Sun created on Genesis Day 4, Plants on Day 3?

[TagliatelliMonster]

Are you sure plants require sunlight, or could they live with an artificial source of light in place of sunlight?

No, this is not a pic of Suave's basement!

Purple haze, all in my brain
Lately things they don't seem the same
Actin' funny, but I don't know why
Excuse me while I kiss the sky

Purple haze, all around
Don't know if I'm comin' up or down
.....

 

[2ndpillar]

Your point has nothing to do with light and the OP... so I'm not sure of your application. (not to mention your exegesis seems to drip with personal dogma versus biblical understanding)

Well, apparently one of us is trying to cast darkness on what is the foundation of darkness, in the form of sin/evil, which is centered around Adam choosing to eat the apple (breaking the Commandment of God) on the urging of Eve. For you to say no one has seen God, that is contrary to what Yeshua said per (John 6:46).

King James Bible John 6:46
Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.

 

[Kenny]

Well, apparently one of us is trying to cast darkness on what is the foundation of darkness, in the form of sin/evil, which is centered around Adam choosing to eat the apple (breaking the Commandment of God) on the urging of Eve. For you to say no one has seen God, that is contrary to what Yeshua said per (John 6:46).

King James Bible John 6:46
Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.

You are now talking about four different subjects.

God said "Let there be light"... all I said is that there is a "possibility" that the same "light" that doesn't require the sun in Revelation may be the same source of "light" where plants could thrive before the actual sunlight was made.

To go all over the map after such a simple statement leaves me wondering... "just what are you trying to say".

 

[Petrus]

According to the Genesis Creation account, the Sun was created on Day 4, and plants were created beforehand on Day 3. I'm curious to know, What heated the Earth for plants to survive between Genesis Creation Day 3 and Day 4?

That one is a conundrum huh? I have yet to figure it out...Old Moses obviously knew nothing about growing plants....And take it from me plants will not survive on love. All that said I think it is just another in a
long line of creation myths...I mean every ancient civilization had one...

 

[2ndpillar]

You are now talking about four different subjects.

God said "Let there be light"... all I said is that there is a "possibility" that the same "light" that doesn't require the sun in Revelation may be the same source of "light" where plants could thrive before the actual sunlight was made.

To go all over the map after such a simple statement leaves me wondering... "just what are you trying to say".

I am trying to say, that blue lights were not discussed in Genesis 1. You have a spiritual light, the light of truth, and you have the light of the sun. The darkness, the spiritual darkness/evil, tries to obscure the truth. You seem to try and obscure the truth through obfuscation. You are trying to make the simple complicated. Genesis is a two-part description, one of the spirit and one of the physical. Edison type lights are limited to the present world and will not be needed in Jerusalem after the inception of a new heaven and a new earth. (Revelation 22:5). If you think your spiritual light can grow plants, then plant some seeds in a closet, and sit next to them, and see if they grow after their seed energy has dissipated. It should be a simple experiment. Then again, it is possible you have no spiritual light by way of the anointing of God. Either way, a result should be shown.

 

[Kenny]

I am trying to say, that blue lights were not discussed in Genesis 1. You have a spiritual light, the light of truth, and you have the light of the sun. The darkness, the spiritual darkness/evil, tries to obscure the truth. You seem to try and obscure the truth through obfuscation. You are trying to make the simple complicated. Genesis is a two-part description, one of the spirit and one of the physical. Edison type lights are limited to the present world and will not be needed in Jerusalem after the inception of a new heaven and a new earth. (Revelation 22:5). If you think your spiritual light can grow plants, then plant some seeds in a closet, and sit next to them, and see if they grow after their seed energy has dissipated. It should be a simple experiment. Then again, it is possible you have no spiritual light by way of the anointing of God. Either way, a result should be shown.

Wow.... you make things so complicated.

It took a simple sentence to explain mine and you took a whole paragraph to explain yours.

Since when do you make the light of God the same as the light of the sun? Are they even comparable? Did the sun create light of God or did God create the light of the sun.

 

[2ndpillar]

Wow.... you make things so complicated.

It took a simple sentence to explain mine and you took a whole paragraph to explain yours.

Since when do you make the light of God the same as the light of the sun? Are they even comparable? Did the sun create light of God or did God create the light of the sun.

No one said the light of God is the same as the light of the sun. I gave you an experiment to find out. Common sense says it will fail. I think you are making up distractions to cover your declarations based probably on the darkness propagated by the devil, and his false prophets. The present creation is based on both light and darkness, by way of the law of oppositions. The new heaven and earth will not rely on the darkness, for the devil will be locked in the abyss. As long as one looks through the dark lenses of the false prophets, they will continue down the road leading to destruction (Matthew 7:13), and suffer the plagues of the daughters of Babylon (Matthew 18:4)

 

[Kenny]

No one said the light of God is the same as the light of the sun. I gave you an experiment to find out. Common sense says it will fail. I think you are making up distractions to cover your declarations based probably on the darkness propagated by the devil, and his false prophets. The present creation is based on both light and darkness, by way of the law of oppositions. The new heaven and earth will not rely on the darkness, for the devil will be locked in the abyss. As long as one looks through the dark lenses of the false prophets, they will continue down the road leading to destruction (Matthew 7:13), and suffer the plagues of the daughters of Babylon (Matthew 18:4)

Again, you are making spaghetti when I am talking about one strand.

Let me try to make it simpler/trying to keep it within the context of the OP:

Revelation 21:23
And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

If the city does not need the sun... from where do the plants therein get there light needs met?

 

[2ndpillar]

Again, you are making spaghetti when I am talking about one strand.

Let me try to make it simpler/trying to keep it within the context of the OP:

Revelation 21:23
And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

If the city does not need the sun... from where do the plants therein get there light needs met?

You tell me. Does the "Lamb" provide enlightenment to the plants, or to man? If you claim to be enlightened, such as anointed by the Spirit of God, can you provide a source of energy for the plants? What is the difference between the light provided of God through Yeshua, and the anointing of men of the Spirit of God? Or is it just that your aura of enlightenment is too low to register on a plant meter? (John 1:5-10)

 

[Kenny]

You tell me. Does the "Lamb" provide enlightenment to the plants, or to man? If you claim to be enlightened, such as anointed by the Spirit of God, can you provide a source of energy for the plants? What is the difference between the light provided of God through Yeshua, and the anointing of men of the Spirit of God? Or is it just that your aura of enlightenment is too low to register on a plant meter? (John 1:5-10)

You are mixing (again!) two incongruent thoughts.

 

[2ndpillar]

You are mixing (again!) two incongruent thoughts.

If you read John 1, you will find that the light of God, "enlightens every man" (John 1:9). This is not in regard to the sun. The incongruence is with you trying to mix light with darkness, the message of the devil, the tare seed, the message of darkness (Matthew 13), the message of the false prophet Paul. Therefore, as with regarding the world, "the world did not know him" (the light).

 

[Kenny]

If you read John 1, you will find that the light of God, "enlightens every man" (John 1:9). This is not in regard to the sun. The incongruence is with you trying to mix light with darkness, the message of the devil, the tare seed, the message of darkness (Matthew 13), the message of the false prophet Paul. Therefore, as with regarding the world, "the world did not know him" (the light).

Again... you have changed the subject. Please stay on task!

 

[2ndpillar]

Again... you have changed the subject. Please stay on task!

That would be the response of the "world", which apparently "did not know him" (the light) (John 1:8). As for you instructing me to "stay on task", what are you a Chicago or San Fransico teacher, staying at home, thinking everyone is under you dominion?

 

[Kenny]

As for you instructing me to "stay on task", what are you a Chicago or San Fransico teacher, staying at home, thinking everyone is under you dominion?

Neither... and no.

Just trying to make progress...

Let's start over... what would you like to discuss?

 

[Suave]

I comprehend that the word 'created' and the word 'made' are two different words.
When I read the word ' made ' that makes me think of something that is already created.
For example: the pro-created child (already existing child) can be 'made' to go to school, 'made' to sit in a chair, etc.
So, on creation Day One the sun, moon and stars were in existence.
Then later on Day 4 God 'made' the already created sun, moon, stars to do something.- Genesis 1:17-18
God ' made ' the light from the already existing sun, moon and stars to now give their light to reach Earth's surface.
Years ago my high school English teacher thought that was the correct understanding of the two different words.

I'm not sure... in the options that are available:
Revelation 22:5
There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light.

Just a thought.

The church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints switched the order.

I find the Genesis Creation account to be in the context of mentioning stars as when they firstly appeared in the sky from Earth. This leaves the Genesis Creation account open to the possibility of stars having been formed before the Earth, but later appearing to be visible from the Earth's perspective.

There are ambient light emissions from hydrothermal vents, perhaps this might have provided a heat and light source for plants prior to the Sun appearing visible to life on Earth.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...light_emission_at_deep-sea_hydrothermal_vents

 

[Kenny]

I find the Genesis Creation account to be in the context of mentioning stars as when they firstly appeared in the sky from Earth. This leaves the Genesis Creation account open to the possibility of stars having been formed before the Earth, but later appearing to be visible from the Earth's perspective.

There are ambient light emissions from hydrothermal vents, perhaps this might have provided a heat and light source for plants prior to the Sun appearing visible to life on Earth.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...light_emission_at_deep-sea_hydrothermal_vents

you make a good point.

The problem I have when people say "Genesis account is wrong" is the reality that we know so little, there isn't enough information and we still discover new possible alternatives that weren't considered before.

Until then... we are simply proposing hypothetical position.

In the Beginning God created the heavens and the earth... pause... no time frame, no mention as to what is exactly "the heavens". And yet we want to explain all of it as if we knew.

 

[metis]

To the OP: allegorical.

With what we know now, it makes not one iota of sense, imo, to take it as being literal. Now, did the authors take it this way? I have no clue but feel it's quite possible as a rebuttal to the much more widespread and earlier Babylonian narratives through the use of story-telling.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

.......In the Beginning God created the heavens and the earth... pause... no time frame, no mention as to what is exactly "the heavens". And yet we want to explain all of it as if we knew.

In Scripture, I find God's home location is: heaven - 1st kings chapter 8.
So, the invisible heavens where God and angelic life live would have existed first before God created the visible/material heavens such as outer space and the mid-heavens here were birds fly.
Thus, even if Not exactly know all the details, we do know that much.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

In the Beginning God created the heavens and the earth... pause... no time frame, no mention as to what is exactly "the heavens". And yet we want to explain all of it as if we knew.

When you say heavens, plural, you are referring to the sun, moon, stars, etc. When you say heaven singular, you are talking about the figurative abode of God.

 

[Kenny]

When you say heavens, plural, you are referring to the sun, moon, stars, etc. When you say heaven singular, you are talking about the figurative abode of God.

Or... Heavens can be the combination of both stars and the abode of God and then broken down into what Paul said, the "Third heaven" - the abode of God which would mean the second heaven is stars, moon etc.