it seems to me that the author knew something about how light works. Maybe a modern 'technical' reading misses the point. Here's an interpretation which I don't think anyone else has mentioned yet: The first day had to have the sun and a rotating earth otherwise how could you have day and night? Now notice the difference between verse 3 and verse 14:

Gen 1:3 "Let there be light.."
Gen 1:14 "Let there be lights.."

To me this latter verse seems to be refering to the rearrangement of heavenly bodies, orbits/tilts etc to mark out times and seasons, but it would have to include a repeat of the initial lighting setup so the listener takes all the lights in the sky into account as far as marking the seasons go. Verse 18 clearly says that these lights 'seperate' the light from the darkness. This is important because in verse 4 we are told that God did it, now we are told what he used. This is reiterative reinforcment on top of the 'seasons' thing, which is what day 4 seems to have really been about. If you asked me what genesis says God made on day 4 I would guess 'the seasons', which would include the addition of the moon which isn't mentioned until day 4. I know genesis 1 is not meant to be a scientific paper, and I know that ancient Hebrew poetry had many literary devices, but either way I think there is room to accept it as an account that doesn't necessarily have to be erroneous, if one is so inclined.

Just my point of view.

 

[logician]

There is as much evidence supporting evolution as there is supporting many of the theories in "hard" sciences like physics and chemistry. The only questions that remain are the exact mechanics of evolution, which involves the study of many other sciences such as geology, biology, genetics, chemistry, zoology, etc.