I am already aware .....of them and many other ancient civilizations..........

Study God's Word.....too....not just ancient civilizations.

Study for yourself.

Well you are certainly getting introduced to them now. At the very least.

Mon 09/15/08 07:18 PMQUOTE:

Tribo...the answer you seek is....

"God IS LIGHT "




Question: "How could there be light on the first day of Creation if the sun was not created until the fourth day?"

Answer: The question of how there could be light on the first day of Creation when the sun was not created until the fourth day is a common one. Genesis 1:3-5 declares, "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. God called the light 'day,' and the darkness He called 'night.' And there was evening, and there was morning — the first day." A few verses later we are informed, "And God said, 'Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.' And it was so. 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. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning — the fourth day" (Genesis 1:14-19). How can this be? How could there be light, mornings and evenings on the first, second, and third days if the sun, moon, and stars were not created until the fourth day?

This is only a problem if we fail to take into account an infinite and omnipotent God. God does not need the sun, moon, and stars to provide light. God is light! First John 1:5 declares, "This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in Him there is no darkness at all." God Himself was the light for the first three days of Creation, just as He will be in the new heavens and new earth, “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. And they will reign for ever and ever” (Revelation 22:5). Until He created the sun, moon, and stars, God miraculously provided light during the “day” and may have done so during the “night” as well (Genesis 1:14).

Jesus said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life” (John 8:12). Much more important than the light of day and night is the Light who provides eternal life to all who believe in Him. Those who do not believe in Him will be doomed to “outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matthew 8:12).



http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-inspired.html




Recommended Resource: Biblical Creationism by Henry Morris.









OK MS, let's look at this just a little closer please - [and don't believe everything you read on your sites, or, take them for "truths"]

1:3-5 declares, "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light. God saw that the light was good, 1:3-5 declares, "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. God called the light 'day,' and the darkness He called 'night.' And there was evening, and there was morning — the first day." .' And there was evening, and there was morning — the first day."


tribo:

here we see god saying the above - pay close attention now please - """if""" as your answer says God was the "light" on the first three days till the sun was formed, then what do you make of him saying on the first day - ""And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and He >>>separated the light<<< from the darkness. God called the light 'day,' and the darkness He called 'night.'

"HE SEPERATED >>>WHAT<<< the light[his light himself???] from the darkness [who's darkness?] "god called the light[his personal light?] day [so he called his own personal seperated light day?] and the darkness he called night." Hmm??

If god was the light your answer claims and the light "WAS GOD" then their statement is fooolish!! unless they/you really beleive that god is seperating himself into two distinct parts [day and night] do you see how silly that sounds MS? if they/you can do no better than this, there is no hope for you in your understanding.

if god is light and he seperated himself from the night then he would no longer be the light you speak of would he? it would then be day!! does god give his light away to form light for the earth? and if so then he himself is not light anymore, correct? god cannot be the light spoken of and still be the light spoken of - it is clearly reffering to the seperation of DAY and NIGHT - not gods personal light.


Edited by tribo on Mon 09/15/08 07:26 PM

God IS Light.


One day there will be no more Night.

God WILL ALSO AGAIN,at that time, Provide the LIGHT...where there willl be no more night.....simply because GOD IS THe LIGHT!!!!!


God IS the LIGHT of the World.

The other "lesser lights" were just created for us ... so man could determine the seasons and the times.

Capeche?

GOD...IS...THE....LIGHT...OF THE...WORLD!!!!

Tribo I think she is speaking figuratively. The science thing, not going to happen here. You will need to ask Eljay or someone. I cant help of course because I am in complete agreement that it is ridiculous. I cant begin to explain something cohesively that is based upon flawed logic. I have no starting point.

i'm not italian but i capeche!!

now can you? god may be the light of the world according to the book, but it is not HIS LIGHT he is talking of when he says he will separate "THE" "LIGHT" form the darkness - how can you even think that my lady? do you really believe he is saying he is separating himself from the darkness? C'mon baby your not that naive are you? is this another lesson for you in reading closely like you and debs take on the "book" of revelations being meant for the bible instead of just for the book of revelations? or do you still cling to that fallacy also? i hope not.

KRIMSA......


MANY floods happened back then......and still ARE happening....Today!!!

But there was ONLY ONE CATASTROPHIC FLOOD that took place........the " Big One".....which God promised He would NEVER send again to destroy the whole world....and He backed His promise with a sign given to man..... the sign being, "the Bow in the sky"(Rainbow).


READ THE WORD.
LEARN .


Have to run....

Be Blessed Now....

Well then it should be pretty easy for you to explain how BOTH accounts depict ANGRY god(s) instigating catastrophic, all consuming floods to destroy ALL humans on the face of the planet because they had behaved badly. Also hinting at a boat being made and animals placed on board Hmmm.

if you read her copy posted answer to me i think you'll see different i have heard this before from eljay and others this is why i'm revisiting it again with more to offer on my side than last time, new material old debate.

Tribo.......

The Word of God at first is like pablum....when we first begin to eat as children of God....

then soon , we are able to get into the meat and potatoes of God's Word , as we grow in God's word.. ...

then, as we continue to grow and eat, we find there is a feast provided...as we dig deeper and deeper into the Meaning of God's Word.

Different levels of understanding OF God's Word are provided for ALL..... cause people are all at different levels of understanding.....

MEANING...... THERE ARE ALWAYS DEEPER MEANINGS REVEALED.... AS WE DIG DEEPER AND DEEPER INTO GOD'S WORD....THAT IS WHY GOD'S WORD IS SAID TO BE SOOOO RICH.....IN WISDOM AND TRUTH.

IT'S ALL THERE TRIBO...ALL THE ANSWERS WE SEEK.....ARE FOUND IN GOD'S WORD.......

EVERY ANSWER TO EVERY QUESTION....

WE JUST HAVE TO DIG IN AND FIND IT .

Well Im Italian and capeesh is really being misused in that context. Che cosa state dicendo, donna?

OK miss deeper knowledge - lets break this down based on the word of you god.

first off i understand what your saying about god being the "light" of the world according to scripture, he is surrounded by a blinding light as that Paul experienced on the road to Damascus. GOTCHCA!! i understand your take on this completely OK?


NOW! what i will break down verse for verse is what I'm saying your book/god states OK?


3 ¶ "And God said, Let there be light"

this is the same phrase he uses to start out all >>six days<< of "CREATION" this is something he is CREATING!! "LET THERE BE LIGHT!" this is not something that all ready existed, LET THERE BE! indicates it did not exist! otherwise why even state it as a creative command?? if it were HIS LIGHT - he could have very well just said - i will be the light.he did not because it was not his light been talked of here it was a created light.


""and there was light."" first there was none then there was - creation - do you see this my little angel?

4 And God saw the light, that it was good:


and god saw - what?? - the light - he did not see this light till he brought it forth into creation!


and God divided the light from the darkness.


if its ""his light"" being talked of here - then is he saying he's dividing himself from the darkness? no it's the second phase of his having created the light! nd then seperating it FROM the darkness it was attached to in what ever way that was.


"And God called the light Day,"

so is this then saying he is calling his own personal surrounding light DAY??? it would have to be if what you beleive is true.


"and the darkness he called Night."


what ever this darkness was it had to be seperated from the light[day] another act of creation, you can not read this and tell me you still believe after reading it that it is to be seen as "GODS OWN PERSONAL LIGHT" unless you believe he created himself in this opening remark of all he created, do you?

anyway i can't make it any clearer than this, so tell me when your ready to accept that what i am saying is the "REAL TRUTH" thnx. oh, and by the way if you still believe that the book of revelations was meant to be meant [warning wise] for the ""entire book"" that was not even around at the time of its writing, then i will be happy to break that down for you also and deb to ok?

your un spirit filled teacher - tribo.

I didn't "claim" the original light was God's glory - I merely offered it up as a possibility. The text just says "Let there be light". So - there was light.



We're talking about one day here. What's your problem again? Plants not able to grow? Why are you even asking this question?



Yes, I see your point - but if you'll forgive me my perception - it's pointless. Seems to me that everything is working just fine. Planets are remaining in orbit - gravity's still in place, and the plants in my back yard are growing. So - what was done wrong again? Are you saying that according to the order of creation in the text - it has to be wrong? I'm missing something here.



Christians believe that the earth exists within a galaxy - solar system - call it what you will - that cannot be measured, or even imagined. Despite what scientists think they believe. The concept of infinity is a biblical one by the way. "As far as the East is from the west". Infinite.

see above your post here.

But isn't that the point. These earlier creation myths were NOT written before the account of Genesis. There are no archeological finds that support this. There are modern presumptions based on using Rosetta stones to interpret hyroglifics. These are not written accounts. Are you presuming to claim that these hyroglifics are your evidence for Genesis being a copy of the myths they are supposedly representing? Where are the written accounts of these earlier creation myth's?

Hmmm... I wrote this while catching up with the thread - and having continued reading - noticed this was adressed. I tend to think that Tribo has pretty much assessed what is generally accepted tradition. It would seem odd if there were no similarities in the creation account. And the differences between many of them, is just the passing of the stories from generation to generation until the ability to record the stories became available. But it remains - there's just no contemporary accounts that we know of earlier than Exodus - which is an account of a specific group of people, and not that of mere world events.

tribo

QUOTE:

BUT THE SEQUENCE - of creation of the sun being formed after the earth - smacks of the flat earth type scenario true or falsely claimed hundreds of years ago. Meaning if the bible can not prove that this scenario i'm bringing up is by some interpretation wrong!! - then it stands as something that goes against what we now know had to have taken place in an order differently than what is stated here in the book. otherwise it defies all the laws that god supposedly put in order to begin with such as gravity [gravitatinal pull of the sun on the planets orbits], do you see my point.

eljay reply:



Yes, I see your point - but if you'll forgive me my perception - it's pointless. Seems to me that everything is working just fine. Planets are remaining in orbit - gravity's still in place, and the plants in my back yard are growing. So - what was done wrong again? Are you saying that according to the order of creation in the text - it has to be wrong? I'm missing something here.

TRIBO:

yep, you sure are, we know that in order for the planets to behave in the way they do as to orbiting the SUN that in order for them to do so the sun would have had to be in place first, now i know your answer will be with god all things are possible but this is the starting of creation, nothing else is out of sequence except for this point of the earth before the sun get it? it seems unlikely that god would do such a thing and keep everything thing else in the proper order no? thats my point.

as to the light i already stated to MS, on that if you care to rebuttle thats fine. she beleives the light was gods personal light. i dont.

Tribo....because God is the Light of the World, a Light shown upon earth in the beginning, that was from God...it was a different light that shone, than that provided later by the sun...it was a Light that was able to shine upon a sinless perfert world... the Light of God....when all was good..and sin had not yet entered in...and that same light will shine again..where there will be no more night...where sin will also be no more....cause that Light that shone then....was/is the Light of the World.

Tribo....do a study on the meaning of the word "light" , in Genesis 3...compare it to the meaning of the word "lights ", later provided by the sun and moon, in chapter 4.

Will get back with you later my friend...

Romans 11:8 - "God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear" even unto this day.

of course, if you don't believe in God or the bible then this would not make much sense. But many are blinded to the truth so they will not commit the unforfivable sin of not allowing the spirit of Christ to speak through them against the anti-christ.

just some food for thought. Many will not believe, I think that during the millenium, all questions will be answered, it will be a time of teaching , the day,(a thousand years as I see it) of the lord prior to judgement.

just stirred my beef stew, thought i'd stir this pot as well.

Look Eljay, I have already told you that if this is simply going to be your argument:

"Oh its not true because radiocarbon dating is always inconclusive and erroneous under any condition and that we have no way of knowing what these people were writing down on stone templates."

If that is all you are going to say here then you are truly in denial. So you are now asserting that every attempt at deciphering any ancient writing is wrong and cant be trusted. Wouldn't you now need to say that about your precious bible? Thats pretty damn old and confusing also dont you think? Why else would people spend hours and hours and hours on these forums essentially arguing every little sentence and accusing one another for days on end of simply "not getting it" or not being able to understand it because they haven't truly "seen the light" or "been saved". Come on. If you are going to make these assertions then at least play it fair and apply your unreasonable criteria to ALL ancient manuscripts.

will do MS, but my exigesis still stands on gen 1 it can be taken no other way than a "created" light!

night.