How did we get Day before we got the Sun??? Is this lunacy?

Question

In the Genesis story of creation, on the Second day God created Light, by saying "Let there be light". But God did not get around to creating the sun until the Fourth day. So, duh, we had light before we had the sun, somehow, and if that is the case, why bother with making a sun? We already had light. I think God realized that He made a mistake a couple of days after he created light because He had no source for the light, and so He had to go back and make a quick fix. Did he then have to toss out the original light from two days before and use sun light instead? Is it possible that God was such a gawdawful planner he kept screwing up the creation thing? Duh. Does this mean Intelligent Design was not so intelligent after all?

Answer 1

This question is the first exegetical issue undertaken by the Zohar, the primary work of Jewish Kabbalism. I myself am not a Kabbalist, having neither the Hebrew language skills nor the Jewish theological training, but I do know that in the Jewish tradition, there is a concept of a primary light which precedes the lesser lights of heaven (the Moon, Stars, and Sun). In theological terms, this might also be understood as a repudiation of the naturalistic religion of the other, polytheistic religions of the Hebrews' neighbors, for whom the Sun, Moon, and Stars were gods and goddesses, in favor of a monotheistic deity outside and superior to the "created" Universe.

Answer 2

The light wouldn't need a source if God created it in transit, already heading somewhere.

I'm not sure if I agree with this, because I'm still researching all of the creationist science, but I heard a teaching about the more figurative language in Genesis 1, and I think it's interesting. He said that you could see the first three days as God creating 3 "realms," the day/night, the water/sky, and the land. Then on the next 3 days, he created things to fill those "realms" and to rule over them, the sun and moon and stars, the fish and birds, and the land animals and us. Genesis 1:16 talks about the lights of the sky governing the day and night, and God commands his creatures to "be fruitful and multiply." He commands us to "be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it." Finally, on the seventh day, he rested.

It's very poetic when viewed that way. It flows and has structure as a story. But there's also some science to back it up, so it may actually be a literal story. I'm still not sure yet. Hope this helps!

Answer 3

The biblical account of creation in Genesis is written from the point of view of a man standing on the Earth observing the changes around him as the "days" of creation unfolded. From the earthman's point of view, there was darkness all around hiim until the atmosphere cleared up enough to permit seeing the Sun and the Moon. These celestial bodies had of course, been there from before the time that this light finally got down to the surface. Remeber that these accounts are supposedly passed down from God to one of his prophets in visions or dreams. From this point of view, the creational account of Genesis is right on track with what science tells us that happened even down to the order of plants appearing before sea creatures, and then land animals and finally man.

Answer 4

Remember, God is GOD. He did not necessarily HAVE TO HAVE a SOURCE for "the light" like we would have to do (lightbulb in our case). With God, ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE!!! By the way, you can have light without the sun. After he made the sun is when He named the period with sunlight "day" and the period without sunlight "night". There are different degrees of "light". Even on a cloudy day we have "light" although the clouds prevent the actual "sunlight" from reaching us. Duh!?! Get real. Stop trying to pick the Bible apart! If you spent your time getting closer to God instead, who knows, you might even make it into Heaven!!!!

Answer 5

Stop trying to equate the Bible with a science text book. God tells us what we need to know-- both literally and figuratively in the Bible. His idea was not to spell out the details of creation as a modern person might in a scholarly journal. I grant you that modern pseudo scientists and some backwards Christians today confuse the issue but people like you don't help by mocking.

Answer 6

Well actually, contrary to popular belief, the sun does in fact NOT provide light. It is merely a heat source, and it keeps the Earth running circles around it for fun. So the light is there regardless of the sun, hope that helps.

Answer 7

Interesting that your second question mentions 'lunacy' -- a moon reference.
... As a non-Christian, I've always thought of that "light" as a reference to illumination in metaphor ...
... I have a storage shed, that is often ignored and messy and formless and a type of lost abyss, etc. Before I can sort it out and make sense of it, I always open that door to its darkness and think "let there be light" -- and then I turn it on.
... the original Light is awareness and what can be known, versus darkenss and that which is unknown or mired in ignorance.

Answer 8

You must have read the Holy Bible up side down.
There was no time before the creation, time means nothing to God, but for you a day of God is a whole evolution.

Answer 9

who says the sun is the only source of light....i see nothing to be confused about ....in the scrupture..god uses the word, "light and darkness", not moon and sun....and you are right on this part at least...until the 4th day...you do know of course....that it was't a day when talking about creation...but a period of time....

Answer 10

He made the moon, you see. by the time it ran out of its own light, the sun was there to reflect, and that covered up his little accident