What did "Let there be light!" actually do?

[Kemosloby]

That's sophistry at its best.

Then God made light twice, which seems redundant. The Fourth day God created the Sun Moon and Stars. The first day God created the light of Heaven and separated the light and darkness, leaving the Earth in darkness to be lit by the Sun Moon and Stars.

And God said, "Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years,

 

[gnostic]

Then God made light twice, which seems redundant

It is not just redundant, it is absurd, it's illogical.

The Fourth day God created the Sun Moon and Stars. The first day God created the light of Heaven and separated the light and darkness, leaving the Earth in darkness to be lit by the Sun Moon and Stars.

Here, you are attempting to rationalise the absurdity.

The sun is older than the earth. And our star, the sun, is a young star. More ancient stars have existed billions of years before the sun.

Some of the stars that we can observed in our night sky, are older than the sun, because they have reach the stage of collapse, for instance, when it move off the main sequence star (fusing hydrogen at star's core), and become red giant (either fusing hydrogen from the shell surrounding the core or begin fusing helium the core into heavier elements, eg carbon, oxygen. When that happen the star will grow in diameter.

Red giant stars are stars that begin their decline, are older stars.

We know this because the Arcturus (Boötes constellation) is the closest red giant star, only about 36 light years away. This red giant is over 7 billion years old.

Our star is still fusing hydrogen, so it is still a main sequence yellow ward star. The sun is already 4.8 billion years old. In another 4 or so billion years from now, the sun will have the same fate as Arcturus. And when it does the red giant sun will consume mercury and possibly Venus too. And though red giant stars are cooler at the surface temperatures, it will still nbe hot enough burn or strip away the Earth's atmosphere, turning the Earth into a new Venus.

The fact, that there other red giant stars and white dwarfs that are close enough to be observe with naked eyes or hobbyist telescopes, show that that are much older stars out there, which debunk the Genesis notion that the Earth is older than the stars we can see.

Second, if the calculation of the Old Testament timeline is right, the Earth is no older than 6000 years, and yet there are stars and galaxies more distance than that.

Our nearest spiral galaxy, the Andromeda Galaxy is about 2 million light years away from our sun. If the earth and stars are less than 6000 years, then we shouldn't be able to see Andromeda yet.

Even though the speed of light is very fast, it will take 2 million years for the light to travel from Andromeda Galaxy to reach Earth. We should not be able to look at our sky, and see the the blurry blob to be that of Andromeda.

This also debunk the notion that creation of all the stars occurred on the 4th day of creation.

 

[Kemosloby]

It is not just redundant, it is absurd, it's illogical.


Here, you are attempting to rationalise the absurdity.

The sun is older than the earth. And our star, the sun, is a young star. More ancient stars have existed billions of years before the sun.

Some of the stars that we can observed in our night sky, are older than the sun, because they have reach the stage of collapse, for instance, when it move off the main sequence star (fusing hydrogen at star's core), and become red giant (either fusing hydrogen from the shell surrounding the core or begin fusing helium the core into heavier elements, eg carbon, oxygen. When that happen the star will grow in diameter.

Red giant stars are stars that begin their decline, are older stars.

We know this because the Arcturus (Boötes constellation) is the closest red giant star, only about 36 light years away. This red giant is over 7 billion years old.

Our star is still fusing hydrogen, so it is still a main sequence yellow ward star. The sun is already 4.8 billion years old. In another 4 or so billion years from now, the sun will have the same fate as Arcturus. And when it does the red giant sun will consume mercury and possibly Venus too. And though red giant stars are cooler at the surface temperatures, it will still nbe hot enough burn or strip away the Earth's atmosphere, turning the Earth into a new Venus.

The fact, that there other red giant stars and white dwarfs that are close enough to be observe with naked eyes or hobbyist telescopes, show that that are much older stars out there, which debunk the Genesis notion that the Earth is older than the stars we can see.

Second, if the calculation of the Old Testament timeline is right, the Earth is no older than 6000 years, and yet there are stars and galaxies more distance than that.

Our nearest spiral galaxy, the Andromeda Galaxy is about 2 million light years away from our sun. If the earth and stars are less than 6000 years, then we shouldn't be able to see Andromeda yet.

Even though the speed of light is very fast, it will take 2 million years for the light to travel from Andromeda Galaxy to reach Earth. We should not be able to look at our sky, and see the the blurry blob to be that of Andromeda.

This also debunk the notion that creation of all the stars occurred on the 4th day of creation.

I already debunked the 6,000 year old earth timeline. See my thread Adam and the Dinosaurs. Adam was created immortal and only started aging since eating the fruit. So it's been about 6,000 years since Adam sinned and ate the fruit. The time before that is indefinite, millions, billions..

Now if on the first day light was created, before there being a sun and moon, there is more than one value for a day. One known value for a day is 1,000 years.

 

[Thief]

Why do you think this is true?

kinda hard to say .....I AM!....

with nothing to show for it

 

[blü 2]

Grandliseur

you need to dispense with magic, and think science instead.​

But that's exactly what I was trying to do in the OP. I examined the text for scientific clues, made such sense of them as was available, and was left with no answer to what exactly happened as a result of Yahweh saying 'Light!'.

things told us are from the perspective of a person standing on earth.​

That's fair.

if you are willing to accept these things as from God​

In the story they're directly from Yahweh, and I'm proceeding on that basis.

this means that the solar system, the earth and the moon - are in their places, more or less.​

No, not till Day 4 does Yahweh make 'the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also' (1:18) There's no reason to think the planets existed before then either ─ of course it's not a solar system since a flat earth in a geocentric universe is being described.

Verse six tells us that from verse 2 we still have an earth that is too hot for the water vapors to settle down as water on the planet, it evaporates when it touches the planet.​

It doesn't say that. 1:2 says the earth was originally dark and shapeless and that there was relevant water somewhere. In 6. Yahweh makes the hard dome of the sky to separate the waters of the sky (rain) from the water on earth.

The atmosphere at this stage is then too dense, dirty to let light through, it is not a question of whether the sun shines.​

That's not what the text says. (Nor does it accurately portray our scientific understanding of the early earth.) It says that the heavens (sky) or possibly Heaven, exist from the start, but either way there's nothing in the sky.

 

[blü 2]

DavidFirth

All I know is that when God said it, it happened. Anything beyond that is just opinion or speculation.​

It's not as simple as that. For example, WHAT light came into being at that time? For example, do you agree that most of the EM spectrum must have existed already, for the reasons I point out in the OP?

Or do you think the Genesis account is a crock?

 

[blü 2]

Guy Threepwood

I've never understood how Yahweh's thought processes could possibly work without chains of cause and effect, as ours do. He's necessarily subject to determinism to the same extent that we are.because the only alternative is randomness, which strikes me as unhelpful for the task of orderly thinking.
.

 

[Thief]

picture yourself as God......yes you can
and you are attempting to introduce yourself as Creator
to an 80yr old man that climbed up the mountain to meet his Maker

i think it might be difficult
explaining fusion to someone raised in the house of Pharaoh
ran from that authority having killed someone
and has been hiding among wanderers.....

the terms of creation had to be.....'watered down'

 

[gnostic]

Adam was created immortal and only started aging since eating the fruit. So it's been about 6,000 years since Adam sinned and ate the fruit.

With regarding to Adam's supposed immortality. That is something that you have no evidences for.

You own bible only stated he died at age 930. Nothing say he was older than that.

Tell me something, Kemosloby. Would your god condone you making stuff up that's not true?

...because it is clear to me what you are claiming have no basis in truth, and you certainly don't have any evidences that any man can live over 130 years old.

 

[gnostic]

Now if on the first day light was created, before there being a sun and moon, there is more than one value for a day. One known value for a day is 1,000 years.

At that's more creationist's crap.

It say the first day, and all successive days afterward as "evening and morning".

A cycle or period of "evening and morning" = 1 day, not one thousand years.

This is why I can never trust creationists being honest when interpreting their own scriptures they followed. Creationists are nothing more than BS con-artists.

 

[Socratic Berean]

At that's more creationist's crap.

It say the first day, and all successive days afterward as "evening and morning".

A cycle or period of "evening and morning" = 1 day, not one thousand years.

This is why I can never trust creationists being honest when interpreting their own scriptures they followed. Creationists are nothing more than BS con-artists.

This isn't a matter of scriptural interpretation, but a linguistics argument. In the original text, the Hebrew word at issue here is "yom," which is often used in that language to indicate long periods of time as well as for a 24-hour period we call "day." (Similar to how, in English, you can say that you spent one day at the zoo and you can say that things were very different in the day of Abraham Linoln, but even more extreme.). Young earth creationist try to explain this away in Genesis, but often leave out several key factors that allow solid Hebraists to retort soundly with example-based evidence. (Another conversation for another thread, another day.). If you are interested in the issue, there is plenty of information out there on the web that captures the debate and clarifies the linguistic issue.

 

[Kemosloby]

With regarding to Adam's supposed immortality. That is something that you have no evidences for.

You own bible only stated he died at age 930. Nothing say he was older than that.

Tell me something, Kemosloby. Would your god condone you making stuff up that's not true?

...because it is clear to me what you are claiming have no basis in truth, and you certainly don't have any evidences that any man can live over 130 years old.

It's common sense that Adam was created immortal. If it was not possible for a man to live forever why would God promise it to those who believe in Jesus?

 

[Socratic Berean]

Genesis 1

1 In the beginning, Yahweh created earth and sky (or, heaven).

2. The earth was shapeless, empty and dark.
Water existed.

3 Yahweh said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.
​

So what does 'light' mean here? Well, we're told there's mayim ─ 'water', 'urine', but the first seems more likely; and it doesn't say qerach, 'ice', 'frost', 'crystal'. For water not to be ice, there must be ambient energy, so the EM spectrum already exists.

Thus Yahweh has already created an EM spectrum, but it has at least one gap in it, the place where visible light goes.

So when Yahweh says 'owr! ─ 'light', 'daylight', 'dawn' but we don't have a sun yet ─ then light at wavelengths 390 to 700 nm or so comes into being.

Very interesting line of thinking. The account seems to allow for God first creating something that radiated, or at least the concept of radiance (maybe it was light or maybe it was the EM spectrum more broadly or, as Tumah notes, something different all together), and then later creating some things that produce light (stars, sun included). Not necessarily redundant, as some would try to argue.

The account holds that the earth was "void" and "without shape," but I wonder if conductive heat from the inner earth could have allowed for liquid water, in conjunction with or as an alternative to EM, assuming there was any such inner earth heat that early on. (I suppose some of that inner earth heat, if it existed, could have been radiant...which would require IR, no? (Not my area of strength here)).

I cannot begin to speculate on how such things could happen, but you've sparked an interesting line of conversation.

 

[Kapalika]

I always thought that Genesis 1:2 was referring to the ancient belief about the Abyss and that Yahweh basically just created stuff from there. In some Jewish lore there is a belief that Leviathan and I forget the name of the other thing existed before Yahweh or at least was stuff he didn't create. I think he killed the one leaving Leviathan. Anyways I thought Leviathan and the other thing were swimmin' in the watery Abyss.

God I wish I kept notes. A while ago some malware wiped all my bookmarks and I didn't have them backed up like an idiot.. If anyone knows what the heck I'm talking about please step in.

Anyways just a thought but maybe "let their be light" refereed to something involving the first process of working with that to later make things like land ect. You can search for diagrams online but basically the ancient Jews believed in a flat Earth with an Abyss below and a firmament above.

Kind of like this:

 

[leibowde84]

kinda hard to say .....I AM!....

with nothing to show for it

So, why do you think "I AM" is synonymous with "let there be light"? It's not like God was making himself visible, as there wasn't anyone there to see him yet.

 

[gnostic]

This isn't a matter of scriptural interpretation, but a linguistics argument. In the original text, the Hebrew word at issue here is "yom," which is often used in that language to indicate long periods of time as well as for a 24-hour period we call "day."

It is more than just linguistic claim, it is about context.

The Hebrew transliteration of "yom" may mean unspecified period of time, BUT ONLY if you read yom without any other specific time, attach to yom.

BUT there are specific time mentioned with yom, that is - "evening and morning".

The "evening and morning" give it specific time, which clearly means "day", and not "1000 years".

You are only focusing on the possible meaning of a single word yom, and not on the context of complete sentence:

...And there was evening and there was morning, the [xth] day.

It is what I highlighted in red, that tell you what sort of yom they are. The repeated verses with "evening" and "morning" that tell you the passages' contexts are "day", not your ridiculous "thousand years" or "million years".

 

[gnostic]

It's common sense that Adam was created immortal.

It is not common sense that you ignored that if Adam was made immortal then there would be no need to plant Tree of Life in Eden, no need to bar them from the Eden after their decree or curse were proclaimed.

The fruit from the Tree of Life were supposed to make them immortals, and they didn't eat from this tree, therefore they were never immortals.

You are not being logical if you think they were immortals when they never ate from the Tree of Life. Your common sense is sadly lacking when you never considered the Tree of Life.

 

[Thief]

So, why do you think "I AM" is synonymous with "let there be light"? It's not like God was making himself visible, as there wasn't anyone there to see him yet.

He wasn't proving Himself to anyone else

He was simply......creating

 

[leibowde84]

He wasn't proving Himself to anyone else

He was simply......creating

I'll ask again, since you haven't even addressed my question. Why do you think "I AM" is synonymous with "let there be light"?

 

[Kemosloby]

It is not common sense that you ignored that if Adam was made immortal then there would be no need to plant Tree of Life in Eden, no need to bar them from the Eden after their decree or curse were proclaimed.

The fruit from the Tree of Life were supposed to make them immortals, and they didn't eat from this tree, therefore they were never immortals.

You are not being logical if you think they were immortals when they never ate from the Tree of Life. Your common sense is sadly lacking when you never considered the Tree of Life.

The continued eating from the tree of life kept them immortal. They were never forbidden from the tree of life, until kicked out of the garden, what makes you think they didn't eat from it?