Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This post is about the sunnot the light created on day 1, and specifically because there was no heaven yet formed and stretched out on day 1, when light was brought into being; so the sun is not that light.
You skeptics have been attacking the Bible and claiming that, though you deny God, you still have authority to interpret His word as invalid, because you say He created the sun on day 1, when as yet there was no created heaven to set it in. Now, how deranged is your view, when on the one hand you deny God, deny His Word, and then on the other claim you know that His Word means that the light is the sun?
You oppose yourselves and show yourselves to be most foolish and unwise in the discussion, devoid of wisdom and understanding.
You believe a book written by men thousands of years ago. A book with NO REAL evidence to be true. No facts exists as to it's validity!! Nothing to prove the events in the bible, yet we have proof of what the Sun is. Where outside the BIble do your facts exist? Yes I deny God, there is NO PROOF he exists!!!!!!!!!!
You believe a book written by men thousands of years ago. A book with NO REAL evidence to be true. No facts exists as to it's validity!! Nothing to prove the events in the bible, yet we have proof of what the Sun is. Where outside the BIble do your facts exist? Yes I deny God, there is NO PROOF he exists!!!!!!!!!!
Gracious! where is your proof of what the sun is? There is none for you, since you reject the Bible.
You haven't been to the sun, nor into the sun, and so you have no proof at all of what the sun is. You haven't even seen it, in person, with your own eyes, for that is impossible!
You can blind yourself by staring at the light refracted from it, but you cannot see the sun, itself, and you have never had any part of it in your possession, to prove one thing about it.
Silliness indeed!
You silly scoffers on this board are arguing that the sun was created before the heaven, but there was not even a place to set it until after the heaven was created.
*cough* No, that's not what many of us are saying. Personally, what I am saying is that you have no concept of simple scientific principles and basic rules of nature.
And, no creator or god made the sun, universe, or anything else. Something that does not exist cannot create anything.
Gracious! where is your proof of what the sun is? There is none for you, since you reject the Bible.
You haven't been to the sun, nor into the sun, and so you have no proof at all of what the sun is. You haven't even seen it, in person, with your own eyes, for that is impossible!
You can blind yourself by staring at the light refracted from it, but you cannot see the sun, itself, and you have never had any part of it in your possession, to prove one thing about it.
Silliness indeed!
I HAVE MORE PROOF THAN YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Sun
Telescopes of various types are used to study the sun. However, the sun emits so much energy across a broad specturm of wavelengths, especially the visible spectrum, that some kind of filtration is necessary.
The easiest type is white light filtration. This uses a filter that blocks out a large portion of visible light (around 99.9%) to allow scientists to view the photosphere of the sun. This is the "visible" layer of the sun, or it's surface so to speak. It is the area from which a vast majority of the energy is radiated. There is not much to see here other than some granulation and sunspots. Cooler areas like sunspots and areas convecting downward into the sun will appear darker.
Another way of studying the sun is in Hydrogen-alpha light. This requires a very special type of filter that filters out all but a very specific wavelength of red light. This type of light is emitted by the coolest area of the sun, the chromosphere. This is a layer that lies just above the aforementioned photosphere. The chromosphere is more dynamic than the photosphere when observed in this way. It also allows scientists to see prominences along the limb of the sun and can reveal solar flares as well.
High tech satellite telescopes like the ones in the SOHO (Solar and Heliospheric Observatory) satellite have a variety of wavelengths they can observe, including a number of different UV wavelengths. These cannot be studied well on Earth's surface because our atmosphere filters out a good portion of the sun's UV rays. Pictures of these observations are usually in false color as we can obviously not see the UV light directly. Most pictures you usually see of the sun are false color UV images, but some are Hydrogen Alpha (Ha) images too.
A caronagraph is a camera that has a disc in the middle that blocks out the sun itself so that the camera can observe the sun's caronasphere. This is a very rarified "atmosphere" of the sun that is also extremely hot. It radiates light like the sun but because its density is so low, the sun's light itself tends to wash it out. The disc that blocks out the sun allows the camera to see the caronasphere. This won't work on Earth because the sun's light is scattered by our atmosphere and brightens the sky too much to see it. The one exception is during a total eclipse, when the moon blocks out the sun. Then the caronasphere can be seen with the naked eye.
Gen 1:1 IN the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. What is the beginning? How do you define beginning? Beginning of what?
Gen 1:2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. According to Gen: 1-10, God created the earth after the Gen 1-2. Why is this Gen: 1-2 speaking of Earth having no form? So you're saying Earth already Was, before God created it, but had no form? What was Earth w/out form called? Did God give it a form?
Gen 1:3 Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. Light from what? The only source of light is Sun. It was also created in Gen: 1:16. So which light are we talking about here? And why God had to create yet another light later on.... Repetition perhaps?
Gen 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness.
Gen 1:5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.
Gen 1:6 Then God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters."
Gen 1:7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so.
Gen 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.
Gen 1:9 Then God said, "Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear"; and it was so.
Gen 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters He called Seas. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:11 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth"; and it was so.
Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:13 So the evening and the morning were the third day.
Gen 1:14 Then God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; Wasn't this already done earlier??
Gen 1:15 "and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. Again, light, light, light. Too many times, are these different sources of light?
Gen 1:16 Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. Light again?? So, when did original light was created, and what was the source?
Gen 1:17 God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth, One more time....
Gen 1:18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:19 So the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
When someone tries to denounce the young earth creation by claiming the sun was created on day 1, as the light separating night from day, they are deceived and deceiving, because the Word says there was no heaven until day 2, and so the light of day 1 is not the sun.
When someone tries to denounce the young earth creation by claiming the light from the stars would take too long to reach earth for the Bible to be true and so they know better, they are deceived and deceiving, because the Bible says the light was created before the heaven was formed, and before the heaven was stretched out, between the divided waters which covered the created earth on day 1.
When someone tells you they know these things are so which they say opposite to the Word of God, they know nothing, and are ignorant of the Word and of the creation they exist in, and they have no authority to denounce the Word of God because they are ignorant of what the Word says and they call God a liar about what it does say.
When someone tells you that science [a non existent entity] proves the Bible is not true, they are deceived and deceiving, because they have never been outside their little fishbowl and have never measured anything outside their own present, supernaturally created and supernaturally sustained existence.
God said the sun was created/made on day 4, and set in the firmament/heaven which He stretched out between the divided waters on day 2, of 24 hour days of the creation week.
That's just what the Bible says, and anyone who tries to say it is not true is bearing false witness against God and is very foolish indeed.
As a young-earth creationist, this is honestly the least of your worries, Yeshua.
If I were you, I'd be more concerned with the fact that some form of macro-evolution did take place. A study in human evolution and physical anthropology, there is no doubt that it took place. The question for you, really, is why? God didn't speak about species evolving in Genesis. Why? The question is if God created the earth and used evolution to populate the planet, why didn't he speak about it in Genesis? You really have an issue here, because either Genesis is figurative and not literal, or your Bible isn't of God. (And by the way, evolution didn't take place within the Young-Earth time frame - another issue)
Second, another problem with Y.E.C. is that plate tectonics, archaeological finds, carbon dating put the planet at a far older age. This has little to do with God, and more to do with Jim Ussher's prediction of 6,000 years. Clearly, this planet has been around much longer than 6,000 years and there is clear, distinct proof of it.
Instead of tackling the silly verses, you should worry FAR MORE about these two subjects because they have had the power to make the book of Genesis entirely obsolete for many smart and rational people. And you wouldn't want your religion to only be populated by the ignorants, would you? Nay, tackle these topics instead... if nothing more, than for your own good.
As a young-earth creationist, this is honestly the least of your worries, Yeshua.
If I were you, I'd be more concerned with the fact that some form of macro-evolution did take place. A study in human evolution and physical anthropology, there is no doubt that it took place. .
Variation within the kinds is always going on, but no new information is added to the created kinds, and the kinds that seem to have lost information actually do have the ability to revert to the original, as was discovered in the tenth generation of hybrid flax plants I think it was, which reverted back to the parent, which was supposedly impossible because of lost information.
FYI, before the flood the fallen watchers/sons of God, who married/took daughters of Adam, taught the splitting of roots =gene splicing, to men, and they committed the sin of mixing of kinds to provoke God, by genetic manipulation [book of Enoch; Book of Jasher; Book of the Giants; Book of Jubilees].
They did do the same after the flood, and so there are chimera unlawfully created by men, with the wicked angels and their demon offspring.
It is being done again today, as it was before and after the flood, and when there is a Chimera of mixed kinds, it is not a sign of evolution, but of illegal mixing of kinds, done to provoke God.
And as to plate tectonics, the earth land mass was one [Genesis and Enoch], until Babel, and at that time God divided the earth, and shortened man's life span on it, and scattered man by tongues over the divided earth [Book of Jasher chapter 7:19,20
Quote:
These are the generations of Shem; Shem begat Arpachshad and Arpachshad begat Shelach, and Shelach begat Eber and to Eber were born two children, the name of one was Peleg, for in his days the sons of men were divided, and in the latter days, the earth was divided. And the name of the second was Yoktan, meaning that in his day the lives of the sons of men were diminished and lessened,
and in Jasher chapters 10 and 11, so as to keep man from doing whatever his evil imagination could think up, and to stop the destruction of the world thereby, until His plan was finished for the redemption of the souls/seed to be born in Adam, whom He wants to be born again, and adopted back, for His glory to indwell for the regeneration of all things.
Last edited by yeshuasavedme; 07-27-2009 at 12:13 PM..
Variation within the kinds is always going on, but no new information is added to the created kinds, and the kinds that seem to have lost information actually do have the ability to revert to the original, as was discovered in the tenth generation of hybrid flax plants I think it was, which reverted back to the parent, which was supposedly impossible because of lost information.
FYI, before the flood the fallen watchers/sons of God, who married/took daughters of Adam, taught the splitting of roots =gene splicing, to men, and they committed the sin of mixing of kinds to provoke God, by genetic manipulation [book of Enoch; Book of Jasher; Book of the Giants; Book of Jubilees].
They did do the same after the flood, and so there are chimera unlawfully created by men, with the wicked angels and their demon offspring.
It is being done again today, as it was before and after the flood, and when there is a Chimera of mixed kinds, it is not a sign of evolution, but of illegal mixing of kinds, done to provoke God.
Let me re-state because you're confusing the point:
Fact: Humans evolved just like any other animal in nature, through macroevolution.
Question: If God created man in his own image, then why the mounting evolutionary evidence against it? Evolution doesn't disprove God, but what we can gain from it is that, if macroevolution took place, why did God claim to make man in his own image if he didn't? The story of Adam and Eve would only be figurative, and not literal.
Let me re-state because you're confusing the point:
Fact: Humans evolved just like any other animal in nature, through macroevolution.
Question: If God created man in his own image, then why the mounting evolutionary evidence against it? Evolution doesn't disprove God, but what we can gain from it is that, if macroevolution took place, why did God claim to make man in his own image if he didn't? The story of Adam and Eve would only be figurative, and not literal.
Humans have not evolved, but diversified since Babel -the variations for kinds within the limit of the kind is inherent to the kind. The borders cannot be crossed by God's law/command, in the natural; but men manipulate the kinds unlawfully, to provoke God.
God did make Adam in His own one, seen image/similitude; and that image of YHWH seen is God the word, who is come in second creation flesh of human being creation to be the Kinsman to Adam; and so, the Redeemer of Adam.
Romans 5:14 says Adam is made in the very tupos/ like a "struck", mirror image, of God the Word who was to come.
He came to redeem our bodies back for regeneration in His New Man image, to cleanse our soul which dwells in the body of flesh, and to adopt us in Spirit into His One Living Spirit, out of the dead Adam spirit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
