The Big Bang (Genesis 1:2-3)

a reply to: raymundoko

You said the Sun and stars were not visible until Day 4.

Obviously diffused light isn't invisible.

What's the source of that diffused light on Day 3?

Explosions are very violent and unpredictable events. In every explosion that I've ever seen, the debris path is completely unpredictable. If inside of a building, I placed a lead marble next to a charge, then detonated the charge, there is no one that could tell me where that ball would go.

Now, if I set up a bullseye outside the building, and detonated the charge, what do you believe the odds are of that lead ball, with pinpoint accuracy, striking the 3rd ring from the bullseye? I don't have the mathematics skills to calculate such odds. My guess would be somewhere around infinitesimal.

Then I look folks whom deny intelligent design, and I have to wonder how much faith they have to believe that a random explosion parked earth, or whatever materials created earth, or any goldilocks planet for that matter, billions of billions of lights years away in the most fantasticular cosmic bullseye the universe has ever seen in regard to the distance from the sun. Then couple that with the by chance of life originating from a comet or wherever it came from...

The odds of that happening, on a universal scale, by complete randomness has worse odds than my lead marble hitting the 3rd ring of that bullseye.

That's a lot of faith in random events.

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: raymundoko

You said the Sun and stars were not visible until Day 4.

Obviously diffused light isn't invisible.

What's the source of that diffused light on Day 3?

On day Three God created the firmament. Because of the creation of the firmament there is a Bright light.

Moses didnt see the firmament until later. Moses only saw the light.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

The Sun is the source...do you not understand what a thick atmosphere and diffused light are?

In the beginning there was nothing. In deep sleep, prior to waking there is nothing. Is there any thing at all appearing in deep sleep? Do you even know you exist in deep sleep?
When waking what is different? What has appeared when waking? Prior to waking there was no image of light to be seen and no seeing of the light.
The nothing that was there prior to waking (light appearing) has not gone away - it is what you are.
You are just seeing/knowing the light.

What you are could be compared to a tv screen with moving pictures and sounds appearing on it. The screen is always present even when there are no pictures appearing - imagine deep sleep where nothing appears and then imagine waking and the light is switched on - it is like turning the tv on. The movie made of light is moving and the still screen is overlooked.

When you realize that it is just a light show you will see it is good. It is only when you seem (divide) to step out of the light that is ever present that there will appear to be separate things.

It's just a movie.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

The formless emptiness plus light equals what there is

Come now..

Does that make any sense to you?

It doesn't to me.

Does my previous post help?

a reply to: chr0naut

I did. Still heading downhill I fear.

a reply to: raymundoko

The Sun is the source...do you not understand what a thick atmosphere and diffused light are?

Do you know what diffused light is? In this context it would be sunlight. Yet Genesis says 'to give light on the earth' is what the 'Greater Light' did on Day 4, and not a prior day. You're saying Earth had enough light to grow plants on Day 3, albeit it was diffused light. Okay but that's still sunlight, and that's precisely what Genesis says happened on Day 4.

So let me get this straight. We should ignore what Genesis explicitly says i.e that all stars and the Sun are made on Day 4, ignore that Genesis says it was Day 4 that light [diffused or otherwise] reached Earth, and instead adopt this even more obscure idea that it was from Moses's perspective and there was a thick atmosphere with diffused light?

I am using a direct inference of what Genesis actually states.

Can you post these verses that makes it clear it was actually a vision of Moses's, including a clear indication he was seeing diffused light produced by the Sun via a thick atmosphere prior to Day 4?

Do that and I will concede. Do it not and I think it's obvious who here it being more true to scripture.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Midrash are not scripture... That doesn't change the fact that is how it was interpreted by early Jews.

To be clear, god never says that is when he made the Sun. God states:

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.

Then, the author, or person viewing the creation vision, wrote that they were made because that is when they were finally visible. From the standpoint of the earth, they had just been made.

a reply to: raymundoko

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 lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.

THEN

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 morning—the fourth day.

According to the scripture, God made the sun, moon and stars all on the 4th day. It seems to me that you're saying that Moses got it wrong! We can all agree on that!

a reply to: raymundoko

To be clear, god never says that is when he made the Sun. God states:

Sigh. This will be my last post on the matter in this thread.

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 lights—the 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 morning—the fourth day.

Greater Light to govern the day and to give light to Earth is made on Day 4.

Carry on. I am done.

*Edit: Sorry Windword I posted before I read your post. If I had I wouldn't have bothered with mine.

a reply to: windword

No, I'm saying from his perspective he got it right.

You also seem to not quite understand what I was saying, here it is again, take your time.

The creator is directly quoted with 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.

Then, the author, or person viewing the creation vision, wrote that they were made because that is when they were finally visible. From the standpoint of the earth, they had just been made.

Edit: Format

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

I get it, you like to argue with religious types because you think they're an easy target. You need your version to be right so you can attack young earth creationists. It's easier to be atheist and hate on the bible if you have it your way.

Again, you're both quoting the person seeing the creation vision, not the creator. The fact you want to bow out of the conversation because it isn't going your way is expected.

a reply to: raymundoko

Whatever you want to think about me is up to you. I don't care. At this point I also don't care if you fail to see how you're being illogical, and how you haven't substantiated your interpretation through scripture itself.

Adios.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Then I look folks whom deny intelligent design, and I have to wonder how much faith they have to believe that a random explosion parked earth, or whatever materials created earth, or any goldilocks planet for that matter, billions of billions of lights years away in the most fantasticular cosmic bullseye the universe has ever seen in regard to the distance from the sun. Then couple that with the by chance of life originating from a comet or wherever it came from...

1. It wasn't an explosion.
   
   
2. It wasn't random.
   
   
3. It didn't park Earth, or the materials that form it, anywhere special.
   
   
4. The 'cosmic bullseye' could be anything up to 3AU in width.
   
   
5. Life is far more likely, given what we know, to have originated on Earth rather than on a comet. But never mind that: do you seriously expect to get away with using the vastness of the universe as the source of an argument from incredulity in one place ('cosmic bullseye') and simultaneously ignore that vastness and its effect on statistical probabilities in the next?

That's a lot of faith in random events.

'Random' doesn't mean the same as 'unlikely'.

a reply to: raymundoko

you're both quoting the person seeing the creation vision

Whereas you appear to be reading that person's mind.

a reply to: Astyanax

Or reading comprehension...

a reply to: raymundoko

My profession is that of a writer and editor. You'll be needing a better excuse than lack of reading comprehension — unless, of course, you are citing your own incomprehension.

a reply to: Astyanax

1. Okay, no explosion. Yet the universe is expanding in all directions simultaneously. That's still just as unpredictable.

2. If it wasn't random, it was by design.

3. I'd consider the habitable zone of a star a special place.

4. The "cosmic bullseye" (what I was referring to as our suns habitable zone) is not 3AU in width.

5. Originated from a comet, or on earth, doesn't much matter. The point remains. As for the rest... what?

a reply to: EternalSolace
Pretty sure Astyanax is saying you used the size of the Universe in defense of your argument but didn't realize its size actually undermines it.