Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   If our sun is second or third generation, does this not conflict with Genesis ?
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 replied

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

  
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 replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 29 of 231 (615420)
05-12-2011 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by CogitoErgoSum
05-12-2011 5:48 PM


Re: Science?
CogitoErgoSum writes:
if our sun is a second or even third generation star, how is this accounted for in this narrative ?
Hi CES. Welcome to the site. I'm literalist old earth creationist with a unique perspective. Genesis one begins with an opening statement before the day/night work had begun. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." That statement does not give any time frame as to when he made them. He simply states that whenever they were made he did it.
In order to effect the work of the first three days to suit him, he needed a great amount of heat and light; more than our sun would have afforded.
We read in Revelation about the new Heavens new earth and new Jerusalem which is to come. The text says there will be no sun & moon in the Holy City because the glory of God will lighten it. The implication in Genesis one is that the glory of God via the Holy Spirit will be the source of light until our sun was created on the fourth day.
The light was likely regulated to the precise temperature to effect the evaporation of the water from the void of the cold wet planet in order to created the perfect atmosphere and to separate the land and water on earth.
The record tells us that one of the primary functions of the sun was to initiate the 24 hr day. Clearly implicated is that before day five, we have no knowledge as to how long the first four days were. I include day four, because the text does not state how long it took to do the work of day four, i.e. create and set the lights in the firmament, as the text puts it.
In chapter two verse 4. we read phrase worded, in the day that God created the earth the sun, moon and the heavens. The term day here is obviously not a literal day but referring to the time when each were made.

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 27 by CogitoErgoSum, posted 05-12-2011 5:48 PM CogitoErgoSum has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by NoNukes, posted 05-13-2011 4:14 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 231 (615455)
05-13-2011 7:45 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Jon
05-12-2011 10:25 PM


Re: Science?
Jon writes:
if our sun is a second or even third generation star, how is this accounted for in this narrative ?
The obvious answer is that it simply isn't accounted for.
There was no Genesis creation.
LOL. Your assertion remains debatable.

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 30 by Jon, posted 05-12-2011 10:25 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Jon, posted 05-13-2011 2:53 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 231 (615458)
05-13-2011 8:31 AM


Age Of Sun
Way back in 2003 there was a sun thread segment in which I debated Eta Carina about a suddenly created sun as to the appearance of age etc. The thread was A young sun - a response.
That was before I realized that the Genesis one record did not state how old the sun, moon and stars were.
In the later pages of that thread I did, IMO, establish that if the sun were relatively suddenly created it would have shown the appearance of well over 30,000,000 years old, that being the length of time for a proto-star to develop/evolve into a star, according to conventional cosmology.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by NoNukes, posted 05-13-2011 12:39 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 231 (615521)
05-13-2011 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by NoNukes
05-13-2011 4:14 PM


Re: Science?
NoNukes writes:
There is no indication in the Bible that evening and morning became different lengths after the sun, moon, and stars were created.
Say what? No indication whatsoever? None? What then are the implications of verse fourteen?
quote:
4 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years:
The implication is that one of the purposes of the sun being created on day four was to determine the days years and seasons for the planet. No?

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 47 by NoNukes, posted 05-13-2011 4:14 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Jon, posted 05-13-2011 9:38 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 54 by NoNukes, posted 05-13-2011 11:52 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 231 (615525)
05-13-2011 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Jon
05-13-2011 9:38 PM


Re: Science?
Jon writes:
NoNukes writes:
There is no indication in the Bible that evening and morning became different lengths after the sun, moon, and stars were created.
Say what? No indication whatsoever? None? What then are the implications of verse fourteen?
quote:
4 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years:
The implication is that one of the purposes of the sun being created on day four was to determine the days years and seasons for the planet. No?
For those of us who missed it, would you be kind enough to point out the part of that verse that mentions a change in the length of days?
Look up and assimilate the meaning of implication. The verse implicates a determination of days, years and seasons. Pray tell, in context, what do those words imply to you, given that we, on planet earth, observe 24 hr days, etc?

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 50 by Jon, posted 05-13-2011 9:38 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Jon, posted 05-13-2011 10:52 PM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 53 of 231 (615529)
05-13-2011 11:11 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by jar
05-13-2011 5:05 PM


Re: Evening and Morning, the classic Jewish Day.
jar writes:
Buzsaw writes:
The record tells us that one of the primary functions of the sun was to initiate the 24 hr day. Clearly implicated is that before day five, we have no knowledge as to how long the first four days were.
Well, actually there is evidence that the first days were the same as the latter days; exactly the same phraseology is used between each day.
Nonsense! Just as the usage of the term day is determined by context so with the term evening and morning.. The context of days one through four imply an undetermined length of evening and morning and the context of days five and six imply a literal day determined by the lights being created on day four. The context says emphatically that that was the purpose of the created lights on day four.

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 48 by jar, posted 05-13-2011 5:05 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by NoNukes, posted 05-14-2011 12:12 AM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied
 Message 56 by Jon, posted 05-14-2011 12:16 AM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 231 (615547)
05-14-2011 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by NoNukes
05-13-2011 11:52 PM


Re: Blinded with Science?
NoNukes writes:
The stars have nothing to do with the length of the seasons or the length of a day. But we can identify the seasons by observing the stars at a particular point in time each day. Or knowing the time of year we can determine the hour by observing the stars or even the position of the sun among the stars.
Obviously, all bodies were not meant to fulfill the same function. Obviously, the message of the text is that one of the functions of them was to determine the days, the sun being the one fulfilling that purpose.
One might say that the US government consists of three branches, the executive, the legislative and the judicial, but that does not mean all fulfill the same function. One of the functions of the government is to adjudicate. One of the functions of the heavenly lights is to determine the days etc. Savvy, or do we need to expend more time and bandwidth on these basic aspects of the context?

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 54 by NoNukes, posted 05-13-2011 11:52 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 231 (615602)
05-14-2011 3:28 PM


Topic/Forum Clarification
Is a forum change in order here, in order that creationists may respond in kind to the topic which is as much about creationism as it is about science and Bible study?
The exchanges in the early messages between the admin topic promoter, Adminnemooseus and the topic author seem to indicate so. Most of the content of the thread (abe: including the OP) has been devoted to exchanges between the topic author and other members regarding the Genesis account.
Message 2
...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
"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.
Sun - New World Encyclopedia
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.
Message 5
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.
Edited by Buzsaw, : shown in text

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by NoNukes, posted 05-14-2011 4:52 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 231 (615614)
05-14-2011 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by NoNukes
05-14-2011 4:52 PM


Re: Topic/Forum Clarification
NoNukes writes:
That said, I don't understand the requirement that the creationist side of the debate here be limited to YEC. All that is required is an explanation of why some extra elements exist in the sun so that it appears to be second generation. Apparent age explanations will not cut it, in my opinion, because as I understand stellar evolution, our tiny sun will never fuse hydrogen/helium into the heavy elements currently found in the sun.
The wording in the text goes:
quote:
16And God made the two great lights, the great light to rule the day, and the small light to rule the night, -- and the stars.
17And God set them in the expanse of the heavens, to give light on the earth,
After thinking further about this wording, it doesn't emphatically say when the great lights were made and where they existed until they were set in the heavens related to planet earth. The term heavens, like day etc can be relative to text, the heavens relating to the earth being our own Solar System or perhaps our Milky Way Galaxy. The context of verses 1-3 indicate that until day four these lights were no in the earth's heavens. The term "set" seems to imply moving from one area of the heavens to that relating to planet earth.
Conclusion: Whether 1st generation or 2nd or 3rd would not affect the Genesis one account.
In Revelation 16 (I think verse 4 without looking) the 4th vial of wrath poured on the earth an extreme global warming caused by the sun. Other Revelation prophecies as well as some OT prophecies depict of a latter time drying up of the rivers and extreme drought on earth. I cite this because perhaps (I say perhaps) that would be more indicative to a 3rd generation sun than a 1st generation sun.
One thing for sure, is that the Genesis record does not state how long days one through four were, whether relatively short or exceedingly long.

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 60 by NoNukes, posted 05-14-2011 4:52 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by NoNukes, posted 05-17-2011 8:23 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 84 of 231 (616348)
05-20-2011 10:26 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by CogitoErgoSum
05-19-2011 5:40 AM


Re: Assumptions
CogitoErgoSum writes:
Pretty hefty assumptions here.
(1) Sol contains elements other than hydrogen and helium? Has anyone taken a sample from the sun and tested it out? Blowing hot air much these days?
(2) You assume these elements didn't form in the big bang.
(3) You assume there was a big bang.
(4) Sol is not a first generation star, which goes back to the circular argument.
(5) Sol has metalic elements. Again, anyone ever taken a sample from the sun? Seems to me like the scientific community is just blowing hot air on this one LOL
1) One word - spectroscopy, however there are other methods, see Error 404 - non-existent address, high school science really.
2) The EVIDENCE for the big bang suggests these elements didn't form in the big bang.
http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm. There are links to other articles at the bottom, and quite a good finishing paragraph.
3) See 2
4) The EVIDENCE from 2, and the EVIDENCE from 1, along with what we know about supernova etc. would suggest that Sol is not a first generation star.
5) see 1
If you are looking for 100% proof, never going to happen, as I am sure has been pointed out on these forums there is no such thing as 100% proof. However the EVIDENCE leads us to... is not the same as assumptions.
Creationists, with some legitimacy. might argue that your #2 and #4 are not cut in stone, so to speak.
The BB theory, upon which both are based has some questionable unknown aspects like no existing area in which to have happened, no known before the event, no existing outside of in which to have expanded and no existing time in which to have happened.

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 75 by CogitoErgoSum, posted 05-19-2011 5:40 AM CogitoErgoSum has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by jar, posted 05-21-2011 8:39 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 231 (616350)
05-20-2011 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Coyote
05-20-2011 10:21 PM


Re: Mythology...
Coyote writes:
There is no scientific evidence for the Genesis myth, nor for the myth of a young earth.
Those stories are ancient tribal myths. One might as believe in the myth of a flat earth.
There has been, however, cited evidence of the credibility of the Biblical record, which does not literally depict a young earth. All hypotheses and theories have their problematic improbabilities.

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 83 by Coyote, posted 05-20-2011 10:21 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Theodoric, posted 05-20-2011 10:36 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 88 by Coyote, posted 05-20-2011 10:42 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 231 (616354)
05-20-2011 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Theodoric
05-20-2011 10:36 PM


Re: Mythology...
Theodoric writes:
All hypotheses and theories have their problematic improbabilities.
You are equivocating hypothesis and theory.
How so?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Theodoric, posted 05-20-2011 10:36 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Theodoric, posted 05-20-2011 10:43 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 96 by Admin, posted 05-21-2011 8:26 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024