- This topic has 6,414 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Mike disagrees that God made the heavens and earth before Day 1 concluded. Is he right?
So your story is that heaven and earth already existed in Gen 1:1. But the earth was completely dark because, although the sun existed, volcanic air pollution (or whatever) prohibited the light of the sun from reaching the earth. And when God said, “Let there be light”, He literally meant, “Let there be a clearing of the earth’s atmosphere, so the already existing sunlight can reach it.”
Okay. So now we have a cleared atmosphere and the light from the sun can reach the earth. So then what does the following mean?
Genesis 1:14-17… And God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven… And let them serve as lights in the firmament of heaven to shine upon the earth.”
God made two great lights… God set these lights in the firmament of heaven to shine upon the earth…
Yes, when these celestial bodies appear in the firmament, then yes they will provide light. When light appears, you have two options. 1) The light was turned on at that point or 2) It is made visible. Think of a car with the headlights on. It is outside a garage. The garage door opens and the light of the car shines into the garage.
Regardless, you say that my story is that heaven and earth already existed in Genesis 1:1. No, it is not my story Mike. Read it for yourself. Take your time. Read it a few times. It is the actual story of Genesis.
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.
4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.
5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.So before the conclusion of Day 1, we already have Light and Darkness. Day and Night. Heavens and Earth. And from what perspective is this light viewed? From the surface of the planet. Then in Day 4 (I think it is), you can not just see light, but the actual objects that shine those lights, and once again, as seen from the surface of the planet. So what explains all this with no contradiction? The theory I propose for one. But not your theories Mike.
And why is there a bigger and lesser light? We know it is because one generates light and the other reflects it. A bit like us. God is light. But we are called to be the light of the world like Jesus is. So he is the greater light and we are lesser lights.
DEBUNK STATUS: Debunked.
DEBUNK DIFFICULTY: Medium.
Planes are not laser beams Mike.
The pilot then flies “straight and level” all the way to Hawaii
Imagine a globe. Now project 5000 feet around it.
What shape is that path?
And if the pilot had to constantly dip the plane, then the globe would be probably less than 10km in diameter if you had to consciously do that.
Lol. Think about it.
The earth’s circumference is about 40,000 km and 5000 feet up, the circumference is even longer. You are simply not going to detect the curve of something that long in distance whether you go around the planet or travel from one city or another. In fact, it would only matter if the plane flew with laser like precision in a straight line. But they do not ever do that, and actually cannot do that.
I have travelled short and long distance in planes many times. I can tell you that planes go up, down, turn left, right, and go through clouds that cause the plane to shift. Airpockets make the plane lose altitude very fast and these are common on flights. So the curve that you take is not an issue because the flight path is irregular and if you maintain certain altitudes, you are not going to fly into space anyway.
Planes are always adjusting because pilots are constantly altering their position for many different reasons. And if they use autopilot, then pilots are not consciously driving the plane anyway, so the computer is doing all the calculations and I’m willing to bet that altitude is a massive guiding factor.
If a pilot flies a small plane across the Pacific using their own vision with no instrumentation whatsoever, they will be constantly adjusting the plane to not fly too high or low and will hopefully choose the correct direction from visual cues when looking down. They simply won’t see the curve and adjust to compensate. Because the earth is not 10km in diameter.
DEBUNK STATUS: Debunked.
DEBUNK DIFFICULTY: Medium.
Why the plane dipping argument actually debunks the Flat Earth?
I have argued successfully why pilots do not consciously need to dip the nose of the plane constantly. Simply put, the curve is too small to detect by humans because the earth is too large to really comprehend when making everyday calculations. Couple this with irregular flight paths, and any micro adjustments that are necessary are eclipsed by the bigger adjustments whether intentional or caused by natural circumstances.
But here is why this argument actually debunks the flat earth. Because flying on a flat earth and maintaining the so-called globe lie, pilots have to fly by latitude instead of a straight line and that requires a constant turning right or left of the aircraft. Yes, we may not detect that either, however, there is no guiding force for doing this except for intentional deception. Let me explain.
Planes flying around the globe will fly in a curve by simply maintaining altitude. So the autopilot or pilot will adjust the plane in order to keep the required altitude. And remember that there are obstacles in the atmosphere that will result in many unplanned adjustments like going up, down, left, right, to avoid a turbulence and and hitting turbulence or air pockets. These require larger adjustments and as such would in essence override micro adjustments for the curve. By and large though, if you maintain certain altitudes, you will not fly off into space because maintaining an increasing altitude is what you require to head into space.
But that is not so with flat earth latitude flight paths. Latitude is not detectible by air pressure like altitude. So to fly latitude lines, you have to intentionally do this for no other reason than deception. But on a globe earth, you are guided by air pressure, which is a measurable thing and not just a mental construct like latitude.
When you think about it, planes altering course to compensate for the shape of the earth favours the globe, not the flat earth. Do pilots intentionally lie and fly by latitude instead of straight lines that would give away the flat earth? No way. That is absurd.
I have travelled from NZ to South America. Yes, it is a very long journey over one-third of the planet and below is nothing but water. On a flat earth, the distance is like 3 x longer if you go by latitude. But if you take the direct path, then you fly over California. This would save the airlines a ton of money over time. But you are telling me that they go the long way because the airline industry is on on the globe scam. Lol.
Well that my friend is absolute BS and you know it. If you do not know it, then what can I say. You have exceeded stupid if that is the case. I would suggest that you ask God for wisdom as he is generous.
So, I will take this as a win for Team Globe once again. No one in their right mind will argue against this conclusion.
Mike: So your story is that heaven and earth already existed in Gen 1:1. But the earth was completely dark because, although the sun existed, volcanic air pollution (or whatever) prohibited the light of the sun from reaching the earth. And when God said, “Let there be light”, He literally meant, “Let there be a clearing of the earth’s atmosphere, so the already existing sunlight can reach it.”
Okay. So now we have a cleared atmosphere and the light from the sun can reach the earth. So then what does the following mean?
Genesis 1:14-17… And God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven… And let them serve as lights in the firmament of heaven to shine upon the earth.”
God made two great lights… God set these lights in the firmament of heaven to shine upon the earth…
Proclaimer: Yes, when these celestial bodies appear in the firmament, then yes they will provide light.
You said that the sun had already been providing light ever since God said, “Let there be light”, (which you think means God cleared the atmosphere to allow light to shine on the earth). So when we come to the part I quoted above, what does it mean?
Proclaimer: Then in Day 4 (I think it is), you can not just see light, but the actual objects that shine those lights…
What happened between day 1 (atmosphere cleared so sunlight could hit the earth) and day 4, (able to now see the objects shining the light)?
Are you saying there were two different clearing the atmosphere events? Please elaborate. Thanks.
Proclaimer: When light appears, you have two options. 1) The light was turned on at that point or 2) It is made visible. Think of a car with the headlights on. It is outside a garage. The garage door opens and the light of the car shines into the garage.
Well we know it can’t be #1, since the light already had to be on to break up the darkness on day 1, right? I don’t understand #2. What would be this “garage door” that God opened up to let the already shining light be visible from earth?
Proclaimer: 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.
4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.
5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
So before the conclusion of Day 1, we already have Light and Darkness. Day and Night. Heavens and Earth.
Is it possible that Gen 1:1 is an introductory statement announcing the creation event that is about to be described in more detail? A simple yes or no works.
Are you saying there were two different clearing the atmosphere events? Please elaborate. Thanks.
Nope. But I guess that is possible. But it can be explained with constant clearing from the initial conditions of a thick moisture laden atmosphere containing water and CO2 or other elements such as what volcanoes might add into the atmosphere.
Pay attention Mike. Darkness was on the face of the deep and the atmosphere cleared to allow filtered light through, then completely cleared later to allow sight of the lights above. You see, day and night happened before the conclusion of day 1. Just deal with it as it is what scripture says. Day and night can still happen whether you can actually see the sun or the moon or not. Think of a cloudy day or night, today. You still see the light right and can distinguish between day and night despite not even seeing the sun or moon.
Remember that the spirit of God was hovering over the waters, so the perspective about light, day, sun, etc is looking from the surface of the planet. It’s not the perspective from any sun or the moon. It is what you see when you look up into the sky / firmament.
The shadow on the Moon during a lunar eclipse, is 100% proof that the earth is spherical.
Another nail in the coffin called ‘flat earth’.
New Era of Space Travel
It’s been half a century since humans last walked on the moon, but NASA is ready to return.
Why don’t they turn the camera around and take video or photos of the earth from space?
The Himawari 8 satellite creates a whole disk image of the earth every 10 minutes. This video covers one month. So another question is, why doesn’t it turn around and take a photo of space to prove it is in space. The answer to both questions is that is not their purpose. When they launched this satellite and other craft into space, they are not thinking about trying to prove the globe to flat earthers. Sorry to burst your bubble if you thought flat earthism meant anything to anybody.
If Earth is round, why are there no pictures of upside down buildings?
It could appear upside down if you are upside down to the part you are photographing. If you are looking at earth with the north pole at the top, then you could orient yourself 180 degrees and now the South Pole would look like the top. But it doesn’t matter, because you could just flip the photo up the other way if you wanted.
If you zoomed into earth from the side near the equator, it would appear sideways. But what would most people do if they took a photo that was sideways? Well you would orient yourself in such away to make the photo look upright. That would just mean orientating yourself 90 degrees. But let’s say you didn’t. Then you would photoshop the image by rotating it, so your brain can make sense of the picture. I mean distributing a picture that is oriented 90 degrees can be annoying. As for photographing buildings, well your camera would not be powerful enough to zoom in on them.
In short, your orientation in space is what makes things look upside down or sideways. Kinda works like that on earth too. But we have gravity which fixes us toward the centre. You don’t have that influence in space.
In other words, your orientation can be completely arbitrary, but you make a decision on how you want the photo took look by orientating yourself in such a way, to get the desired result. Below is a photo taken by Apollo 11. You will notice that it is not orientated in the way you are use to seeing earth from space. This could be altered in photoshop which by the way, doesn’t make the image fake.
About photos of buildings upside down etc. Satellites do take such photos, but they look straight down so you get an aerial shot. You probably use Google Earth or Maps right. Anyhow, take a look at the video in the post above for example. If that satellite had the capability to look close enough at buildings, they would be looking directly down at Australia or Japan and not say toward India that is not straight down. If you wanted to zoom into buildings in India from there, then you would wait for India to come into view. Not sure this satellite would do that though, as it’s purpose is monitoring weather for Japan I believe. So it’s probably tidally locked to earth and appears fixed.
Quick note to Danny. I think it is important that you read this post because it shows the debate between myself and Mike regarding the reputation of scripture itself. Mike doesn’t see the big picture. He is doing a fine job for Atheism.
Is it possible that Gen 1:1 is an introductory statement announcing the creation event that is about to be described in more detail? A simple yes or no works.
It could be from the outset. But when you delve in, you can clearly see that the earth is already created before or during the first day meaning the heaven / firmament. This means the firmament must also be created at this point if that verse is correct. If we argue your view Mike, then that scripture is wrong. Further, heaven / firmament is mentioned first, and earth second. But you are arguing that the earth came first and the heaven / firmament on a latter day. So why believe the the earth was indeed created before the conclusion of day one, but not the firmament?
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters…………………………….And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
So heaven and earth are already in existence before the conclusion of the first day. It’s all there inside or before Day one. There is no way to get around that. That is the context for what is to come.
If you ignore that and place the creation of the heaven / firmament on the fourth day, then you have a huge biblical contradiction and it is also an incorrect scientific view. So the only option you leave yourself is to conclude that the Bible got this one wrong because truth does not contradict. And this is the conclusion even if you ignore the scientific viewpoint. You would have to come to that conclusion if you believe this is literal because the Bible says it was created before the first day and also on the fourth day.
But, if you just read the text, you see that it was before or during the first day. When you get to the fourth day, it is saying the sun, moon, stars were placed in the firmament with the context being the spirit hovering on the surface of the planet, so the view is looking up into the sky. And to support this view, it says that they are for signs and times, so it is talking about visually seeing these celestial objects. Now you do not have a biblical contradiction and you also align with what science says as a bonus prize. And for me, truth has multiple witnesses. This view means you can win smart scientists to God without offending their common sense with biblical and scientific contradiction.
So this argument is really about debunking or defending the bible Mike, and I am arguing for scripture and you against. This is why gadam loves you. Because he is doing exactly the same thing as you. You are working together in a team to debunk the bible it seems. A weird situation you have created Mike.
Mike: Are you saying there were two different clearing the atmosphere events? Please elaborate. Thanks.
Proclaimer: Nope. But I guess that is possible. But it can be explained with constant clearing from the initial conditions… Pay attention Mike. Darkness was on the face of the deep and the atmosphere cleared to allow filtered light through, then completely cleared later to allow sight of the lights above.
Okay, thanks. I now understand that you believe it was one constant clearing event that took the atmosphere from dark to opaque to clear over time.
Let me try to write the account of your understanding, and you can let me know which parts I got wrong, if any…
1. God created heaven (complete with stars and planets) and earth over a 4.5 billion year period.
2. When the earth was brand new (4.5 billion years ago), it was shrouded in volcanic debris so the light of the sun couldn’t reach the surface of the earth.
3. The earth was also a water-world at that time, and so the Spirit of God spent many, many years hovering over the dark waters that engulfed the entire planet.
4. At some point (thousands of years? hundreds of thousands? millions?) the atmosphere finally cleared just enough for a very faint amount of sunlight to start hitting the surface of the earth.
5. God’s Spirit that had been hovering over dark waters for eons noticed that sunlight could now barely break through the atmosphere and hit the earth after many years of slow and steady natural processes. And God, for some reason, described this natural event as if He Himself had performed some spontaneous action: “God said, ‘Let there be light’, and there was light.”
6. God then “separated the light from the darkness”. (What did that entail in your understanding, Proclaimer? Because you say the sun already existed and planet earth was already rotating and orbiting the sun like it does today – so after the atmosphere cleared over time through natural processes and allowed sunlight to hit the surface of earth for the first time, what act would God have needed to perform to “separate the light from the darkness”?
It was already being separated by the spin of the earth, right? The only thing that changed is that the light started being able to reach the surface of the earth, right? So what exactly was this “separation event” that God performed?)
7. God described all of this time (the 4.5 billion years plus whatever amount of time it took until sunlight could finally reach the surface of the shrouded earth) as “Day One”.
8. The very long epochs of Day Two and Day Three came and went.
9. At some point after Day 3, the atmosphere had finally cleared enough that, if there had been anybody living on the earth at that time, they would finally be able to see the actual sun itself – not just its light.
10. God’s Spirit noticed that the atmosphere had finally cleared enough through natural processes over a long enough period of time that the luminaries themselves could finally be seen from the earth. And again, for some reason, God described this natural event as if He Himself had performed some spontaneous action: “And God said, ‘Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven’. God made two great lights and the stars as well. God set these lights in the firmament of heaven to shine upon the earth.”
Proclaimer, please let me know what I got wrong, and tell me the act that God performed to “separate light from the darkness”. Thanks.
Yes Mike, something like that. Except you are being too specific. The spirit of God could hover over the waters and command something for a short period of time and the result could play out over millions of years and then do it again for the next stage of Terraforming. After all, these stages have a beginning and end, morning and evening. Or it could be that the Spirit of God could remain over the surface of the planet. Because we know that the Spirit of God will eventually be in all things. So the Spirit is present where there is no sin.
And remember this, long periods of time are nothing to God. And he is patient. Take the last days for example. We think it is all done and dusted in a few years or so. But God works to a different timetable to us.
As for volcanic debris, this is but one possibility for a thick choking atmosphere that blocks out light to the surface of the earth. There is also asteroid bombardment and other possibilities that could explain this. Even just water above the earth in the form of thick cloud would suffice. And if it all sounds far fetched, it is not to science and remember that our neighbouring planet has these exact conditions. So that is a reality check right there.
Failing all this Mike, you leave yourself no way out but debunking the Bible in your own mind and if you react truthfully to that conviction, you might leave your faith, or just carry on with the contradiction nagging you in the background and doing your best to ignore it. The latter is not good. would you run a race and expect to win with a thistle in your foot?
Finally, your comments about God’s Spirit noticing that the atmosphere clearing is disingenuous. Better to say that this is part of the plan of God for creating order out of chaos. Or form out of formlessness or form out of a void. The spirit is not an ignorant person noticing stuff and reacting to it. It is wrong to apply such to what I am saying.
God’s Spirit noticed that the atmosphere had finally cleared enough through natural processes over a long enough period of time that the luminaries themselves could finally be seen from the earth. And again, for some reason, God described this natural event as if He Himself had performed some spontaneous action: “And God said, ‘Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven’. God made two great lights and the stars as well. God set these lights in the firmament of heaven to shine upon the earth.”
Also a correction needs to be made here too.
God said let their be lights in the firmament means you can see the lights in the firmament and reminding the reader that God had made these two great lights and the stars does not mean he made them at this point.
If I said, here is the car I built and you see it for the first time, would you then conclude that I just built the car there and then, or that I had done it earlier and now you are seeing it.
But if you continue to argue that God created the firmament on the fourth day (no exception) then you have to argue with what took place before or during day one. So you need to answer that yourself. I do not have any such contradiction to work through. You do however.
Proclaimer, thanks. Please address the question in the parenthetical part within point #6. I’m asking what act God performed to “separate light from darkness”.
I’ll be back by the weekend if not before. Cheers.
Proclaimer, thanks. Please address the question in the parenthetical part within point #6. I’m asking what act God performed to “separate light from darkness”.
I have explained this multiple times. Please pay attention.
- God created the firmament and earth.
- The earth is in darkness. No sunlight is reaching the earth. Could be because of the waters above the earth creating a thick cloud which blocks out light from reaching the surface.
- Atmosphere clears somewhat to allow filtered light through to the surface (like a very cloudy day today). So we have day and night, despite not actually seeing the sun directly.
- Atmosphere still clearing due to plants dwelling on the planet and now the firmament is clear enough to see the actual celestial bodies and to use them as marking the times and seasons.
There it is Mike. An interpretation that doesn’t contradict Genesis that as a bonus also happens to align with the scientific view.
So these are the options you are left with.
- The view I put forth is correct, but with room to change details like volcanic eruptions, asteroids, watery atmosphere etc.
- Genesis contradicts itself. The firmament is created before the conclusion of day one and also in day four. An oversight by the author of Genesis.
- Genesis is not a scientific record, but an allegory that teaches us that God created all things in a simple parable style story that was never meant to be pulled apart and dissected using a scientific method.
These are the options. So far Mike, you are actually arguing for point 2 because you have rejected or are not arguing for points 1 or 3.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
