Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 112 (8734 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-29-2017 6:57 PM
443 online now:
DrJones*, jar, nwr, Percy (Admin) (4 members, 439 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 802,209 Year: 6,815/21,208 Month: 2,576/2,634 Week: 239/525 Day: 72/82 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23456
...
16NextFF
Author Topic:   If our sun is second or third generation, does this not conflict with Genesis ?
CogitoErgoSum
Junior Member (Idle past 1990 days)
Posts: 13
From: Manchester, England
Joined: 04-15-2011


Message 1 of 231 (615255)
05-10-2011 9:34 AM


First posting, having read these forums from afar, so bear with me. Not my specialisation really, I teach Biology, but having to teach life cycles of stars I did a little research. If our sun is second, or third generation ; as they have found out by looking at the composition, does this not negate the whole "let there be light" narrative. The fact that our sun actually formed from a supernova of a previous sun means we have already had light. I await being torn apart with trepidation !

Edited by CogitoErgoSum, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Adminnemooseus, posted 05-11-2011 3:54 AM CogitoErgoSum has responded
 Message 63 by Trae, posted 05-16-2011 6:01 AM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded
 Message 65 by Taz, posted 05-18-2011 10:01 AM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded
 Message 81 by Ryan, posted 05-20-2011 9:31 PM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded
 Message 129 by IamJoseph, posted 07-30-2011 9:12 PM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded
 Message 131 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 08-02-2011 5:16 AM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded
 Message 207 by Blue, posted 05-05-2014 11:28 PM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded

    
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3740
Joined: 09-26-2002


(1)
Message 2 of 231 (615256)
05-11-2011 3:54 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by CogitoErgoSum
05-10-2011 9:34 AM


Reference please, etc.
...I did a little research. If our sun is second, or third generation...

A reference link to support that, please.

...does this not negate the whole "let there be light" narrative. The fact that our sun actually formed from a supernova of a previous sun means we have already had light.

As I see it, if anything, it gives creationists an out to explain how God created light 2 days (wasn't it?) before the creation of the (current) sun. That light could have been from the previous sun version.

Adminnemooseus


Please be familiar with the various topics and other links in the "Essential Links", found in the top of the page menu. Amongst other things, this is where to find where to report various forum problems.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CogitoErgoSum, posted 05-10-2011 9:34 AM CogitoErgoSum has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by CogitoErgoSum, posted 05-11-2011 10:36 AM Adminnemooseus has responded

    
CogitoErgoSum
Junior Member (Idle past 1990 days)
Posts: 13
From: Manchester, England
Joined: 04-15-2011


Message 3 of 231 (615257)
05-11-2011 10:36 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Adminnemooseus
05-11-2011 3:54 AM


Re: Reference please, etc.
"Our own sun contains about 2 percent of these heavier elements [oxygen and carbon] because it is a second- or third- generation star, formed some five thousand million years ago out of a cloud of rotating gas containing the debris of earlier supernovas. Most of the gas in that cloud went to form the sun or got blown away, but a small amount of the heavier elements collected together to form the bodies that now orbit the sun as planets like the earth." Stephen Hawking - Brief History of Time

Sorry I didn't want to just produce a post with a load of links on it, as I find those a little wearing.

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Sun

I realise that to accept this the timeframe would play havoc with YEC anyway.

You may be right about the Genesis narrative. I have read through it and despite reading through, I cannot find mention of light 2 days before the creation of the sun. I suppose, as with all religious texts, the interpretation can be warped to fit whatever evidence is displayed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Adminnemooseus, posted 05-11-2011 3:54 AM Adminnemooseus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by CogitoErgoSum, posted 05-11-2011 3:45 PM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded
 Message 5 by Adminnemooseus, posted 05-11-2011 7:54 PM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded

    
CogitoErgoSum
Junior Member (Idle past 1990 days)
Posts: 13
From: Manchester, England
Joined: 04-15-2011


Message 4 of 231 (615258)
05-11-2011 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by CogitoErgoSum
05-11-2011 10:36 AM


Re: Reference please, etc.
I'll research properly, forget topic. My ego wouldn't be able to deal with feeling wrong !
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by CogitoErgoSum, posted 05-11-2011 10:36 AM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded

    
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3740
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 5 of 231 (615259)
05-11-2011 7:54 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by CogitoErgoSum
05-11-2011 10:36 AM


Re: Reference please, etc.
You may be right about the Genesis narrative. I have read through it and despite reading through, I cannot find mention of light 2 days before the creation of the sun. I suppose, as with all religious texts, the interpretation can be warped to fit whatever evidence is displayed.

Creates light:

quote:
Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light, and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light day, and the darkness he called night. And there was evening, and there was morningthe first day.

Creates sun and moon:

quote:
Genesis 1:14 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, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth. And it was so. 16 God made two great lightsthe greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morningthe fourth day.

Source

I misguessed - God created light 3 days before creating the sun.

Sorry I didn't want to just produce a post with a load of links on it, as I find those a little wearing.

Don't want a load of links, but 1 or 2 is nice, and is (more or less) called for by forum rule 4:

quote:
Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.

Without a reference/link, it's a bare assertion.

I could have let you get away with not having a reference/link, but such are desirable.

Adminnemooseus


Please be familiar with the various topics and other links in the "Essential Links", found in the top of the page menu. Amongst other things, this is where to find where to report various forum problems.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by CogitoErgoSum, posted 05-11-2011 10:36 AM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by NoNukes, posted 05-11-2011 8:23 PM Adminnemooseus has acknowledged this reply
 Message 141 by Eliyahu, posted 02-21-2014 8:58 AM Adminnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

    
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3740
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 6 of 231 (615261)
05-11-2011 8:01 PM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the If our sun is second or third generation, does this not conflict with Genesis ? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9343
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 7 of 231 (615266)
05-11-2011 8:23 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Adminnemooseus
05-11-2011 7:54 PM


Re: Reference please, etc.
Adminnemooseus writes:

I misguessed - God created light 3 days before creating the sun.

True, but is that really relevant to the OP's question? When we say that the sun is second/third generation we mean that the sun was formed from material from two generations of stars that lived and died before our sun was ever formed.

If light was created before the sun and the stars, then the light created in Genesis 1:3 was from a source other than the sun and stars. Now that in itself may be problematic, but it has nothing to do with the sun being second or third generation.

Genesis 1:14-16 says that the sun, stars, and moon were all made on the fourth day. Yet the first, second, third and fourth days on earth each included a morning and an evening. (Genesis 1:5, 8, 13, and 19. There seems to be plenty of contradictions with modern cosmology in days 1-4. I'm not sure the sun being 2nd generation is even the worst contradiction.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Adminnemooseus, posted 05-11-2011 7:54 PM Adminnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Minnemooseus, posted 05-11-2011 10:10 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3471
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 8 of 231 (615277)
05-11-2011 10:10 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by NoNukes
05-11-2011 8:23 PM


Evidence for what happened on day 1?
God created light 3 days before creating the sun.

True, but is that really relevant to the OP's question? When we say that the sun is second/third generation we mean that the sun was formed from material from two generations of stars that lived and died before our sun was ever formed.

YECism, in general, is an exercise in jamming huge amounts of process into very short periods of time.

The point I was shooting for, was that the evidence for "two generations of stars that lived and died before our sun was ever formed" could be YEC interpreted as evidence for what happened during the creation process of day 1. And it could be a pre-sun light source, although even that wouldn't explain the pre-sun days and nights.

More evidence for something that didn't happen (a young universe/Earth creation).

Moose


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by NoNukes, posted 05-11-2011 8:23 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5541
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 9 of 231 (615279)
05-11-2011 10:50 PM


Science?
This thread is in the Science Forum.

Why are there so many references to ancient tribal myths?


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by CogitoErgoSum, posted 05-12-2011 4:28 AM Coyote has not yet responded
 Message 12 by Buzsaw, posted 05-12-2011 8:20 AM Coyote has responded

  
CogitoErgoSum
Junior Member (Idle past 1990 days)
Posts: 13
From: Manchester, England
Joined: 04-15-2011


Message 10 of 231 (615289)
05-12-2011 4:28 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Coyote
05-11-2011 10:50 PM


Re: Science?
Sorry, after a bit of further reading. The first generation of stars also would not have had planets either

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3083875.stm

So first day God created light

Third day God created land

Not if there weren't any planets !


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Coyote, posted 05-11-2011 10:50 PM Coyote has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by NoNukes, posted 05-12-2011 6:33 AM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded
 Message 16 by Jon, posted 05-12-2011 12:08 PM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9343
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 11 of 231 (615297)
05-12-2011 6:33 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by CogitoErgoSum
05-12-2011 4:28 AM


Re: Science?
CogitoErgoSum writes:

Sorry, after a bit of further reading. The first generation of stars also would not have had planets either

Third day God created land

Not if there weren't any planets !

You realize of course, that at any point in the narrative, unlimited supernatural power can be invoked. If metals (heavy elements) are needed to form the sun and planets, then God would just make them from scratch, or from hydrogen and/or helium.

You aren't critiquing YEC cosmology, but some kind of Big Bang/YEC hybrid cosmology.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by CogitoErgoSum, posted 05-12-2011 4:28 AM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded

    
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 231 (615318)
05-12-2011 8:20 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Coyote
05-11-2011 10:50 PM


Re: Science?
Coyote writes:

This thread is in the Science Forum.

Why are there so many references to ancient tribal myths?

Did you read the "let there be light" in the OP? It appears that this thread is partly about an attempt to refute the Genesis record. Shouldn't there be opportunity for creationists to debate their positions?


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Coyote, posted 05-11-2011 10:50 PM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Coyote, posted 05-12-2011 9:57 AM Buzsaw has responded
 Message 31 by dwise1, posted 05-12-2011 10:42 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5541
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 13 of 231 (615328)
05-12-2011 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Buzsaw
05-12-2011 8:20 AM


Re: Science?
Buzsaw writes:

Coyote writes:

This thread is in the Science Forum.

Why are there so many references to ancient tribal myths?

Did you read the "let there be light" in the OP? It appears that this thread is partly about an attempt to refute the Genesis record. Shouldn't there be opportunity for creationists to debate their positions?

No. There is enough ignorance in the world already. We don't need any more. ;-)


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Buzsaw, posted 05-12-2011 8:20 AM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Buzsaw, posted 05-12-2011 11:30 AM Coyote has not yet responded
 Message 15 by fearandloathing, posted 05-12-2011 11:46 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 231 (615344)
05-12-2011 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Coyote
05-12-2011 9:57 AM


Re: Science?
Coyote writes:

Buzsaw writes:


Did you read the "let there be light" in the OP? It appears that this thread is partly about an attempt to refute the Genesis record. Shouldn't there be opportunity for creationists to debate their positions?

No. There is enough ignorance in the world already. We don't need any more. ;-)

Oh. Well then, perhaps you can persuade Admin to change the cite name from EvC to E=E No Debate Forums or Evolutionist Tea Party Discussion Board.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Coyote, posted 05-12-2011 9:57 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 1499 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


(1)
Message 15 of 231 (615350)
05-12-2011 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Coyote
05-12-2011 9:57 AM


Re: Science?
Coyote writes:

Buzsaw writes:

Coyote writes:

This thread is in the Science Forum.

Why are there so many references to ancient tribal myths?

Did you read the "let there be light" in the OP? It appears that this thread is partly about an attempt to refute the Genesis record. Shouldn't there be opportunity for creationists to debate their positions?

No. There is enough ignorance in the world already. We don't need any more. ;-)

I got to agree with Buzz on this, it seems to me this topic will go nowhere without the input of creationist. I cant imagine anyone else who would refute the position presented in the OP, JMHO, and I am often wrong.


"I hate to advocate the use of drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they always worked for me." - Hunter S. Thompson

Ad astra per aspera


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Coyote, posted 05-12-2011 9:57 AM Coyote has not yet responded

    
1
23456
...
16NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017