Snowflakes....designed or accidents of nature?

[McBell]

I doubt that anyone could produce a positive thought that would appeal to people such as yourself. Negativity seems to dominate many people's thinking in this world. It's obvious that there is so much that contributes to this attitude.
But denying the existence of a Creator will not make things better or give hope beyond what man can offer. Humans are clearly incapable of producing what most of us desire......good health, happiness and security, living in a world with no war or conflict.

If you say there is no designer....then you are welcome to your view and where it will lead you.

Do you expect to have a happy future relying on man to lead you to a better place? Don't hold your breath, will you?

We all know that misery loves company.

Way to completely tuck tail and run coward like from the points made in the post you quoted to present the above quoted bull ****.

 

[JayJayDee]

This tree wasn't even mentioned until then. So how can you possible know what god had planned for it when the tree was not mentioned until after sin?

I really think it would be beneficial if you knew the facts before posting.

Genesis 2:9....."And out of the ground the Lord God made to spring up every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." (ESV)

Both trees are mentioned before the fall. So the means to live forever and the means of death were both there in the garden for the choosing. Only one tree had a prohibition at first.

"Life and death" is what God also put before his nation of Israel. (Deut 30:19) It is what he puts before us too.

I know in the book of Job God permitted and encouraged Satan to torture Job, as a wager on Job's faith. That's actually very cruel what God allowed to happen to Job, and not just to Job but his family as well. Sure, God got bragging rights and Job was rewarded, but was that reward for faith or did God realize he really messed up by allowing all that to happen just for his own personal amusement?

Now, this is where I just shake my head. This is nothing close to what the account of Job is all about. By a superficial reading it might assume that what you say is true....but there is so much more to it than that.
God permitted it, that is true, but he certainly did not encourage it. The "wager" as you put it, was nothing of the sort.

It was the devil who raised the validity of Job's faithfulness, because God's words addressed to the devil were in response to what the devil had already done....he had already "considered" or "set his heart upon" God's most faithful servant at that time, perhaps thinking up ways to trip him up.

Satan's challenge was.....Job 1:9-12 “Is it for nothing that Job has feared God? Have you not put up a protective hedge around him and his house and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his livestock has spread out in the land. But, for a change, stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your very face.” Then Jehovah said to Satan: “Look! Everything that he has is in your hand. Only do not lay your hand on the man himself!”

In the second trial, after he had endured the first successfully, the devil was not finished.

Job 2:3-5....God said that Job was still "fearing God and shunning what is bad. He is still holding firmly to his integrity, even though you try to incite me against him to destroy him for no reason.” 4 But Satan answered Jehovah: “Skin for skin. A man will give everything that he has for his life. 5 But, for a change, stretch out your hand and strike his bone and flesh, and he will surely curse you to your very face.”

By challenging the motive behind Job's faith, the devil was minimising the reasons why Job served God so faithfully, implying that they were purely selfish.

By saying "A man will give everything that he has for his life" satan was implying that every "man" was on trial here.
Job was actually representing all of us. If we were to have such severe trials, how many of us would curse God and abandon him? There was only one way to prove his case.....allow the trials. Each one of us is Job.....so how are we doing?

What is often forgotten is the reward God gave Job for his time of faithful endurance under test.

Job 42: 12-17....."So Jehovah blessed the last part of Job’s life more than the beginning, and Job came to have 14,000 sheep, 6,000 camels, 1,000 pairs of cattle, and 1,000 female donkeys. He also came to have seven more sons and three more daughters. He named the first daughter Je·miʹmah, the second Ke·ziʹah, and the third Kerʹen-hapʹpuch. No women in all the land were as beautiful as Job’s daughters, and their father gave them an inheritance along with their brothers. After this Job lived for 140 years, and he saw his children and his grandchildren—four generations. Finally Job died, after a long and satisfying life."

Not only was everything reversed, but doubled. Job did not die an old and unhappy man. This too is pictorial of the rewards God gives for faithfulness under trial. When God's kingdom comes, Job and his wife will have all 20 of their children together to enjoy the rest of eternity in peace and happiness under the rule of God's kingdom. This is the Bible's promise. I think it is a lot more appealing that the finite troubled existence of this world with nothing to look forward to but more of the same until we make ourselves extinct.

You don't know if this tree was a part of the plan or not. Birthing pains were mentioned as a result of sin. Does this mean birthing was supposed to have been painless (HA!!)?

Have you ever been witness to the birth of animals? I have bred dogs for many years and I can assure you that birth pains are pretty much exclusive to humans. Contractions in animals are not painful. If pain is in evidence then it is a signal that something is wrong.

Or does it mean there would have been no children being born? Afterall, Cain and Abel were not born until after sin, and god, rather than giving another generation a chance and even trying to fix his design, cursed the whole lot of us.

There was nothing in the design to fix. It was the introduced state of imperfection that needed correcting. But first God had to ensure that this scenario would not be repeated. By allowing things to play out naturally, he established precedents so that this issue of his rightful sovereignty could never be raised again...either in heaven or on earth for all time to come. That is not a short term solution, but forward thinking into an infinite future.

The track record of theocratic states sucks just as much as it does for secular states. The only real difference, which is in general an improvement, is secular states are very frequently more tolerant of religious and social freedom than theocratic states.

There has never been a truly theocratic state. Israel was the closest man has ever come, but because of their inherent imperfection, they never succeeded. Had they strictly followed the laws God gave them, their existence would have been idyllic.

If God is loving and caring, why did he make it so that this would be passed on?

You don't seem to realise that once a knowledge of evil was in the world, there was no sending it back. Once you know something, you can't "unknow" it.

If Adam and his wife had died within the 24 hour "day" on which they ate the fruit, no children would have come into the world. But God allowed the mandate that he stated to them.....i.e. "Be fruitful, become many and fill the earth" to be fulfilled, so that children would naturally be produced even in a sinful state. He also said that a "day" to him is like a "thousand years" to us (2 Pet 3:8) so in God's counting of a "day" no human has lived a full day. Methuselah is the oldest living human on record, but even he only lived to be 969 years old.

God promised he would send a rescuer to redeem Adam's children, then he would use the situation to test all humanity on the issue raised not by man, but by the devil.
The first rebel was not human and he challenged God for the position of sovereign ruler over mankind. Other angelic creatures were watching to see how God would handle this challenge. If God had merely snuffed out the rebels, there was nothing to stop this scenario being repeated, again and again. God's way of dealing with it, settles it once and for all time for humans as well as angels.....both endowed with free will.

Actually our hunter/gatherer and pastoral and nomadic tribes were doing pretty good for themselves until organized and structured societies came along. Once these spread, their complicated ways and problematic cogs spread with them. Power became more concentrated, the general public had less and less to do with it, and now we have just a few who call the shots and can do things, bad things, because we gave them the position to be able to do so.

Yes this is true to a point. Nomadic tribes had a relatively peaceful existence until they found themselves at odds with other nomads and began fighting over water and livestock and pasture ground......

Humans, no matter what time period they lived in, have always managed to mess things up and solved all their problems with violence.......they still do. We don't learn...do we?

 

[JayJayDee]

Way to completely tuck tail and run coward like from the points made in the post you quoted to present the above quoted bull ****.

Oh look....another little ray of sunshine come to brighten our day.

Do you have something to say that isn't negative Mestemia?

What sort of contribution was that to the thread? Are we all enlightened by your comment?

Have you got something to say that is relative to the topic under discussion perhaps?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

God permitted it, that is true, but he certainly did not encourage it.

Saying "go for it" is pretty much the definition of encouragement.

Satan's challenge was.....Job 1:9-12 “Is it for nothing that Job has feared God? Have you not put up a protective hedge around him and his house and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his livestock has spread out in the land. But, for a change, stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your very face.” Then Jehovah said to Satan: “Look! Everything that he has is in your hand. Only do not lay your hand on the man himself!”

Do you not see that Satan is provoking God here? Satan is being rather passive-aggressive here, and God is going along with it.
There is also the question of why is Satan different between Judaism and Christianity? If Christianity is piggy-backing off of Judaism, shouldn't Satan, who is not the evil boogeyman in Judaism, be the same character? Why reinvent him?

I have bred dogs for many years and I can assure you that birth pains are pretty much exclusive to humans.

I can assure you, no, they aren't. If they are exclusive to humans, why have I heard other animals pant, have wide eyes, and shriek over them?

There was nothing in the design to fix. It was the introduced state of imperfection that needed correcting.

I would say that passing punishments down to people who had nothing to do with the offense is a serious flaw in need of repair.

There has never been a truly theocratic state.

There have actually been several.

You don't seem to realise that once a knowledge of evil was in the world, there was no sending it back.

God could have prevented it from spreading. He killed plenty of other people, why not Adam and Eve before they could teach such things to their children?

Nomadic tribes had a relatively peaceful existence until they found themselves at odds with other nomads and began fighting over water and livestock and pasture ground......

They still fought less than what settled people do today.

 

[shawn001]

Oh look....another little ray of sunshine come to brighten our day.

Do you have something to say that isn't negative Mestemia?

What sort of contribution was that to the thread? Are we all enlightened by your comment?

Have you got something to say that is relative to the topic under discussion perhaps?

JayJayDee, Genesis says the earth came before the sun and that didn't happened for a fact. Are you "enlightened" by that fact?

Its also says plants came on the "the third day."

But the Sun on the "the fourth day."

Genesis is not accurate. Its also has major similarities to the Babylonian creation stories which are of course a DIFFERENT RELIGION..

Comparing two creation stories: one from Genesis
and the other from Babylonian pagan sources:

Comparing the Genesis and Babylonian stories of creation


The Earth is 4.57 billion years old and the first flowers evolved around 128 million years ago.

National Museum of Natural History: Science in the News


NOVA | First Flower | PBS


Is this a great design of beauty like the snowflakes, just wondering?

Naked Mole Rat

 

[shawn001]

On Saturn's moon Titan it rains Methane.

Seasonal Methane Rain Discovered on Titan | WIRED

On Titan: It's Raining Methane

 

[JayJayDee]

JayJayDee, Genesis says the earth came before the sun and that didn't happened for a fact. Are you "enlightened" by that fact?

Well, actually it doesn't. A more careful reading of the Genesis account will identify creation of the heavens and the earth as the very beginning of it all. In case you hadn't noticed, our sun (though small by comparison to other "suns") was part of the initial creation of the universe. Light came to be as one of the first things mentioned. (Gen 1:3-5)

Its also says plants came on the "the third day."

Since light was already in evidence, it is possible that there was enough light for photosynthesis to take place without the luminaries being clearly visible. They were there producing their light, but obviously through a cloud layer.

But the Sun on the "the fourth day."

No, not the creation of the sun, but it becoming clearly visible along with the moon at night. Light and dark were already established on the first day.

Genesis is not accurate.

I believe it is very accurate. What is not accurate is people assuming that it is inaccurate without really reading it.

Its also has major similarities to the Babylonian creation stories which are of course a DIFFERENT RELIGION..

There are not really any "different" religions. There are only two....true and false. There are only two gods in existence.....only one of them is the true God...the other is a pretender whose sole aim is to discredit the true God by producing red herrings to distract people from the truth.
All false "religions" have a common thread because all are from the same source....Babylon, which is the springboard from which all false worship began. Nimrod was the culprit. Do you know about Nimrod?

Comparing two creation stories: one from Genesis
and the other from Babylonian pagan sources:

You do realize that the devil is a mimic, don't you? If there was not an element of truth in some of these "religions" no one would accept them.
The flood stories are global too. The gods and demi-gods of Greek mythology find quite a bit of similarity with the Genesis account about the licentious rebel angels materializing and co-habiting with human women to produce a gigantic race of violent super bullies. Elements of truth survive in the thread of the embellished stories.

 

[JayJayDee]

Please click to expand this. I have tried many times to get it to post correctly but it refuses for some reason.

The Earth is 4.57 billion years old and the first flowers evolved around 128 million years ago. [/quote ]

If you say so.....were you around to record the creation events? Anything that happened pre-historically has no eye witness testimony. We must rely on flawed human beings with their flawed arguments to interpret the evidence. How does that make them any more acceptable than those who accept the Bible's account as factual?

We know that the earth itself is very old and Genesis 1:1 makes allowance for this. It doesn't tell us when "the beginning" actually was.

Is this a great design of beauty like the snowflakes, just wondering?

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I guess another mole rat thinks this is beautiful. At least they smell beautiful. Since they are blind, they certainly do not need to attract a mate by sight. LOL. And since they live underground, we never really see them. All creatures have their place....we just have to discover what it is. He is actually perfectly adapted to his environment.

 

[shawn001]

Well, actually it doesn't. A more careful reading of the Genesis account will identify creation of the heavens and the earth as the very beginning of it all. In case you hadn't noticed, our sun (though small by comparison to other "suns") was part of the initial creation of the universe. Light came to be as one of the first things mentioned. (Gen 1:3-5)



Since light was already in evidence, it is possible that there was enough light for photosynthesis to take place without the luminaries being clearly visible. They were there producing their light, but obviously through a cloud layer.



No, not the creation of the sun, but it becoming clearly visible along with the moon at night. Light and dark were already established on the first day.



I believe it is very accurate. What is not accurate is people assuming that it is inaccurate without really reading it.



There are not really any "different" religions. There are only two....true and false. There are only two gods in existence.....only one of them is the true God...the other is a pretender whose sole aim is to discredit the true God by producing red herrings to distract people from the truth.
All false "religions" have a common thread because all are from the same source....Babylon, which is the springboard from which all false worship began. Nimrod was the culprit. Do you know about Nimrod?



You do realize that the devil is a mimic, don't you? If there was not an element of truth in some of these "religions" no one would accept them.
The flood stories are global too. The gods and demi-gods of Greek mythology find quite a bit of similarity with the Genesis account about the licentious rebel angels materializing and co-habiting with human women to produce a gigantic race of violent super bullies. Elements of truth survive in the thread of the embellished stories.

"Well, actually it doesn't. A more careful reading of the Genesis account will identify creation of the heavens and the earth as the very beginning of it all. In case you hadn't noticed, our sun (though small by comparison to other "suns") was part of the initial creation of the universe. Light came to be as one of the first things mentioned. (Gen 1:3-5)"


Wrong!!!! and Yes I have read the Bible.

Genesis 1 KJV

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Of course we don't have day or night on Earth without the sun and moon.

4 And 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.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

The two great lights are the sun and moon. Created on the fourth day AFTER the Earth.

Does the sun rule the light during the day? Does the moon reflected light from the Sun show at night?

Without the sun, the nearest star would throw almost no light on the earth or even all the stars, its still be pretty dark. There is also no morning or night without the sun. For a fact the solar system formed when the sun started nuclear fusion. We know how our solar system formed and in fact now can see other ones forming and stellar nurseries. Genesis is wrong for a fact. Its been noted for a long time now.

Your reading it wrong.

"Since light was already in evidence, it is possible that there was enough light for photosynthesis to take place without the luminaries being clearly visible. They were there producing their light, but obviously through a cloud layer. "

Again the stars don't create enough light for photosynthesis on the planet, you HAVE to have the sun. The whole system would break down, everything.


"There are not really any "different" religions. There are only two....true and false."

And yours in true of course. That is what they all say and hence a problem and one reason for wars throughout history.

Politicians and the religious both use the word "Truth" in the same way.

You have not actually studied religions, I can tell.

"

 

[Kolibri]

@shawn001

This makes a whole lot more sense when you take perspective of the "spirit" in verse 2 into account. Genesis 1:2- 2:3 is from the point-of-view of how things seemed from the planet's surface. Under dense cloud cover, like Venus, seeing the shape of the Sun and Moon would be nigh impossible and, at first, no light made it to the surface.

 

[shawn001]

(1:1) In the beginning
The first of two contradictory creation accounts. Compare with Genesis 2:4-25 in which the order of events is entirely different.

The Genesis 1 account conflicts with the order of events that are known to science.

In Genesis 1:1, the earth and "heaven" are created together "in the beginning," whereas according to current estimates, the earth and universe are about 4.6 and 13.7 billion years old, respectively.

In Genesis, the earth is created (1:1) before light (1:3) and the sun and stars (1:16); birds and whales (1:21) before reptiles and insects (1:24); and flowering plants (1:11) before any animals (1:20). The order of events known from science is in each case just the opposite.



(1:3) Let there be light
God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day (1:14-19). And how could there be "the evening and the morning" on the first day if there was no sun to mark them?

(1:6) A firmament
God spends one-sixth of his entire creative effort (the second day) working on a solid firmament. This strange structure, which God calls heaven, is intended to separate the higher waters from the lower waters.

(1:11) Let the earth bring forth grass
Plants are made on the third day before there was a sun to drive their photosynthetic processes (1:14-19). Notice, though, that God lets "the earth bring forth" the plants, rather than creating them directly. Maybe Genesis is not so anti-evolution after all.

(1:14) Let them be for signs
God placed the sun, moon, and stars in the firmament so that they can be used "for signs". This, of course, is exactly what astrologers do: read "the signs" in the Zodiac to predict what will happen on Earth.
What the Bible says about astrology

(1:16a) God made the two great lights.
"The greater light [the sun] to rule the day, and the lesser light [the moon] to rule the night." But the moon is not a light; it only reflects light from the sun. And why, if God made the moon to "rule the night", does it spend half of its time moving through the daytime sky?

(1:16b) He made the stars also.
God spends a day making light (before making the sun and stars) and separating light from darkness; then, at the end of a hard day's work, and almost as an afterthought, he makes 300 sextillion stars.

(1:17) To give light upon the earth.
Then why is only a tiny fraction of stars visible from earth? Under the best conditions, no more than a few thousand stars are visible with the unaided eye, yet there are hundreds of billions of stars in our galaxy and a hundred billion or so galaxies. Were they all created "to give light upon the earth"?

(1:26) Let them have dominion.
God gave humans dominion over every other living thing on earth. This couldn't be true, of course, since millions of other species existed for millions of years before humans existed. But this verse is used by fundamentalist Christians to justify their mistreatment of other species and disregard for the environment. After all, they believe that God created the other species just for them, so they can do whatever they please with them.

(1:28) Be fruitful and multiply.
God commands us to "be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over ... every living thing that moveth upon the earth." This verse is used to justify Christian opposition to birth control, concern for the environment, and animal rights. The earth was made for humans, and they can do as they damn well please with it.

(1:29) I have given you every herb ... and every tree ... for meat.
Since many plants have evolved poisons to protect against animals that would like to eat them, God's advice is more than a little reckless. Would you tell your children to go out in the garden and eat whatever plants they encounter? Of course not. But then, you are much nicer and smarter than God.

(1:30) To every beast ... I have given every green herb for meat.
All animals were originally herbivores. Tapeworms, vampire bats, mosquitoes, and barracudas -- all were strict vegetarians, as created by God.

(1:31) Behold, it was very good.
God purposefully designed a system that ensures the suffering and death of all his creatures, parasite and host, predator and prey.

Genesis 1

 

[Kolibri]

shawn001 - "The first of two contradictory creation accounts. Compare with Genesis 2:4-25 in which the order of events is entirely different."

That is because they are arranged differently.
The first account is chronological.
The second account is topical, meaning in the 2nd account things are only introduced as they are needed to progress the theme of man's creation and fall into sin.

 

[shawn001]

@shawn001

This makes a whole lot more sense when you take perspective of the "spirit" in verse 2 into account. Genesis 1:2- 2:3 is from the point-of-view of how things seemed from the planet's surface. Under dense cloud cover, like Venus, seeing the shape of the Sun and Moon would be nigh impossible and, at first, no light made it to the surface.

cloud cover?

You have in it "And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night."

But no one could tell that because of cloud cover. I don't think so.

It makes a whole lot more sense that people 2000 years ago didn't know how our solar system formed.


Here is another problem.


NOVA | The Bible's Buried Secrets - PBS: Public Broadcasting ...
NOVA | The Bible's Buried SecretsCached
The Bible's Buried Secrets. An archeological detective story traces the origins of the Hebrew Bible.

"
What are some obvious inconsistencies, for instance in the Noah story?
In the story of the flood, in Genesis chapters 6 to 9, there seem to be two accounts that have been combined, and they have a number of inconsistencies. For example, how many of each species of animals is Noah supposed to bring into the ark? One text says two, a pair of every kind of animal. Another text says seven pairs of the clean animals and only two of the unclean animals."

NOVA | Writers of the Bible

"
Michael D. Coogan is Lecturer on Hebrew Bible/Old Testament at Harvard Divinity School, Director of Publications for the Harvard Semitic Museum, Editor-in-Chief of Oxford Biblical Studies Online,[1] and Professor Emeritus of Religious Studies at Stonehill College. He has also taught at Fordham University, Boston College, Wellesley College, and the University of Waterloo (Ontario). Coogan has also participated in and directed archaeological excavations in Israel, Jordan, Cyprus, and Egypt, and has lectured widely. Coogan was raised as Roman Catholic and for 10 years was Jesuit. From the "I Wanna Know" interview he does not affirm his personal faith, but speaks of Christians using the third person and maintains an academic posture. Coogan doubts that Jesus thought of himself as divine.[2]

One of the leading biblical scholars in the United States,[3] he is the author of The Old Testament: A Historical and Literary Introduction to the Hebrew Scriptures, editor of The New Oxford Annotated Bible, The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Books of the Bible, and Oxford Biblical Studies Online, and a contributor to such standard reference works as The Encyclopedia of Religion, HarperCollins Bible Dictionary and The New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Other projects that he conceived, edited and collaborated on include The Oxford Companion to the Bible, The Illustrated Guide to World Religions, and The Oxford History of the Biblical World."

 

[shawn001]

shawn001 - "The first of two contradictory creation accounts. Compare with Genesis 2:4-25 in which the order of events is entirely different."

That is because they are arranged differently.
The first account is chronological.
The second account is topical, meaning in the 2nd account things are only introduced as they are needed to progress the theme of man's creation and fall into sin.

The accounts are scientifically inaccurate for a fact.

Our moon was also formed by a giant impact between the Earth and a planet the size of Mars. The Earth almost did not survive the collision.

The Sun formed before the planets for a fact, because its material left over from the formation of the sun.

 

[shawn001]

How Did the Solar System Form?
The formation of the solar system offers astronomers a rare model of an early hypothesis being dead right.

Published: Monday, September 01, 2014

How Did the Solar System Form? | Astronomy.com

The Eagle Nebula is a stellar nursery.

New 'Pillars Of Creation' Hubble Image Is Breathtaking

 

[Kolibri]

As the Creative Days were longer than a 24 hr period, evening and morning are both extended periods of time on the order of at least thousands of years each. Even now, according to the Hebrews 4:4-6, we are still in God's 7th or rest day.

So understanding "evening and morning" to mean "the beginning of the day, and when work really started to progress" for each "day", there is a certain progression that does not disagree with science.

Knowing that the Sun and Moon were already physically present but invisible to the naked eye on the surface helps.

Day 1: Light starts to find its way to the surface, a visible light and dark cycle is established.
Day 2: The skies clear enough that one can actually see an expanse where it not all fog-like - (some of the water is suspended creating a greenhouse effect over the planet.)
Day 3: Dry land and vegetation be begin to appear.
Day 4: The skies finally clear up enough to see the shapes of the Sun, and Moon, and stars.
Day 5: The fish and birds are created.
Day 6: The land animals and lastly humans are created.

 

[JayJayDee]

Wrong!!!! and Yes I have read the Bible.

Really....let's see.

Genesis 1 KJV

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

OK....I give up shawn...where did the "light" that was there on the "first day" come from?

Did God light a big celestial candle perhaps?

Since "the heavens and the earth" were "created" "in the beginning" are you suggesting that the earth is somehow older than the moon and stars? What do you think the "heavens" are if not the physical heavens of which the earth is a tiny part?

Of course we don't have day or night on Earth without the sun and moon.

So you are suggesting that the earth came before the sun? Really?

4 And 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.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

Previously, on the first “day,” the expression “Let there be light” was used. The Hebrew word there used for “light” is ʼohr, meaning light in a general sense. But on the fourth “day,” the Hebrew word changes to ma·ʼohr′, which refers to a luminary or source of light. (Gen 1:14) So, on the first “day” diffused light evidently penetrated the swaddling bands, but the sources of that light could not have been seen by an earthly observer. Now, on the fourth “day,” things evidently changed.

The words for "made" and "create" are very different in Hebrew......

At Gen 1:16 the Hebrew verb ba·raʼ′, meaning “create,” is not used. Instead, the Hebrew verb ʽa·sah′, meaning “make,” is employed. Since the sun, moon, and stars are included in “the heavens” mentioned in Gen 1:1, they were created long before Day Four.

On the fourth day God proceeded to “make” these celestial bodies viable from the earth's surface. When it is said, “God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth" this would indicate that they now became discernible from the surface of the earth, having been in the firmament all along.

Also, the luminaries were to “serve as signs and for seasons and for days and years,” thus later providing guidance for man in various ways.(Gen 1:14)

The two great lights are the sun and moon. Created on the fourth day AFTER the Earth.

Does the sun rule the light during the day? Does the moon reflected light from the Sun show at night?

Without the sun, the nearest star would throw almost no light on the earth or even all the stars, its still be pretty dark. There is also no morning or night without the sun. For a fact the solar system formed when the sun started nuclear fusion. We know how our solar system formed and in fact now can see other ones forming and stellar nurseries. Genesis is wrong for a fact. Its been noted for a long time now.

"Noted" by whom? Obviously not by the Creator.

The last time I looked our sun was a star......it was part of "the heavens" created when the earth also came into being.
Unless of course you believe that our sun and the moon actually were a special creation reserved for the 4th day and not part of the heavens at all?

I don't believe that is what Genesis says.

Your reading it wrong.

LOL but you can't possibly be reading it wrong of course?

"Since light was already in evidence, it is possible that there was enough light for photosynthesis to take place without the luminaries being clearly visible. They were there producing their light, but obviously through a cloud layer. "

Again the stars don't create enough light for photosynthesis on the planet, you HAVE to have the sun. The whole system would break down, everything.

Your explanation does not fit Genesis at all I'm afraid.

"There are not really any "different" religions. There are only two....true and false."

And yours in true of course. That is what they all say and hence a problem and one reason for wars throughout history.

I have to agree with you there......wars are often fought with religious overtones.....except that JW's don't participate in wars. We are known for our political neutrality.

Politicians and the religious both use the word "Truth" in the same way.

They may.....but JW's are not among them. Our truth is not the same truth as politicians or other religions....thankfully we are unlike both.

You have not actually studied religions, I can tell.

LOL....and you have not studied the Bible....I can tell that too.

 

[Kolibri]

Why bother with all this intellectual tapdancing? Genesis is obviously just the campfire tales of ignorant savages.

Because Jesus spoke of Adam, Noah and Abraham as real people and these events as being real. If there is real faith to be had, then these things are not just campfire tales. But now we live in a more scientifically advanced society, and one that is overflowing with critical thinking, what is reasonable to accept comes under quite a bit more scrutiny.

 

[Looncall]

Because Jesus spoke of Adam, Noah and Abraham as real people and these events as being real. If there is real faith to be had, then these things are not just campfire tales. But now we live in a more scientifically advanced society, and one that is overflowing with critical thinking, what is reasonable to accept comes under quite a bit more scrutiny.

That is what one would expect of someone living in the time of Jesus. In a way, it is evidence against the divinity of whoever it was that gave rise to the Jesus stories.

We now have quite enough evidence that neither Genesis nor the Noah story recounts anything that actually happened.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Snowflakes are lovely and nature is wonderful. And that's it really!