In Genesis the plants were created before the sun moon and stars

[excreationist]

Just in case people didn't notice it before, this is what it says in Genesis 1:

As you can see there are similarities between days 1 and 4, days 2 and 5, and days 3 and 6. See:

Framework interpretation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It has a kind of poetic structure so it might not be intended to be taken 100% literally and historically.

Young earth creationists take it literally and say that the original light source was God and it was then replaced on day 4. Then in Revelation this reverts back:
Revelation 21:23

The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp.

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.

It is a problem for old earth creationists though they would say that on day 3 the plants were receiving light from the sky but the sun moon and stars only became distinct in the sky a long time later. (day-age theory)

Old Earth Creation Science Belief Systems

A table showing the events of history along with the different old earth creationist belief systems

www.oldearth.org

 

[Elixir]

What’s your point? That the Bible is fictional?
With few exceptions, we already knew that.

 

[Swammerdami]

What’s your point? That the Bible is fictional?
With few exceptions, we already knew that.

Correct. I think even most Christians with a 100+ IQ understand that the Bible is full of fictions.

I'm surprised atheists spend so much effort exposing these fictions -- is there a prize when you identify the thousandth fiction?

The Old Man and the Sea is a great novella despite that it is fictional. What would you think of a book review that focused on evidence that the deeds of Santiago never really happened?

 

[Elixir]

is there a prize when you identify the thousandth fiction?

There was, but I won it a long time ago. And it wasn’t much of a prize.

 

[excreationist]

What’s your point? That the Bible is fictional?
With few exceptions, we already knew that.

I'm saying that the part about the plants before the sun moon and stars fits well with YEC but not OEC (who believe in mainstream science). And Revelation also fits well with it.
Also some people might be surprised to find out that in the Bible the plants were created first.

 

[Elixir]

I'm saying that the part about the plants before the sun moon and stars fits well with YEC but not OEC (who believe in mainstream science).

OEC is not consilient with what is known (what you are calling “science”). The OE Creos say they believe science, but basically cherry pick to leave room for what their god was supposed to have done.

 

[excreationist]

I'm saying that the part about the plants before the sun moon and stars fits well with YEC but not OEC (who believe in mainstream science).

OEC is not consilient with what is known (what you are calling “science”). The OE Creos say they believe science, but basically cherry pick to leave room for what their god was supposed to have done.

I mean they often believe in billions of years and do the best they can to fit the Bible into that.

 

[excreationist]

Btw I’ve heard YECs say that God didn’t create the sun first to not place a lot of importance on it since some people worshipped the sun.

 

[Swammerdami]

What’s your point? That the Bible is fictional?
With few exceptions, we already knew that.

I'm saying that the part about the plants before the sun moon and stars fits well with YEC but not OEC (who believe in mainstream science). And Revelation also fits well with it.
Also some people might be surprised to find out that in the Bible the plants were created first.

Swammi, who found the post VERY interesting (and novel to me), raises his hand.

 

[bilby]

The Old Man and the Sea is a great novella despite that it is fictional. What would you think of a book review that focused on evidence that the deeds of Santiago never really happened?

Much the same as I would think of a series of hotly contested online discussions of the historicity or otherwise of Jesus Christ.

 

[No Robots]

The Seven Days of Creation​

 

[ZiprHead]

The Seven Days of Creation​

Quick hint: The TOU requires a short synopsis of content at the link so people don't have to leave the site to understand what's at the link. Thanks.

 

[No Robots]

^The link that I provided indicates that the days of creation are to be understood as symbolic.

 

[Lion IRC]

Also some people might be surprised to find out that in the Bible the plants were created first.

Your 'first triad' chart contradicts the claim that plants came first.
It says they came third.

 

[excreationist]

Also some people might be surprised to find out that in the Bible the plants were created first.

Your 'first triad' chart contradicts the claim that plants came first.
It says they came third.

I don't know what you mean. It says plants were on day 3 and the sun, moon and stars were day 4....

 

[Lion IRC]

Day 3 is third. Not first.
You said "first".


Your chart says...

First - Day and night.
Second - Waters and sky
Third - Land and vegetation.

 

[Elixir]

Tomorrow: colors and animals!

 

[Angry Floof]

Plants existed without the sun? Well, we know that's impossible so IT MUST HAVE BEEN GOD!!11 *falls to knees in repentance*

 

[excreationist]

Day 3 is third. Not first.
You said "first".


Your chart says...

First - Day and night.
Second - Waters and sky
Third - Land and vegetation.

The only mention of "first" is "first triad" - and there is the "second triad".

There is no mention of "third". There are only 2 triads.

Perhaps you didn't notice it but it lists 6 days.... some are towards the centre of the screen.

The first triad has days 1, 2, and 3. The second triad is days 4, 5, and 6.

 

[excreationist]

Other problems include land vegetation (day 3) being before sea creatures (day 5) and birds (day 5) before land animals (day 6).