Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 120 (8782 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-21-2017 11:49 AM
111 online now:
Coyote, Faith, herebedragons, Meddle, nwr, Phat (AdminPhat), ringo, Stile (8 members, 103 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: evilsorcerer1
Post Volume:
Total: 816,614 Year: 21,220/21,208 Month: 1,653/2,326 Week: 108/881 Day: 30/78 Hour: 6/4

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2345678Next
Author Topic:   Genesis 1:1-5 Day One
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 110 (661397)
05-04-2012 11:44 PM


The Light was Good
Why was there no light when the Earth was made?

Surely the Evolutionists will tell you that the Sun was first to form and from it the planetsall as part of the continuation of the 'Big Bang' movement. But does this really make sense? Does it make sense that light would first exist before it had anything to illuminate?

Of course not! As the opening passages of Genesis tell us, Earth was first made; after was made the light (though not yet the Sun, Moon, or Stars). Imagine the light existing first in the absence of anything. What do you imagine...?

Darkness!

There can be no light without something for it to illuminate. So in the beginning, there was nothing. Then the Earth was formed. Only then could light existbefore this time it would simply be called 'darkness'. Light was created to shine down and illuminate a world in creation (previously dark: Gen 1:2). It was created to demarcate time (Gen 1:5).

Earth was not made from the light, but light made for the Earth.

CJ

Edited by CreationJon, : No reason given.


Love your enemies!

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Phat, posted 05-05-2012 2:42 AM Jon has not yet responded
 Message 4 by vimesey, posted 05-05-2012 5:55 AM Jon has responded
 Message 14 by kbertsche, posted 05-05-2012 1:19 PM Jon has not yet responded
 Message 20 by NoNukes, posted 05-06-2012 12:29 PM Jon has responded
 Message 51 by ICANT, posted 05-11-2012 3:25 PM Jon has responded
 Message 54 by Tangle, posted 05-12-2012 10:35 AM Jon has responded
 Message 103 by Evangelical Humanists, posted 05-27-2012 6:39 PM Jon has not yet responded

  
AdminPhat
Administrator
Posts: 1803
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-03-2004


Message 2 of 110 (661399)
05-05-2012 2:28 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Genesis 1:1-5 Day One thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
Phat
Member
Posts: 9589
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 3 of 110 (661400)
05-05-2012 2:42 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jon
05-04-2012 11:44 PM


Re: The Light was Good
Greetings, CreationJon. Noting the new name, I am curious as to what type of creationist that you are. Shall "creationism" be based only on the Bible, or is it a philosophy all its own?

You are a linguist, and one of the questions that I have about the origin of words is what the words mean in context to the time they were first uttered versus the translations and the changing cultural meanings of said words.

Lets analyze some of the Genesis words in their Hebrew form, shall we? I am using a Strongs Concordance.

OT:2822--choshek (kho-shek'); from OT:2821; the dark; hence (literally) darkness; figuratively, misery, destruction, death, ignorance, sorrow, wickedness:

KJV - dark (-ness), night, obscurity.

OT:216---'owr (ore); from OT:215; illumination or (concrete) luminary (in every sense, including lightning, happiness, etc.):

KJV - bright, clear, day, light (-ning), morning, sun.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jon, posted 05-04-2012 11:44 PM Jon has not yet responded

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 888
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 4.1


(2)
Message 4 of 110 (661402)
05-05-2012 5:55 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jon
05-04-2012 11:44 PM


Re: The Light was Good
Hi there CreationJon,

I read your post a few times, and was just wondering - is your question similar to the old zen question about whether a tree falling in the middle of a forest makes a sound if no-one is there to hear it ?

In other words, we're comfortable that a tree falling will create pressure waves in the air molecules, radiating out from the fallen tree - the energy the falling tree produces dissipates partially in this way. That will happen every time a tree falls, regardless of whether anyone is there. However, is it correct to call that phenomenon "sound" if those pressure waves don't vibrate an eardrum ? It's a neat little semantic question, but not one which takes you anywhere.

I read your post as asking a similar question about "light". Are you saying that yes, waves of photons could well have been radiating from a source before the earth was formed, but it is only when the earth was there for those waves to hit, that we can actually call them "light" ?

Please let me know if I've misunderstood you.

Cheers

vimesey


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jon, posted 05-04-2012 11:44 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Jon, posted 05-05-2012 8:37 AM vimesey has not yet responded

    
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 110 (661411)
05-05-2012 8:37 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by vimesey
05-05-2012 5:55 AM


Re: The Light was Good
I read your post as asking a similar question about "light". Are you saying that yes, waves of photons could well have been radiating from a source before the earth was formed, but it is only when the earth was there for those waves to hit, that we can actually call them "light" ?

Well there certainly was no 'source' as you would understand it, for the Sun, Moon, and Stars were still three days off from being made. Nor was there anything for the transmission or reception of the light.

So we don't really have a falling tree that still makes a sound. What we have is a falling tree in empty space: it makes no sound nor ripples no air molecules because there are no air molecules to ripple nor people to hear.

Until matter (the 'Earth' of Genesis 1:1) and energy ('Heavens' of Gen 1:1) there would be nothing for the light force to exist in or on, and nothing for it to illuminate that we should call it light. At first instance, when the matter and energy came into existence, they were without form (Gen 1:2).

Part of the process of giving that stuff form involved the creation of mountains, the creation of Stars, the formation of dry land as separate from wet, and yes, the construction of light-transmitting particles.

On the first day, light and the ability of the Universe to carry it were madejust after the creation of matter itself.

CJ


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by vimesey, posted 05-05-2012 5:55 AM vimesey has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by jar, posted 05-05-2012 9:32 AM Jon has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29183
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 6 of 110 (661416)
05-05-2012 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Jon
05-05-2012 8:37 AM


Re: The Light was Good
So you are saying that hydrogen and oxygen were made before there was light?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Jon, posted 05-05-2012 8:37 AM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Jon, posted 05-05-2012 11:30 AM jar has responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 110 (661421)
05-05-2012 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by jar
05-05-2012 9:32 AM


Re: The Light was Good
So you are saying that hydrogen and oxygen were made before there was light?

I am saying that before there were the necessary matters and energies light could not have existed. You can't make a log cabin without wood; and you can't have light without the necessary light matters and energies.

CJ


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by jar, posted 05-05-2012 9:32 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by jar, posted 05-05-2012 11:34 AM Jon has responded
 Message 21 by NoNukes, posted 05-06-2012 1:25 PM Jon has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29183
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 8 of 110 (661422)
05-05-2012 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Jon
05-05-2012 11:30 AM


Re: The Light was Good
Well, the story says that water existed before light.

Water is hydrogen and oxygen.

What matters and energies other than hydrogen and oxygen existed before there was light? Was helium or carbon around?


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Jon, posted 05-05-2012 11:30 AM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Jon, posted 05-05-2012 12:11 PM jar has responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 110 (661426)
05-05-2012 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by jar
05-05-2012 11:34 AM


Re: The Light was Good
What matters and energies other than hydrogen and oxygen existed before there was light? Was helium or carbon around?

Clearly there were many matters and energies that existed before there was light. It is hard to say exactly which ones there were, but it would be my understanding from reading the text that most if not all of the necessary ingredients for Creation were made in that first instance with the Heavens and Earth. From these ingredients other things were made, light first, then plants, then ... .

So helium and carbon may well have preexisted light.

CJ

Edited by CreationJon, : No reason given.


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by jar, posted 05-05-2012 11:34 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by jar, posted 05-05-2012 12:18 PM Jon has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29183
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 10 of 110 (661428)
05-05-2012 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Jon
05-05-2012 12:11 PM


Re: The Light was Good
So we know that water existed, which also means that certain other forces existed. We know that electrons and protons existed. We know that covalent bonds existed. Did X-Rays or Gamma Rays or Microwaves or Infrared Rays or Ultraviolet rays exist?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Jon, posted 05-05-2012 12:11 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Jon, posted 05-05-2012 12:27 PM jar has responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 110 (661430)
05-05-2012 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by jar
05-05-2012 12:18 PM


Re: The Light was Good
Did X-Rays or Gamma Rays or Microwaves or Infrared Rays or Ultraviolet rays exist?

It is difficult to say. We know for certain that visible electromagnetic radiation did not exist.

The invisible kind may have preexisted light, it may have been created without mention after light, or all of the electromagnetic radiation may have been created along with visible light on the first day.

CJ


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by jar, posted 05-05-2012 12:18 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by jar, posted 05-05-2012 12:30 PM Jon has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29183
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 12 of 110 (661431)
05-05-2012 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Jon
05-05-2012 12:27 PM


Re: The Light was Good
Well the water was formless, is that correct?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Jon, posted 05-05-2012 12:27 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Jon, posted 05-05-2012 12:39 PM jar has responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 13 of 110 (661433)
05-05-2012 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by jar
05-05-2012 12:30 PM


Re: The Light was Good
Well the water was formless, is that correct?

I would assume so for two reasons: (1) the Earth was clearly without form (Gen 1:2) and the Waters may have been as well, and (2) the Waters on Earth had yet to be separated from the Waters in Heaven (Gen 1:68).

Granted, the text does not say that the Waters were formless. So there are some things we can read and know, and other things that we can only infer.

CJ


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by jar, posted 05-05-2012 12:30 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by jar, posted 05-05-2012 2:56 PM Jon has responded

  
kbertsche
Member
Posts: 1368
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


(1)
Message 14 of 110 (661436)
05-05-2012 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jon
05-04-2012 11:44 PM


Re: The Light was Good
One minor quibble with the OP: it wasn't the light on Day 1 which was created to "demarcate time", it was the light bearers (sun, moon, stars) on Day 4 which were created to do so, "to indicate seasons and days and years" (v.14).

Edited by kbertsche, : Clarification


"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein

I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. Erwin Schroedinger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jon, posted 05-04-2012 11:44 PM Jon has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by arachnophilia, posted 05-24-2012 4:16 AM kbertsche has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 29183
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 15 of 110 (661439)
05-05-2012 2:56 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Jon
05-05-2012 12:39 PM


Re: The Light was Good
Sine the story uses the plural 'waters' then the waters were above absolute zero in temperature (otherwise they definitely would have form) and so we can say with some confidence that at least the infrared section of the electromagnetic spectrum existed.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Jon, posted 05-05-2012 12:39 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Jon, posted 05-06-2012 2:21 AM jar has responded
 Message 101 by arachnophilia, posted 05-24-2012 4:18 AM jar has acknowledged this reply

  
1
2345678Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017